A Case Study of Municipal Taxation by Citation

• Author: Kyle Sweetland,Jennifer McDonald,Dick M. Carpenter
• Date: 01 February 2022
• DOI: 10.1177/08874034211020353
• Published date: 01 February 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034211020353

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2022, Vol. 33(1) 3 –22

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/08874034211020353

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

A Case Study of Municipal

Taxation by Citation

Dick M. Carpenter II1,2 ,

Kyle Sweetland1, and Jennifer McDonald1

Abstract

This study examines taxation by citation—local governments using code enforcement

and the justice system to raise revenue rather than solely to advance public health

and safety. It does so through a detailed case study of Morrow, Riverdale, and

Clarkston, three Georgia cities with a history of prolific revenue generation through

fines and fees from traffic and other ordinance enforcement. Results suggest taxation

by citation is a function of the perceived need for revenue and the ability to realize it

through code enforcement. Moreover, the phenomenon may be a matter of systemic

incentives. City leaders need not be motivated by simple rapaciousness. They may

see fines and fees revenue as the answer to their cities’ problems. Once in effect,

the mechanisms necessary for taxation by citation—such as highly efficient court

procedures—may stick, becoming business as usual.

Keywords

fines and fees, taxation by citation, municipal courts, code enforcement, traffic

citations

Introduction

This article presents a case study of three cities that have historically generated sub-

stantial revenues from fines and fees associated with city ordinances. Cities have long

generated revenue through citations and traffic tickets, but widespread awareness

about the extent to which municipalities depend on such revenue is rather recent.

1Institute for Justice, Arlington, VA, USA

2University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, USA

Corresponding Author:

Dick M. Carpenter II, University of Colorado, 1420 Austin Bluffs Parkway, Colorado Springs,

CO 80918-3733, USA.

Email: dcarpent@uccs.edu

1020353CJPXXX10.1177/08874034211020353Criminal Justice Policy ReviewCarpenter et al.

research-article2021

4 Criminal Justice Policy Review 33(1)

Contemporary pundits and policy makers alike denounce the practice, so much so that

it now has its own trope: “taxation by citation” (Bailey, 2012; Dieterle, 2017; Foldvary,

2015; Mitchell, 2015).

Critical attention and widespread awareness began after the 2014 events in

Ferguson, Missouri. Michael Brown’s shooting and the subsequent protests compelled

the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate (U.S. DOJ, 2015). The DOJ found

the city’s uncompromising code enforcement to raise revenue created long-simmering

tensions between its citizens and law enforcement. Revenue generation through fines

and fees long preceded 2014, as city leaders pressed the politically appointed police

chief and municipal court judge to help meet growing budget pressures through cita-

tion revenue.

Ferguson garnered nationwide attention for its fines and fees revenue generation,

but it was a mere 18th among a list of U.S. cities prolific in taxation by citation. Cities

all over the country—in Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, New York, Tennessee,

and Utah—ranked above Ferguson, and cities in still other states were among the top

25 (Kopf, 2016). And, as evidenced by a 2017 report by the U.S. Commission on Civil

Rights (2017), concern is now growing nationally that such revenue-generating behav-

ior may be more widespread. Indeed, drawing on a broad review of relevant literature,

Graham and Makowsky (2020) argue municipal fines and fees behavior is part of a

larger framework of revenue generation through the criminal justice system that has

become a key component of local government budgets across the United States.

Literature Background

Taxation by citation is when municipalities use their code enforcement powers to raise

revenue from fines and fees in excess of what they would collect were they issuing

citations solely to protect and advance public safety (Dieterle, 2017; Foldvary, 2015).

One indicator of taxation by citation may be large proportions of municipal revenue

generated by fines and fees, although there is no established definition of what propor-

tion is too large. Early working definitions suggest that a threshold of 10% of a city’s

revenue is a reasonable indicator (Maciag, 2019; Simmons, 2014).

Critics identify at least three legal and social concerns over taxation by citation: (a)

conflicts of interest, (b) distortion of law enforcement priorities, and (c) violation of

poor people’s rights. According to detractors, conflicts of interest are created when

municipal courts that process citations are funded by their cities. Multiple court deci-

sions have held judges should not have a financial or other personal interest in cases

they decide, and municipalities and law enforcement should not have a financial inter-

est in obtaining convictions (Marshall v. Jerrico, Inc., 1980; Tumey v. Ohio, 1927;

Ward v. Village of Monroeville, 1972).

Second, critics argue taxation by citation diverts law enforcement resources away

from protecting and advancing public safety. According to critics, incidental benefit to

a city budget from fines and fees poses no problem, but there is a problem when creat-

ing or enforcing ordinances is motived primarily by revenue generation (Ginkowski,

2018). Multiple court decisions have found the same (State ex rel. Pedersen v.