Culver City increases penalties for parking violations

Parking tickets in Culver City are going to get more expensive starting January 1, 2027, as the City Council approved an update to the penalties charged to parking violators. Monday night’s motion marks the first time these penalty fees have been increased in nearly two decades.

Efforts to modernize fees continue as Culver City explores ways to generate revenue after taking out bonds to balance General Fund expenditures that had been outpacing revenues for three years before the 2026-27 budget.

The cost of parking tickets on violators' wallets can greatly vary based on the particular type of infraction. There are more than 50 specified parking violations that incur penalty fees, and a review dated April 27 conducted by the Culver City Police Department (CCPD) compared the fees associated with many of these violations to comparable penalties in the cities of Los Angeles, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, and West Hollywood.

CCPD’s report showed that many of the city’s parking penalties had fallen behind regional competitors. The last time these fees were updated was in 2008, and they are only evaluated when the city council gives direction to do so. The last time the city council ordered a reexamination of these fees was in 2012, but it was only done to add a new category of penalty for the misuse of disabled placards.

The current penalty of $515 for this violation, the most expensive parking violation in Culver City, will be increased to $552. This is similar to the $518 charged in West Hollywood but noticeably different from Santa Monica ($363), the city of Los Angeles ($363), and Beverly Hills ($1,000). Monday night’s proposed numbers were determined by matching the penalties that were lower than the average of the four jurisdictions compared in the CCPD report up to those averages, and disabled placard misuse violations were among the many penalties that fell below that standard.

Conducting irregular reviews of these and other fees is not the more common practice, according to City Manager Odis Jones. Jones explained that many jurisdictions have a regular schedule for reevaluating these and other city fees, many times taking place during the city’s annual budget formulation process.

These fees are being raised not only as a potential deterrent, but also to help cover rising costs for citation administration. These fees are projected to improve parking citation revenue — which is deposited into Culver City’s General Fund — by more than $314,000.

Councilmember Albert Vera proposed that the rates for the three most common infractions in Culver City — street cleaning violations, expired parking meter violations, and permit parking violations — be set at the highest levels in the region instead of the average to cover the many projects and services the council is looking to provide.

These three classes of violations make up nearly 60% of the violations in the city, and the added bump could have generated an additional $155,000 on top of the nearly $152,000 already projected to be generated by the fee increases in these three categories, based on 2025 citation data.

However, Vera’s proposal did not receive the support it needed to move forward, and the council decided to adopt the original recommendation.

“I figured the way this council likes spending money, we need all that we can get,” Vera said, “but I understand where my colleagues are coming from.”

Part of the reasoning against this additional bump was consideration for seniors and others who face financial or other obstacles. At least three people contacted councilmember Yasmine-Imani McMorrin with concerns about being able to pay these increased fees should they be incurred, she said at Monday night’s meeting.

The Culver City Police Department offers a hardship exception, CCPD Captain Andrew Bellante explained, which involves setting up a payment plan and waiving any late fees and other penalties.

“On average, we get about four or five requests a month,” Bellante explained Monday night. “To my knowledge, they've all been approved.”

A sharp exchange between McMorrin and Vera ensued once it became clear Vera’s suggestion would not be considered further. The former interpreted Vera’s response as a roundabout attempt to single her out, and said that tensions and disagreements leading to lapses in respect and decorum have been an issue on the dais this year.

“It adds a layer that isn't necessary,” McMorrin said of personal rhetoric. “We're all taking time away from our families to be in the space and serve the city that we love; we just go about it in different ways.”

See below for a detailed list of the fees and the changes being made to them. (For newsletter viewers, view the full article on culvercrescent.com or by clicking the title of this article)