Can village park rangers in Suffolk County issue Vehicle and Traffic Law tickets while traveling on public streets between parks?

Plain-English summary

Old Field, a village in Suffolk County, asked whether it could let its park rangers issue Vehicle and Traffic Law tickets both inside village parks and on public streets while the rangers traveled between them. The AG split the answer.

Inside village parks: yes. Criminal Procedure Law § 2.10(9) directly designates "park rangers in Suffolk County" as peace officers and gives them authority to issue appearance tickets, simplified traffic informations, simplified parks informations, and simplified environmental informations. The Village didn't have to delegate anything; the authority came from state law. The Commissioner of Motor Vehicles' uniform traffic ticket (15 N.Y.C.R.R. § 91.2-91.3) is the form they would use for traffic violations.

Outside village parks, on public streets: no. Two reasons.

First, peace officers are different from police officers. Suffolk County Park Police were upgraded to police-officer status in 1991 (Criminal Procedure Law § 1.20(34)(r)), but town and village park rangers in Suffolk were left at peace-officer status. The peace-officer category is meant for "specialized law enforcement responsibilities confined to a specific locale or criminal activity" (Recommendation of the Law Revision Commission, reprinted in Bill Jacket for ch. 843 (1980)). Criminal Procedure Law § 2.20 conforms a peace officer's powers to the scope of his employment. The opinion analogized to railroad peace officers, who can't enforce traffic infractions on city streets unrelated to railroad operations (People v. Hartman), and to correction officers and parole officers, who can't enforce environmental conservation provisions outside their special duties.

Second, Old Field had given up general law enforcement when it joined the Suffolk County Police District in 1958. Once a village joins that district, it irrevocably divests itself of general law enforcement (Inc. Village of Old Field v. Cosgrove). It also relinquishes Municipal Home Rule Law § 10(4)(a) authority to designate peace officers to enforce health, safety, and welfare laws (County of Nassau v. Inc. Village of Woodsburgh). So even if home rule could otherwise extend ranger jurisdiction to public streets, the Village's accession to the County Police District foreclosed that option for it specifically.

The AG also addressed an earlier 1991 informal opinion (No. 91-28) that some had read more broadly. That opinion assumed, without deciding, that town park rangers had been authorized to enforce the Vehicle and Traffic Law generally. The 2012 opinion explained that the assumption was contingent on the requesting town not having transferred general law enforcement to its county. Old Field had transferred, so the assumption did not hold.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2012. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: What's the practical effect of the peace-officer/police-officer distinction? A: Police officers have general law enforcement authority anywhere in the state. Peace officers have specialized authority limited to a defined sphere. CPL § 2.20 makes that explicit by saying peace officers exercise their powers only when "acting pursuant to [their] special duties." A traffic stop on a public street between parks is not within the special duties of a park ranger.

Q: Why did joining the Suffolk County Police District matter so much? A: Old Field opted into the SCPD in 1958. The Court of Appeals' affirmance in County of Nassau v. Inc. Village of Woodsburgh (and the Old Field Cosgrove case at the Appellate Division) treated that election as an irrevocable transfer of general law enforcement to the county, plus a forfeiture of the village's MHRL § 10(4)(a) authority to appoint peace officers for general public health and safety enforcement. Old Field could not undo that election by attempting to re-create general policing authority through park rangers.

Q: What about home rule for villages that haven't joined a county police district? A: The opinion declined to address that broader question. It stuck to "the particular facts presented." A village that has retained general law enforcement might have more flexibility under MHRL § 10(4)(a) to extend its peace officers' jurisdiction, but Old Field's status closed off that path for it.

Q: Could a Suffolk County town or village just hire park police instead of park rangers? A: That's the County's choice, not the Village's. CPL § 1.20(34)(r) names "Suffolk County Park Police Officer[s] employed by the Suffolk County Department of Parks." Towns and villages employ park rangers (peace officer status), not park police. The opinion did not address whether a county would hire park police to patrol village parks or how that would interact with home-rule arrangements.

Q: What does an "appearance ticket" or "simplified traffic information" actually do? A: An appearance ticket directs a person to appear at a designated court at a designated time. A simplified traffic information is one of the four parts of the Commissioner's uniform traffic ticket. They are the routine documents through which ordinary moving violations get into court. Peace officers issuing them have to use the uniform ticket form (15 N.Y.C.R.R. § 91.2).

Background and statutory framework

The peace-officer category in New York runs through Criminal Procedure Law article 2. Section 2.10 lists who qualifies. Section 2.20 sets the powers and the "special duties" limitation. The Law Revision Commission's 1976 recommendations and the 1980 amendments restructured the article around the principle that peace officers are not general law enforcement; they are specialized.

Suffolk County's policing structure was reorganized in the late 1950s. Town and village police departments could opt to dissolve into a county-wide Suffolk County Police District. Villages that opted in transferred their general law enforcement authority to the County. The arrangement was litigated and upheld in Cosgrove and Woodsburgh.

