Hey, there! Log in / Register
Cambridge councilor wants parking, traffic fines tied to income
By adamg on Mon, 04/13/2015 - 6:39am
Cambridge City Councilor Nadeem Mazen thinks the cost of motor-vehicle infractions unfairly burdens low-income residents - and lets the well off just laugh off infractions - so he's proposing the city start basing fines on drivers' income.
The council considers Mazen's request at its meeting tonight, Robert Winter alerts us.
Mazen's proposal is known as "day fining" because fines are based on a person's daily income, rather than a set amount per infraction. In his request to have the city manager develop a day-fine system for Cambridge, he writes such fines
Lessen the impact on vulnerable individuals and provides a meaningful deterrent against unethical behavior for residents of means who would otherwise treat civil fines as a trivial fee.
He acknowledged that past trial efforts at day fining in the US have been hampered by difficulties determining a driver's income, but said the current state of technology means that shouldn't be an issue anymore. In any case, he adds:
Cambridge's unique position as both a technological hub and the home to renowned educational and research institutions such as MIT and Harvard allows the city to coordinate with leaders in the fields of technology and public policy on innovative legislation.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Equal protection under law
Equal protection under law anyone? This is unconstitutional.
Well it is
The Communist PRC.
Ah yes.
That must be why graduated tax levels on income and property value don't exist, and why there are no massive exemptions on inheritance taxes, or any of a dozen other federal and state policies designed only to target the wealthy.
Your dislike of it doesn't have any bearing on its legality.
You're comparing apples to oranges.
A graduated tax is not the same as a fee for an infraction, weather it be improper disposal of waste, failure to remove snow from your sidewalk or a parking ticket.
The graduated income tax
The graduated income tax required a constitutional amendment to make it legal!
Almost right
The income tax required a constitutional amendment; said amendment says nothing about the rate, graduated or otherwise.
You'd have more luck with the
You'd have more luck with the Eighth Amendment prohibition on "excessive fines." And even then, you'd almost certainly have no luck. Without getting too deep into the weeds, the state and cities have broad discretion to set fine levels where they want unless they're grossly excessive which is a high bar. Just because you don't like a policy, doesn't mean you get to call it the "U" word.
"The wealthy" are not a
"The wealthy" are not a "protected class" so to speak. At least not yet.
I take it you haven't done any research on this.
In places where these types of fines have existed for years, they are often called "day fines". The law might say that running a stop light will cost 2 days, for example. When you run the light and get a ticket, you multiply your daily wage times the days for that infraction, and that's how much you pay. Everybody pays the same % of their income for the same infraction. How is that not fair?
The current system violates Equal Protection. This would fix th
Equal protection was designed for the disadvantaged. The current system actually violates the Equal Protection Clause, since it places significantly more harm on the disadvantaged than the wealthy.
How so?
Could you be more specific about your argument that a law that states, for example, "The fine for speeding 20 to 40 MPH over the limit is 1 week's income." violates any theory of equal protection?
Are you a constitutional lawyer?
Tell me how it's "equal protection" when a poor individual must lay the same amout of money for a a violation as a rich person? The rich person doesn't even flinch, but the poor person could very well end up in a downward spiral financially.
I know, I know... Stupid poors. It's their own fault they're broke and not smart enough to go run a hedge fund, right?
Modern day nomadic lifestyle
Modern day nomadic lifestyle people often times don't care about a few bucks or even tickets. Should we change our entire ticking system because they wouldn't flinch about a fine either?
Awesome and Impossible
This is commonly done in the wealthier European countries and results in CEOs getting comically large speeding tickets. It makes perfect sense as a $50 ticket to someone making millions is hardly a discouragement.
But there is no way Cambridge is going to pull the last tax filing on everyone who is issued a ticket. Simply no way to make this happen on a local level if major changes aren't made on the federal and state level first.
I really love the Scandinavian system
...because it lets me bask in gentle schadenfreude like this.
Seriously, though--it'll never happen, because you probably can't legislate this at a municipal level, but I would be 100% in support of it. $200 traffic tickets don't deter people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, and this state (like every other state) refuses to revoke the licenses of people who are serial offenders, so let's hit 'em where it hurts.
> this state (like every
> this state (like every other state) refuses to revoke the licenses of people who are serial offenders
I think you found the real problem here...
Only in Cambridge
If you can't do the time, don't commit the crime. Why not just get it over with and just ban cars in Cambridge.
So if you CAN do the time, just do all the crime you want?
The fines are meaningless to the wealthy, so parking and traffic enforcement doesn't really apply to them. Graduated fine schedules could realign the law with its intent.
Traffic violations...
...aren't crimes.
Fine with me, as long as
Fine with me, as long as Cambridge also bans a lack of frequent transit service to within a 5-minute walk of all points in the city, 24/7.
