Yisroel R.

A Rockland County Supreme Court judge has ordered the county to release records surrounding its agreement with BusPatrol, bringing renewed attention to a school bus camera program designed to protect children but which has also generated frustration and questions from motorists across Rockland County.

The ruling came after Aron Law PLLC, a Brooklyn-based law firm, spent more than two years seeking records through New York’s Freedom of Information Law related to the county’s contract with BusPatrol, including financial records, cost-sharing information, and communications between the company and county officials.

The county had withheld or redacted portions of the requested records, citing trade secrets, competitive concerns, and exemptions for internal government communications. After the law firm filed an Article 78 proceeding in March, Rockland County Supreme Court Justice Djinsad Desir ruled that the county had not provided sufficient justification for withholding records under the trade secret and intra-agency exemptions and ordered those documents released.

BusPatrol operates Rockland County’s school bus stop-arm camera system, with cameras mounted on buses to record vehicles suspected of illegally passing while a bus is stopped with its red lights activated. The program, launched in Rockland in 2023, has since expanded across the county’s school districts, with more than 1,200 buses now equipped with the cameras.

The cameras serve an important safety purpose, targeting one of the most dangerous situations children can face while getting on or off a school bus. County officials have repeatedly defended the program, saying the cameras are intended to change dangerous driving behavior and that potential violations are reviewed by both BusPatrol and the Rockland County Sheriff’s Office before a citation is issued.

At the same time, the program has become a frequent source of frustration for some Rockland motorists, who have raised questions over whether every camera-recorded incident fairly reflects a driver intentionally passing a stopped school bus. Complaints have included situations involving wide or high-speed roads, motorists who say they could not stop safely, questions over whether adequate yellow-light warning was given before a bus stopped, and lengthy waits for those seeking to appeal the tickets.

Those concerns were raised earlier this year in a Rockland Daily reader letter calling for greater transparency surrounding the program. The letter stressed that protecting children around school buses remains paramount while arguing that motorists should also have confidence that citations are accurate, fairly reviewed, and accompanied by a meaningful process to challenge questionable tickets.

The financial structure of the program has also been part of the debate. According to data, BusPatrol reported collecting more than $3.1 million from 12,526 paid Rockland citations during 2025. After the company’s share and technology and administrative fees were deducted, approximately $450,500 was remitted to Rockland County. The exact financial arrangements between the county and BusPatrol are among the records at the center of this current court case.

The latest ruling does not determine whether individual BusPatrol tickets are valid or whether the camera program itself should continue. Instead, it requires greater disclosure of records surrounding the county’s relationship with the company, potentially providing residents with a clearer look at how Rockland’s most visible traffic enforcement programs operates.