Traffic fines help fill city coffers - Officials increasingly target drivers to bolster budgets

[Bozita]

Source: Detroit News

Monday, November 17, 2008
Speed trap: Drivers beware
Traffic fines help fill city coffers
Officials increasingly target drivers to bolster budgets
George Hunter / The Detroit News

Grim economic conditions are forcing some communities to rely on traffic cops to increase revenue by writing more tickets, police and elected officials say.

"When I first started in this job 30 years ago, police work was never about revenue enhancement," Utica Police Chief Michael Reaves said. "But if you're a chief now, you have to look at whether your department produces revenues. That's just the reality nowadays."

A Detroit News analysis of court and police records from 2002-07 shows many Metro Detroit police departments have drastically increased the number of moving violations issued in what some people say is an effort to offset budget shortfalls caused by the sluggish economy.

Michigan has cut revenue sharing to communities by $3 billion over the past six budget years, a blow that's been exacerbated by skyrocketing costs and dwindling property values. Taylor Mayor Cameron Priebe, whose community has lost more than $10 million in state revenue sharing the past six years, says the tough conditions have caused city officials to turn to the Police Department for income.

Read more: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081117/METRO/811170333

[no_hypocrisy]

1. As a traffic attorney, I can confirm this method of keeping property taxes down.

When my clients show me their tickets, I always look at the date of the ticket first. Why? To see if the "real" offense was "driving at the end of the month".

True, some of my clients really have been caught violating traffic laws, and others have not. Those who have a genuine outrage for doing nothing wrong and still got a ticket, they have likely encountered a cop who has too many tickets left over for the month.

And if they're slipshod in writing up the violation, and the client goes to court, there is a good chance the claim will be dismissed or at worst, downgraded to a lesser offense.

While the towns may need the money, they're also putting the driving records of some motorists in jeopardy as far as points toward losing their privilege to drive and/or higher auto insurance premiums.

[nichomachus]

2. Not entirely a bad thing

I'd like to see a little more traffic enforcement around my area. People here take red lights as suggestions -- and ignore them. I never start up at a green light without making sure that the cross traffic has stopped completely. I get honked at, but I've almost gotten hit a couple of time.

Then, they could do something about the geezers who get into the left lane and drive 20 mph below the speed limit.

Our cops are fond of their DUI roadblocks -- but I argue they'd catch more drunk drivers if they'd just enforce moving violations.

Of course, it's still not as bad as Boston, where the local joke is that the only way to get a moving violation is to hit something that votes.

[Gman2]

3. Bullfuck

I got a ticket for lane splitting. The judge and the cop have conspired to use an inncorrect VC. They uttered the same phrase when I said that there are good reasons why they have kept lane splitting legal. They park their bikes and stand on the corner to point at all unsuspecting motorcyclists. The fucking pigs have become KEYSTONE COPS. I am fighting it now. I called the paper about it, and they said that I was just angry. Stupid fucks, that is corruption.

[pattmarty]

6. You are full of shit!!!! The police 9 times out of 10 ONLY.......

....stop drivers of "older" (beaters) cars, or drivers of the "darker persuasions". I will give you only one example, since you seem to be extremely naive; Go to ANY middle class suburb in the country (you don't even have to go to a "big" city) look for the county courthouse and drop in at oh say, anywhere between 9 am and 3 pm and you will find crowds that will make Disneyland jealous. I could give more "personal" examples, but I don't think you really care or give a fucking shit.