If it matters, I don't have a car. I don't want to waste my life waiting for infrequent buses to go from, say, Cambridgeport to West Cambridge. So I go by bike. But a lot of people aren't physically able to do this.
Easier way to do this
Instead of developing an as-of-yet non-existent system, I'd much rather Cambridge stopped with this ridiculous carrot-and-stick approach to traffic and general mobility. Instead of retrofitting the parking fine system to account for "transportation justice" in a legally dubious manner, how about the city really start to get serious about providing options other than cars for low-income residents. And I'm not talking some fancy paint here and there, I'm talking about actual, connected, continuous, grade-separated bike infrastructure or slimming down lanes here and there to force lower speeds. Provide options that aren't automobiles and traffic infractions for people without the means to pay for them will decrease as they no have access to other modes.
A Mercedes rolling though a stop sign in no more or less illegal than a 93 Corolla, this is just political fodder.
A Mercedes rolling though a
If the fine were merely a fee that bought you the privilege of breaking the law, then you would be correct. But if the fine is to act as a deterrent, then I would argue that a $50 fine is going to be much less effective against a Mercedes owner than a 93 Corolla owner.
So if this counselor was
So if this counselor was pulled over he would be ok with a fine that relates to his high income?
No it probably make a call
To Cambridge PD and have it tossed.
Monetary fines are a poor
Monetary fines are a poor approach to achieving this.
Requiring hours in Court-supervised community service provides an equal impact. Having to spend a Saturday morning raking leaves has a fairly equal impact on a CEO as on a low-income worker. Just make sure to have reasonable flexibility in scheduling so you don't cause either to lose their job.
When daily incomes differ, taking four hours out of each's days is an effective way to base fines on daily income.
What planet are you on? A low
What planet are you on? A low income worker may not have any days off between multiple jobs. Or if they do, might need that time to get their car fixed or take care of other responsibilities. Not to mention that low income jobs tend to be far more labor intensive than six figure jobs, requiring more dedicated rest time.
This system already exists.
This system already exists. If you laugh off the first one, the system hits you harder the second time etc. Being able to laugh off the first one is the result of doing well in school and working hard, one of the rewards. Sure there are a few people that have inherited this capability, but no system is perfect.
Some interesting possibilities here
I suspect basing the fine on income would violate equal protection, but there are other ways the system could possibly achieve some interesting outcomes. The ticketing system ties into the RMV and the fine could be based on the value of the vehicle, just as the excise tax is. More expensive the car, the higher the ticket. Better, why not base it on average fuel efficiency (or lack thereof)? This might incent people to drive more fuel efficient cars. I could see Cambridge getting behind that.
So Tesla owners could drive
So Tesla owners could drive their Model S's around town at 100 mph and face no fines at all?
And where do people keep getting this idea that wealth is somehow protected by the 14th amendment? By that same token, means tested access to health care, public housing, education, etc. would be illegal as well. Thankfully it just doesn't work that way.
All this hand-wringing
As if any crappy driver gets pulled over anytime anyway.
Poverty an impediment to higher fines
is probably the real issue for Cambridge. They would really like to charge much higher fines until cars are finally eradicated from its streets.
Seems its being tried elsewhere in the USA: "WHEREAS: Pilot programs in Staten Island, NY, Phoenix, Arizona, and Milwaukee, WI demonstrated that day-fines could be implemented easily, with little interruption to the day to day operations of the departments that handle them;"
All I want to know is this
Will the stenographer's notes, transcribed into language we all can understand, be posted on the Cambridge City Council's website?
The City of Cambridge's City Council meeting minutes leave out information of vital interest to those interested in the politics of Cambridge. The meetings are not shown on cable system's in the greater Cambridge area other than Cambridge. Contact the Cambridge City Clerk to request the full transcripts of the City Council meetings and post them online.
!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Okay what is it today? Swap your Uhub persona with someone elses day?
(I've caught two other users today mimicking other users..)
Who should I be today? Swirly? AdamG? Michael Kerpan?
Nonsense
Although I do not live in Cambridge, I have long had a deep interest in the machinations of the government of the City of Cambridge. They are the only jurisdiction in the United States that elects their councilors via single transferrable vote proportional representation.
And as others on this board knows, they are not barred from providing a verbatim transcript of their proceedings, unlike the city where I live.
well
your post was almost verbatim to theszak's posts he makes with the same subject, but about Boston City Council.
Thank you
I even did it off the top of my head.
He once coined the phrase "validly public public documents." That was a doozy.
Please provide, in plain ASCII format...
:-D
Watch them on-line. They're
Watch them on-line. They're a real snooze-fest.
How about..
Imprisoning the car?
If the moving violation is severe, require that the car be impounded or denver-booted for a day or two.
