If there ever was a system that says ‘taxation by citation,’ the North Carolina red-light camera system is it.
A little background.
In March 2022 the North Carolina State Court of Appeals ruled that Greenville’s red-light camera program was unconstitutional but not because of the cameras themselves. Under the state’s RLC citation scheme, expenses from fines cannot exceed 10 percent of the income, and the rest of the fine money funnels to the school district where the cameras reside.
The problem with Greenville cameras, the expenses topped out at 28 percent. The court ruled that Greenville’s funding framework violated the state’s constitutional directive that the ‘clear proceeds’ of all collected fines must be used exclusively to maintain free public schools.
Two motorists who received $100 RLC tickets sued the city and the Pitt County Board of Education and have won this round at the appeals court level.
Due to the ruling from seven months ago, the Greenville City Council finally decided not to renew the American Traffic Solutions (ATS) camera contract in early November, and the cams went dark on November 15th. The cams had been up since 2017.
In a scathing rebuke over the cameras, local columnist Bobby Burns said that when he wrote a column in May 2016, before the RLC installation, he suggested that the Pitt County Board of Education mind its own business. He claimed his reasoning was simple—the school board had no business involved in Greenville’s policing efforts.
Even though the cams are off, the city has already appealed to the North Carolina Supreme Court, which has yet to indicate if it will hear the case.
But, as we already know, the lure can be too great regarding RLC camera revenue.
Immediately following the city council vote to cancel the RLC contract, the Pitt County Board of Education adopted a resolution that supported the city’s efforts to go to the state legislature. The city and the Board want the cameras back on, and they are okay with the costs of the cameras to be paid from the proceeds of fines assessed against violators.
The city of Fayetteville already did so—a legislative bill allowed the city and the school system to manage a joint contract, which helped get around the constitutional quandary somehow.
Columnist Bobby Burns asked a straightforward question about this kind of legislative action—why should laws be made to subvert the meaning of the state Constitution? He stated that this kind of behavior doesn’t seem appropriate and it’s not fair to the other 20 NC cities and towns that also are allowed to operate RLCs.
The issue now is whether voters should decide on making a change to the state’s Constitution.
What do you think?