[BlueJazz]

19. Yep..You're right. When I was going to College, I lived in a poor part of town.

Every time I drove to school and back I'd see TONS of cars pulled over in my section of town....Mostly for doing 5 MPH over the limit...(I talked to several folks who told me this)

After college, I got a great job, moved to the "Nice" part of town and lo and behold, I rarely saw a Cop and the
Traffic would speed like fucking Maniacs.....so I saw "First hand" the disgusting Bias of Traffic Enforcement.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

10. I wish they'd target aggressive drivers.

The ones who tailgate and veer from lane to lane. Obnoxious and dangerous. :grr:

As for red lights, people who blatantly run them should definitely be penalized but the red light cameras in my area (Greater Phoenix) are set up to catch those poor saps who need to make a left turn at a busy intersection. Either the turn signal is set for 3 seconds, enough time to let approximately one and a half cars through (assuming the driver at the front is anticipating it and not sitting there in a daze and taking his sweet time to proceed). Or the genuis trafic planners have the turn signal shut off during that time, even though traffic is heavy going the other way. So you're forced to turn just as the light is turning red. Some cities in the Valley have the lagging turn signals, they go on after the light goes red for opposing oncoming traffic. Seems to work a lot better.

[Doremus]

4. Bullshit.

"But if you're a chief now, you have to look at whether your department produces revenues."

The people ALREADY give you revenue in the form of taxes. If you're short on cash either lower your fixed expenses, i.e. no more fancy new police cars every year, a moratorium on buying the latest high-tech gadgetry, etc, or go to the electorate with your hat in hand.

This back-door revenue stream vis a vis speed traps and cameras is BS.

[Waiting For Everyman]

5. Typical - just when they need to get off peoples' backs, they do the opposite.

Smart move, geniuses.

[daggahead]

7. If they're gonna write tickets, then ...

start fining those bastards that don't use turn signals!

[ccinamon]

15. I'll agree with you on this one!!

They would probably earn more money for ticketing for lack of turn signals than for speeding....only about 30% of the people use their turn signals.

I'm so used to using a turn signal, that sometimes I will signal when there is a sharp curve in the road!! lol i always end up feeling stupid afterward....there's no exit or anything, but there goes my signal because it looks and feels more like a corner turn that a slight curve...

[Retrograde]

27. and adult bicyclists who flout traffic laws

(minors can get off with a warning), and yes, I ride a bike - and try to follow the rules.

My town gets (or got) a sizable percentage of its revenue from parking tickets. (Now that the economy's down it's easier to find legal parking). I have no problem with that: the rules are posted. I'd like to see more tickets for carpool-lane violations or parking in handicapped-reserved places without a permit.

[thesquanderer]

8. Really.

Towns using traffic and parking tickets for the purpose of revenue generation? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

[mile18blister]

9. Red light cameras are the worst.

The choice is often between getting rear-ended and paying $341 entering the intersection .01 seconds too late. The cameras are known cash-cows and do nothing to stop drivers from running the light long after it changes.

[amdezurik]

11. and that is not the worst of it

in marin county and San Francisco county that I know of directly you have NO right to appeal the ticket. It is all outsourced and if you do want to contest it you submit a form to the COMPANY (not the local cops or government) and THEY "determine" your guilt or innocence internally (mostly by using a paper shredder). And that is only AFTER you pay the blackmail, uh "fine" I mean. AFAIK nobody has ever had one of these tickets reversed...

[AtheistCrusader]

12. If you are travelling the posted speed limit

You should be able to stop if you miss the yellow cycle. The yellow is timed to allow it. Worrying about whether the guy behind you MIGHT rear end you, is no excuse for breaking the law. Would you use the same excuse if you clipped a pedestrian that stepped out in the far crosswalk, because you entered the intersection after the light flipped to red?

The cameras suck, but I think your logic is a bit flawed.

