Cebu City dad questions ‘non-uniform, excessive’ parking fees

Local

ARE Cebu City’s private parking operators charging more than what the law allows?

This was the question raised by Councilor Pastor “Jun” Alcover Jr. during a privilege speech at the City Council session on Tuesday, March 3.

Alcover flagged what he described as “non-uniform and excessive” parking fees being collected by some privately owned off-street parking establishments across the city.

Alcover said his office has received several complaints from motorists who claimed they were being charged P30 to P40 for the first three hours upon entry, and P10 for every succeeding hour, rates he said appear to exceed the ceilings set under Cebu City Ordinance No. 2089.

“The ordinance is explicit. The rate ceilings are clearly defined. There is no ambiguity in its language,” Alcover told the council.

Cebu City Ordinance No. 2089, titled “An Ordinance Setting Standards for the Operation of Privately Owned ‘Off-Street’ Pay Parking Areas in Cebu City and Providing Penalties for Non-Compliance of Required Standards,” lays down specific classifications and corresponding rate limits.

Under Section 6:

Class A parking establishments, those with concrete parking spaces, good facilities, and located near malls, hospitals, churches, and business centers, may collect only P20 for the first three hours and P5 for each succeeding hour.

Class B parking establishments, those with underdeveloped parking areas, may collect only P10 for the first three hours and P5 for each succeeding hour.

Alcover said receipts obtained by his office allegedly showed higher collections from parking facilities near major establishments, ranging from P30 to P40.

“Kon atong subayan, Mr. Chair, wa kini mahisubay sa atong ordinance. Makapangutana kita unsay ilang gibasihan niining ilang collections?” he said during his speech.

While acknowledging that parking services are privately operated, Alcover emphasized that they are imbued with public interest, as they directly affect patients going to hospitals, families attending church, employees reporting to work, and business owners running daily operations.

“Any excessive or unauthorized collection, however small it may seem, multiplied daily across hundreds of motorists, results in substantial financial burden to our constituents,” he said.

He raised what he called the “fundamental question” before the council: “Is Ordinance No. 2089 still being enforced?”

“If it remains valid and in effect, then compliance must be mandatory. If economic realities necessitate adjustment of rates, then the proper recourse is legislative amendment — not unilateral imposition by private operators,” he added.

Alcover noted that enforcement of the ordinance falls primarily under the Cebu City Transportation Office (CCTO), formerly known as CITOM, along with other regulatory bodies such as the Business Permit and Licensing Office (BPLO).

In response to the complaints, Alcover moved for the City Council to conduct an executive session in aid of legislation to determine the extent of non‑compliance with Ordinance No. 2089.

He urged the Council to require concerned city departments, including the BPLO and other regulatory offices, to present their monitoring and enforcement mechanisms, invite representatives of privately owned off‑street parking operators to clarify their current rate structures, and assess whether legislative intervention, amendments, or strengthened enforcement measures are needed.

He also proposed authorizing the Sangguniang Panlungsod Secretariat to formally invite the CCTO, BPLO, and parking operators in Cebu City.

“This representation does not seek to unduly burden legitimate businesses,” Alcover said. “Rather, we seek to ensure fairness, transparency, and uniform implementation of duly enacted city laws.”(TGP)