The Scourge of Local Government Contracting
I've been reading about the NC SafeLight program that exists in several cities across North Carolina recently...ever since I recieved a long overdue notice a few months back that I had been ticketed for running a red light. Before you judge me, it was December 2005 and it was raining fairly hard on my way back to Wilmington, NC where I lived at the time. I was doing the speed limit and coming upon an intersection, the light turned yellow. I had few options: I could either hit the brakes and skid into the middle of the intersection uncontrollably (and perhaps off the road), or I could drive thru hoping to catch the light. I chose the later and barely missed the yellow light.
Fast forward to a few months ago, when I recieved the forwarded ticket in the mail. It turns out the Union County/ City of Monroe used a private contractor to install and operate a red light camera system. They own and operate the system, taking a slice out of each ticket for their own purposes and remitting the rest to the municpality. I tried contacting the Union County, the City of Monroe and the contractor who operated the system for an appeal but all of my phone calls went unanswered (left several messages). The ticket is still out there as far as I know.
The major problem I have with such a system is that it is putting the responsibility for law enforcement and citizen monitoring in the hands of a private company. Luckily, a recent case Shavitz vs. City of High Point has determined that 90% of fees derived from the cameras must be turned over to schools in accordance with NC laws and cannot be diverted to the municipalities themselves. Based on this ruling, it is no longer economical for municipalities to operate such systems. I would have rather had the program ousted for reasons due to constitutionality and due process, but this will suffice in the mean time. Interestingly enough, the Town of Chapel Hill voted in 2004 to eliminate their contract with Affilated Computer Services, citing concern about the company's profit motivations (company got 96% of revenues) and "the mechanization and privatization of police functions". You can find a story on that decision here.
I can appreciate the intentions of the SafeLight program; attempting to make intersections safer. But to me, there's something fundamentally wrong with outsourcing our government's normal functions to private contractors. The conservative catch phrase of "smaller government" seems to be a ruse. The outsourcing of government functions still provides the "big government" functions they claim to be against, but often at higher cost and much less accountability to the populations in which they are serving.
For example, the City of Raleigh uses a contractor to administer its parking enforcement program. Park Raleigh (privately owned by Central Parking Corporation) has been enraging downtown visitors for the last few years with their aggressive and sometimes questionable enforcement practices, including using little known parking regulations to "boost ticket sales". While they are reportedly paid a flat rate to provide ticketing services, they no doubt need to keep the number of citations up to provide a reasonable return on investment so that the City of Raleigh will renew their contracts.
Their citation appeal forms are official looking forms, with a logo with capital building on it and their name, which no doubt was chosen because it implies a governmental association.I'm sure that many people aren't even aware that they are a private company, as most people are used to having the municipalities themselves provide these services. They even term the appeal process as an "administrative review" which is a misnomer, as no publicly elected or appointed administrators review the appeal, of which determinations can be as arbitrary as the company's manager wishes. In fact, its probably in the best interest of the company to make sure that they aren't overturned so that they will not be viewed as being incompetent or inconviencing the public with erroneous citations.
Fast forward to a few months ago, when I recieved the forwarded ticket in the mail. It turns out the Union County/ City of Monroe used a private contractor to install and operate a red light camera system. They own and operate the system, taking a slice out of each ticket for their own purposes and remitting the rest to the municpality. I tried contacting the Union County, the City of Monroe and the contractor who operated the system for an appeal but all of my phone calls went unanswered (left several messages). The ticket is still out there as far as I know.
The major problem I have with such a system is that it is putting the responsibility for law enforcement and citizen monitoring in the hands of a private company. Luckily, a recent case Shavitz vs. City of High Point has determined that 90% of fees derived from the cameras must be turned over to schools in accordance with NC laws and cannot be diverted to the municipalities themselves. Based on this ruling, it is no longer economical for municipalities to operate such systems. I would have rather had the program ousted for reasons due to constitutionality and due process, but this will suffice in the mean time. Interestingly enough, the Town of Chapel Hill voted in 2004 to eliminate their contract with Affilated Computer Services, citing concern about the company's profit motivations (company got 96% of revenues) and "the mechanization and privatization of police functions". You can find a story on that decision here.
I can appreciate the intentions of the SafeLight program; attempting to make intersections safer. But to me, there's something fundamentally wrong with outsourcing our government's normal functions to private contractors. The conservative catch phrase of "smaller government" seems to be a ruse. The outsourcing of government functions still provides the "big government" functions they claim to be against, but often at higher cost and much less accountability to the populations in which they are serving.
For example, the City of Raleigh uses a contractor to administer its parking enforcement program. Park Raleigh (privately owned by Central Parking Corporation) has been enraging downtown visitors for the last few years with their aggressive and sometimes questionable enforcement practices, including using little known parking regulations to "boost ticket sales". While they are reportedly paid a flat rate to provide ticketing services, they no doubt need to keep the number of citations up to provide a reasonable return on investment so that the City of Raleigh will renew their contracts.
Their citation appeal forms are official looking forms, with a logo with capital building on it and their name, which no doubt was chosen because it implies a governmental association.I'm sure that many people aren't even aware that they are a private company, as most people are used to having the municipalities themselves provide these services. They even term the appeal process as an "administrative review" which is a misnomer, as no publicly elected or appointed administrators review the appeal, of which determinations can be as arbitrary as the company's manager wishes. In fact, its probably in the best interest of the company to make sure that they aren't overturned so that they will not be viewed as being incompetent or inconviencing the public with erroneous citations.
I just read your comments on Safe Light. I am very concerned that our government in Cary, NC are unaware of the case, Shavitz vs. City of High Point. Where would I find a copy of the case to present to the City Council members?
I also received a red light citation, did not pay the fine, received a default letter that doubled my original fine to $100.00 then in less that 20 days received a collection notice from a lawyer in Toledo, Ohio stating that if I did not pay my credit would be destroyed.......
Posted by Kellie on January 03, 2008 at 12:39 PM EST #
Sorry to hear about your problems with the Cary Safelight Program Kellie. I have contacted the Cary PD to discuss this subject and have not had my voicemails returned. It is possible that the town has the resources and desire to continue the program, even if it is not advantageous financially or perhaps they operate the system themselves.
Posted by Stephen Kleinschmit on January 09, 2008 at 01:52 AM EST #