Add a recent government
report to the growing chorus of voices for change in the way traffic citation
fines are assessed in Delano and Ridgecrest.
One of the report’s central recommendations is to end the flat fee
system and institute a sliding scale based on the driver’s ability
to pay. But there are significant problems with this move, not the least
of which, according to study author Anita Lee, is that there would be
two different people paying two different fines for the same infraction.
The study also suggested that the Legislature end the earmark system,
and that the revenue be directed to the general fund and distributed on
an as-needed basis to different programs.
Currently, over 75 agencies, from the Abalone Restoration and Preservation
Account to the Winter Recreation Fund, depend on the money that comes
from traffic citations.
As an example of out-of-control penalty assessments, the report cited a
VC 22450 infraction. The fine for running a stop sign is $35, but the total amount
due, after considering penalty assessments and add-ons, is $283. That
figure has increased nearly 30 percent in the last decade. An infraction
has substantial indirect costs as well. According to one estimate, the
actual cost of a California traffic ticket is
twenty times the fine, when considering increased insurance rates and other costs.
The bottom line is that a traffic ticket is a crippling financial blow
to many working individuals and families. Unless the law changes, and
lots of luck with convincing politicians to accept less funding, the only
way to save money is to fight the ticket.
Getting Legal Help
The aggressive attorneys at Bigger & Harman, APC, are committed to
giving individuals a voice when dealing with speeding and traffic tickets.
Call today at 661-349-9300 or email
firstname.lastname@example.org to receive the personal professional attention you deserve. En español,
llame al 661-349-9755.