A Princeton man is suing the City of Hoboken over their Camera-based License Plate Enforcement for Access & Response (CLEAR), claiming that it’s in violation of the Federal Highway Administration’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
By John Heinis/Hudson County View
” … The eleventh edition of the MUTCD is an amendment to the 2009 edition of the MUTCD and thus, N.J.A.C. § 16:27- 3.1 refers to that edition. As a result, N.J.S.A. 39:4-198 requires that Hoboken post ‘signs according to the specifications contained’ in the eleventh edition of the MUTCD,” Freeman, a doctoral candidate at Princeton University, argues.
“Even if, this Court were to find that N.J.A.C. § 16:27-2.1 refers to the latest version3 of the tenth edition of the MUTCD (“MUTCD 10th Ed.”), it ultimately is irrelevant because Hoboken fails to comply with both the tenth (as revised) and eleventh editions of the MUTCD.”
The lawsuit is unique since Freeman is not a lawyer and he is representing himself, as well as for the fact that he is not a Mile Square City resident.
The three-count lawsuit, filed in Hudson County Superior Court on Tuesday, has Freeman describe himself as someone who “routinely parks in Hoboken” who wants to prevent the city from issuing these “defect” parking tickets to him and his peers.
He also noted that part of the reason he filed the lawsuit was because he got a parking ticket dismissed since Hoboken did not have signage that complies with the MUTD.
The program has been panned by Hoboken business owners on Washington Street who have said at city council meetings that by targeting all illegally parked cars, patrons are discouraged from visiting due to legal parking spots being scarce.
Just eight days after the program started, the city council voted 4-4 to stop it in it’s tracks, which means the resolution failed, as only HCV reported.
Mayor Ravi Bhalla has continually touted the program, for example stating that parking violations were down 52 percent in the first week that the program was implemented.
One week after the aforementioned vote, October 15th, Freeman noted that he sent a cease-and-desist letter to Hoboken Corporation Counsel Brian Aloia, Assistant Corporation Counsel Alyssa Wells, and Anna Seguinot, who with them, to stop the CLEAR program.
He said they did not agree to cease the operation and did not offer any other solution(s), and a Hoboken parking utility dispatcher essentially said on October 23rd that he would have to follow the city’s rules just like anybody else.
Freeman further argues that it is illegal for a municipality to issue a ticket via mail prior to serving the ticket to a vehicle owner in person.
“Upon information and belief, Hoboken’s camera ticketing system will automatically issue
tickets and will issue tickets for purported violations that are not in fact violations,” the lawsuit contends.
“Freeman faces irreparable harm if the City of Hoboken tickets Freeman’s vehicle and does
not provide service as required under the Parking Offenses Adjudication Act. Freeman faces a non-speculative risk that the City of Hoboken tickets Freeman’s vehicle and does not provide service as required under the Parking Offenses Adjudication Act.”
As a result, he is seeking a declaratory judgement and injunctive relief that says the city’s residential parking permit rules are null in void due to violating the MUTD, as well as injunctive relief to put a halt to the CLEAR program immediately.
Freeman is also seeking counsel fees, interests, costs of suit, and any other relief the court deems just and equitable.
City spokeswoman Marilyn Baer said they would not comment on specifics of the case, but indicated the allegations would not have any impact on CLEAR or other parking regulations/programs.
“Our parking regulations remain valid and will continue to be enforced. An individual’s decision to challenge these regulations or make claims does not affect the validity of the City’s parking ordinances and policies. However, regarding this specific case, the City will not comment, as it is our policy not to discuss pending litigation.”
In January, this Mr. Freeman should be awarded a key to the City.