Comments on: Speed Cameras Are Detestable

By: Kim Evans

Kim Evans — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 21:39:19 +0000

COMMENT: The Charlack camera automated SPEEDING traffic ticket is NOT considered A MOVING VIOLATION therefore you can not have the amount of the ticket reduced by one of those traffic law lawyers. Charlack will give you a $35.00 rebate, of the $100.00 fine, if you attend a 3 hour Traffic Safety Class and no points will go against your license nor will your car insurance provider be notified. If this violation were treated as a moving violation would different laws apply?

By: Eapen Thampy

Eapen Thampy — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 08:01:04 +0000

Dave,
Thanks…that’s kind of the answer I was expecting. I guess my next question would be that for purposes of Article IX, what is the relationship between a MODOT approved city or county moving ordinance and the state statute it derives from? Does the ordinance operate for Article IX purposes as an independent ordinance or does it carry it with the derivative underlying state jurisdiction?

By: David Stokes

David Stokes — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 04:36:41 +0000

Eapen,
Great questions. Fun questions. The answer is apparently everything. By “everything” I mean the highway patrol, or city police departments or county sheriffs on state roads, are enforcing both local ordinances and state statutes. MoDOT and state statutes set speed limits on state highways: http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C300-399/3040000010.HTM. Cities and counties generally also set their own limits. Those limits are almost always the same as the MoDOT regulations. If not, they have to be approved by MoDOT beforehand. Of course, the highway patrol spends very little time patrolling urban areas. They are generally writing tickets on state highways in unincorporated areas, and those tickets are generally enforcing county ordinances.

By: Eapen Thampy

Eapen Thampy — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 01:50:29 +0000

Dave,
That makes sense. Let me ask you this question: when Highway Patrol writes a ticket, are they enforcing a city ordinance or state statute?

What I’m really wondering is where the money goes and what the structural authority comes from, because it makes a difference. Fines vesting from breaches of the penal code are constitutionally directed to Missouri’s education funds, and I’m curious about where all that goes.

By: David Stokes

David Stokes — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:58:18 +0000

Speeding violations are going to be city ordinances. I am not questioning the overall “right” of Charlack to enforce speeding violations with its city limits. I was just pointing out that they are going to make a lot of money from tickets on a road they do not pay to maintain, and on a road for which I think state law could be changed to prevent the use of items like speed cameras. Charlack would counter that they do pay for the police officers that attend to accidents in that stretch of highway. (There is no Charlack Fire Department.) Perhaps I could have been a little more clear there.

There have been disputes between the owners of roads and the cities they go through. I recall when the Forest Park Parkway reopened in 2006 that St. Louis County, which owned it, and Clayton, which much of it went through, disagreed over the speed limit that was to be set. For a very brief time – if memory serves me – the city and county set different speed limits on the road, and it would have been quite an issue if Clayton had issued traffic tickets for speeding violations above their speed limit but less than the county limit. The issue was resolved quickly, and I don’t think that ever happened.

By: Eapen Thampy

Eapen Thampy — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:33:40 +0000

Dave,
What is the source of the speeding violations? Is it a city ordinance or a state statute?

By: Ruth Carlson

Ruth Carlson — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:27:25 +0000

I drive that section of 170 everyday!

By: Phil

Phil — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:37:46 +0000

Amen.