City Softens Plan to Charge Most Residents to Park : Congestion: Opponents argue that the streets would be packed with cars despite the cost. Officials restrict the fee to families that leave more than two vehicles on the street.

SOUTH GATE —  A hostile audience of 500 hooting and foot-stomping residents persuaded the South Gate City Council to back away from a proposal to charge most residents $25 a year to park on residential streets.

However, many residents left the three-hour meeting angrier than when they arrived. The hearing became a chorus of dissent about an overnight parking ban the council passed in September.

“They didn’t please anybody. The cars are still going to be on the street whether you pay $25 or not,” resident Sally Dominguez said.

The ordinance passed in September restricts parking on city streets from 2 to 5 a.m. to those who have a permit. Rather than overturning the restrictions, the council extended the time from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m.

City officials said the ordinance and the proposal to impose parking fees were an effort to solve a traffic problem that has become unmanageable in recent years.

Many residential streets in the city were built more than 50 years ago and are too narrow to accommodate parking and traffic. In addition, the city, which was planned for only about 55,000 residents, now has a population of 90,000. Many of its streets are lined wall-to-wall with cars, frustrating motorists and hampering the passage of emergency vehicles.

“If the street’s overcrowded, it makes it difficult to get to a house that’s on fire or a place where there’s a heart attack,” City Manager Todd W. Argow said before the meeting.

City officials said crimes such as vandalism and car theft also increase when more vehicles are on the streets.

To cut down on overcrowding and the number of cars, city staff proposed charging the fees, which would have covered part of the $272,000 cost of enforcing the parking restrictions.

“The public streets are not your private domain. They’re here for all of us to use,” Councilman Larry Leonard told the crowd.

Some residents said they live in crowded conditions with relatives to save money. Paying for parking, they said, would be a severe hardship.

“This is more of a blue-collar city than a white-collar city,” resident Lee Murry said. “We can’t afford a (permit) for parking in the street.”

The council voted 3 to 2 to impose the fees only on households with more than two vehicles parked on the street. Residents will pay a $25 fee for every additional car. The council did not decide when the permits would become effective.

Mayor Mary Ann Buckles and councilmen Albert T. Robles and Leonard voted for the measure. Councilmen Johnny Ramirez and Jerry M. Garcia opposed it.

“It’s government putting their hands in people’s pockets again,” Ramirez said. “You’re going to have people still fighting for parking out there.”

The council rejected a proposal to have city inspectors visit homes to determine whether all parking spaces in garages or driveways were being used. Residents complained that the visits would invade their privacy.

City officials are considering other alternatives to ease the parking problem, including a plan to restrict parking to one side of the street.

This is the second time the council has tried imposed a fee for overnight parking on city streets.

Two years ago, the council approved a similar plan to issue $65 permits for overnight parking. But city officials backed down after infuriated residents complained about the cost, Argow said.

Residents are still inflamed. And many vowed to take action at the ballot box.

“You’d better be ready for a recall,” resident Nelson Daza warned the council.