Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Burke County solicitor advises state-court handling for school bus and school‑zone camera citations

July 09, 2025 | Burke County, Georgia


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Burke County solicitor advises state-court handling for school bus and school‑zone camera citations
Burke County Solicitor Matt Franklin told commissioners during a meeting that citations generated by school bus and school‑zone cameras are civil claims in which the county acts as the plaintiff, and that handling appeals in state court would require county legal representation.

Franklin summarized a memorandum prepared by Judge Cox and said the memorandum lays out options, including prosecuting in state court, hiring private counsel to file actions in state court, or litigating in magistrate court where different representation rules may apply. "Because the county is the actual plaintiff, that changes things," Franklin said. "I would recommend that we just go ahead and do it in state court and try them through the solicitor's office."

The distinction matters to defendants and county operations. Franklin said school‑zone camera citations carry a $100 fine, while school bus camera citations carry a $1,000 fine, and that appealing a citation to state court can require a filing fee of about $200 — larger than the $100 school‑zone citation itself. He said the Burke County Sheriff's Office reviews video evidence and an independent contractor assists with sending citations and court notices.

The solicitor told commissioners most Georgia counties challenge such citations in lower courts; Judge Cox's memorandum noted only one or two counties file in state court. Franklin said trying cases in magistrate court could require a separate solicitor calendar for what would otherwise be state court work, and that if the county chooses state court the solicitor's office would need to handle representation.

Commissioners did not take formal action on Franklin's recommendation at the meeting. Franklin said the issue stems from an unclear mix of law and local practice and that the Georgia General Assembly has considered clarifying legislation but a prior attempt failed.

The discussion leaves open two operational questions: whether defendants will consistently choose magistrate versus state court, and how the county will budget solicitor time or outside counsel if the workload increases. The solicitor's memo and the county's options will likely factor into administrative planning and any future requests to the board for resources or schedule changes.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Georgia articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI