Ocean Township, New Jersey file complaint against departmental demands that they achieve numeric traffic ticket goals.

Ocean Township, New Jersey police officers pressured by supervisors to achieve a specific traffic ticket quotas filed a grievance last week against their own department. With the support of their local police union, Patrolmen Les Laffan and Doug Willms suggested that negative performance reports placed in their personnel files may run afoul of a state law prohibiting numeric ticket quotas. The reports specified the exact number of tickets all officers must write or face disciplinary action including the loss of opportunities to earn overtime pay.

“Your motor vehicle enforcement must improve by April 1st to a rate that would have you meet the standard of ten summons(es) a month or your participation in voluntary duties with this department will be suspended and departmental charges will be considered,” the reports stated.

The Police Chief Antonio V. Amodio Jr. defended the practice to the the Asbury Park Press newspaper and maintained his department has no quotas.

“Everything from parking violations on up, these officers were only writing an average of 3 and a half summonses per month, 40-some summonses per year, which we felt was completely unacceptable,” Amodio told the Press. “The standard — and I specify standard; it’s not a quota — the standard currently being used in the department is 120 summonses per year.”

Ocean Township officials have been concerned about a seven percent drop in revenue from traffic tickets last year. In 2006, it raised $744,303 from citations but only $687,063 last year. The focus on increasing the number of traffic tickets has not resulted in any corresponding decrease in the number of accidents over the past seven years.

“When they start to mandate the high number of production to offset other revenue… that raises serious questions about which roads are toll roads and which are not,” New Jersey State Policemen’s Benevolent Association spokesman Jim Ryan told the Press.

Washington state governor advocates legislation to overturn a state supreme court ban on roadblocks.

Washington state Governor Chris Gregoire (D) announced Monday that she would push for the authority to set up roadblocks to detain and question motorists suspected of no wrongdoing. Gregoire said new legislation would be required to accomplish this in the name of stopping drunk driving. The stops would also enable state and local governments to collect millions in additional federal grant money.

“Sobriety checkpoints will be an important tool for law enforcement to catch drunk drivers and will help keep families safer when they are on the road,” Gregoire said.

Washington is currently one of eleven states that prohibits the use of roadblocks as a violation of state constitutional protections against warantless searches. Gregoire’s proposal attempts to get around this by creating a system where police would ask a judge to approve a blanket search warrant on a county-by-county basis. The legislation would also restrict roadblocks to locations which have had an “alcohol-related” collision within a one-mile radius. It is unclear how these provisions would satisfy the state’s highest court.

“This court has consistently expressed displeasure with random and suspicionless searches, reasoning that they amount to nothing more than an impermissible fishing expedition,” Washington’s Supreme Court wrote in a unanimous decision last April.

Read the rest of this entry »

Legislation approved by a Utah House committee would test speed limits of 80 MPH on I-15.

Texas may lose the distinction of being the state with the highest legal speed limit in the US. With the blessing of the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), state Rep. James A Dunnigan introduced legislation that would test the effects of higher speed limits on part of Interstate 15. The state House Business and Labor Committee unanimously approved Dunnigan’s bill on Wednesday.

“The engineering studies that we conduct would determine what the appropriate speed would be,” UDOT Government Affairs Director Linda Hull explained on Wednesday. “Looking at it from the outside we think it might be eighty miles per hour.”

The test would consider the 85th percentile speed — the actual speed at which the majority of traffic is moving in safety — along with ten other factors to determine whether to increase the I-15 limit from 75 MPH to 80 or more. UDOT would report back on the safety effects of the change to legislators who would determine whether limits could be raised elsewhere in the state.

A similar bill that would have raised the speed limit to 80 MPH last year was amended before becoming law. Instead of setting a top speed of 80, that law mandates that all speed limits be set according to engineering studies. The same law also requires slower vehicles in the far left-hand lane to yield when a faster vehicle approaches from behind. Texas officials approved an 80 MPH limit on I-10 and I-20 in 2006.

The full text of the legislation is available in an 80k PDF file.

An effort to allow sheriffs to use radar on roads their departments patrol has again surfaced during the 2008 Mississippi Legislature. The measure has passed the Senate and is awaiting consideration in the House of Representatives.

Amid fears of speed traps and other concerns, radar bills have failed in many prior legislative sessions. And the issue among the public still appears as contentious as ever.

A recent unscientific online poll found respondents almost evenly divided on the issue. Just a few votes over 50 percent thought sheriffs should be allowed to use the speed enforcement devices.

Lincoln County Sheriff Steve Rushing, speaking to the Lions Club last week, said radar would be a useful tool for his department. He said radar would not be used to set up speed traps or focus on ticket writing, but he did see where it could help in some places where speeding is a concern for residents.

Speaking on integrity concerns, Rushing pointed out that voters have entrusted sheriffs with a gun and a badge to enforce the laws of the county and state.

But given the failure of radar bills, that trust apparently doesn’t extend to the issue of radar.

We suspect many lawmakers and citizens who oppose radar have no doubt their sheriffs would use the devices responsibly. Their concerns, though, seem to be with those other sheriffs who would use radar as a revenue generator.

Read the rest of this entry »

So, on Saturday, I was getting a litle bored around the house, and decided to get out for awhile. I had intended on running a few errands, doing some grocery shopping, and driving around to check out all the new construction going on.

On my way out of Lakeway, I saw one of the new “stealth” police cars that was stopped in the median of Lohmans Crossing, front and rear radar blasting away! Well, I had plenty of spare time, so I pulled over at CVS Pharmacy and got out my sign, video camera, phone, scanner, and legal excerpts book. It was the perfect spot. Right as motorist pulled onto Lohmans, there I was — and slow down they did!

Although I was there warning motorists, I could only do so from one direction. Anyone coming at the radar from the other direction had no warning. So, the cop still managed to give out tickets –FOUR that I witnessed in about 50 minutes! Actually, I think one car got ticketed for not obeying the Texas “Move Over” law.

After being there awhile, Lakeway police began getting phone calls, telling them about the sign. They didn’t even approach me at first. They just gathered in the CVS parking lot, talking to each other. You KNOW they were talking about what they could do, probably calling their supervisor, checking legal statutes, etc.

Finally, they all left, but I guess one cop (officer Adams) drew the short straw and came over to talk to me. He did a really nice job of handling the situation by talking about safety, agreeing with the idea of me “helping them out” by holding my sign, saying that it was an “interesting idea” and all about safety, etc. I think it was all kind of tongue-in-cheek for him, though — In fact, I’m certain it was. Anyway, here’s the video. Let me know what you think.

View Larger Map with MORE Austin Speed Traps!