Report Shows Parking Meter Revenue Up, Insight Into Settlement

Chicago Parking Meters, LLC brought in an additional $30 million in meter revenue according to financial statements released to the city.

New financial reports from Chicago Parking Meters, LLC show dramatic increases in meter revenue but also what looks like a recognition Mayor Emanuel’s negotiated settlement with CPM is having a impact on the company’s bottom line.

Gross parking meter revenue was up nearly 29% last year according to CPM’s most recent income statement. Revenue rose from $108 million in 2011 to over $139 million in 2012–an over $30 million increase. Parking meter rates rose only 16% between 2011 and 2012.

“At some point you have to laugh at how much revenue they’re bringing in,” said Alderman Scott Waguespack (32nd). “At this rate the company will recoup their investment in just 10 years.”

The original meter lease deal back in 2008, gave CPM a 75-year lease for a one time payment to the city of $1.16 billion. Waguespack was one of only five no votes on the lease and at the time, strongly believed the payment low-balled the true value of the nation’s third largest metered parking system. Although originally the bulk of the billion plus dollars was earmarked for rainy day savings, most of the proceeds have already been spent.

But CPM’s financial statements also seem to reveal the dramatic fiscal impact to the company’s bottom line from the hard fought settlement Mayor Rahm Emanuel and his team’s recently negotiated.

Read more at DNA Info Chicago.

13 Responses to Report Shows Parking Meter Revenue Up, Insight Into Settlement

  1. Darcy says:

    Thx for the post. The link to the income statement isn’t working.

  2. ejhickey says:

    any comments?

  3. Jeff says:

    Nice to know that millions of our dollars are going to a shadowy investor group based in Dubai. Three guesses as to what kind of international activity all that money will end up funding. Hint: it rhymes with shmerrorism.

  4. Saucexx says:

    Another stupid article from our intelligence free press.

    According to the article CPM collected $139 million in 2012 but only netted $20 million. This was after “expensing” the $33 million they didn’t collect from invoicing the city for prior years street closures.

    A few questions:

    If CPM is already claiming the loss against 2012 numbers why is the City Council being forced to look at Rahm’s new parking “deal”? I thought the $33 million was part of the negotiation. So either it wasn’t or Rahm assured them the City Council would roll over and pass it.

    Where’s the rest of the money? $139m – $33m (or $7m, the article is not clear here ) = $106 million (or $132m, see above) $106m – $20m net income leaves $86 million (or $112m?, again see above). Where did that money go? Was it for debt service, payroll, overhead? It would be nice if the article pointed that out.

    Why are they expensing unclaimed receivables? Did they claim this as income in prior years? As far as I understand the prior years numbers that they released were for meter proceeds only. Not claiming income and then writing it off is double dipping. Maybe the IRS needs to start looking at their books

    The Mayor is unabashedly claiming we’re saving 1 billion over the life of the contract by forcing CPM to use the City’s formula for calculating street closures. By reading between the lines the City has also admitted they’ll be paying CPM aprox $4+ million per year for the rest of the contract. That’s $290-320 million the city WILL STILL HAVE TO PAY CPM. Why is this not pointed out? That means CPM will have effectively bought the meters for $860-900 million after netting out the city’s future payments. Using the Mayors logic had he not contested the invoices, CPM would have eventually billed the city 1.3 billion for street closures when they only paid 1.2 billion for the whole thing!

  5. Saucexx says:

    Another thing, according to the article the City has also agreed to pay CPM $63 million for handicap parking abuses($55 million) and street closures ($8.9 million). As a comparison the city collected $25 million a year before they sold the meters, or 2.5 years worth of meter monry. It’s simply inexcusable and borderline criminal that they city should be forced to pay for anything. This alone should be enough to overturn this awful contract in court. If only we had a Mayor interested in fighting it……………

  6. The Parking Ticket Geek says:

    Darcy,

    Click on the link. A page pops up. Under the headline is the link to the PDF. It’s titled “CPM Transmittal”.

  7. Uncommon Sense says:

    Geek,

    Like Darcy, the PDF is not there. I see nothing titled “CPM Transmittal”. When I click on the link, it goes to a page that says “Nothing found for attachment” and “The page you requested could not be found”

  8. Drew says:

    No kidding meter revenue is up.

    City just increased the cost of a meter ticket in the areas that see the most parking…middle of last years first quarter as I recall.

    And if I read the contract correctly, the city can’t ever reduce the fines during the life if this shit contract else they have to pay CPM

    Jan 2014 can’t come fast enough for Chicago.

  9. Drew says:

    It’s gotten to the point that I half expect to see coin slots on the restroom doors at all city facilities and a sign on the door “operated by LAZ” or CPM”.

  10. The Parking Ticket Geek says:

    Uncommon Sense,

    I just checked it on my very old PC and I had no issues. It seems to be working on my end. I will check on another computer but no problems here. Not sure why you would be having issues. Sorry.

  11. The Parking Ticket Geek says:

    Saucexx,

    Sorry I didn’t get into a complete forensic accounting analysis of CPM’s financial statement, but this is not a website about financial accounting but on transportation, parking and driving.

    The reason I posted a link to the documents was for people, like yourself, who might want more details, to look over the documents themselves.

    I was reporting on the larger concepts of their increased revenue and how the renegotiated contract is impacting their financial reporting.

  12. Chicago Joey says:

    “said Alderman Scott Waguespack (32nd). “At this rate the company will recoup their investment in just 10 years.””

    Obviously Waguespack is just one of many economic geniuses in city government who think revenue is the same as earnings. Ask Waguespack how much the city earned after all operating costs, capital investment and interest payments on those same meters.

  13. The Parking Ticket Geek says:

    Good point Chicago Joey.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>