City parking joke

City parking joke

If there were a competition for the most puzzling institution,
the trophy could well go to the Jakarta City Administration for
its puzzling flood control policy, the busway and the "three-in-
one" traffic rule, but one that stands out most notably as a
microcosm of all that is bizarre is its parking policies.

The only clear thing about the administration's policies in
these matters is that nothing is clear. The policy on the busway
system also makes it clear that everything related to Jakarta's
transportation system is complicated.

While Jakartans have yet to hear an official, let alone,
acceptable explanation on these policies, the administration has
just made things more difficult with the governor's decree on the
increase in the off-street parking rate from Rp 1,000 to Rp 1,500
per hour. The decree is supposed to take effect on Jan. 1, 2004.

But this decree has vehicle owners scratching their collective
pates as they wonder who goofed up this time. It seems that
everyone knows about the new pricing system except the many
building owners and parking management companies that have
arbitrarily increased their parking fees in direct defiance of
the City decree. Some charge Rp 2,000 for the first hour plus
another Rp 2,000 for the second hour, Rp. 1,000 for the third
hour, and so on.

Signed by Governor Sutiyoso on Dec. 5 and promulgated on Dec.
8, the decree has -- curiously -- not yet been presented to the
head of the City Parking Agency. Yani Mulyadi, the head of the
parking agency said that directives for the implementation of the
decree have not yet been issued because he has not yet received a
copy of the decision. And, of course, no civil servant can
actually make a decision without directives, apparently even the
head of an agency.

He said he was very surprised upon hearing that copies of the
new decree had been distributed to the parking management
companies and building owners.

Even more bizarre is that building owners are indeed aware
that they are not abiding by the gubernatorial decree No.
98/2003.

The head of Glodok Plaza parking, Abdul Jamil, for example,
was quoted by a local paper as saying that he acknowledged the
administration's request to delay the implementation of the
decree (until January 2004), "but we will continue to charge the
new (higher) fee."

He said that complainants or those dissatisfied with the
services could contact the head office of PT Secure Parking,
which manages most of the off-street parking facilities in the
Greater Jakarta area. "One thing is certain, and that is, we will
not lower the rates," he said.

Given such a situation, the oddest thing may be the City
Administration's seeming inability, or unwillingness, to do
anything about the arbitrary decisions by parking companies --
not to mention the absence of guarantees or compensation for any
loss or damage to the vehicles, while they are parked in "secure"
parking lots.

This being the case, Sudaryatmo, of the Indonesian Consumers
Protection Foundation (YLKI), can hardly be blamed for assuming
that there must be some kind of conspiracy between the
administration and the private parking companies.

Many complaints about unauthorized increases in the parking
fees have been received by YLKI. Sudaryatmo confirmed these
reports, saying that the city officials would also clearly be
aware of these illegal practices.

A similar controversy occurred in May this year when building
owners at malls, hotels and shopping plazas started to charge
drivers Rp 1,250 or Rp 1,500 for one hour parking, instead of the
official fee Rp 1,000.

The reasons they gave for raising their fees varied from
employee demands for a salary increase to extra taxes.

YLKI protested, saying that burdening vehicle owners with an
extra 20 percent (of Rp 1,000) in taxes was unfair and
contradicted Provincial Regulation No. 6/2002. The regulation
stipulates that the parking taxpayers are the individuals and/or
firms which run parking businesses. It would only be fair that
consumers be exempted from having to pay for the parking
companies taxes.

YLKI also attacked the ruling, which it says denies consumers
the right to Protection as stipulated by Consumer Protection Law
No. 8/1999. Car owners have no where to turn when they find
accessories from their vehicles stolen or damaged due to the fact
that the ruling does not guarantee the vehicles' safety. The
parking lot management is not even held responsible for the loss
of parked vehicles.

Controversies linger on and no agreement has been reached on
this issue between consumers and the parking companies/building
owners. And the city administration has done nothing to mediate
in the "miscommunication" between consumers and PT Secure
Parking.

Another intriguing controversy on parking also took place in
May this year when the administration appointed a private firm to
manage on-street parking using prepaid cards.

So persistent was the administration at that time that five
locations -- Jl. Raden Patah in South Jakarta, Jl. Bulevar Kelapa
Gading in North Jakarta, Jl. H. Agus Salim in Central Jakarta,
Jl. Gadjah Mada, West Jakarta and Jl. Jatinegara Timur in East
Jakarta were designated as pilot projects in the plan.

The prepaid card system allowed street parking attendants to
use Personal Digital Assistance (PDAs) to record vehicles coming
in and going out.

No arguments could melt the administration's persistence
regarding that policy, which was later found unworkable. And yet
no adequate explanation has ever been given about the failure of
the system.

All this clearly reflects the City Administration's preference
for leaving the complicated parking-related problems both
unexplained and unresolved. These facts also tell us that the
administration's policy is clear on only one thing: Keeping
things unclear.