The article seemed to try to indicate that Parker's (outragrous) treatment was indicative of a more systemic problem, but I didn't think the argument held up very well.

So Woodworth collects a lot of revenue by enforcing the speed limits. Good for them. What is the connection to Parker's case? Is it just the implication that the town is too focussed on revenue-raising? That's pretty weak.

As is the implication of racism, really. This one incident seemed arbitrary, not targeted. Again, without evidence of a wider pattern this just seems like one (egregiously) bad case of motivated reasoning in a town that (charitably put) seems generally to be interested in upholding the law to the letter.