Author Archives: wthornburg

Will St. Ann stop the I70 enforcement?

October 14, 2015

St. Ann is a small city of less than 13,000 people that patrols a stretch of Interstate 70 near St. Louis’s Lambert Field. The sight of police cars lined up on this stretch of I70 is normal one for most St. Louis residents. According to reports, St. Ann has been able to replace a large amount of lost sales tax revenue with its traffic enforcement efforts. St. Ann lost the sales tax revenue when a mall shut down. In 2014, St. Ann issued approximately 8,000 traffic citations. The revenue from the municipal court rose to $2.6 million that year, more than doubling the amount collected in 2009.

Better Together, an organization critical of the St. Louis Area Municipal System, lists that St. Ann collected 37.47% of its revenue from municipal court fines and fees. This number is disputed by St. Ann officials. Prior to the recent law going into effect in late summer of 2015, municipalities were capped at 30% of their operating budget being obtained from traffic citations. Now that cap is at 12.5%.

St. Ann Police Chief Aaron Jimenez acted proactively as the new cap was going to drastically cut his budget. He laid off 10 officers.  Mayor Michael Corcoran thinks differently. He stated St. Ann is “on solid ground” but other St. Louis area municipalities will be drastically impacted. The Mayor did acknowledge that the traffic officers were paying their own salaries with the revenue collected on I70. Chief Jimenez stated he doesn’t care where the money goes and that will continue to enforce the speed limits in the same fashion.

St. Ann also had a practice of arresting individuals for minor traffic offenses and requiring them to post a bail amount to be released. Several public action groups sued the city for violating the constitution. As a result of a court order St. Ann is required to release those arrested with no bond or on their own recognizance. There is an exception if the person is able to see the judge within 24 hours. Chief Jimenez stated that the jail is down to three or four prisoners at a time. This is in direct contrast to the previous 50 or 60 inmates St. Ann typically held, often for neighboring municipalities. This holding system also brought in over a quarter million dollars each year.

St. Louis Municipalities are seeing a drop in traffic ticket revenue

October 12, 2015

The St. Louis Area has had quite a bit of criticism over the years due to its municipal court system. The St. Louis area alone has over 81 different municipal courts. Each court has its own ordinances, court staff, judge and prosecutor. Many have their own police department tasked with upholding the laws of that specific municipality. In 2013, 10 of the 25 municipal courts with the most fines and fees per capita were in St. Louis County (2013). Further, 19 of the 25 courts that issued the most warrants per capita were in North St. Louis County.

Things are changing though. Recently the traffic reform bill went into effect limiting the amount of revenue municipalities can obtain through traffic tickets. The St. Louis area was specifically targeted and received a lower revenue cap than the rest of the state. This law went into effect at the end of August, but municipalities were lowering their ticket revenue from January to July of 2015.

From data that was self-reported by the municipal courts, overall the 81 municipal courts saw a 39% decrease in traffic cases filed and 38% decrease in money collected.

  • Ferguson filed just 1,330 traffic citations between January and July. Last year the number of tickets during that timeframe was 7,031. The Ferguson Municipal Court revenue fell by 58%.
  • St. Louis County municipal court which handles unincorporated areas with divisions in north, south and west saw a 70% drop in traffic cases files and revenue collected.
  • St. Louis County is running 20% behind the Kansas City area.  This is notable as St. Louis County has over 300,000 more residents than Kansas City.
  • Bellefontaine Neighbors entered mediation after it was revealed that the department punished officers for not writing enough tickets or “meeting their quota.” Revenue in that jurisdiction is down 42% and number of cases filed is down 70%. The police chief calls this a shift due to emphasizing the community driven “serve and protect” aspect of police work instead of just enforcing the law.
  • Berkeley is down 74% by reducing their traffic unit from 4 officers last year  to one this year.
  • St Ann is down 11%, but claims it is because the Missouri Department of Transportation ended the travel safe zone in 8/2014 that doubled fines for speeders.
  • Hanley Hills citations fell from 521 last year to just 101 this year. Last year they issued 708 warrants to only 199 this year.
  • Other places have started issuing warning instead of citations.

While some places are reducing the number of tickets written, others are issuing more.

