Posted on 06/27/2008 2:53:03 PM PDT by radar101
A San Diego couple were angered by a $350 bill sent by the La Mesa Police Department for seven hours of extra duty by officers who responded to their daughter's drunken-driving accident in September. Paul and Rebecca Hand didn't question the arrest or the more than $4,000 in DUI-related fines, the DUI education classes and 12 weeks of group therapy classes a judge ordered after the 22-year-old woman hit a parked car.
They were alarmed by the bill from police that arrived eight months after the crash. They complained to La Mesa officials, saying they assumed property taxes paid for police, fire and rescue services in La Mesa, where they had lived for seven years until moving to San Diego in 2007.
The Hands also complained in letters to the media about a highly publicized drunken-driving incident Feb. 20, when Mayor Art Madrid and city employee Trisha Turner were given a ride home by police.
Turner was subsequently charged with misdemeanor driving under the influence.
“If the general public is being billed for police services related to a drunk-driving incident, then certainly the mayor and his constituent in the vehicle should be billed for police time,” Paul Hand said.
La Mesa officials apologized for mailing the bill to the Hands so many months after their daughter's accident, but declined to drop it. Hand said his daughter has since paid the bill “to get it behind her.”
A state law enacted in 1985 authorized public agencies to charge anyone whose negligent operation of a car, boat or plane while under the influence causes “any incident resulting in an appropriate emergency response.”
A review of 17 similar invoices that La Mesa sent to motorists for drunken-driving accidents in the past year shows that the billed amount ranged from $97 for a man who hit a pole near Grossmont Hospital in June 2007 to $900 for another man who crashed onto transit property March 8.
Police said the $900 bill was higher than most because the man walked out of a hospital after being treated for injuries, and police had to track him down and arrest him for the crash.
Gary Ameling, La Mesa's director of administrative services, said neither Madrid nor Turner has been billed for the 32-minute police response and police escort to Madrid's house.
“We have never billed (under this law) for anything other than a drunk-driving accident,” Ameling said.
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine did not return phone calls seeking comment about whether Turner or Madrid could have been billed for police time under the same section of law.
In a 2006 court ruling, ordinary arrests, including DUIs, didn't merit the reimbursement. However, a portion of the law says a person who commits “intentionally wrongful conduct” is also liable for the expense of an emergency response.
Madrid declined to comment, saying he had referred the matter to the city attorney.
A poll of 17 other cities countywide shows that most of them charge such fees for drunken-driving accidents.
At least one – San Diego – also charges for some actions not linked to drunken driving, such as police pursuits and hit-and-run-driving incidents, said Bill Harris, a spokesman for Mayor Jerry Sanders.
POLICE REIMBURSEMENT BY THE NUMBERS
A sampling of collections made by cities in the past year:
$72,000: Oceanside
$28,000: Escondido
$25,000: Chula Vista
$7,000: La Mesa
Coronado, El Cajon and Santee don't charge such emergency-response fees, but routinely seek reimbursement from motorists who damage public property.
SOURCE: Union-Tribune
Now our government wants to be able to bill its services like it was a private company.
Great privatize the police funcition, get rid of all the dead weight, stupid SWAT teams, Helicopters, para military gear and then bill who ever causes the problem.
Am I the only one who is wondering why mommy and daddy are getting a bill for a 22 year old?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Bill these people out the butt for their voluntary, willful, crimes.
I have a relative without their legs due to one such person. I would take no prisoners for such idiocy.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Only when the people who needed those services broke the law on the way. Tucson’s had laws like that for a while, enter a flooded wash get billed for the rescue.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Let 'Neutron Jack' run any gov't agency and watch the fat fry.
Only when my taxes are reduced will I agree with that.
And if you’re sharp there’s an entrepreneurial opportunity. My brother-in-law used to head out to nearby washes with with ATC and tow rope after the rain, find somebody stuck and offer to pull them out for half of what TPD charged.
I had thought about that but assumed 22 was beyond any definition of ‘dependent’.
It’s double dipping. Tax payers already pay for ER services which can almost always be related to neglect or an accident in someone’s opinion.
I suspect that the “Singapore solution” is going to be used more and more around the country. Fines for everything.
That is, cities, counties and States will start slapping fines and fees to what were previously criminal matters.
For example, California has a huge number of first time, non-accident DUI offenses every year. As an alternative to the usual punishments, they could offer a cash fine of say $20,000-$30,000. Only for first time offenses, and only if they are non-accident, and *only* in cash.
Just this alone, and just for those people able and willing to pay, most likely could *eliminate* California’s entire budget deficit!
Certainly it is unfair, and favors those with a lot of money. Or does it?
If you are poor, you might lose your job, your car, your home, your insurance, etc. And though you wouldn’t lose $20-30,000, you might very well lose the equivalent to it.
If you have money, you wouldn’t lose those things, because you have money. But few people would take a money hit that large without feeling it.
And because it is a one time deal only, it is NOT going to encourage bad behavior. Second offenses go the normal route no matter how much money you pay.
But here is an important point: very few people ever have a 2nd DUI offense. If you do, you will keep having them anyway.
Whether or not you like this as an idea, does anyone believe that California, and other States for that matter, would not do it if it could make them a LOT of money?
Billing convicted drunk drivers for the police time used at the accidents they cause is an excellent idea!
All the police is good at anyway is speed traps. Have your house broken into or your car stolen and you are SOL. Drive 10 miles on over the speed limit and police are ON IT.
To whom do they send the bill for services used by illegals?
Our county guys used to be really fast with responding. When the city annexed us kicking and screaming...forgetaboutit. My alarm went off one day. I went home..the door was open...I waited and waited. Finally I went in with the dogs and checked it out. They still had not arrived by the time I left to go back to work. I know now where I can find one or two any day of the week if I really need them though. They will be down the corner with their radar guns. Oh well...
Well us of course.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.