Ban the Cams! Latest News

Posted in: Legislative News  | Add a Comment(0)

http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/Iowa-City-Moving-Toward-Banning-Traffic-Enforcement-Cameras-207484871.html

Iowa City Moving Toward Banning Traffic Enforcement Cameras
By Gregg Hennigan, Reporter

IOWA CITY – Iowa City Council members indicated Tuesday night they would put a stop to plans to install red-light cameras in town – at least for now.

Meeting in a work session, no City Council member voiced objections to a recommendation from city staffers that the ordinance allowing traffic-enforcement cameras, like red-light and speed cameras, be repealed.

The move comes in the face of a petition that sought to force the council to either ban the cameras, along with drones and automatic license plate readers when a peace officer at the scene does not write the ticket, or let voters decide the issue in a referendum.

The City Council voted 4-3 to in February 2012 in favor of an ordinance allowing traffic-enforcement cameras.

Iowa City residents Martha Hampel and Aleksey Gurtovoy later started the petition process. A petition was declared valid last week, but City Attorney Eleanor Dilkes, City Manager Tom Markus and other city officials offered the surprising recommendation that the camera ordinance be repealed and the other parts of the ordinance proposed in the petition be approved.

Their reasoning was that the city has not installed any cameras yet and probably wouldn’t until next year as it waits for the state to create rules on their use. The City Council can take up the issue again two years after the ordinance is repealed, at which time the guidelines and political fate of cameras should be clearer.

“Referendum or not, the state is looking at it, and at some point will tell the cities what they can do,” said Mayor Matt Hayek, a supporter of red-light cameras. “It renders our proceeding with something like that of dubious value.”

But the city’s action may not be totally satisfactory to opponents.

Rita Bettis, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, which supported the petition effort, wrote a letter to the City Council this week saying she disagrees with Dilkes’ interpretation of the validity of the portion of the petition dealing with the traffic-enforcement cameras. She also questioned the city’s planned use of license plate readers to identify parking violations.

Dilkes said the traffic camera part of the ordinance proposed in the petition is requesting a referendum (something for the council to reconsider) and the timeline for reviewing that has passed.

The sections on drones and license plates readers are an initiative (something new to be considered) and are valid, she said.

Bettis, who did not immediately return a phone message Tuesday, wrote that the City Charter does not contemplate a hybrid initiative-referendum and the proposed ordinance must be wholly one or the other. In her opinion, it’s an initiative.

Dilkes said that would render the referendum process meaningless because someone would only need to add provisions to a proposal seeking to repeal something in order to bypass the deadlines that go with a referendum.

Bettis also took issue with Dilkes’ opinion that “peace officer” includes parking enforcement attendants. The petitioners’ proposal says a peace officer must be present to write a ticket. The city’s plans for using license plate readers for parking violations would include staff placing tickets on vehicles.

Bettis argued that city and state law considers peace officers to be sworn law enforcement officers. But Dilkes countered that the laws include officers authorized to regulate parking violations in the definition of “peace officer.”

An ordinance is expected to be before the City Council at its next meeting.

Posted in: Taking on the Government  | Add a Comment(0)

Drivers threaten to show up to court or pay stop sign scamera ticket. Problem: "no such court exist"

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/05/14/57607.htm

Franz Kafka Heroes Challenge Traffic Tickets

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (CN) - A class action claims the City of Center Point and Redflex Traffic Systems illegally ticket drivers by threatening them with a court appearance if they refuse to pay fines, though "no such court exists."

     Redflex owns and operates the traffic cameras for Center Point, which photographs cars believed to run red lights or stop signs or speed.

     Such traffic-enforcement systems have been challenged, usually unsuccessfully, in courts all over the country.

     This one is a bit odd, though. It claims that the law that made the traffic cameras legal also gave ticketed drivers the right to appeal - but there are no courts authorized to hear the appeals, the two named plaintiffs say.

     Rhonda Lashon Stubbs and Celeita Snow sued the city and Redflex in Jefferson County Court.