  • In Kinloch in 2014, 453 tickets were issued and revenue was at $36,104. The 1st seven months of this year has seen those numbers rise to 616 tickets with revenue of $42,808. Kinloch police chief says the increase could be due to crime fluctuations. Kinloch has a strict no tolerance policy when it comes to illegal dumping. This type of non-traffic charge is not limited by the municipal reform measure. There are no limits on fines and individuals can be held on a cash bond. Non traffic matters do not count towards the revenue cap.
  • Sunset Hills, Dellwood, Crestwood, Manchester, Eureka and Maryland Heights have increased the number of tickets written from 2014 to 2015.
  • Sunset hills has increased its revenue collection by 37%.
  • Some court dismissed old cases, but Vinita Park reset them on the court calendar.

Missouri Municipal Reforms go into effect today August 28, 2015

August 28, 2015

Senate Bill #5 goes into effect today. This bill legislated sweeping reforms to the county and municipal courts in the State of Missouri. Specifically targeted at traffic violations, this law regulates income the courts can receive and penalties they may order for traffic violators.

The law prohibits fines for traffic violations to exceed $300 when combined with court costs. This appears to be per violation and not a max fine from any one individual. Failure to pay the fines will not result in incarceration as previously allowed. Further failure to appear and/or pay will not allow the courts to issue new charges for failure to appear.

Judge Thornhill of the Springfield Municipal Court was quoted as stating, “So therefore, in that situation when people owe money but don’t come in and pay, or don’t come in and tell us why our hands are tied.”

Counties and municipalities are permitted to seize income tax refunds for amounts owed in excess of $25.00. There do not appear to be provisions to prevent courts from requesting the Department of Revenue to suspend a violators license for failure to pay. Driving While Suspended charges carry 12 points and can be filed as misdemeanors.

The amount of operating revenue that a municipality or court is permitted to receive from traffic violations has been lowered from 30% to 20% for all areas of the State except St. Louis County and its municipalities. In St. Louis County the percentage of operating revenue has been lowered to 12.5%. Each county, town, city or village will be required to file with the State Auditor a report showing amounts of fines, bond forfeitures, and courts costs and the percentage of those moneys in relation to the general operating budget of the county, town, city or village. Failure to comply could result in a loss of sales tax revenue, or in extreme cases disincorporation.

 

 

Nixon signs traffic court reforms into law

July 10, 2015

July 9, 2015, Missouri Governor, Jay Nixon, sign into law a new bill to reform the municipal court system across the state. The law, set to go into effect on August 28, 2015, is attempting to end “predatory” practices aimed at the poor. According to reports, the municipal courts in St. Louis County alone generated more than $52 million last year.

Most municipalities with have three to six years to comply with the provisions in the new law. These provisions include limits on fines, banning of failure to appear charges for missing a court date and jail as a sentence for minor traffic offenses. Further cities will be limited in how much of their operating budget can be obtained through court fines and fees.  This will be enforced by requiring the municipalities to provide annual financial reports to the state auditor. Failure to provide these reports or comply with other provisions in the new law might require the transfer of all pending cases to state court. It might also cause the municipality to lose sales tax revenue. Other consequences could be disincorporation.

Other requirements under the new law:

  1. City ordinance must be available to the public;
  2. Municipal judges must certify their courts are in compliance;
  3. Police departments must be accredited;
  4. Police departments must have written policies on use of force and pursuit;  and
  5. The Missouri Supreme Court is required to develop rules regarding conflicts of interest in the municipal court system.

Special Group Appointed to Review Missouri Municipal Court Practices

May 16, 2015

Headed by former Missouri Supreme Court Chief Justices, Edward D. Robertson, Jr and Ann K. Covington and Appellate Judge Booker t. Shaw, an eleven member group has been created by the Missouri Supreme Court to study municipal court practices and recommend improvements. Per an order from Chief Justice Mary R. Russell, the group will have a few public hearings.

After the Department of Justice report on municipal court practices, the Court felt it necessary to appoint this group to look into, among other things, the revenue raising for municipalities from the court system. This comes right on the heels of a recent General Assembly bill aimed at reducing the percentage of a city’s operating budget that comes from traffic fines.

We should expect a preliminary report by September 1, 2015 and the final by December 1, 2015.

