Galactic Towing, Inc. appealed the denial of its request for declaratory and injunctive relief against the City of Miami Beach's vehicle towing regulations, which Galactic argues are preempted by the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the City, determining that the regulations are permissible under the public safety exception of ICCTA, 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(2)(A). This provision typically preempts state regulations concerning the price, route, or service of motor carriers but allows for safety-related regulations.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in City of Columbus v. Ours Garage, which clarified that while ICCTA preempts state economic authority over motor carriers, it does not restrict states' traditional police powers over safety. The court noted that local regulations must genuinely address safety concerns to avoid preemption. Galactic raised three arguments on appeal, primarily contesting whether the City’s towing ordinance is genuinely related to safety, which it claims lacks sufficient support in the record according to the standards set by Ours Garage.
Galactic argues that specific provisions of the City’s non-consensual towing ordinance, including permit requirements, business application protocols, and storage regulations, fail to adequately address safety concerns. Key sections include:
1. **Permit Requirement (§ 106-264)**: Towing businesses must obtain a permit before towing vehicles from private property, which is distinct from any other licensing requirements. This permit serves a regulatory, not revenue-generating, purpose.
2. **Business Application (§ 106-266)**: Applicants for initial or renewal permits must submit a detailed application to the city manager, demonstrating completion, payment of fees, proof of insurance, and passing a thorough background check. The application is subject to scrutiny to ensure that no individuals associated with the business have a history of permit suspensions or revocations.
3. **Additional Requirements (§ 106-268)**: Towing operations must have explicit written authorization from the property owner before towing, and vehicles must be stored within city limits for the first 48 hours post-tow.
The district court reviewed these ordinance sections and determined they effectively address public safety, referencing similar ordinances upheld in other jurisdictions. It concluded that the city’s regulations fit the public safety exception outlined in § 14501(c)(2)(A), citing a Fifth Circuit ruling that rejected a preemption challenge to a comparable ordinance.
Cole v. City of Dallas establishes that regulations requiring criminal history checks are permissible under the public safety exception. Similarly, Fife Enterprises v. Washington State Patrol affirmed that licensing and record-keeping requirements are exempt under the same exception. Ace Auto Body, Towing, Ltd. v. City of New York further supports the inclusion of various towing ordinance requirements, including criminal history disclosures, within the safety exception. Hott v. City of San Jose confirmed that regulations involving liability insurance and background checks also fall under this scope. The district court correctly determined that the City’s vehicle ordinance sections were aligned with the public safety exception under § 14501(c)(2)(A).
Galactic's claim of insufficient evidence for the City's legislative intent was countered by the ordinance’s clear statement of purpose, which identifies unauthorized parking as a public nuisance and emergency. The City provided affidavits from officials that detailed the safety implications of the ordinance, which Galactic failed to contest effectively, relying instead on its initial pleadings. The court noted that a party cannot simply deny allegations when opposing a summary judgment motion supported by affidavits. Additionally, Galactic's motion to strike the affidavits was denied, with the court finding no abuse of discretion in admitting them. The ruling was affirmed.
