senate votes to limit Coburg traffic income

July 12,2005
The Oregonian
By Grant Schulte


The Oregon Senate moved Monday to cap the amount of money Coburg officials can collect from Interstate 5 speeding tickets, following charges that the city created a speed trap to fill coffers.

The dispute between the city and some lawmakers resurfaced with the 22-9 vote on a bill that would limit its speeding-ticket revenue to 10 percent of the city budget.

A similar measure, enacted in 2004, let cities use fines only from their own jurisdiction. Coburg annexed land across I-5 -- bringing that section of the highway under its oversight.

This time, Senate Bill 1074 is intended to stick: It applies only to Coburg.

The bill sends an unmistakable message to the city's leaders, who "thumbed their nose at this Legislature," said Sen. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, the measure's sponsor. The bill's fate in the House remains unclear, though Prozanski said the leadership has signaled it will allow hearings.

Prozanski said the proposed cap would still place Coburg among cities that earn the most revenue from speeding tickets statewide -- about $120,000 a year.

"It's a tax on driving," said Senate Minority Leader Ted Ferrioli, R-John Day. Worse, he said, the city's intense focus on speeders undermines public trust in legitimate law enforcement.
[catching speeders is "legitimate law enforcement", it becomes abusive when a city focuses more on catching speeders then catching criminals e.g. sheriff's traffic team, and Mr. Ferrioli, placing a GPS in every car is a tax on driving. Why are you not to crying out to stop that?
]

Sen. Bill Morrisette, D-Springfield, one of the measure's sharpest critics, lambasted the Senate effort as a crackdown on officials trying to enforce the law.

"What's the problem?" asked Morrisette, a former Springfield mayor whose legislative district includes Coburg. "What do you have to complain about if you get a ticket for exceeding the speed limit?"

Morrisette said increased patrols have unearthed more serious crimes, such as drug trafficking, along the heavily traveled highway while protecting drivers from accidents.


First, I do not like speed traps because I'd rather have the officers patrolling the neighborhoods instead. I thought it was very interesting when I asked a Coburg police officer about this and he told me that the majority of the tickets were for people that were driving over 80 miles an hour.

I am greatly opposed to police departments using traffic citations for source of income. That is not law enforcement, it is revenue enhancement.

Same thing with photo radar that takes your pictures and mails you a ticket.

Moreover, I am not surprise that Bill Morrisette is one of the measure's sharpest critics. Springfield was one of the first cities that I'm aware of in my area to use speed traps as the sole means of making money. I remember that within the first two weeks they cited so many people that the municipal court was telling them to back off. Officers on motorcycles were literally hiding in the bushes with only a radar gun visible to catch violators.

Fortunately, they do not do that anymore. Now it is just the occasional car sitting in a medium with its lights off.

In short, if they're doing it as a means of enforce the law, that is fine, if there sole purpose is for revenue, then I'm against it.