By Anonymous OBcean
Dear representatives of Councilmember Campbell and Mayor Gloria,
I am writing to express my outrage after receiving a citation under San Diego’s “daylighting” parking enforcement near an unmarked crosswalk.
This law, as currently enforced, functions as a trap. There are no signs, no painted curbs, and no visible warnings to alert drivers that parking is prohibited. Residents and visitors are expected to somehow know they must remain 20 feet from an invisible, unmarked crosswalk. That is not reasonable governance — it is punitive and predatory.
Public safety should never be implemented through gotcha enforcement. If pedestrian visibility is truly the priority, then the City should first ensure that every affected curb is clearly marked and properly signed. Instead, the City appears to be issuing tickets in areas where no ordinary driver would have any idea they are in violation. That creates the unavoidable impression that this is less about safety and more about revenue.
I supported both of you in past elections because I believed in your leadership. Policies like this — enforced without adequate notice — severely damage that trust. I cannot in good conscience continue supporting elected officials who allow residents to be cited under rules that are neither clearly communicated nor visibly marked.
The City should immediately suspend enforcement until proper signage and curb painting are installed. Failing to do so not only undermines public confidence but invites serious legal scrutiny, including the potential for a class action challenge based on lack of fair notice.
San Diego residents deserve transparency and fairness — not hidden enforcement zones.
Standing 20 feet back from future support.
Ocean Beach resident and proud contributor to the city’s unmarked crosswalk awareness fund
You are required to know the laws. I have an unpainted curb in front of a hydrant outside my house. I know how far to stay away. You also can be cited for parking in a driveway obstructing a sidewalk. Fun facts.
Wow Chris, you said something I fully agree with. Hell has opened a Winter resort.
Driveways are marked. With a curb cut.
A better comparison would be hydrants. Many do not have marked curbs, and the default distance must be abided by (idk what it even is.) Some are painted red, which reduces the distance from default.
And yet under this law, if there is a red curb painted 12ft back from the intersection, and you park behind that, you can be cited. That’s entrapment. I don’t see how this law could possibly withstand any legal muster in that situation.
What a dumb and pathetic whine.
1. This is a CA law and not SD specific.
2. I bet you cramp your tires when you park on a hill in OB even when there is no sign to do so, right? You manage because you know the traffic rules and follow them, even without a sign. “Daylighting” is no different.
Just learn the new traffic laws, all drivers have to, and stop trying to blame the mayor for your ignorance.
Your point about it being a State law and not a local ordinance may seem on point but it is not. Other jurisdictions, including the city/county of San Francisco, have declined to enforce the daylight ordinance until the curbs are painted red. Simple, direct and respectful of its citizens.
I would also point out that in the days leading to the beginning of enforcement in San Diego, we were told by the City that the law would be enforced but that there would not be parking enforcement of the law in residential areas. On day three of enforcement one of our our cars, on a residential street in OB, was ticketed.
The same announcement was made again a month or two ago, but I’m not falling for that “Lucy with the football” trick that always gets Charlie Brown. To quote former president George W. Bush, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”
By the way, this law seems to only be a way of punishing us for not being able to accurately visualize what 20 feet looks like.
You also have to be able to visualize 15 feet around hydrants, 18″ to a curb, 500 feet behind an emergency vehicle….
Please stop driving if this is too difficult for you.
Fire hydrant distance. Also taught in basic drivers education.
And if you take drivers ed now it’s also taught.
You probably got your license before car seats were mandatory, that doesn’t mean you don’t have to use them.
Mel, I’m happy that you feel it is appropriate to make a comment about my driving ability without knowing anything about me. Yes, I know it is 15 feet around a hydrant but they are almost universally marked by red curbs. And you tell me how often you see people giving 500 feet behind an emergency vehicle. I believe that this is very, very rare in our society, in fact many follow directly behind an emergency vehicle.
My point is that other jurisdictions actually appear to care about their citizens and take steps to inform them, by painting curbs red, about the legal distance to the crosswalk. Our city leaders do not seem to care about us, only about how to generate revenue – trash fees, daylight law, parking in Balboa Park, etc.
What a dumb and pathetic reply.
1. I don’t care that it’s a state bill. The City is writing the tickets and collecting the money for their general fund. They should challenge the law or help out their citizens and visitors by providing proper signage.
2. Cramping your tires is something taught in basic driver’s education. Staying 20 feet back from unmarked phantom crosswalks is not. Especially if you’re an unsuspecting visitor/tourist, this is not common knowledge.
Your logic is completely flawed and oddly cruel. You’re probably the person going around reporting your neighbors about this total bs law on Get It Done.
