Mooresville and Iredell-Statesville schools ask county to pursue civil enforcement for stop-arm violations

School officials from Mooresville Graded School District and Iredell-Statesville Schools presented the Ardo County Board of Commissioners with data and a draft ordinance template asking the county to use the civil-enforcement option under Senate Bill 55 to address drivers who pass stopped school buses.

Dr. Jason Gardner, representing Mooresville Graded School District, said upgraded bus-camera systems documented what the districts suspected: high numbers of stop-arm violations. "As of today, 511 documented stop-arm violations in our school district of around 6,000 students," Gardner said. He and other presenters said the burden of proof for criminal enforcement is high because positive identification of the driver is often not possible, and that civil enforcement administered through a vendor can reduce law-enforcement workload and increase enforcement consistency.

Presenters described the model used in Harnett County, which has run a civil enforcement program for about three years. They said Harnett's program has uploaded roughly 15,000 videos from bus cameras, reported a fleet of about 300 buses, and showed 5,311 civil payments with 1,875 overdue at the time their figures were shared. Presenters also said the district's preliminary understanding of typical vendor agreements is a roughly 50/50 split of collected fines between vendor and school/district, and that vendors sometimes lease camera equipment as part of the contract. Several commissioners asked for clarification on revenue splits, appeals and how civil enforcement interacts with pending criminal prosecutions.

County staff and presenters said the Harnett model holds monthly appeal hearings in which individuals may contest civil penalties; transportation staff and a small appeal committee review the video and decide whether to uphold or dismiss the citation. Harnett's appeals meetings were described as a courtroom-style process with sworn testimony and approximately 15–25 appellants at a session.

Commissioners asked whether civil penalties become part of insurance records; staff said the vendor model was similar to toll-camera or red-light-camera civil systems and typically does not report to insurers, though unpaid fines can lead to vehicle-registration blocks. Commissioners also asked whether pursuing civil fines would preclude criminal charges; presenters said agencies that pursue a criminal prosecution do not pursue both civil and criminal penalties for the same incident and that law-enforcement officers would screen footage to determine whether to file criminal charges.

After discussion about logistics, equity, and potential public reaction, commissioners gave staff direction by consent: staff will gather additional information, consult with Harnett County about operational details and appeal procedures, prepare a draft ordinance (using the template provided by the board attorney) and propose public-hearing dates. Commissioners discussed scheduling an informational update at the next meeting and a potential public hearing in April, with formal adoption to follow once implementation questions are resolved. No ordinance was adopted at this meeting.

Ending: Staff asked commissioners to submit any specific questions in writing so staff's follow-up can address commissioners' concerns; staff said they will return with a draft ordinance, implementation details and proposed public-hearing dates.