Towing Fees – Manchester Marketing Non-compete Clause

SUBCONTRACTING AGREEMENT

THIS SUBCONTRACTING AGREEMENT made as of the ____ day of  ______, 20___, between MANCHESTER MARKETING, INC. t/a SEIBERT’S SERVICE STATIONS (“Manchester”) and  ___________________________________ (the “Subcontractor”).

(h) During the term of this Subcontracting Agreement, and any renewals, amendments or extensions thereto, and after termination of this Subcontracting Agreement, with or without cause, for a period of twenty-four (24) consecutive months the Subcontractor shall not, in any manner or on behalf of any other person, firm, partnership, corporation or other entity, as an agent independent contractor, stockholder, proprietor, partner, member, lender, financial backer, or in any other capacity, directly or indirectly, bid for, canvass, solicit or accept any towing services procured, requested, contracted or ordered by, or that otherwise involves, the City. In addition, during that same period, the Subcontractor shall not submit a bid to the City or align itself with any other person or entity for the purpose of participating in the Contract or future contracts or agreements for towing with the City. In addition, during that same period, Subcontractor agrees that it shall not provide any information or assistance to any other person, firm, partnership, corporation, limited liability company or other entity, as an agent independent contractor, stockholder, proprietor, partner, member, lender, financial backer, or in any other capacity, directly or indirectly, for the purpose of bidding for, canvassing, soliciting or otherwise attempting to provide towing services to the City.

Towing Fees – Letter to Byron Marshall

September 17, 2010

VIA EMAIL TO byron.marshall@richmondgov.com
Mr. Byron C. Marshall, Chief Administrative Officer
City of Richmond
900 E. Broad St., Room  200
Richmond, Virginia 23219

Re: Towing Rate Increase

Dear Mr. Marshall,

I still have concerns about your decision to raise the standard towing rate charged to citizens.  Last year, the city requested companies to submit bids for towing illegally parked vehicles and to provide other services to the city.  Seibert’s Towing submitted the winner bid.

In essence, the contract provided that Seibert’s would charge the citizen $65 for towing a vehicle and the city would pay Seibert’s an additional $38 per tow.  The additional $38 would offset Seibert’s agreement to provide other towing services to the city at no charge.

After the contract was signed, you agreed to allow Seibert’s to charge citizens an additional $30 per tow.  According to the city finance department, Seibert’s is giving the city $3 and keeping the remainder.  It appears that the $27 kept by Seibert’s is unearned additional profit.

Seibert’s will tow approximately 9,000 illegally parked vehicles per year.  It appears that the additional profit for Seibert’s as a result of your action will be approximately $243,000 per year.

My past inquiries to you and the mayor have been deferred to Ms. Victoria Benjamin, the general counsel for the city police department, who was in charge of obtaining the Seibert’s contract.  Her belated responses have been incomplete, inaccurate, and unsatisfactory.

Ms. Benjamin seemed to claim that the addition money is compensation for services rendered by Seibert’s, but she did not specify the services.  She also seemed to claim that Virginia Code Section 46.2 -1217 allows you, as chief administrative officer of the city, to increase the rate charged to a citizen by a private company.

I have two questions that I would like for you to answer personally:

1. What additional services is Seibert’s providing to earn $243,000 per year?

2. What specific provision of Section 46.2 – 1217 authorizes the city’s chief administrative officer to increase the towing rate charged to a citizen by a private company?

I look forward to receiving your response.

Sincerely yours,

C. Wayne Taylor
www.cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com

Links:

Letter From Victoria Benjamin Re Revenue
http://cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com/2010/09/17/towing-fees-letter-from-victoria-benjamin/

Letter From Victoria Benjamin Re Authority
http://cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com/2010/09/17/towing-fees-letter-from-victoria-benjamin-2/

Copy:
City Council
Press

Essential to a well managed government is that information flows freely from both the citizens to the government and from the government to the citizens. Moreover, citizens expect and deserve a responsive government.
–Mayor Dwight Jones
www.cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com/freedom-of-information

Towing Fees – Letter From Victoria Benjamin

August 17, 2010

Mr. Taylor,

In response to your FOIA request included below – please be advised that the tow rate of $95 only refers to tows from public property owned by the City.  As such, the $95 rate pertains to a contract term included in the City’s contract for “public tows” from public property.  The Virginia Code allows local jurisdictions to contract and set contract terms for towing of public property – See VA Code § 46.2 -1217.

Victoria Pearson Benjamin, Esq.
General Counsel
Richmond Police Department

Towing Fees – Letter From Victoria Benjamin

June 8, 2010

Hi Mr. Taylor,

This email is in response to your email to the Mayor in which you asked a total of 6 questions.  For convenience purposes, I will include your questions along with their corresponding answers:

1. Do you intend to raise the parking violation towing fee from $65 to $95?

As of June 1st the parking violation towing fee increased to $95.

