WATTS, Okla. -- James Little is on a personal quest to prove that methods used to enforce traffic laws in Watts meet the legal definition of a speed trap.
The Herald-Leader has published Little's letters to the editor, which describe his efforts in this endeavor. These efforts include submitting a freedom of information request and confronting the police about the use of "shadow graphics," or vehicle decals that are hard to read or recognize. The average driver may consider these graphics as an annoyance as they speed to work to avoid tardiness. But others, such as Little, maintain that the city's use of shadow graphics is a means to facilitate the gathering of more funds for the town through speeding tickets.
Also, in these letters he has called the police armed highway robbers and accused them of lying to him and threatening him. Little has even created a large sign, which he hauls behind his vehicle, warning motorists about his perceptions of the legal climate in Watts.
"I had to physically go do something," Little has said about watching Watts' police pull people over. "They are running wild down here and they think they can do anything they want to do. I have had around 60 people stop and talk to me and tell me horror stories, like a woman with a broken arm trying to change a flat tire with a cop watching her and still running his radar and not helping her."
However, the Watts City Attorney, Ralph Keen, disputes Little's claims and said the city is not a speed trap.
In April, Little submitted a freedom of information request for records to Watts. He requested the following:
• The number of traffic tickets written for each month of 2014, and the first three months of 2015.
• The total amount of money received from fines in the previously mentioned time period.
• The total number of police officers in the period and their pay.
• The number of reserve officers during the period and the status of their Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training.
• The amount of sales tax received during this time.
• The total amount of other income received by the city.
Keen replied eight days later via a letter stating that staff had begun collecting the documents. The city charged Little $188.25 for the documents. The charges are broken down as $15 per hour for searching and copying documents, 25 cents per copy and $1 per certified copy, according to correspondence signed and sealed by Bob Jordan, mayor of Watts. The bill was dated May 14.
Little did not retrieve the records he requested and said he believes the cost to be too high, and the reasoning for the high price was to deter him from further investigation.
"Generally where they end up trying to stick you is search fees," said FOI expert Spencer Bryan of the Bryan and Terrill Law Firm of Oklahoma. "And there is a provision that says you cannot use this to discourage people from their request and it has to be actual cost. It cannot be decided arbitrarily."
Keen wrote Little stating that it was his opinion that Little's investigation was a "gratuitous attempt to single out and disparage legitimate law enforcement activities in the town of Watts." Keen cited the letters Little wrote to the paper as evidence as to why Little's records request was not in the best interest of the public and their understanding. Keen also wrote that Little didn't met the criteria for a waiver of the $188.25 fee. Keen also wrote that the request was "highly specific" and that the request is a "disruption in their (city staff's) normal essential functions."
All the information requested is public information under the Oklahoma Freedom of Information Act. Watts is not required to keep the requested information in their city budget that is submitted to the the state auditor.
Little then turned to the Oklahoma Office of the State Auditor and Inspector, where he spoke with Trey Davis, an administrative service manager and spokesperson for the office, and got a copy of the Watts city budget for fiscal year 2014. This information is available on the Oklahoma State Auditor's website, sai.ok.gov.
"According to the audit report (page 8), for FY14, Fines and Forfeitures totaled $119,257," Davis wrote to Little. "All revenues totaled $215,064. The percentage of revenues attributed to Fines and Forfeitures is 55.45 percent of all revenues received by the town in FY14. A town with revenues resulting from traffic offenses totaling 50 percent or more of all annual revenue may be subject to determination as a speed trap and restricted from enforcing traffic laws on state roadways falling within the town's city limits."
But fines and forfeitures are made up from things other than just speeding tickets, said State Auditor Gary Jones from the Oklahoma Attorney General's Office. During an interview Jones said that the city should be able to break down the fines and forfeitures to show how much money the city receives from speeding tickets.
When the Herald-Leader asked Keen to break down the traffic ticket revenue, he responded with the following: "Based only on these same unadjusted total numbers, FY 2014 would appear to be above the allowable ratio, however, the analysis does not end there. To rely solely upon the total fines and forfeitures, which include traffic crimes as well as municipal code violations, would be erroneous. Therefore more detailed accounting is necessary."
