- November 17, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
Palm Coast may suspend its red light camera program in light of a court ruling that prohibits third-party vendors — like camera company American Traffic Solutions — from issuing uniform traffic citations, requiring that local governments do that work themselves.
In a conference call Monday with ATS, Palm Coast City Manager Jim Landon said at a Dec. 9 City Council workshop, ATS proposed that Palm Coast take over the UTCs, which the city has been paying ATS to handle.
“And I said, ‘Over my dead body,’” Landon said. “And as soon as I said that — they didn’t like to hear that — the rest of the conversation was not quite as congenial. Because they don’t like the other two options. They don’t like not sending out UTCs, and they don’t like suspending the entire program.” UTCs are sent out to vehicle owners who fail to pay their initial $158 red light camera violation notices. They carry a $264 fine.
The court ruling, coming from the Fourth District Court of Appeal, has been stayed pending appeal, leaving municipalities unsure of how to comply with the now-unsettled law. At a City Council workshop two weeks ago, the council discussed the possibility of going to a circuit court judge for a declaration on whether the city’s contract with ATS remains valid.
For now, the city’s other options, laid out by Landon at the Dec. 9 meeting, would be to suspend the program entirely; continue the program and have city staff deal with UTCs; or continue what the city is doing now — issuing $158 violation notices, but not letting ATS issue the UTCs.
City Attorney Bill Reischmann said the city’s “cleanest option” would be to “suspend it entirely, and then see what falls out of the tree there.”
The risk of doing so, he said, is that ATS could sue the city for damages.
Netts noted that the courts seemed to be “not particularly thrilled” with red light cameras. “So we suspend the whole kit and caboodle,” he said. “ATS goes to court, goes in front of a judge who doesn’t like the whole process to begin with. If I were a betting man, I’d bet they’d lose that.”
But it would still be risky. The safest option, legally, would be for the city to handle the UTCs itself, Reischmann said. But that’s expensive: The city would have to add work hours, and possibly staff.
“And ATS will be doing less work under their contract — receiving the same compensation and doing less work,” Netts said. Reischmann said the city could move to amend the contract, and Councilman Jason DeLorenzo said, “Any contract amendment, including changing the business rules, I’m going to move for a change of the date — the ending date — for a significantly shorter one,” he said. The city’s current contract with ATS ends in 2019.
Council members asked Reischmann to research options, including that of seeking a declaratory judgment on the contract, an option council members expressed interest in.
“I want to make sure we stay in a place where we’re not very vulnerable to any big loss,” Councilman Steven Nobile said. “And if that’s right here, until this case is finalized, I’m OK with it. But I still would like to get a shot right now, while the poker’s hot, at saying, ‘This contract is void. You’re out.'”