Also I’m not the sole complainer about this stupid law…. So apparently there’s a lot of “dumb, pathetic whiners” you get to go attack. Have fun!
https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/san-diego-daylighting-law-enforcement/3912934/?amp=1
Have you taken basic driver’s ed since the law was passed. I’m guessing not. I am confident they update driver’s ed based on current laws and don’t just teach the ones in place in the 80s.
So you may want to also check out the new laws for 2026. For example: “Slow Down, Move Over” — AB 390 (Wilson) – Expands the requirement that a driver approaching a stationary vehicle slow down and move over to include any stationary vehicles, including marked highway maintenance vehicles and those displaying flashing hazard lights or another warning device.
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/news-and-media/dmv-highlights-new-laws-in-2026/
Guess what?! I was once a tourist from Germany taking a road trip in California . I did a great thing, I read up on the rules of the road in California beforehand. Information is power. Regarding the daylight parking rule, it’s been in existence in Germany forever (was part of my drivers ed); so I have a leg up on that one, and I may be biased. I think it’s a good rule, also in front of “zebra stripe” crossings (which as opposed to over here seem to function without a hazard blink light button in other parts of the world). That said, I tend to see part of your point in referring to the picture you posted with your article, I wonder where the pedestrian crossing is? If on foot, am I meant to stumble through the plants in the PROW at the risk of stepping in some accidentally left behind dog turd? Maybe the pedestrian infrastructure needs to be elevated along with the introduction of first world traffic rules in this City.
Rechts vor Links!
Mel, this is a punishment for locals and visitors, without proper signage, and essentially a revenue stream for a city that cannot maintain itself. This ordinance is destined for court.
By that logic so is cramping wheels.
That’s not a law everywhere either and there are no signs.
Mel, I’m glad you brought up wheel curbing.
I had lived in my home for over 25 years when suddenly every single vehicle on my block and the blocks heading toward the cliffs received a wheel curbing citation. Never in the years before had I ever seen anyone get a wheel curbing ticket.
As a result I did a deep into the curbing ordinance and its enforcement. The law (California motor vehicle code Section 22509) states that on slopes in excess of 3% grade wheels must be crimped. Now as a part of my career I have had to evaluate development proposals and, give San Diego’s topography, I’ve had to become familiar with grading and other actions taken to allow development. A lot of times the slope of a property becomes critical to the approval, denial or modification of a development proposal. I can tell you that it is just not possible to even an experienced person to identify a slope correctly within one or two percent, but the City demands that we make such a determination when we park.
Be that as it may, I delved a little further. I used the City’s GIS date and determined the exact slope of the street in front of my house. It turned out to be exactly 3%, not greater than 3% as stated in the motor vehicle code. As a result I protested the citation (which, by the way, you can only do after paying the fine). Despite my use of the City’s data, the hearing officer determined, very scientifically, that it was “close enough” to validate the ticket.
I am not a scofflaw. I believe in following the intent and the letter of the law in all instances. All I’m asking for is for the City to give us a chance – paint the curbs red, tell us when a slope exceeds 3%, etc., and not tell us the ordinance will not be enforced in residential areas and then send the parking enforcement people into our neighborhoods. Is that asking too much?
I got a ticket for the same thing in Dallas two years ago. Long before the daylight law in California. When I was complaining to some friends who were all from different states, they told me they were surprised it wasn’t a law in California as it was in all of their states. Maybe it’s a case of California catching up instead of leading the way.
CA AB 413
“While some cities have begun to remove parking spots, pull out meters, paint curbs red or otherwise fill daylighted spots, they don’t actually have to do so under the law. Which means it’s up to California drivers to recognize an illegal daylighted spot and stay out of it, even if the spot looks perfectly available, with no red curb.”
KQED article February 14, 2025
This has been a statewide law since Jan of last year, tho the Bay Area has been more lax about enforcement:
https://www.kqed.org/news/12019725/daylighting-laws-will-be-enforced-in-the-bay-area-in-2025-heres-how-to-avoid-a-ticket
Bottom line, it’s the responsibility of residents and visitors to know the law.
You’re not up on current law. If a resident / visitor is unaware of a parking rule and there are no signs to advise / warn them, then they cannot be held accountable. Plenty of drivers unaware of rules and there’s inadequate signage, have their tickets thrown out if they contest them. Speaking as a retired lawyer.
Frank, I’m not a lawyer so please forgive me if I’m wrong, but I was always told “ignorance to the law is not a defense”. Is that not true?
We’re not talking “laws”, we’re talking rules of the road, proper signage for traffic parking. There has to be sufficient signage re parking, etc, otherwise how is one to know what is proper or not. That’s why there are signs on the street for when people need to move vehicles for the street to be cleaned, as an example.
Interesting. So every house should have a sign saying “72 hour parking only”?
??? Nothing I have said would equate to that.