2.  Do you intend to raise the disable/stolen vehicle towing fee from $75 to $95?

I will need to verify this rate and get back with you.

3.  Do you intend to raise the abandoned vehicle towing fee to $95?

I will need to verify this rate and get back with you.

4.  Is the potential additional annual revenue approximately $313,000?

The projected increase in revenue for the city if the standard tow (parking violation towing) rate is increased to $95 was $36,236, with an overall profit to the City projected at $215,000.

5.  What portion will be given to Seibert’s Towing?

Under the new rate of $95, Seibert’s will receive $73 per tow.

6.  Is the portion given to Seibert’s Towing a gift?

The portion Seibert’s receives is their fee for providing the service, i.e. the time involved, the gas, the truck, the insurance costs, the labor cost, licensure of the driver, securing the vehicle, etc.

I hope this email has addressed your questions.  Please let me know if this prompts further questions.

Victoria Pearson Benjamin, Esq.

General Counsel
Richmond Police Department           

Towing Fees – New Question

City of Richmond, Virginia

cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com

3. Is the contract void because it is not substantially in the form approved by city council?

Towing Fees – Types of Tows

City of Richmond, Virginia
1

Types of Towing – 2010
		Private Property	Public Property
City Request Seibert’s Contract (§ 46.2-1217 Board)		Stolen
		Abandoned
		Hold For Investigation
		Impounded for three or more parking tickets
			Street Cleaning
			Traffic Violation
			Peak – Traffic Zone
			Accident – no citizen preference
			Disabled – no citizen preference
			Impounded for 30 days for DUl
			Impounded for equipment violation
Citizen Request	Violator’s Vehicle	“No Parking” (§ 46.2-1233.2. Board)
	Citizen’s Vehicle	Accidents
		Disabled
Other		Sheriffs Department – Unpaid taxes
		Richmond Schools – School vehicles

Towing Fees – Financial Arrangement

1

	Siebert’s Competitive Negotiation Contract – 2010
1	Private Vehicle – Police Call	#	Rate	Siebert’s		City
2	Proposal			Tow	Fine	Fine
3	Citation / Fine split
4	Street Cleaning 23/17	5,708	$65	$371,020	$131,284	$97,036
5	Traffic Violation 43/17	2,600	$65	169,000	111,800	44,200
6	Peak Traffic  43/17	750	$65	48,750	32,250	12,750
7	No Citation
8	Abandoned – Public Property	968	$65	62,920
9	Stolen	627	$75	47,025
10	TOTALS			$698,715	$275,334
11	TOTALS			$974,049		$153,986
12	Final Offer – Amend split ($2)/$2
13	Street Cleaning	5,708			(11,416)	11,416
14	Traffic Violations	2,600			(5,200)	5,200
15	Peak Traffic Hours	750			(1,500)	1,500
16	TOTALS				($18,116)	$18,116
17	TOTALS			$955,933		$172,102
18	Increase In Tow Rate
19	Street Cleaning	5,708	$30	171,240
20	Traffic Violations	2,600	$30	78,000
21	Peak Traffic Hours	750	$30	22,500
22	TOTALS			$271,740
23	TOTALS			$1,227,673		$172,102
24	Owner Needed Tow
25	Accident – D/N	?	$125/$140	?
26	Disabled	?	$75	?
27	Other Charges
28	Storage /day	?	$20	?
29	Administrative Fee	?	$30	?
30	C.A.P.S./environmental	?	$65	?
31	Misc. Charges	?	varies	?
32	City Vehicle – All services	?	No Charge	0.00
Less: Expenses				(?)
NET				?

Towing Fees – New Question

City of Richmond, Virginia

cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com

2.  Is the contract void because the Manchester bid was not based on each towing charge as required by the Request For Proposals?

Towing Fees – New Question

City of Richmond, Virginia

cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com

Is the contract void because the appropriate board did not review the contract as required by the Code of Virginia?

City of Richmond, Virginia – Towing Fees – Questions To Police Council

May 17, 2010

VIA EMAIL TO: Victoria.Benjamin@Richmondgov.com

Victoria Benjamin
General Council
Richmond Police Department
200 W. Grace St.
Richmond, VA 23220

Re:  Ordinance 2010-61  Towing Contract

Dear Ms. Benjamin,

I have in my notes that you told City Council that the standard towing rate had been $65 since 1992.  I have reviewed the 1992 documents and do not see that.

Please send me a copy of the 1992 document page that indicates that the standard towing rate was $65.

Thank you for your attention.

Sincerely yours,

C. Wayne Taylor
cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com
cwaynetaylor.wordpress.com/freedom-of-information/

copy: Council