     Stubbs's Lexus, license plate IMNGOD, was ticketed twice, allegedly for running the same stop sign on different days. Snow's Mercedes Benz was issued 14 citations.

     Snow says she repeatedly requested hearings on her tickets, and the city granted them, then "postponed" them, but never set a new date.

     It can't, she says, because there is no court that can hear it.

     "Ms. Stubbs paid the Notice of Violation because the Defendants left her with the false impression that the administrative hearing would be binding and would be conducted by the 'Municipal Court,'" the complaint states. "Currently, however, the Defendants strenuously argue that no such court exists. By leaving the Plaintiff with the false impression that she would appear in front of a 'court,' the Notice of Violation carried the full imprimatur of the State of Alabama and misled and intimidated Ms. Stubbs and the Class members into paying the 'fine.'

     "Similarly, the Notice of Violation sent to Stubbs and other members of the Class did not explain that the $100 'fine' could not be collected unless the City filed a later, separate civil suit. Neither Ms. Stubbs nor any other Class member was informed that the Notice of Violation was not judicial in nature but was actually a non-binding collection notice."

     In fact, the plaintiffs say, a state judge has told the city that its system is illegal.

     The complaint states: "On August 17, 2012, an order was entered by Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge David N. Lichtenstein in City of Center Point v. Kenneth Crowder, CV-2012-0929 whereby this Court found that the Alabama District Courts do not have jurisdiction to hear appeals of any matters concerning fines, adjudications, or other action pursuant to Ordinance 2011-02. Therefore, the 'appeal' rights granted in the statute are defective as contrary to the Alabama Constitution.

     "As a result of deficiencies in the Statute and Ordinance - as pointed out by Judge Lichtenstein - no meaningful appeal lies from any decision of the hearing officer appointed by the Mayor. Act 2011-580 grants rights of appeal and the Due Process Clause requires the opportunity for meaningful review; absent that, the Statute and the Ordinance are unconstitutional as applied and are due to be stricken."

     Every member of the class, in other words, becomes a hero, or victim, of his or her own Kafka novel.

     The plaintiffs seek declaratory judgment, costs, and damages for civil rights violations, suppression of material facts, and unlawful debt collection practices.

     Their lead counsel is Samuel M. Hill.

     Franz Kafka (1883-1924) wrote novels and stories in which the hero, often named Josef K., is summoned to appear at a court he cannot reach, for a crime uncertain.

     Center Point, pop. 23,000, is a suburb of Birmingham.
 

Posted in: Speed Camera News  | Add a Comment(0)

Baltimore, Maryland Denies Speed Camera Cover Up  (OPEN MEETING LAW LIKELY VIOLATED BY CITY!)

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/41/4104.asp

Baltimore, Maryland Denies Speed Camera Cover Up
Motorists complain about secret meetings of speed camera task force in Baltimore, Maryland.

Earlier this month, the city of Baltimore, Maryland denied to the state's Open Meetings Compliance Board that it was not keeping meetings of the city's speed camera task force secret, in violation of state law. Assistant City Solicitor Hilary Ruley provided screenshots from the Wayback Machine, to show that announcements were post at some point for a pair of meetings.

"This is the best evidence that the city can currently locate of the fact that all of the task force's meetings were advertised," Ruley wrote. "Again, it invited the media and the general public to attend all of its meetings and the media did attend each meeting."

The controversy developed last month when three motorists representing the Maryland Drivers Alliance complained to the state that Mayor Stephenie Rawlings-Blake set up a speed camera task force -- a government body -- that held secret meetings with the photo enforcement firm Brekford in violation of the Maryland's open meeting law.

"Please note also that that city provided screen shots from web.archive.org for notices of just two of their meetings," Louis M. Wilen, one of the three who filed the original complaint, wrote in an emailed response to the board. "The additional three pages that Baltimore City provided are work orders, not actual evidence that meeting notices were posted. I realize that the OMA Compliance Board procedures do not provide for yet another response from the complainants, but I hope that the OMA Compliance Board will consider the above information when making their decision."

