Personal ties, aggressive lobbying, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in political contributions propelled the meteoric ascent of BusPatrol, an obscure school bus camera vendor who quickly became a big player in a specialized business that did not exist in Florida until last year. That achievement marked a stunning reversal for a firm with a checkered history of claims that it prioritizes income over public safety and opportunity over ethics.
BusPatrol’s resurgence, which has already been seen in other states, mimics the revival of Florida state Rep. Vicki Lopez, a former Lee County commissioner indelibly linked to the organization. A Tributary inquiry discovered a typical pattern between Lopez and BusPatrol: overlapping personal, professional, and political interests, which echoes previous claims of ethical wrongdoing against both.
However, such baggage is frequently not a barrier to success in Florida, where ethics regulations are ineffective and rarely enforced, allowing corporate interests to exploit them. Lopez’s first year as a newly elected Miami Republican in 2023 came 30 years after she was booted out of public office due to suspicions of wrongdoing. Within months of taking office in Tallahassee, she co-sponsored House Bill 741, which allows school districts to deploy cameras to ticket vehicles that run bus stop signs.
Less than three months after the new law was enacted, her son, Donny Wolfe III, left his brief stint as the Miami mayor’s chief of staff to become BusPatrol’s new VP of Government Relations. The corporation then employed Adrian Lukis, Lopez’s former stepson, and Wolfe’s former stepbrother, as lobbyists.
Lopez voted in favor of a bill that authorized firms like BusPatrol to be compensated for each citation issued in the following legislative session. She never revealed that her vote could benefit a corporation with her son on the payroll, as two ethics experts stated was required by law. A Lopez representative noted that the Florida House general counsel informed her that she had no competing interests.
As the Legislature established the structure for this new industry and two of Florida’s largest school districts benefited from the new law, BusPatrol donated $775,000 to legislators and local politicians.
This business model has come under fire in other jurisdictions, where drivers claim the company’s cameras have resulted in incorrect penalties, and government watchdogs have highlighted a revolving door between BusPatrol and authorities who have helped ensure the company’s success. BusPatrol did not respond to the Tributary’s requests for interviews.
The Bus Patrol Revenue Machine:
BusPatrol’s business model has proven to be highly profitable. In Florida and elsewhere, the corporation has positioned itself as a leader in school bus safety, but questions remain about whether its primary goal is public safety or profitability. The company’s cameras generated 11,500 citations in the first two weeks in Miami-Dade. BusPatrol retains 70% of the income from each $200 citation issued. BusPatrol would generate around $3.2 million per month in income at that pace. In Hillsborough County, the business predicted its cameras would result in 2,500 to 3,000 citations within the first week.
If the county proceeds to issue approximately 3,000 citations per week, the firm will earn roughly $1 million per month in Hillsborough. BusPatrol has often faced charges that local governments exploit its cameras to issue erroneous and excessive citations. The business faces a federal class-action lawsuit for issuing citations without evidence in New York. According to news reports from New York, Massachusetts, and Pittsburgh, drivers were fined despite not infringing the law. Last year, Pittsburgh-based television station WPXI reported receiving complaints from viewers that BusPatrol’s cameras were incorrectly citing passengers with $300 fines.
