Money – not justice or traffic safety – is at the heart of the squabble between the state and cities over traffic fines.
A half dozen cities are taking advantage of provisions in state law that allow municipalities to enforce minor traffic violations – infractions such as failure to yield, or rolling through stop signs, committed within city limits.
These cities – Roseville is one – have interpreted the law to mean that they can issue city tickets or administrative citations and collect the fines. That means the state doesn’t get its cut as it would if Roseville police had issued regular tickets. It also means that drivers get a break.
Roseville has set its fine at $100 and collects all the money. If police issued a regular ticket, the minimum fine plus penalty assessment would cost an errant driver $201, of which the city would get just $31.50. The rest would be distributed to the state, the county, courts and various other government funds. The violation would also go on the driver’s DMV record and probably lead to higher insurance rates.
The squabble over who collects the fines raises a separate issue – that state traffic fines have become wildly disconnected from the actual violations involved.
A $201 ticket for rolling through a stop sign or making an illegal left turn is excessive. Failure to carry proof of insurance carries a $300 fine. Illegal parking in a handicapped zone costs violators $950.
For someone struggling to pay rent, such fines can be economically devastating.
State Sen. Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, has introduced legislation to stop cities from issuing their own tickets.
She argues that the state is being deprived of “legitimate revenue,” and good drivers are subsidizing insurance rates for bad drivers whose violations never get reported to the DMV.
Oropeza is right, but until state traffic fines are scaled in a fair way that reasonably matches the offense to the penalty, most drivers and voters will want cities to take the Roseville route.