“There has to be sufficient signage re parking, etc,…”
There is a 72 hour parking rule in San Diego. If a vehicle is parked at the same location for over 72 hours, it can be ticketed and towed. So according to your post, a sign should be posted so a visitor or resident who did not know that “rule of the road” is aware, right? what should the distance between the sings be? Every 50′, 100′?
I’m not trying to start an argument with you Frank and I agree this is just a way to get more revenue and enforced in an arbitrary manner. But it was a widely publicized new law that was going into effect. I don’t think we need signs along every street in SD that have every parking regulation on them.
Sean, have you ever used the get it done app to report a car that has been parked for more than 72 hours? If you do you will receive a reply that it will be 30 to 45 days for the report to be addressed. I recently reported an obviously abandoned, unregistered car and that was the response that I got.
What is the point of having a law on the books that is pretty much not enforced in any meaningful way? Enforcement appears to be random, even if reported on the get it done app. Similarly, the daylight parking ordinance appears to be entirely random. When I’m out walking I see multiple violations every day – sometimes four at one intersection.
I think enforcing the laws against running red lights, running stop signs, speeding, reckless driving, etc., will go a much longer way to improving pedestrian safety that keeping cars away from corners. Unfortunately our city has said that motor vehicle code violations (except daylight parking!) are not high priority. I’m not making this up. It was announced some time ago by an SDPD officer at a Peninsula planning board meeting that such (i.e., lax traffic enforcement) was going to be the case going forward.
And remember that all that money, time and effort that has gone into implementing Vision Zero has resulted in no decrease in traffic fatalities. Maybe enforcing the laws would that actually help making things safer would help.
Ignorance of the law is not a defense. Marked or not, lol. Judges will tell you that.
The requirements are fairly lax, I believe posting a sign at the city limits of traffic cameras, for example, was sufficient. Same with curbing wheels, signs are posted in some areas but not all.
There are even signs against vehicle habitation… are the signs required, or just put there to encourage the behavior? There are likely 72 hours signs somewhere, same with signs for no dogs on the beach.
You’re also required to stop for pedestrians crossing at intersections, but the traffic engineers sometimes still add a flashing light if prudent for safety.
First of all the rant is appropriate–the enforcement is arbitrary and the ability to decide the parameters of the parking law are almost impossible to discern–even if you look at the law and the less than adequate explanations (unlike parking on a hill although I have heard cases where they ticketed for parking on a flat without curbed wheels). So what are we supposed to know intuitively about these laws–carry a tape measure to measure from an unspecified place or carry a protractor to determine the angle of the street? Please–these are revenue efforts. Yes, the so called “daylight” law is state but how the city implements it is local and they were not interested until we turned them down for an unspecified tax increase to save them from their inability to balance the budget which is part of their job. Back to the “can see Russia from my parking place.” This is a “one size fits all–downtown and old neighborhoods) and makes no sense in many locations because parked cars would make no difference for pedestrians. Finally, be careful what we ask for because the city is randomly painting curbs red (20′). Random–on our corner (and others I’ve noticed) they only painted three corners (four way stop) and they have started the 20′ measure well above any real or imagined crosswalk and have managed to reduce or eliminate yet more legal parking–this on top of their boondoggle paid parking which will drive more people to park in the neighborhoods (yes, I know it’s public parking-that’s not my point.) So, another rant to bitch about.
In OB, there are spaces that are striped perpendicular that are within 20 feet of the yellow ADA square at the crosswalk (Newport and Bacon both corners, Bacon and Voltaire NW corner and Santa Monica and Abbot north side). There looks like another in Point Loma on Scott Street and probably scores more in the city of SD. If spaces are parallel with painted space markings the spaces appear toi be legal spaces.
Not removing those spaces should take place before any fines are given. The plain fact is the city has overspent and created this fiscal crisis that they are trying to grab revenue from everywhere. So, the city is benifiting from the new state law by not painting the curbs red or removing marked spaces.
If the city wasn’t doing bait and switch on nemerous other items like the trash fee, it would be a different story, but not painting the curbs red before ticeing is downright unethical
Good points, Paul.
There is a space at Point Loma Avenue and Ebers Street that is signed for 15 minute parking and has a green painted curb within the 20 foot “daylight” area. Could you get a ticket here? My guess is yes, even though you have been mislead by signage and curb painting. After all, you are obliged to know the law, as some on this site have pointed out, even when you are told something different through signage.
You know, there used to be an intersection near Old Town that, given the way it was signed and the lanes painted, it was very, very confusing and difficult to determine what you as the driver needed to do. I was friends with a policeman who told me he used to hang out at that intersection because he knew he could write as many tickets as he wanted. Almost nobody drove through that intersection legally.
