3 ms·

Political oversight is the issue: to supply revenue, a politician is given a choice, between raising taxes and issuing more fines. Raising taxes is always a dif

by scarmig 13y ago

Political oversight is the issue: to supply revenue, a politician is given a choice, between raising taxes and issuing more fines. Raising taxes is always a difficult battle, while jaywalkers or people who speed on the highway make a convenient target. So the latter happens more than it should. These tickets disproportionately target the poor, who have the hardest time paying them on short notice, leading to additional fines that accumulate and build on each other. So officials are incentivized to either game the system by doling out tickets more than is socially productive or by targeting people who are most likely to pay back the most in fines. The revenue has to go somewhere, but it absolutely should not go into the pockets of the agency issuing the fines. Where should it go? Best case would be to reimburse the people harmed by the social ill that's being fined: that level of targeting is hard, leaning toward impossible. Next best is to give everyone an equal share of the fines: this is also difficult, and overly costly for what would amount to a couple bucks. Third best would be to have it go into the government's general fund, to the exclusion of the agency issuing the fines. Fourth best would be going straight to the general fund. Second worst is giving it to the agency issuing the tickets, which is where we're at now. Worst of all would be allowing the officers issuing the fine to pocket it themselves, which leads to the lowest levels of ability to audit and the most perverse and misaligned incentives.

stinkytaco 13y ago
People keep saying this, but I really have nothing more than anecdotal evidence to believe that it is true. But seriously, if you are concerned, that is why we have a democratic process. Deal with it in the election. >Fourth best would be going straight to the general fund. I'm curious where you think it goes? I have worked at a number of municipalities and all revenue goes to the general fund. During the budget process departments predict expected revenue. This is taken into account when setting the city budget overall (which also takes into account tax revenue and reserves). No money "goes into the department's pockets". They account for it and turn it over to the city's auditor. Those fees go into providing city services, it's not like they are lining someone's pocket. My issue is the term "full stop". That is not a good way to deal with problem solving in the real world. I have been to municipalities where there is little to no parking enforcement or that have very lax parking laws (ahem, New York) and I don't personally find it pleasant. No system is perfect, they all require political oversight and constant vigilance, but most states have open records laws that allow you (or local press) the audit these processes and the revenue raised. All systems should have recourse in case of design flaw or human flaw. All systems should have the final say rest with citizens through their elected officials.
- scarmig 13y ago
  Couple points: 1) I said nothing about whether parking enforcement should be lax or not: that's an entirely separate question from how it's funded. 2) Municipalities do differ, but the fee associated with a ticket either often ends up divvied up to agencies related to the ticket-issuing. See [1], for instance. (I couldn't find one where that wasn't the case, but I suspect that's probably because of people complaining loudly about this issue, resulting in Google giving a bad sample) 3) The meta-political discussion seems odd to me: no one (here, at least) is saying we should move to an authoritarian regime that institutes all these regulations by fiat. Speaking for myself, I want the public to build democratic governance structures that give officials the correct incentives to maximize social good. [1] https://exploreb2b.com/articles/where-does-your-traffic-ticket-money-go https://exploreb2b.com/articles/where-does-your-traffic-tick...
  - stinkytaco 13y ago
    The meta political discussion is more to address the point that the OP made that parking tickets as a revenue source are a "social ill, full stop". It is hard for me to believe that parking revenue should not be allowed to be used to offer services to the citizens of a municipality if there is adequate political oversight. If you feel the parking money is misappropriated or downright being fraudulently collected to raise revenue, this is an issue that local elected officials are designated to deal with. If you feel that is not being done, that is what the political process is for. I am not saying that this does not occur, I am saying that there is recourse and that its occurrence does not rule out the use of parking fines as a revenue source everywhere without exception. As to point 2, I am sure there are municipalities that work like that, just that I know of none and that the article is a bit flimsy. I don't disbelieve that what you say occurs does, but I do believe that if there's an issue, it should be uncovered by a careful audit.

by scarmig 13y ago

stinkytaco 13y ago

People keep saying this, but I really have nothing more than anecdotal evidence to believe that it is true. But seriously, if you are concerned, that is why we have a democratic process. Deal with it in the election. >Fourth best would be going straight to the general fund. I'm curious where you think it goes? I have worked at a number of municipalities and all revenue goes to the general fund. During the budget process departments predict expected revenue. This is taken into account when setting the city budget overall (which also takes into account tax revenue and reserves). No money "goes into the department's pockets". They account for it and turn it over to the city's auditor. Those fees go into providing city services, it's not like they are lining someone's pocket. My issue is the term "full stop". That is not a good way to deal with problem solving in the real world. I have been to municipalities where there is little to no parking enforcement or that have very lax parking laws (ahem, New York) and I don't personally find it pleasant. No system is perfect, they all require political oversight and constant vigilance, but most states have open records laws that allow you (or local press) the audit these processes and the revenue raised. All systems should have recourse in case of design flaw or human flaw. All systems should have the final say rest with citizens through their elected officials.

scarmig 13y ago
Couple points: 1) I said nothing about whether parking enforcement should be lax or not: that's an entirely separate question from how it's funded. 2) Municipalities do differ, but the fee associated with a ticket either often ends up divvied up to agencies related to the ticket-issuing. See [1], for instance. (I couldn't find one where that wasn't the case, but I suspect that's probably because of people complaining loudly about this issue, resulting in Google giving a bad sample) 3) The meta-political discussion seems odd to me: no one (here, at least) is saying we should move to an authoritarian regime that institutes all these regulations by fiat. Speaking for myself, I want the public to build democratic governance structures that give officials the correct incentives to maximize social good. [1] https://exploreb2b.com/articles/where-does-your-traffic-ticket-money-go https://exploreb2b.com/articles/where-does-your-traffic-tick...
- stinkytaco 13y ago
  The meta political discussion is more to address the point that the OP made that parking tickets as a revenue source are a "social ill, full stop". It is hard for me to believe that parking revenue should not be allowed to be used to offer services to the citizens of a municipality if there is adequate political oversight. If you feel the parking money is misappropriated or downright being fraudulently collected to raise revenue, this is an issue that local elected officials are designated to deal with. If you feel that is not being done, that is what the political process is for. I am not saying that this does not occur, I am saying that there is recourse and that its occurrence does not rule out the use of parking fines as a revenue source everywhere without exception. As to point 2, I am sure there are municipalities that work like that, just that I know of none and that the article is a bit flimsy. I don't disbelieve that what you say occurs does, but I do believe that if there's an issue, it should be uncovered by a careful audit.