How We See It: Shift Of Fines To Local Coffers No Reason To Change Law

Law enforcement agencies always have to be on guard that their actions are not misinterpreted.

For a serious example, let's consider Ferguson, Mo.: In the wake of a young man's death at the hands of an police officer, every person standing behind a badge must take extraordinary care not to aggravate the situation even if they are driven by good intentions. The same applies to less-intense circumstances, including the day-to-day patrols officers.

We rely on them for public safety, for protection and for enforcing reasonable laws. But what would happen if the state of Arkansas changed policy so that each state trooper received 15 percent of the money resulting from each traffic citation they wrote? Rather than public safety, it would be extremely easy to suppose a trooper's "enforcement" of the laws was motivated by his need to make his mortgage payment, pay for that ski boat or sock away money for retirement.

Don't worry. It's just an example. But it's easy to imagine how motorists might become a little skeptical about the reasons behind the state's heavy enforcement of traffic laws.

The Benton County Sheriff's Office has proposed a change that gives rise to the same concerns. Chief Deputy Rob Holly recently outlined a proposed ordinance that would allow deputies to write tickets for traffic offenses already covered by state laws. The county's Legislative Committee forwarded the proposal to the Sept. 9 meeting of the Committee of the Whole.

"There are two reasons for this," Holly said. "First, is to give the deputies working patrol another tool in the tool bag. With this local ordinance they will have the discretion to write a violation under the county ordinance that doesn't go on their (driver's) records. Second, if they do write tickets under this ordinance it's something the county can get the revenue from."

The proposed ordinance includes 10 offenses under the category of careless and prohibited driving. It would establish a $250 fine for each offense. State law carries a fine of $100 for each violation.

Do we really need law enforcement officers thinking about opportunities to bring in new revenue?

Rogers has a similar ordinance, but it probably shouldn't. The city attorney there says it has not led to any significant revenue, but it's a strong tool for making a plea bargain more attractive. In short, plea to a local ordinance violation and nothing goes on your driver's record. Or, looking at it through another lens, it's a way to convince a local driver there's a price to pay if you fight city hall.

And just to be clear, Holly spoke specifically about his agency's desire to keep more money locally.

The laws and policies affecting the way law enforcement officers do their jobs ought to be based solely on promoting public safety. It should not be about creating an opportunity to make money or to create a way to lean on alleged violators. This isn't a capital murder case.

The proposal appears to have the effect of shifting money from one pocket of government to the other and for no measurable benefit to the public.

Holly says the measure will give deputies an option to give motorists "a slap on the wrist" rather than a state violation, to give people a break. It will be up to the deputy to decide who gets the special treatment and who doesn't.

Let's not confuse the public, or the deputies, about what the sheriff's office mission should be.