[pitohui]

20. god help anyone in the car w. you if you truly believe this

a driver who does not drive defensively and who does not consider the actions of the driver behind her will eventually be in a world of hurt

i was rear-ended in an accident where police, the driver herself, the insurance co., and all witnesses agreed that it was the lady who rear-ended me's fault -- and so it was -- but that didn't stop me from having two years of pain as a result of the accident that was no fault of my own

it is cruel beyond belief that a person has to choose between being physically (perhaps permanently) harmed or to pay a bullshit ticket that they probably can't afford in this economy

when you are rear-ended, the cars involved DON'T CARE that it was the other person's fault, they DON'T CARE who got the ticket -- innocent people receive long lasting and even permanent injuries through no fault of their own every fucking day

PLEASE be aware of what other drivers are doing -- even the other drivers behind you -- forget this attitude of "oh if she rear-ends me, i'll get paid for my pain" -- a honest person doesn't get back enough cash to pay for the pain (invariably the people i have known who have profited by being in car accidents were con artists who had attorneys that specialize in these cons, their large awards will NEVER be given to you), and many times that driver who rear-ended you has minimal or NO insurance anyway so there is no award to go after

[petronius]

24. 'Driving defensively' also includes travelling at a rate of speed which will allow

you to react to changing conditions ahead of you (e.g. a light changing yellow). The situation you describe is the (rare) exception, not the rule. If god needs to help anyone, it's the people who push the yellows for 'fear of being rear-ended,' not the folks who give themselves time to stop...

[AtheistCrusader]

25. I've been rear ended.

One wreck totaled my 68 mustang, the one with the half height suicide seats with no headrests. I know what pain is. The car buckled in the middle so bad I had to crawl out through a window, because the doors were too deformed to open. The alternative was running down a pedestrian. I can replace a car. I can't replace the little kid with the blue backpack, that the idiot teenager in the black prelude almost pushed my fully stopped car into. I have a better chance surviving in a car that's been rear ended, than getting t-boned or worse, running down some poor pedestrian for being in the intersection, going fast, when I shouldn't be there. Also, consider blind pedestrians, who will follow the AUDIO signal to cross the street, trusting that YOU obey your signals. Good luck explaining your rationale to the cops after you run down someone who had NO chance to see you coming.

Obey the signals. Driving defensively would include slowing down, not speeding up, when followed at an unsafe distance.

The economy doesn't factor into it. The ticket doesn't factor into it.

[Sherman A1]

13. Precisely

My wife just got a ticket for blocking an intersection during rush hour when coming home from the doctor's office. When she questioned the officer as to the offense, he told her that she would not be getting a ticket if she didn't have her butt out in the intersection. We took the ticket to the local Ticket Clinic and will pay the almost $300.00 to have it taken care of and not have the points assessed. The lady at the the Ticket Clinic mentioned that since the Ford Motor Company Plant had closed in the community (Hazelwood, MO) that the local police have really been "enforcing" the law to make up for the revenue downturn. So when it's all said and done, I will be writing the mayor of Hazelwood and congratulating him on the work of his department and mentioning that I will not be shopping in his community as I am afraid to drive in it due to the cash hungry police department.

[8 track mind]

14. in other news...

Ryan seacrest is gay and a bear had a bowel movement in the woods. Film at eleven.

[MrsBrady]

17. while you were out...

the sun came up in the east

and set in the west

[MrsBrady]

16. in dallas they put in the cameras at red lights

dallas had some of the most dangerous intersections in the city.

guess what. they worked. accidents were down.

at first revenue went way up, but after people got used to them.... revenue went down.

now? they are considering taking them out... because they are not paying for themselves.

proof - they are not concerned with safety. they want the money.

[JonQ]

18. I thought traffic fines were to

discourage dangerous driving habits. Like speeding, swerving from lane to lane, that sort of thing. (of course we all knew that raising revenue was a big part of it, but they're supposed to pretend that isn't the case).

I'd like to see them start giving out tickets for driving below the speed limit in the passing lane when there is no reason to do so. From what I've seen we ought to be able to pay off the national debt in about a month if we implemented that.

