Some of you may have heard of the company Verra Mobility. And if you subconsciously felt a shudder of rage go up your spine, then you probably have an idea of what that company does. We previously highlighted another one of their products in an earlier blog article of ours; that being the extremely controversial speed cameras placed in work zones in NY state. Verra Mobility is a company that specializes in one major product group, one one very specific type of customer. That product is what we would generally refer to as photographic enforcement systems, and their only customers appear to be municipal and state governments who need cash, and need it quickly.

At the beginning of Verra’s relationship with NYS, it seemed that public sentiment about their products was far more mixed, with a significantly higher number of NY residents arguing that the red light cameras which were going up all over the state could help stop a perceived trend of New York drivers rapidly worsening behavior out on the roads. But critics at the time pointed out that it was extremely likely that, should the red light cameras not face resistance from the public, there was simply no way the counties and state would stop at just those cameras.

What those critics mainly complained about, was the fact that at least in Long Island, neither Nassau nor Suffolk County had budgets which anyone would ever describe as healthy. And if the cameras were actually a means to generate income, as opposed to truly being for their stated aim of improving safety, they would almost certainly be abused to the maximum degree that could be legally justified.

Here we are, about 10 years since those cameras were rolled out, and the fines for getting caught by one have only gone up, with countless additional fees tacked on top of the fine itself, as well as outrageous levies in Nassau County for needing more time to pay, and wanting to contest the original fine itself. All of this is justified by arguing, and we quote, “The residents of Nassau County should not have to shoulder the expenses for motorists who fail to comply with the various parking and traffic regulations and laws. With this principle guiding the agency, the following fees shall be applied.”

All of this is in the face of a complete lack of concrete evidence that the red light camera program actually achieved much of anything when it came to its initial “aims” to reduce traffic accidents. A study performed approximately 3 years after the implementation came back with statistics that were hard to look at as “successful” in any way other than being something of a stealthy tax burden imposed on NY motorists. This study showed that while T-Bone style accidents and other offset accidents of the like had gone down approximately 11%, the overall level of accidents skyrocketed by nearly 60%. Mostly due to panicked responses from motorists who could not afford the fines, and did not respond in a safe way.

With the safety justification for the cameras on thin ice, it became increasingly clear that profit motive was the ultimate goal of these programs, as instead of reflecting on the viability of the relationship with Verra Mobility, they were commissioned to roll out a series of school zone speed cameras instead. It was around this time that the average NY resident started to become aware of Verra’s involvement with the NYS counties and municipalities, as the school zone cameras were met with surprise and unease by residents who felt victimized by the red light tickets. What came to be known alongside familiarity with Verra, was the revenue sharing agreements that came along with their enforcement systems.

Effectively NY counties had little to no involvement with any part of the installation, maintenance, or enforcement actions. What Verra was selling was not the product of the systems themselves, but a service. One where it was speculated that they could be receiving up to half of the revenue generated, though these figures have been difficult to verify. And this was revenue that was now leaving the NY economy. So while the counties could help balance their budgets, and try to sell that to their constituents, they were funneling money out of New York in the process.

As one might imagine, many NY state residents were outraged to find this out. But at this point, NY State’s relationship with Verra had expanded beyond just employing their services. Seeing a chance to create even more revenue off of this relationship, NY State controlled pension funds began investing heavily into Verra Mobility. With county budgets and retirement/pension funds now wrapped up in Verra Mobility’s ability to generate revenue off of NY state residents, it was only a matter of time before new opportunities to implement systems were found, and new services were developed specifically to take advantage of these opportunities.

On top of this, it became incredibly important to protect the revenue stream, and make sure that due process would be hard to achieve. As Verra’s systems do not implement any way to confront one’s accuser, counties needed to find ways to make the fines stick outside of a judicial process. Where we practice law in Suffolk County, we have the relatively notorious TVB, or Traffic Violations Bureau; a non-judicial, executive function of Suffolk County government, known for being one of the most difficult places in the country to achieve a good outcome for clients in traffic violation cases. The ability to undertake the normal legal processes which would guarantee a fair outcome for a client are severely restricted, and the TVB can effectively decide what it does, or does not want to consider as part of any proceeding.

And this brings us fully around to what we’ll be discussing in our next post on this topic, later this month. Verra Mobility and NY counties’ latest implementation of their agreement: the CrossingGuard bus camera system. This system uses cameras placed on the outside of the bus to photograph and ticket any motorist who drives past a school bus while the STOP sign and barrier are extended. What it does not implement is any way to monitor anything else. And with tickets ranging from $200-300 plus admin fees, and a TVB system with little interest in fair outcomes, we have already encountered and worked on cases where innocent motorists have had to hire us to get them something that looks like justice. Stay tuned for next week’s article, where we talk about some of our experiences with the new bus camera systems, and the Suffolk TVB. You don’t want to miss it.