The 1991 amendment (Act of July 23, 1991, ch. 542) clarified the peace-officer/police-officer split. Suffolk County Park Police were upgraded to police-officer status under § 1.20(34)(r), and the legislature explicitly preserved peace-officer status for town and village park rangers. The opinion treated that drafting decision as deliberate.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Criminal Procedure Law § 2.10 (peace officers)
• Criminal Procedure Law § 2.20 (peace officer powers)
• Criminal Procedure Law § 1.20 (definitions, including police officer)
• Municipal Home Rule Law § 10

Cases:

• People v. Hartman, 114 Misc. 2d 138 (Crim. Ct. Bronx Co. 1982) (railroad peace officer can't enforce unrelated traffic infractions)
• Inc. Village of Old Field v. Cosgrove, 244 A.D.2d 530 (2d Dep't 1997) (irrevocable transfer of general law enforcement to county)
• County of Nassau v. Inc. Village of Woodsburgh, 109 Misc. 2d 299, aff'd, 86 A.D.2d 856 (2d Dep't 1982), aff'd, 58 N.Y.2d 996 (1983) (same)

Source

• Landing page: https://ag.ny.gov/libraries-documents/opinions/opinions-year
• Original PDF: https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/2012-7_pw.pdf

Original opinion text

Criminal Procedure Law §§ 1.20(34)r, 2.10(9), 2.20; 15 N.Y.C.R.R. §§ 91.2, 19.3; Session Laws 1991 Ch 542, 1980 Ch 843; Environmental Conservation Law § 9-1501; Municipal Home Rule Law § 10(4)(a); Vehicle And Traffic Law § 511-b The Village's park rangers may issue uniform traffic tickets for violations of the Vehicle and Traffic Law within village parks. They may not issue tickets for violations they observe on public streets while traveling between parks.

August 8, 2012
Anthony S. Guardino
Village Attorney
Village of Old Field
1320 RXR Plaza
Uniondale, NY 11556-1320

Informal Opinion
No. 2012-7

Dear Mr. Guardino:
You have requested an opinion regarding whether the Village is authorized to delegate to its park rangers the power to issue uniform traffic tickets under the Vehicle and Traffic Law. The delegation would authorize the exercise of this power both when the park rangers are patrolling village parks and when they are traveling between the parks on public streets. As explained below, we are of the opinion that the park rangers are currently authorized by state law, without any new delegation, to issue uniform traffic tickets when they are patrolling village parks. We are of the further opinion that the Village may not extend this power to include issuing tickets while the park rangers are traveling on public streets between parks.

Preliminarily, state law specifically grants to "park rangers in Suffolk County" the authority to issue appearance tickets, simplified traffic informations, simplified parks informations, and simplified environmental informations. Criminal Procedure Law § 2.10(9). A simplified traffic information comprises one part of the uniform traffic ticket promulgated by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles. 15 N.Y.C.R.R.§ 91.3. Park rangers issuing tickets for traffic violations must use the uniform traffic ticket. 15 N.Y.C.R.R. § 91.2. The Village is in Suffolk County, and its park rangers are "park rangers in Suffolk County." Thus, state law expressly grants the Village's park rangers the authority to issue uniform traffic tickets.

A more complex question is where the Village's park rangers can exercise this authority. The fundamental responsibilities of local park rangers involve patrolling local parks. It necessarily follows that the Legislature intended the authority it granted to park rangers in Suffolk County to be exercised in the parks patrolled by the rangers. Therefore, we believe that the Village's park rangers are authorized to issue uniform traffic tickets while they patrol village parks.

We are of the opinion, however, that the Legislature did not intend this power to be exercised by the Village's park rangers on the streets outside patrolled parks. This is because Village park rangers, unlike County park rangers, are expressly made peace officers rather than police officers, and state law imposes limits on the authority of peace officers to exercise their powers. State law specifically provides that "[p]ark rangers in Suffolk County" (who are employed by towns and villages, see Act of July 23, 1991, ch. 542; Governor's Veto Mem., Veto Jacket, Veto 28 of 1990) are peace officers. Criminal Procedure Law § 2.10(9). By contrast, a "Suffolk County Park Police Officer" employed by the Suffolk County Department of Parks is expressly made a "police officer" under state law. Criminal Procedure Law § 1.20(34)(r). This distinction reflects a legislative decision to permit town and village park rangers to maintain their peace officer status when their towns and villages opted into the Suffolk County Police District and thus gave up their police departments, and the Suffolk County Park Rangers (now "Park Police") were given police officer status. See Act of July 23, 1991, ch. 542; Governor's Veto Mem., Veto Jacket, Veto 28 of 1990.