[pitohui]

21. why don't you just cook and eat everyone over age 60?

you say --

I'd like to see them start giving out tickets for driving below the speed limit in the passing lane when there is no reason to do so.

that's a pretty ridiculous suggestion, by the way, let's give tickets to everyone driving ABOVE the speed limit and let's give tickets to everyone driving BELOW the speed limit -- um, you do realize that there is some variance and that even with cruise control it's unlikely that even you would be able to drive at precisely the exact speed limit at all times

traffic fines, as everyone knows, are to raise revenue -- there is little or no evidence that they serve to discourage dangerous driving -- virtually the entire decrease in driving deaths per capita since the 1970s has been a result of increased safety equipment such as shoulder harnesses, air bags, crumple zones, better built cars, and so on

people who are naturally cautious are cautious and want to live w. or w.out traffic tickets

people who are aggressive, drunk, or impatient -- well, wherever they go, there they are -- traffic tickets don't change them, that's why we all know certain people who can't afford it and can't pay it and end up driving w/out a license and then calling us at odd hours to get bailed out of jail when they get caught -- tickets don't deter because you can't change an adult's basic personality

personally i don't understand why the fuck everyone has to be in such a damn hurry all the time, but i don't recommend to give tickets to every person on the road who is younger and faster than me, that's just petty and silly...altho it WOULD pay off the national debt, i suppose

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. In many states, this is illegal

The passing lane is for passing. If you are driving slow, move over to the right.

[JonQ]

23. Yeah because ticketing people not driving

appropriately is the same as killing and eating them. You have a clear grasp of proportion.


"by the way, let's give tickets to everyone driving ABOVE the speed limit and let's give tickets to everyone driving BELOW the speed limit"

As I recall the DO give tickets to people driving above the speed limit, and in several places they give it for going too slow. Is it safe for someone to drive 30 mph on a road that is marked 70?

And if you want to drive "cautiously" (which I assume means at least 20 miles below the speed limit, with your turn signal on for no apparent reason) then do so, in the right lane. The passing lane is for passing, not cruising below the speed limit. That's like getting pissed that you have to actually turn in the turning lane. Um, that's what it's for.

[MurrayDelph]

26. No question out here in Los Angeles

Earlier this year, my wife was driving to the mall (to buy me a present) out here in the Valley, and the street had pylons to narrow the road down to one lane. At the end of which was an impromptu checkpoint, where the cops were looking for reasons to ticket drivers.

My wife is rather large-chested (whee!), and frequently wears her shoulder belt a little lower than "normal." She was still belted in, but they gave her a ticket ($100) for wearing her belt wrong.

And recently, Mayor Villaraigosa announced that he wanted to implement a surcharge for tickets.

I can't wait until I retire to Oregon!

[leftyladyfrommo]

28. I'm sure they are doing this in Kansas City.

There are traffic cops out everywhere and they are stopping people for even minor infractions.

At about $80 a pop and all of my friends and I have gotten tickets here lately.

I do think it has slowed the traffic down on the freeways and that is a good thing. People are being a lot more careful now than they were. I drive a lot and I have really noticed this.

[noiretextatique]

29. they are begging for a taxpayer's revolt

here in oakland, ca, they city has made all the parking around the BART stations limited or permit parking, which forces people to either pay for parking ($5.00 per day or more) or park further away in a sketchy neighborhood. the city claims the permit parking is for the residents in the area, and while that is true at some stations, it's not true at all of them. the parking tickets here have increased almost 100% in the past two years. parking enforcement practically lives at the BART stations and downtown, waiting for people's meters to expire.

as for who gets cited...a few years ago two cops pulled me over for driving without lights on a well-light street. 15 minutes later, after i practically cursed them out for profiling me, i went on my way with a ticket. the bail for this ticker was $450.00, and fortunately, i had the money to pay it. so i paid my bail and set a court date. but most of the people in court that day plead guilty because:

1) they did not have the money to post bail and go to court
2) by pleading guilty, they could make payments on the fine

the difference between me and most of the people in court that day was money. i got to go to court, and since the cops did not show up, the judge ruled in my favor...and i got my money back. it's a shame that we make people buy justice and punish those who can't afford it.