That will accomplish the task of making sure the punishment stings equally.
Habeas carpus!
Habeas carpus!
It wouldn't though
Poor person gets fired for calling in carless to their job, rich person pays for a cab on what they spend on lunch most days or works from home or takes a personal day.
Hey Cambridge
You might not need to raise so much money through fines if you didn't just approve 230K for a (expletive) public toilet. I can't believe you actually let 12-year olds vote on something.
Hey Will,
Hey Will,
We don't care what you think.
-Residents of Cambridge
FTFY
Then don't read UH
Exit's over there. I'm sure "I was here first, screw you" resonates with a proud resident of Greater Boston such as yourself.
Only a complete moonbat would disagree with somebody slamming a body who seeks to raise fines.
Context?
Context?
Is that a wheelchair accessible self-cleaning public toilet?
Because frankly, deploying those things is well worth the money if you want a civilized public environment.
How much for a toilet?
i agree public toilets make sense in te city. But $200k + for one blows my mind.
You a homeowner?
I'm betting that you aren't if you think that is a lot of money for a facility that sees more than four or five rear ends in a day.
Oh, but I don't get why that school cafeteria cost $500,000 when my home kitchen renovation was only $10,000.
Cambridge
Makes more than enough on their parking tickets alone.
I understand they have relatively low taxes, too.
Not just "relatively low"
The lowest.
If there is an accident involving
a Prius and a 10 speed what do we do? Which operator should be charged if they are both environmentally aware? Check their bank statements?
You've got it all wrong
This is not about environmental justice. It is about economic justice (or at least making sure the rich are screwed as much as the poor are.) so out with their most recent tax returns.
My question would be- if I am driving in Cambridge, will I be required to carry my last paystub in addition to my license, registration, and proof of insurance? If only the stenographic report of the meeting were available!
Do parent incomes for students count?
Have your FAFSA filed? With the costs of everything rising in Cambridge, they will be among the poorest left there except for projects, section 8 and like set-aside housing.
Sounds like somebody's been watching
reruns of Make Room for Daddy again -specifically, the episode where he gets stopped in Mayberry, NC for running a stop sign.
Thank you
I now have an another layer to my "six degrees of TV universes" game I play. I forgot that Make Room for Daddy gave us The Andy Griffith Show.
So many universes, so little time.
Look up the "Tommy Westphall Universe" theory to understand what I mean...
It's a win-win
...if I don't file my taxes, then I get to park wherever the hell I want for free. Makes perfect sense!
What an utterly moronic idea. My income, as menial as it is, is none of Cambridge's business.
It's okay if I run this stoplight ...
.... because I work at a non-profit for low wages
.... because I am a struggling student on financial aid
.... because I am a hard working wage-earner
.... because I am driving a Prius / riding a bicycle / and not driving a Mercedes
I think that there are studies in ethics that show that (generally good) people sometimes cut corners in some areas of moral and ethical decision making because they feel their good moral/ethical behavior in some other area makes them entitled to do so. So it would be a big problem to tie fines to income, creating a false moral/ethical equation.
You have it backwards
The moral/ethical dilemma you note is what happens now for richer people. "I don't have to follow this traffic/parking regulation because doing so has no impact on me. I will pay the fine gladly for it is so beneath my costs for the day that I would rather do that than return in 2 hours to pay the meter." That happens NOW.
If the ticket is currently $40 and you make $20/hr, then parking in a 2 hour spot and not returning because you were at work just negated the whole reason you went to work.
If you're making $300/hr, the $40 ticket in 2 hours barely makes a dent in your bottom line for even a fraction of the time, thus making it financially worth it and thus satisfying your moral dilemma of ignoring the law.
Now, if instead the fine is "2 hours of your annual pay", then the ticket is still $40 for the $20/hr worker and also $600 for the $300/hr worker and both feel the same pain and there's no moral question any more for the richer worker who can ill afford to give away 2 of his 2080 hours per year every time he needs to park somewhere...the same as the $20/hr worker who can't afford to give away 2/2080 hours either.
Here's an idea: If you
Here's an idea: If you commute to a service industry job in Cambridge, and live somewhere like Chelsea where your T commute would take upward of an hour, you can get a Cambridge parking pass for $20/year. If you live in a $3 million house off Brattle Street, you'll have to pay a bit more than that.
Boycott Cambridge
If Cambridge goes through with, there is an easy remedy: move to Newtown. Hire an Uber to take me to Cambridge. Never go out in Cambridge -- don't go to their stores,restaurants, etc.
The wealthy do this for 6 months and guess how long this stuff idea lasts?
Taxing the wealthy and other stupidity like this doesn't work at the local level. Only the federal level where there is much less mobility
Of course Liz Warren would be happy to help out when she becomes President.