Missouri Supreme Court to decide on camera tickets

December 4, 2014

On Tuesday, the Missouri Supreme Court heard arguments on three separate cases regarding speeding and red light cameras. The cases involved red light camera tickets out of St. Louis City and St. Peters and speeding camera tickets out of Moline Acres. These three cases hit slightly different issues regarding the legality of camera tickets. The ordinances from these jurisdictions were overturned by lower courts that deemed them in violation of state law.

St. Louis City takes a picture of the license plate and issues the ticket to the owner of the vehicle. Proponents indicate that the over 50 intersection cameras free up the police and make the community safer. Police Chief Sam Dotson reasons that the cameras mean more officers are out patrolling neighborhoods instead of enforcing traffic laws. The opponents argue that the owner is only operating the vehicle 70-80% of the time. The onus is put on the owner to prove that s/he is not the driver instead of requiring the City Prosecutors to prove that a violation had occurred. While the St. Louis City tickets were overturned, the judge put a stay on the order to allow for the appeal. City is still issuing tickets; however, all fines collected are being placed in an escrow account pending the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court.

The cameras in St. Peters show the license plate and the driver. Pursuant to the attorneys for the city of St. Peters, the tickets are issued to the operator not necessarily the owner. These tickets do not assess points upon payment. The lower courts found the ordinance in violation of the Missouri Law that requires points to be assessed for a moving violation.

Moline Acres uses speeding cameras. Carl Lumley, attorney for Moline Acres, argues that the owners are ticketed for allowing their vehicles to speed. The citation is for not supervising their vehicle correctly not for speeding. Owners can attempt to prove that they did not give permission to the driver to operate the vehicle. Once again this places the burden of proof on the owner instead of the Prosecutors.

The legislature could have approved a proposal earlier this year that would have set forth a legal framework, but the proposed bills did not pass the May session. The Supreme Court decision will hopefully settle the uncertainty that currently follows on the camera tickets.  The decision will hopefully come out by the end of the year.

Missouri Appellate Courts upholds operating a vehicle even when asleep

November 10, 2014

A recent Missouri Appellate decision out of the Southern District of Missouri has clarified what it means to be operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated. It affirmed that you can be “operating” a vehicle even if you are asleep or unconscious.

Defendant was found guilty of Felony DWI and received a four-year suspended sentence. He appealed his conviction asserting that there was not enough evidence to show that he was under the influence of alcohol at the time he was operating the motor vehicle.

The facts of the case as presented to the court are that the officer responded to an early morning report that there was a driver asleep behind the wheel at an intersection. When the officer arrived the engine was still running and the car was in drive. The officer observed defendant as follows; “eyes were closed, his head was resting on his chest, and he was drooling.” The defendant had his foot on the brake.

The Officer upon contact with the Defendant believed him to be intoxicated due to the strong odor of alcohol on his breath and the admission that he had been drinking at a friend’s house earlier.

Defendant argued that because there was no evidence to indicate how long the truck had been idling for, there was no evidence that Defendant was intoxicated at the time he fell asleep at the light.

Missouri statute 577.010.1 provides that “a person commits the crime of [DWI] if he operates a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated or drugged condition.” As the statute does not define the term operating, the court looked to the dictionary which defines it as “to cause to function usually by direct personal effort: work.”

The State argued that a vehicle can be “operated” even if the person is asleep or unconscious and the Court agreed. The State and the Court looked at precedents where previous drivers were found to be in operation of the vehicle even while unconscious because they were engaging the machinery of the vehicle (eg. foot on the brake pedal).

 

Representative Clay calling for federal review of St. Louis Courts

October 29, 2014

After the recent shooting of unarmed Mike Brown in Ferguson, many St. Louis area jurisdictions have come under scrutiny. Protestors are claiming that these courts, especially in North County overtax the residents with excessive court fees and fines. Better Together which is an organization advocating the consolidation of St. Louis City and St. Louis County, issued a report indicating that 34% of all the municipal fines and fees in the entire state of Missouri come out of the approximately ninety St. Louis Area municipal courts.

State law caps revenue from traffic cases at 30% of a city’s general revenue. Ten St. Louis Courts are currently being audited by Missouri Auditor Tom Schweich to determine if these municipalities have been abusing their authority in order to obtain more income from tickets.

Using the report from Better Together, Missouri Democrat Representative William Lacy Clay is calling for the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the St. Louis Municipal Court. Rep. Clay represents constituents out of North St. Louis County. He alleges that these jurisdictions target minority and low income residents as “ATM machines for local government.”