Bill would give local DMVs a cut

County clerks have fought the state for a share of motor vehicle fees for decades, but they say the system is so rigged that they can't compete.

A new bill by Assemblywoman Addie J. Russell, D-Theresa, may level the playing field.

Mrs. Russell has proposed that each county keep 12.7 percent of all fees paid by its residents for any motor vehicle-related service conducted through the state processing center or Web site after April 1, 2011.

Under the current arrangement, counties keep that share only if the transaction is handled by a local Department of Motor Vehicle office. The state keeps the remaining 87.3 percent.

Mrs. Russell said her bill does not prevent "enterprising" clerks from processing out-of-county registrations and keeping the percentage.

The St. Lawrence County clerk's office has earned $1.5 million since 2006 by processing registrations for more than 70 downstate car dealers. Clerk Patricia A. Ritchie said her office could reap $700,000 annually if every county resident had his or her vehicle registration processed locally.

But Mrs. Ritchie said the renewal form mailed to residents by the state doesn't mention that the transaction can be handled locally. Instead, drivers are encouraged to mail their license or registration renewal to a Utica processing center, or renew through a state-run Web site or a state-run phone system. If any of those options is used, the state keeps 100 percent of the revenue.

Mrs. Ritchie said she tried to start an Internet site that would handle motor vehicle transactions for St. Lawrence County residents, but the state said it wouldn't allow an independent system. She said she was similarly rebuffed when she tried to start processing renewals over the phone.

"I think it was all about the money," she said.

Both Mrs. Ritchie and Jefferson County Clerk Cheryl D. Lane acknowledge that if Mrs. Russell's bill became law, their departments would receive money for work they didn't do.

But both clerks said there are more than two dozen transactions more complicated than a registration renewal that county employees perform daily for the state's benefit.

Mrs. Lane said county employees collect fines levied for lapses in insurance that are all returned to the state. She said the department often will help residents research how insurance lapses occurred.

"It takes a lot of time to see where the problem is for the customer and it takes up time we could be waiting on a customer that we could get a fee for," she said.

Mrs. Ritchie said the county acts on the state's behalf in several other instances, such as clearing out-of-state tickets and helping residents change their name on a registration or title.

Both clerks support Mrs. Russell's bill, but Mrs. Ritchie said it shouldn't be the ultimate solution.

"We don't want money for not doing anything," she said. "We want customers. We want to provide the service. We've proved over the years we can do it cheaper, better and faster."

Mrs. Russell said the state has "gone awry" from its original agreement by creating more ways, such as the Web site, to lure revenue from the counties.

"Where do you make up shortfalls in revenue but the property tax?" she said. "That's ultimately where this issue falls to. I've made the decision that we should deal with it at the state level and not put it onto a property tax at the county level."

There is, as of yet, no Senate companion bill.