Bluff City asks court to dismiss $6 million 'speed trap' lawsuit
GREENEVILLE — Bluff City, its mayor and an Arizona-based traffic camera company are asking that a $6 million lawsuit filed against them in September be dismissed.
Motorists Chris Cawood and Jonathan Kelly Proffitt filed the $6 million proposed class-action lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Greeneville naming Bluff City, Mayor Irene Wells and American Traffic Solutions as the defendants. All three defendants filed motions to dismiss the lawsuit last month.
The lawsuit claims Bluff City and ATS are conspiring to violate the Fair Debt Collections Act, state law and the city’s own ordinances by imposing an administrative fee of $40 on top of the $50 fine imposed for motorists allegedly captured on the city’s two speed enforcement cameras on Highway 11-E.
Court documents state Cawood received such a ticket in May 2010 for traveling 58 mph in a 45 mph zone on Highway 11-E, while Proffitt received a similar ticket for driving 56 mph in the same zone. Though Proffitt paid his violation, Cawood did not, nor did he attend the court hearing on the matter in September 2010.
Cawood and Proffitt claim Bluff City has created a “speed trap” on that section of Highway 11-E by dropping the speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph less than a mile from where the cameras are posted.
According to a response filed by Bluff City last month, the Bluff City Board of Mayor and Aldermen lowered the speed limit on that section of highway in September 2000 — nine years before approving a measure to install speed enforcement cameras.
Cawood and Proffitt’s lawsuit alleges Bluff City dropped the speed on the section of Highway 11-E that is subject to the speed camera enforcement program without performing an engineering and traffic investigation as required by state law.
In its response, Bluff City points out state law did not require an engineering and traffic investigation when the speed limit was lowered in 2000; that provision was not added until 2007. Bluff City further argues the one-year statute of limitations on filing a claim has expired since Cawood and Proffitt received their citations more than a year ago.
Bluff City’s traffic enforcement program has suffered from controversy in two separate instances involving a new law that took effect in July and imposes limitations on red light and speed camera enforcement programs.
In the first incident, the Bluff City Police Department fired an officer who allowed a reserve officer to review and approve hundreds of tickets after the law took effect. The law requires potential violations captured on camera to be reviewed and approved by an officer who is certified under the state’s Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission.
The city estimated it would have to refund some $12,000 in collections as a result.
The second incident came when the city was hit with complaints, similar to those in the lawsuit, that one of its two cameras was positioned less than a mile from a sign that signaled a drop in the speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph. The new state law bars the placement of speed cameras within a mile of any 10 mph drop in the speed limit.
City officials have said they believed their program was grandfathered, giving them until 2015 — when the contract with American Traffic Solutions expires — to make the change. However, according to an August state attorney general’s opinion, no such grandfather provision was included in the new law.
Bluff City shut down the camera in September and began the process of tallying refunds. Records showed that more than 1,300 tickets had been issued by that camera, which monitors the southbound side of the section of Highway 11-E. Of those, 640 had already been paid.
The Bluff City BMA approved a measure last month to turn the camera back on.
To comment, you must register and verify your email address by telephone.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the registered user participating in online discussions. You agree not to post comments off topic, abusive, obscene, defamatory, vulgar, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned.
Browse Premiere Local Businesses
This suit should not be dismissed, bluff city needs to abide by the state laws and mandates. Yes it has been 45mph for as long as i can remember in this area near the speed cameras, but after installing the cameras, they needed to follow the state law. They did not, and assumed that they are grandfathered. The money collected should be used to pay for turn lanes of 11e for the flea market, so buyers and sellers can get in and out safely. This is a very dangerous section of road on sat and sunday. Were safety improvements are needed, they are not getting the attention they deserve. Improvements to the highway along the speed camera area would help motorist keep from getting hit.