To abate future concerns, the certified public accountant employed by the town has prepared and will continue to prepare data on a monthly basis that outlines the ratio of traffic enforcement fines in governmental revenue for any who are curious, Keen wrote.
In the accountant's data for the fiscal year of 2013-2014, which is FY 2014, the total fines minus forfeitures was $115,068.75, and of that $97,562.36 were classified as net traffic fines. That same data showed net governmental revenues to be $201,040.68. This puts traffic fine revenue at roughly 48.5 percent, just under the legal limit. The more than $14,000 discrepancy in revenue between the state audit report and the town's reports is caused from the state auditors incorporating special revenue into the total, this could be revenue from things like county sales tax or interest charged on behalf of the city, Davis said during an interview.
"One of the primary reasons small towns, including Watts, may appear to have a disproportionally high ratio (of traffic fines) is ... because they have a very limited sales tax base," Keen wrote in correspondence to the Herald-Leader.
He then added that without the enforcement of traffic laws the city could "ill-afford" a full-time certified police force. He then added the hypothetical scenario of an active shooter in the Watts public school with the police 30 to 45 minutes away -- instead of in the town.
Little has taken the claims of Watts' "limited sales tax base" a step father by stating there is no sales tax going into Watts. This would make the police department one of the few revenue generating areas for the town and thus the police department itself.
The issue of using the police to generate revenue for a municipality has been discussed at length in recent reports from the U.S. Department of Justice. The DOJ's report titled the "Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department" states that the Ferguson Police Department's and Ferguson's court strategy to generate revenue through code enforcement is unconstitutional and can contribute to constitutional violations, and furthermore is unlawful and harmful. The report also says that the means employed by the police and courts of Ferguson to generate revenue erode police legitimacy and public trust, make policing less fair, are less effective at promoting public safety, and make the city generally less safe.
For context, Ferguson has a population of 21,203 according to the 2010 Census. In 2010 Ferguson's general revenue was reported as $11.07 million with $1.38 million in fines and fees collected from the court, representing 12.5 percent of the total funds, according to the DOJ report. But the 2015 Ferguson City Budget projected a total of $13.26 million for general revenue with $3.09 million coming from fines and fees, representing 23.3 percent of the total funds. The amount collected every year between 2010 and 2015 not only was projected to increase, but in many cases the courts surpassed the increased projections.
Watts, like Ferguson, has had increased revenue from fines and forfeitures every year since 2010, according to multiple Watts city budgets. In 2010 the fines and forfeitures were less than 32 percent of the town's general revenue, but by 2014 they were more than 55 percent.
On Tuesday morning The Herald-Leader attempted to contact Keen to get his comments on the limited or lack of sales tax revenue for Watts and the similarities with Watts and Ferguson. Keen did not respond to a message, left with his law office assistant, before deadline late Tuesday afternoon
Before the city is investigated by the Department of Public Safety an official request for the information must be filed with the commissioner. But, only certain people can request the commissioner of the Department of Public Safety to investigate the traffic-related enforcement practices of a municipal law enforcement agency, according to Oklahoma state law. Those people are a district attorney with local jurisdiction, a majority of the county commissioners with a resolution, the Oklahoma Attorney General, or a state legislator whose district the municipality in question is located. The request also has to state that the city has operated the speed trap zone within the city limits and generates more than 50 percent of revenue for the city's operations.
At the moment the DPS cannot confirm whether there is an investigation in Watts for operating a speed trap, said Lt. John Vincent, DPS public affairs officer. It is the department's protocol to not release any information regarding an open investigation, this does not mean that the investigation is happening. Vincent said he is not aware of any investigation and the people who would be conducting one within the DPS would not tell him even if one was being conducted.
Once the investigation is complete, the commissioner submits a report to the Attorney General.
However, any Oklahoman can file complaints with the office of the Oklahoma Attorney General, including complaints on potential speed traps, wrote Will Gattenby, the press secretary for the Oklahoma Attorney General. To file a complaint contact the Attorney General's Office at 405-521-3921 or online at ok.gov/oag.
The attorney general has had only one complaint filed on Watts for operating a speed trap, Gattenby said.
General News on 07/01/2015