Chris Sikich

IndyStar

Attorney Ed Bielski is seeking an injunction in federal court to prevent the city of Carmel from collecting fines for traffic tickets police issued under an invalid city ordinance.

The Court of Appeals of Indiana unanimously ruled on Dec. 11 that Carmel traffic ordinance 8-2 improperly duplicated state law.

Through his effort to collect information for the federal lawsuit, Bielski said, he learned Carmel has continued to try to collect money from motorists cited under the local ordinance for traffic tickets. Carmel's fines can be more than three times as much as the state's fines for the same infraction, he said.

Carmel police, he said, sent letters via certified mail on Feb. 16 to motorists who had received traffic tickets under ordinance 8-2 to alert them they they were now being ticketed under a different traffic law. The letter, he said, provided the motorists with a new court date. They also were advised they could pay their fines rather than go to court by signing their traffic ticket and mailing in the money.

Bielski said the information in the letter was an outright fabrication. He said the tickets had not been refiled and no new court dates had been set in Carmel's traffic court. And regardless, he contends, Carmel can't retroactively cite motorists under a different traffic law.

"The city is creating a problem by suggesting to people they should be paying their tickets," he said, "because there are no tickets pending."

Bielski has to amend a procedural matter in the federal complaint before Judge Mark Dinsmore will decide whether to grant the injunction. There is no timeline for a decision.

In a prepared statement to IndyStar, John Maley, an attorney with Barnes & Thornburg who represents the city of Carmel, said he believes the federal court has no jurisdiction over claims adjudicated against traffic offenders in state court.

He said the city would seek to dismiss the federal lawsuit.

"Carmel views the lawsuit as meritless," Maley said, "under governing legal precedent, and is vigorously defending it. Carmel will seek recovery of all costs possible if successful in defending the action."

The city also hopes to overturn the Dec. 11 decision by the state Court of Appeals. Carmel has appealed that decision to the Indiana Supreme Court, which has not yet decided whether it will hear the case.

Carmel attorney Doug Haney argued in Carmel's court filing that the Court of Appeals ruling impinges on elected officials' authority throughout the state to set speed limits and strips cities and towns of their statutory power to collect monetary judgement against traffic offenders.

The Indiana Association of Cities and Towns and Indiana Municipal Lawyers Association have filed briefs supporting Carmel's effort, saying the ruling could have dire impacts on cities and towns throughout Indiana with similar ordinances.

The case stems from a traffic ticket Jason J. Maraman received last year that cited him under Carmel traffic ordinance 8-2 for driving 30 mph in a 20 mph zone. The state Court of Appeals ruled Carmel's traffic ordinance 8-2 was invalid because it simply copied the state code governing traffic.

The state's Home Rule Act says local governments can't simply duplicate a state statute, Maraman argued in court, representing himself. The Home Rule Act of 1980 grants powers and places restrictions on local governments in Indiana and delineates the role of the state from the role of local governments.

If local governments adopt traffic ordinances, he argued they have to write local ordinances detailing their city interests, such as identifying a specific reason for a local speed limit on a specific stretch of road.

In court filings, Carmel has said city police have issued 8,124 speeding tickets under ordinance 8-2 during the past three years and notes they all would be declared invalid under the court ruling.

Bielski said Carmel's motivation is, in part, financial. Carmel police are citing motorists under the local ordinance, he said, so the city, rather than the state, can collect the fines.

He said a speeding ticket for driving 20 mph over the limit includes a $35.50 state fine, plus court costs, under state statute. Under Carmel's ordinance, he said, driving 20 mph over the limit on the same road includes a $125 city fine, plus court costs.

He said Carmel also appears to have used ordinance 8-2 to write tickets to cite everything from expired license plates to drivers without a valid license. He said he can't imagine another reason why a city would have a local interest to cite motorists under a local ordinance, rather than a state statute, for such infractions.

"Carmel is treating its police like a revenue source," Bielski said. "When you make that a primary goal and function in a community, you've lost direction. I think Carmel is confused as to what its police officers are. They are protectors not tax collectors."

All eyes on Carmel in traffic lawsuit

Call IndyStar reporter Chris Sikich at (317) 444-6036. Follow him on Twitter: @ChrisSikich and at Facebook.com/chris.sikich.