Last week, Boston's newly elected City Council President Maureen Feeney appeared on WGBH's "Greater Boston with Emily Rooney" to talk about a new ordinance aimed at collection up to $3,000,000 in delinquent fines from those who do not pay ther tickets. This new ordinance, proposed by the mayor and supported by Ms Feeney, would allow fine collectors to use more aggressive methods in collecting the overdue payements, including placing liens on properties where fines remain uncollected. Repeat offenders would also be denied city building permits on future projects. Following the recent trend to shame violators, the city will set up a website which will list the names of the offending parties, supposedly shaming them into paying.
While I submit to Boston's authority to enforce the existing laws, I can't understand how an expansion of the existing ordinance will do anything except harass law abiding citizens who occasionally make a mistake. Most importantly, it makes no distinction between land owners and tenants, nor does it weed out scavengers and sloppy trash collectors.
Full disclosure: Last year I received a "green ticket" violation for "improper and unlawful dumping". According to the citation, on the regular trash pick-up date, I walked my trash to a neighboring street that did not have a scheduled trash pick-up that day to dispose of my garbage. The charge was ridiculous-- I have never placed my garbage anywhere but in its lawful place. Still I was fined $50 for the violation. The agent who ticketed me was never available to explain how he determined my guilt, so I took the matter to court where it was promptly dismissed. I found the entire process to be unnecessarily burdensome and absurdly difficult.
On Tuesday night, as I watched Ms. Rooney and Ms. Feeney discuss the ordinance, I was shocked by the doublespeak and contradictions the Council President put forth. Based on her comments, I sent her an e-mail asking her clarify a few points. I have note heard back from her, so I am putting her proposed method of shaming violators via the web to the test:
Ms. Feeney:
I recently saw your interview with Emily Rooney on Greater Boston regarding the new proposals to collect outstanding fees owed the city via trash violations. Based on your comments and assertions, I have a few questions I wold like answered at your earliest convenience.
1. In the interview, you pointed out that the ticketing agents who must repeatedly issue violations to the same offenders are paid with taxpayer money. What is the salary of these agents? Are they only paid via tax payer money when they are issuing violations? Would the proposed website listing of repeat and delinquent violators be paid for by taxpayer dollars? Would the personnel responsible for updating the list be paid for with tax payer dollars?
2. Do you believe that the proposed website listing of these violators (i.e. repeat offenders and those who do not pay) will help generate the lost revenue? If so, would you propose expanding the program to include all other offenses?
3. Do you think it is reasonable to confiscate the private property of a private citizen because he or she does not pay his or her violation for trash? Is the lean/ confiscation process funded by tax payer money?
4. Can you issue violations to the trash thieves- i.e. the scavengers who rummage through every one's trash and spread debris everywhere? How do you determine who is actually at fault for the violation in these situations?
5. Finally, when Ms. Rooney made the comment that the fees are "not very much" ("only $25 - $100") and said "why not just pay the fee?" you seemed to agree by nodding your head. Is it your opinion that $25 or $50 or $100 is a trivial amount to everyone, regardless of guilt or innocence? Or could that money be better spent on school clothes, or perhaps several meals?
I look forward to your response.
Thank you
James Bailey
Boston, MA
Comments