I fully support this rant and the broader push for transparency and fairness in how the City enforces “daylighting.” Before San Diego continues issuing citations, I would like to see actual statistics on how many pedestrian deaths or injuries occur in unmarked crosswalks each year. The City repeatedly claims this ordinance is about safety, yet provides no data to justify that claim. If the numbers exist, they should be public. If they don’t, that speaks volumes.
This policy also has a real impact on residents. Parking in our neighborhoods is already a daily battle—I often have to park five or six blocks from my home, and once I finally get a close spot, I don’t want to leave because I know I won’t find another. Removing even more parking without signage, markings, or notice only makes life harder for the people who actually live here.
If the City wants compliance, it needs to start with clarity. Mark the curbs. Install signs. Publish the data. Until then, enforcing invisible rules isn’t safety—it’s punishment.
Beachbabi, we actually do have some data regarding the changes to improve safety, particularly pedestrian safety. After years of bike lanes, corner bulb-outs, daylight parking areas and all the Vision Zero improvements to improve safety the actual number of deaths has increased. The city’s response appears to be ” the improvements we have installed so far aren’t working, so we have to do more of them.”
I know I’m pretty simple minded but I would really like to see some empirical results that show that all these changes are actually achieving some improvements in bike/pedestrian/motorist safety. So far, that’s not the case.
I also don’t keep a tape measure in my vehicle. How am I supposed to know how far 20’ from the corner is? If I am a few inches off I guess that leaves me subject to a ticket?
Wouldn’t it be hoo of me as a pedestrian to take an extra second or two to make sure it is clear to walk out from behind a parked car? I feel I might be the best person to be responsible for my own safety when I’m walking around town.
Also, seriously…how am I to know what 20 feet looks like? Is it 20 steps? My steps, or my husband’s steps? Is it 2 car lengths? 3 car lengths? Which 2 or 3 cars? Honda Accords? Jeep Wranglers? I would ask these questions in court & fight a ticket like this, 100%.
Funny but city laws allow you to cross the street anywhere as long as it is safe to do so.
Chris, another reason the daylight law is ridiculous.
The vast majority of intersections have no pattern of casualties that this universal 20 foot rule claims to address. Most intersections that need curb clearance already have it.
Under the subparagraph (B) section of the new law (see below), the city could grandfather as legal all currently marked parking spaces that are fewer than 20 feet clear.
The city could initiate a program to mark unmarked locations based on existing engineering practice instead of the ludicrous 20 foot minimum that disregards context.
The city could refrain from enforcing unmarked locations like nearly every other city in California.
Instead, the city has allowed, and perhaps welcomed, the Get-it-Done platform to be exploited by activists targeting mid cities and beach neighborhoods, leading to punishing levels of costly daylighting citations.
CVC 22500:
(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), a local authority may establish a different distance if both of the following requirements are met:
(i) A local authority establishes the different distance by ordinance that includes a finding that the different distance is justified by established traffic safety standards.
(ii) A local authority has marked the different distance at the intersection using paint or a sign.
You all have missed the point. We are supposed to feel guilty we even have a car. We are supposed to be cheerleaders for bikes even though the majority cannot ride them. Bikes can cause neck pain, low back pain, wrist pain, over developed calf mucles, prostate and sun damage and other deleterious physical conditions, which is why no more than 8% of the population will ever ride them. Support your local billionaire, that’s who all of this is for.
I think you may be under the mistaken impression that this was about safety. Maybe that’s how the state law was intended. I doubt that’s how the Mayor or the San Diego City Council view it. I feel quite certain as soon as the law was passed they were already running the revenue numbers of how much they could bring down the deficit spending caused by poor decision making.
If they really wanted to save lives, they would paint those areas red. If one is trying to make money, they leave them blank and then fleece people who either don’t know the law yet, (lots of tourists), or can’t exactly measure 20 feet, or maybe just didn’t notice. But they don’t paint them red because that would reduce revenue and save lives.
Today’s headlines from KPBS included the following: https://www.kpbs.org/news/local/2026/02/23/data-show-san-diego-police-stop-fewer-drivers-while-more-people-die-in-traffic
It’s clear that the city is placing its emphasis on things that do not necessarily save lives (bike lanes, bulb-outs, daylight parking, etc.) and not on the things that will save lives – enforcement. I find it ridiculous that there is a great effort to lower speeds on many streets, but abandoning enforcement. I’m starting to believe that Vision Zero means zero attention to the things that might actually have some impact.
I call it zero vision.
It’s plainly obvious that if the number of riders increase, the number of fatalities will with it. The only way to prevent bicycle deaths would be to prohibit cycling entirely and actually enforce it. The second best way might be to enforce existing traffic laws that cyclists routinely ignore. Yet we have the state of CA encourating cyclists to run stop signs.
Also note, the city has published multiple conflicting iterations of where you can and can’t park. If they can’t even figure out the law… how am I supposed to?