Over the years, I've seen parking enforcement viewed very narrowly, primarily as ticket writing. In reality, what we do sits at the intersection of public safety, customer service, and community trust.
We need to start asking a different question as a profession: Are we training officers to issue citations, or to make defensible, fair, and professional decisions in the field?
There's a difference.
A legally valid citation is not always a strong citation. A strong citation reflects clear and reasonable signage, documentation that supports the violation, an environment the average driver can reasonably understand, and an officer's decision grounded in sound professional judgment. In other words, can the citation stand up not just in court, but in the court of public opinion?
Many of our biggest challenges do not stem from enforcement itself, but from the systems that shape it, inconsistent training, unclear discretionary standards, weak documentation, and uneven supervisory expectations. That is also where our greatest opportunity lies.
I believe parking enforcement becomes more credible when leadership builds systems around defensible documentation, scenario-based field training, professional discretion, customer communication, and meaningful supervisor review.
I'm currently focused on strengthening our field training approach to emphasize real-world scenarios, decision quality, and defensibility over ordinance knowledge alone.
How are others approaching this in their operations? What defines a "good citation" in your agency, and where do you see the biggest opportunity for improvement: training, policy, supervision, or culture?
Looking forward to this discussion.
------------------------------
Kenneth Simon, PTMP, PECP
Parking Enforcement Supervisor
City of Greensboro/ Police Department
Greensboro, NC
------------------------------