Filing: Unlawful evidence for Hempstead school bus camera tickets

The Town of Hempstead used unlawful evidence against drivers accused of passing stopped school buses, including from bus cameras meant for security, not traffic enforcement, lawyers suing the town allege in new court papers.

The filing, made this week in Nassau County Supreme Court, is the latest in an ongoing class-action case against Hempstead's school bus camera program. Some of the video evidence submitted to ticket drivers, plaintiff attorneys claim, is not permitted by either state or local law.

To provide evidence for the town’s program, contractor BusPatrol America equips school buses with external cameras that record while the bus is stopped to pick up or drop off students. Drivers who pass a stopped school bus are subject to a ticket that carries a minimum fine of $250.

Videos captured by those cameras are compiled in an evidence package against drivers, who can either pay the fine or request a hearing in Nassau County traffic court to contest the ticket.

But the new court filing alleges Hempstead has used video from other cameras on the buses as evidence for violations, cameras the class-action attorneys say are not allowed or intended to be used for enforcement.

New York law requires school bus cameras work "in conjunction with a school bus stop arm," the mechanical red stop sign deployed when the bus stops. The statute also says evidence used "shall not include images that identify the driver, the passengers, the contents of the vehicle, pedestrians and cyclists."

But videos shot by a camera near the windshield of the buses have been included as evidence, violating both requirements, according to the new filings, which respond to a town request to dismiss the lawsuit. The windshield cameras continue rolling even when the school bus is no longer stopped and clearly show the faces of children at bus stops and other bystanders.

Martin Bienstock, an attorney for ticketed drivers, said he suspects the town has used this type of evidence in many cases. He highlighted four in his filing.

"It’s not a needle in a haystack," Bienstock said.

Newsday reviewed video evidence for two other alleged violations, unrelated to Bienstock’s court filing, and found in both cases the town used video recorded by the windshield cameras.

The court filing doesn't indicate how many tickets already issued could be impacted.

Hempstead Chief Deputy Town Attorney Tricia Heino-Moriates wrote in a January court filing "every potential violation ... recorded by the school bus cameras are comprised of three video recordings (three angles: front, side and rear)."

But the plaintiff attorneys argue Hempstead’s own contract with BusPatrol says windshield cameras are not part of the company’s "Stop Arm Enforcement Solution," which comprises the driver’s side external cameras and other equipment, such as modems and GPS systems, BusPatrol uses to record potential violations, according to BusPatrol documents included in the court filing.

The windshield camera is listed in the contract as part of BusPatrol’s separate "Student Safety Solution" package, which also includes cameras and microphones that record inside the bus.

In BusPatrol marketing materials included in the court filings, and on BusPatrol’s own website, the company does not describe the windshield camera as a device used to provide evidence for school bus camera tickets, saying the camera provides "valuable evidence in case of collision or other incident."

Additionally, the agreements Hempstead and BusPatrol reach with school districts to allow buses to be equipped with cameras say BusPatrol will ensure that photos, audio and video recorded by the nonenforcement equipment "shall not be made available to the Town of Hempstead or any third party except as explicitly authorized by" the school district.

Town officials did not answer specific questions about these allegations, but provided an emailed statement.

"Although the Town cannot comment further as this is the subject of pending litigation, the Town has consistently directed BusPatrol to operate in compliance with all the requirements of state law," Hempstead spokesman Brian Devine wrote to Newsday. "The Town stands behind the merits of this important child safety initiative."

BusPatrol spokesman Gary Lewi declined to comment on the allegations, citing the pending litigation.

Hempstead launched its school bus camera program in 2022 and issued 270,000 total tickets in 2023 and 2024.

Newsday reported in January that the town in 2023 and 2024 wrote as many as 80,000 tickets in school districts that don’t participate in the program, prompting town leaders to say such ticketing should stop immediately, any such outstanding tickets be dismissed and that BusPatrol should refund anyone who paid an improperly issued ticket.

Since then, the town has not responded to requests for comment on when those tickets would be dismissed and how people who paid them could get refunded. Several new lawsuits have been filed in the wake of Newsday's report.

The class-action lawsuit that brought the new allegations was originally filed in November 2023, with plaintiff Sergey Kadinsky claiming the Town of Hempstead did not have sufficient evidence to prove a school bus camera violation occurred.

In January, the town’s attorneys supplied three videos of Kadinsky’s incident, saying they made clear a violation did exist. The town then requested the lawsuit be dismissed based on the new video evidence.

However, one of those videos was taken by a windshield camera that Bienstock says cannot be used as evidence and should not still exist, since state law requires all recordings from school bus cameras be destroyed once a case is disposed.

Kadinsky paid his ticket June 2023, a year and a half before the town produced the additional evidence.