Los Angeles Approves New Method of Fining Residents for Petty Offenses


Los Angeles City Council today approved a new citation system I warned about in August. This new system allows the Los Angeles Police Department to cite residents for a whole host of minor crimes that used to result in warnings (and potentially misdemeanor charges if police felt like pressing the matter). Now it's a way for the city to extract more money from residents for minor issues, and I'm sure that won't be abused at all. The Los Angeles Times lets the city describe it as a "quality of life" issue but does point out that the city predicts it's going to take in $1.59 million in revenue a year:
A pilot program, called Administrative Citation Enforcement, gives the Los Angeles Police Department and the Department of Animal Services a new enforcement tool that bypasses the court system. It allows city officials to impose fines for offenses such as urinating in public, having dogs off leashes or dumping garbage in public streets.
Currently, officers either can give a warning, or launch a criminal misdemeanor case against people who commit these crimes. Because officers are reluctant to initiate court cases for minor offenses, it's currently difficult to enforce these quality-of-life issues, said Councilman Paul Koretz.
"There is no good appropriate action with teeth," said Koretz, who proposed the concept for the program which was approved by the council last year. For instance, people can ignore repeated warnings about walking their dogs off leash, he said.
Some offenses will start at $250, while animal-related offenses start at $100 per incident, ramping up for repeat violations. As with last time, the Times picks some of the more obvious violations as examples for their story and ignores some of the citable offenses that people are less likely to know about. These are things like attaching signs on poles (like for a weekend yard sale) or not hanging onto your rabies vaccination certificate for your dog. The full list is here (pdf) on pages six through eight. The Times also neglects to explain how difficult it will be challenge citations, which I explained in my previous post.
I am wondering if I should warn my neighbors, several of whom have friendly dogs they take outside to walk without leashes. It's rarely a problem and I don't hear complaints (except for this one little dog with a Napoleonic complex. There's always one).
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Alt-txt - it's funny 'cause it's true.
It would be so much easier if you could just pay them on the spot. Probably a horrible idea but maybe not any more horrible than the system we have now.
I recall watching Top Gear and seeing one of the guys having to pay a ticket on the spot somewhere in Europe. I just spent a couple minutes on google looking for information on places in the world where you must pay the cop, but didn't have much luck.
It was supposedly the case in Montana some years back (late 90's). that's according to a fetching young lady I met from there oh so long ago.
As she put it, speeding fines could be paid to officers on the spot at a reduced charge. She even said that some trips required a trip to the ATM for $ if you knew you'd leadfoot it.
I'm guessing the constitutional basis for imposing fines that can't be challenged is the FYTW clause?
Funny how we poke fun at 3rd world countries about corruption and highway robbery. The funny thing is they at least try to hide it. Here we just do it right out in the open now.
Highway robbery: It's literal again!
We have laws, so it's legal.
I was thinking of the obligatory, glib Chinatown joke, and remembered that was actually set in LA...
Things seem to overtake satire at an alarming rate.
I had the thought earlier today the writing articles for The Onion has got to be one of the most stressful, time-sensitive jobs on Earth for that very reason.
Fortunately, The Onion doesn't have writers -- just a sorting algorithm for craigslist posts, Yglesias tweets, and "letters to the editor" of Salon.
Except wasn't the "it's Chinatown" an excuse for the police looking the other way? This is like the opposite of Chinatown.
It is more about the general futility of circumstance; the corruption is pervasive.
Wasn't it the partner who actually spoke the line, after all?
Somebody has to foot the bill for all this civilization.
I actually rather like the image of them as (biblical) tax collectors.
Sounds like somebody in LA still liked cops. The Council took care of it.
This code is in violation of itself under section 53.06.5. That's the " feeding non-domesticated predators clause."
Seriously, I live here and I can't make sense of many of these. I know the cops are going to go on a psuedo-ticketing frenzy, so I gotta pay attention.
What's with:
53.48....songbirds.
Can I not be a songbird? not have a song bird? wtf?
how about:
53.50....various permit requirements.
try not violating that one.
53.34...animals at large.
does the animal get the fine?
If this is a law, it was written by people stupid enough to conceive it, that's for sure
Jesus, I just read the city code and it turns out I'm way more outlaw than I thought. I got depressed enough reading the state code.
I gotta get a lawyer to cruise around with me and advise me everyday.
You (I) get one free rubber stamping of the fine, the next one if you lose, the fines goes up by some unspecified amount. Punished for pleading your case.
May I suggest Harvey Silverglate?
Thanks, but my wife is a lawyer. She once worked with Manny Clausner.
That was an inside joke about the lawyer, btw.
Yeah. Apparently ignorance actually is bliss.
It's going to be a bitch to be a dog in LA.
[smiles contentedly at having escaped California]
I'm sorry you were saying something?
I wonder if I can demand a misdemeanor if "ticketed" with one of these. I guess I'll find out eventually. I want a jury and some rights when my gov't screws me over.
When will California realiize (considering the recent exodus from California) that nice weather only goes so far to keep citizens
I could deal with it if the fines were between $20-$50. Enough to get the point across but not too much to hurt someone.
'Just the tip'
*drums fingers on table*
Now let's talk about how only 25% of the voting public keeps this machine well oiled, fueled and maintained.
Years ago, after visiting L.A. on business a number of times, I concluded that I would never, never, never live in such a shit hole. And that was before I knew anything about their bureaucracy.