Unlike a police officer, who is responsible for general law enforcement, a peace officer "performs a law enforcement function for an agency that does not have policing as its central mission." Preiser, Practice Commentary, McKinney's Cons. Laws of N.Y., Book 11A, Criminal Procedure Law § 2.10 at 69 (McKinney's 2003). "[T]he term 'peace officer' was to refer to persons with more specialized law enforcement responsibilities confined to a specific locale or criminal activity." Recommendation of the Law Revision Commission to the 1976 Legislature: Relating to the Revision of New York Law Dealing with Peace Officers [hereinafter "Recommendation"], at 3, reprinted in Bill Jacket for ch. 843 (1980). As a result, a peace officer is authorized to exercise his powers, for the most part, only when he is "acting pursuant to his special duties." Criminal Procedure Law § 2.20. This phrase "conforms a peace officer's powers to the scope of his employment." Memorandum in Support of Unified Peace Officer Bill, at 2, reprinted in Bill Jacket for ch. 843 (1980).

Thus, for example, a municipal housing guard is authorized to arrest someone he believes has committed a burglary in a municipal housing project, see Recommendation, at 5; but a railroad peace officer may not enforce traffic infractions on city streets that "in no way interfere with or are related to the operation of the railroad," People v. Hartman, 114 Misc. 2d 138, 143 (Crim. Ct. Bronx Co. 1982). Correction officers and parole officers cannot enforce the prohibition against unauthorized removal of an evergreen tree, which may only be enforced by police officers or "peace officers who are acting pursuant to their special duties." Letter to Richard A. Brown, Counsel to Governor, from Melvin H. Miller, Assemblyman, (June 24, 1980), at 3, reprinted in Bill Jacket for ch. 843 (1980); Environmental Conservation Law § 9-1501.

Similarly, we believe that enforcing the Vehicle and Traffic Law on village streets outside village parks does not come within the specialized nature of a village park ranger's employment. The authority granted by sections 2.10(9) and 2.20 of the Criminal Procedure Law to park rangers in Suffolk County to issue simplified informations for violations of the Vehicle and Traffic Law; the Parks, Recreation, & Historic Preservation Law; and the Environmental Conservation Law is consistent with, and limited to, their responsibility to patrol and protect village parks and consequently may be exercised only within village parks. To view this grant of authority to the Village's park rangers as extending outside village parks would be inconsistent with the limitations of their status as peace officers for the Village parks.

Nor do we believe that the Village is authorized to extend its park rangers' jurisdiction to public streets outside patrolled parks. We do not consider whether a local government may as a general matter make such an extension pursuant to its home rule authority, because we are persuaded that on the particular facts presented here the Village cannot do so. The Village joined the Suffolk County Police District in 1958, and thereby irrevocably divested itself of its general law enforcement functions. Inc. Village of Old Field v. Cosgrove, 244 A.D.2d 530 (2d Dep't 1997); County of Nassau v. Inc. Village of Woodsburgh, 109 Misc. 2d 299, 317 (Sup. Ct., Nassau Co. 1981); aff'd, 86 A.D.2d 856 (2d Dep't 1982); aff'd, 58 N.Y.2d 996 (1983). Moreover, by joining the county police district, the Village relinquished its authority to designate a peace officer to issue an appearance ticket to enforce laws relating to the public health, safety, and welfare pursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law § 10(4)(a). County of Nassau v. Inc. Village of Woodsburgh, 109 Misc. 2d at 311-12, 316. Instead, having transferred the responsibility for general law enforcement to the County, the provisions of the Suffolk County Charter relating to the exercise of police functions by the County govern the Village. Id. at 316. In light of this history, we are of the opinion that the Village cannot delegate enforcement of the Vehicle and Traffic Law on public streets outside village parks to its park rangers.

You have suggested that an earlier Opinion of the Attorney General, Op. Att'y Gen. (Inf.) No. 91-28, supports the Village's authority to delegate to its park rangers the power to issue uniform traffic tickets under the Vehicle and Traffic Law, but we disagree. In the cited opinion we considered the question of whether a town's park rangers were authorized to impound motor vehicles pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 511-b. We "assum[ed] that the rangers are authorized to make arrests and issue appearance tickets for violations of section 511 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law," and reasoned that "they are also authorized to impound vehicles pursuant to section 511-b." We made that assumption because the requester had "informed us that the town has charged the park rangers with the duty to enforce all provisions of the Vehicle and Traffic Law" and we had no information that the requesting town had transferred its law enforcement power to the county. We did not opine as to whether the town was authorized to charge its park rangers with the duty to enforce the Vehicle and Traffic Law, either broadly or with respect to limited territory. Thus Op. Att'y Gen. (Inf.) No. 91-28 does not provide an answer to the question you have asked.

In summary, we are of the opinion that the Village's park rangers may issue uniform traffic tickets for violations of the Vehicle and Traffic Law within village parks but that they may not for violations they observe on public streets while travelling between parks.

The Attorney General issues formal opinions only to officers and departments of state government. Thus, this is an informal opinion rendered to assist you in advising the municipality you represent.

Very truly yours,

KATHRYN SHEINGOLD
Assistant Solicitor General
in Charge of Opinions