Donald Harrington appears before Chief Judge Frank Caprio in Municipal Court about his ticket for allegedly running a red light. Projected on the screen, in background, is the video taken of his car.

The Providence Journal / Mary Murphy

PROVIDENCE — Early one recent morning, a young woman in sweatpants and a Johnson & Wales University sweater is pleading her case in Municipal Court.

She had parked at a metered spot near her classes, she tells Chief Judge Frank Caprio. She put change in the meter, but by the time class had let out, her time on the meter had expired and there was a bright orange ticket on her windshield.

“I was just four minutes over, your honor,” she says.

Caprio leans forward and peers down sternly from his perch. “Just four minutes?”

“Yes, your honor,” she says, between chews of gum.

“OK,” he says with barely a pause. “Dismissed. You’re all done.”

Over the next two hours, the scene is repeated over and over in the simple, white-walled courtroom inside police headquarters, as defendants plead for leniency for parking in tow zones, or too close to fire hydrants, or on city sidewalks.

“I didn’t know I couldn’t park there, you honor,” says one man. “I just popped into the store for a second,” says one woman. “I thought I had more time before the light turned red,” says another man.

Caprio, whose videotaped court proceedings play regularly on the popular public-access show Caught in Providence, hears from nearly 150 people before court adjourns. Nearly all walk away paying less than they expected, or, in some cases, nothing at all.

Some city officials think Caprio and the three other Municipal Court judges might be a little too forgiving to those who come before them, and it is costing the city money.

Mayor David N. Cicilline’s director of administration, Richard I. Kerbel, says the court — which deals with traffic and moving violations and some misdemeanor offenses — is not on pace to meet the city’s revenue estimates.

So, in not so many words, he is asking the courts to step it up.

But Caprio says the court is not a revenue engine. With the economy in tough shape, the court should show more compassion, not less, he says.

“A lot of people are hurting. You’d have to be inhuman not to take those factors in. You got to live in the real world. This is life and it’s all on vivid display here in court,” he said. “What am I supposed to say if a person comes in with four children and is on Food Stamps? ‘Sorry, the city needs money, so you have to pay?’ ”

But what about the cash-strapped city?

Kerbel said the court brings in a significant amount of money, but, he acknowledged, there is a fine line that the mayor’s office must consider: Municipal Court is one of three independent tribunals (the other two are housing and probate) whose judges are appointed by the City Council, not the mayor’s office.

“It’s very clear we cannot tell judges how to do their jobs,” he said. “All we can say is where we are in terms of our estimates, what would help, and what would not help.”

“Every mayor since 1985 has looked for more money from the court,” Caprio said, referring to Kerbel’s comments. “But we don’t get into that. We can’t. I’m not elected as a revenue enhancement officer. I’m elected as a judge.”

An unwritten understanding about municipal court is that if you play by the rules –– come early (the line forms at 7:30 a.m.), wait your turn (first come, first served), and earnestly plead your case –– you will be rewarded, if not with absolution from your fines, at least with some reduction.

“People usually don’t go through the whole process unless they feel they have a valid reason. It’s just too much of a hassle,” Caprio said.

In the first half of 2007, fines from nearly 14,000 tickets were either dismissed or reduced in Municipal Court, representing over $950,000 in fines and fees.

Last year, that number, for the first half of the year, was about 12,500, representing $970,000 in fines and fees or 9 percent of the 141,128 tickets issued.

From July to December 2008, the municipal court brought in $4.65 million to the city, compared with $5.8 million for the same period in the previous year.

At that rate, though, it will be far short of the $10.5 million the city expected from the court by the June 30 end of the fiscal year. Kerbel says the city had planned to put more parking enforcement officers on the streets this year, which could have brought in more revenue for the courts. (The 34 parking officers, who have no police authority, write most of the tickets issued in the city.)

The city has not been able to increase its parking-officer staff as fast as it would have liked because of delays in passage of this year’s budget. As a result, the additional revenue has not materialized, and now the city is expecting about $9.5 million from the courts by the end of the fiscal year. It’s a relatively small piece of the city’s $641-million budget, but with all the other financial difficulties facing the city, every dollar counts.

“These are unprecedented and challenging times,” Mayor Cicilline has taken to saying regularly about watching departmental spending. “Everything has to be on the table.”

Judge Caprio says the blame for the revenue shortfall should not be solely on the courts: parking-enforcement officers, despite an increase in their numbers, have not been issuing more tickets.

In 2008, the city issued 66,000 fewer tickets than were issued the previous year, according to Municipal Court records. Kerbel is confident that the amount of tickets issued will increase in the last half of the year, based on data from previous years and the fact that those additional parking-enforcement officers will be hired.

“We have consistently issued more tickets in the second half of the fiscal year, from January to June, than in the first half,” he said.

Which is fine by Caprio. But it doesn’t change things from the court’s perspective, he said.

“I can’t stress it enough,” Caprio said. “We are a separate branch of government. This isn’t the Department of Public Works. We’re not in the business of making the city money.” Judge Caprio’s court

Here is a sample of how Chief Judge Frank Caprio handled cases within 30 minutes on a recent Monday morning:

•DONALD HARRINGTON

Violation: Caught on video running a red light on Service Road #8, near Broadway.

Excuse: “I thought I had five seconds to go through the light” before it changed from yellow to red.

Potential fine: $85

Actual fine: $85

•MINDY MATOUK

Violation: Eight unpaid tickets, for parking in tow zones and at expired meters.

Excuse: Matouk owns Butterfield’s, a downtown clothing store. She says it’s nearly impossible to find a decent parking spot downtown.

Potential fine: $640 with late fines

Actual fine: $320 (late fines waived)

•CHRISTINE JOHNSON

Violation: Parking in a prohibited area on Exchange Terrance.

Excuse: A RIPTA bus driver, Johnson she says she never got the ticket.

Potential fine: $75 with late fees

Actual fine: $25

•ERIKA READ

Violation: Parking in a bus stop on Broad Street.

Excuse: Her mother works in a shop along the street. She just stopped in for a second.

Potential fine: $90 after late fees

Actual fine: $30

•HELENA HORACE

Violation: Parking near an expired meter.

Excuse: Meter was broken. Horace says she put $3 in quarters in the meter, but only got a half-hour of time.

Potential fine: $25

Actual fine: Dismissed

•MARK GRIFFIN

Violation: Parking in a tow zone.

Excuse: He was running late for his fiancée’s swearing-in ceremony to the state bar in Supreme Court.

Potential fine: $300 after late fees

Actual fine: $100

•CHANTEL WILLIAMS

Violation: Parking in a prohibited area on Chestnut Street.

Excuse: Williams said there was no sign saying she couldn’t park there.

Potential fine: $60

Actual fine: $30

pmarcelo@projo.com