Small town cops impose
'stand-and-deliver' tax

Here is a small but illustrative example of how the radical right's move to downsize and dismantle government leads to fewer services, but more policing, which, in the end, is what the right really wants.

It offers a microcosmic preview of the macrocosmic police state environment in which the middle and lower social classes of the shriveling American society are now finding themselves.

The Yuba City Police Department recently announced a new law enforcement information program dubbed, "Beat the Heat." The department would henceforth post warnings on the department's website alerting motorists to locations in the city where there would be "directed enforcement" of traffic laws -- speeding, running red lights, etc.

It was hailed as a first in fair warnings by both the police chief and the local newspaper, judging by the boosterish tone of the article written about it.

The article was uncritical and the reporter grossly neglected to ask obvious questions and make logical connections that would have placed the news in fuller context. Moreover, some passages of the story strained credulity, while other passages represented unfiltered propaganda.

Consider these two:

Motorcycle Officer Kim Slade said since the program started last month, he's stopped three drivers for running red lights at Gray and Colusa avenues.

Each motorist said they saw a warning on the Web site that an officer would be stationed that day at the intersection, one of the city's two busiest.
{...}

Police Chief Richard Doscher said Beat the Heat officers have been receiving "positive feedback" from members of the public, some of whom have stopped to thank them.

Doscher said he's not aware of any other police departments where enforcement locations have been posted on the Internet.

"Our ultimate goal is to reduce accidents anyway possible," he said.

So much is revealed by the class-based assumptions (or, more likely, pretextual assumptions) implicit in this story, and the reporter's uncritical acceptance of the subjects' statements.

First off, the motorcycle cop's statement that all three of the motorists he ticketed had expressly stated they had personally visited the police department's website and seen the enforcement warning for that day is frankly suspicious.
There is an rule of thumb: one coincidence is possible; two in a row are unlikely; three straight are impossible.

Moreover, according to Michael O'Kelly, an expert in the Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN) of questioned statements, "three is the liar's number."

Years of studying and reviewing people's attempts to be deceptive have taught O'Kelly some rules of the thumb. For instance, "left" is the most sensitive word in the English language and three is considered the "liar's number."

When people are put on the spot and have to pull a number out of their head, it is almost always three. "For some reason, it's almost universal, from culture to culture," O'Kelly says.

"It's like when police officers ask drivers, `Have you been drinking?' They almost always say they've had `a couple of beers'," he observes. (Sacramento Daily Recorder, 11/7/01)

Yuba City is the county seat of Sutter County, Calif.. The county population runs about 80,000 and the city's about 35,000. However, city is constantly annexing adjacent unincorporated areas of the county. In 2003, city officials estimated the population stood at more than 40,000.

A flat and ugly valley town, Yuba City has become something of a bedroom community for the state capital, Sacramento, and has a slightly higher per capita income than nearby communities. But Sutter County, with a strong agriculture element, has one of the highest unemployment rates in the state, poverty levels higher than the state averages and median incomes lower than the statewide figures. Again, scroll down.

Statistics from the Digital Divide Network indicate that in the U.S. only 41 percent of homes have Internet access, which means, conversely that -- even if Yuba City were typical -- the 59 percent of the home-owning drivers would have no way of seeing the website warning.

Some might think that calling this website notation a fair public notice is like calling a note pinned on the country club bulletin board as a fair public notice. That is, all of my neighbors play golf so now everyone has been told.

But, be that as it may, there is another suspicious coincide in the story that is much more serious. The police chief never mentioned and the newspaper reporter and editor never pointed out that the newly elected governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger had just whacked $4 billion out of the state budget item that provided city governments with many of their revenues.

This year -end wrap-up story from the Argus-Courier in Petaluma, another hard-hit California city, gives a good idea of the impact on local governments.

The State of California's fiscal crisis came home in 2003, as cities, counties and school districts faced billions of dollars in cuts, and voters responded by recalling former governor Gray Davis and replacing him with film star Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Local school districts were forced to eliminate or reduce programs such as reading specialists, library technicians and music classes. The county closed all of its community-based mental health offices, but agencies like the Petaluma Health Care District helped restore limited office hours in some locations.

Although Schwarzenegger swept into power declaring he would put the state's finances back on track, within a week he had repealed the $4 billion vehicle license fee increase signed into law by Davis, leaving the state even deeper in debt.
Local governments, fearing another round of mid-year cuts because the VLF is a primary source of funding for municipalities, were outraged. The League of California Cities and at least a dozen municipalities, including Sonoma County, are threatening to sue the state if it doesn't back-fill the lost revenues.

Without the back-fill, Petaluma will be forced to make $1.3 million in cuts, which could mean the loss of police officers and firefighters, and a decrease in city services.

And there between the lines is the more likely truth behind the police chiefs recent interest in stepping up "directed enforcement:" generation of revenues.

Over the years of covering local and state governments I have been assured more than once that governments do not use traffic and parking enforcement to generate revenues, because that would be wrong. It was never the legislative intent of traffic and parking fines, fees and penalties -- which are increased perennially, one might add. Traffic and parking enforcement is designed as means to facilitate safe and orderly vehicular movement. Well, that's the official line, anyway.

In fact, state and local governments have long relied on and budgeted upon planned revenues from traffic enforcement. It became chronic in California following the passage of the 1978 Proposition 13, which seriously limited property tax revenues for all levels of government.

In 2000, a Sacramento County traffic court judge had the unenviable task of announcing to a roomful of defendants that new revisions to state laws had doubled and tripled fines for some offenses, effective immediately. A sympathetic jurist, he offered to sentence the defendants that day to the old fine rates, provided they pleaded forthwith and most of all, not waste the courts time with excuses or explanations.

Later, outside the courtroom, the judge went into detail explaining how massive increases in state highway traffic fines -- especially drunk driving fines -- had been designed to compensate and closely tracked revenue losses elsewhere.

"It's politically so much easier to raise fines than taxes," he pointed out.

Most city departments can't manufacture revenues to save their operations, but cops can.

Police departments have the option of enforcing and even defining in some cases (another essay later on this topic) o as to generate funds to pay their salaries.

Looked at in the least favorable light, "directed enforcement" is merely an organized indirect armed robbery scam in which a gun-totting biker cop acting under the color of authority flags down a driver and gives him or her a receipt for the $351 he expects to be mailed to the city treasury to offset his endangered paycheck.

The only difference between this highwayman and Black Bart is that when Black Bart said to the stage driver, Stand and deliver" he meant now, not within 30 days, or further penalties may be added.

This impromptu revenue ploy represents one of the most regressive forms of taxation, possible. It is fraught with potential for abuse. Furthermore, it is clearly class driven, when you take into account the groups of people to whom the police chief chose to distribute "get out of jail free card" warnings on their home computers.

Worse yet, is the shallow PR gambit of the department allegedly graciously posting warnings on the Internet. Cops need not give any warning, they will gladly tell you, if and when pressed on the subject, so this they are doing out of the generosity of their hearts, But the fact the chief is trying to head off unpleasant public response with the propaganda piece in the paper says all that needs to be said about the possibility of a guilty conscience at work somewhere.

Meanwhile, that the local reporter and the hometown newspaper would let this story run without a whimper of skepticism or a mention of possible links to budget cutbacks only serves to show which way the wind blows in that newsroom.