The speed camera task force was set up in September 2012 so that eight members of various pro-speed camera organizations, including AAA, and city employees could discuss photo ticketing policies. The most controversial meeting of the group was held on March 20 at the Brekford Corporation's headquarters in Hanover. Reporters for the Baltimore Sun attempted to enter the meeting and were told they could not attend. The interactions were recorded on video.

The complaint also alleged the speed camera task force failed to keep minutes of the meetings or refused to make these documents public. Baltimore admits the task force is subject to state law but denies any violation.

"The task force has been in the process of compiling meeting minutes," Ruley wrote. "As the OMA manual recognizes, there is no standard reasonable time for creation of meeting minutes and certainly draft meeting minutes need not be made public."

The city included in its response to the state a set of newly generated, bare-bones minutes for the six meetings of the task force. The individuals who filed the complaint were not satisfied, citing a precedent where routine delays of "several months" in producing minutes was found to be unlawful. They were also unsatisfied with the level of detail provided by the documents.

"At best, the minutes consist of an agenda followed by a mixture of random phrases and undefined acronyms combined occasionally with marginally understandable sentences," Wilen and others wrote in response. "The minutes from two of the meetings do not provide any information beyond an agenda."

If the open meeting compliance board upholds the complaint, each individual participating in the speed camera task force could be fined $100.

Posted in: Speed Camera News  | Add a Comment(0)

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/sun-investigates/bs-md-sun-investigates-speed-cam-suspension-20130517,0,2218138.story

Behind the scenes of a decision to shut down speed cameras

By Scott Calvert, The Baltimore Sun
3:30 p.m. EDT, May 18, 2013

The emailed directive went out midmorning April 16 from a Baltimore City traffic engineer: No more speed camera tickets are to be issued from the camera in the 3900 block of The Alameda. Less than five hours later, an engineering supervisor wrote another email, stating that the city's entire speed and red-light camera network was being suspended.

The emails, provided by the city in response to a Public Information Act request, offer a glimpse at how transportation officials made a major decision about a controversial program that has caused recurring headaches for the city and many motorists. This time, a camera was programmed with the wrong speed limit, and there was a problem with how payment options were listed on tickets.

The city says the automated enforcement program was suspended April 15, and records show the reverberations of that decision played out through the following day — after The Baltimore Sun noted a motorist's concern about an errant ticket issued on the Alameda.

On Friday, city transportation spokeswoman Adrienne Barnes said the decision to suspend the program came after a face-to-face meeting with representatives of the city's new vendor, Brekford Corp.

The emails make clear that by April 15, city officials had concerns about Brekford. Acting Transportation Director Frank Murphy emailed top agency officials midday to say that company executives would attend an afternoon meeting "so we can discuss problems."

Murphy did not detail those problems.

The Sun was unaware of the meeting when, on the following morning, it sent transportation officials detailed questions about the Brekford speed camera on The Alameda.

A little over an hour later, city engineer Carlos Vidal emailed Brekford, describing the same problem with the camera and ordering it taken "out of enforcement mode." A Brekford official soon replied that had been done. If the system had been suspended a day earlier, it's not clear why any speed or red-light cameras still would have been in enforcement mode.

Around 3:15 p.m. on April 16, city engineering supervisor Jamie McDonald notified several officials in city government and at Brekford that no more speed and red-light camera tickets would be issued citywide for the indefinite future.

"We are suspending the program as far as approving locations and issuing citations until further notice," he said in an email. "We have all worked hard and made a lot of progress but there are still some issues that we need to address before we can move forward."

A half-hour later, Khalil Zaied — Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake's deputy chief of operations — told Murphy to inform Brekford CEO C.B. Brechin of the city's decision. Murphy wrote back, saying he had spoken to another company executive. "I informed him," Murphy said.

The department publicly announced its decision a short while later.

Posted in: Speed Camera News  | Add a Comment(0)

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/05/plaquemines_parish_sheriff_to.html#incart_river

Plaquemines Parish sheriff to withdraw traffic camera proposal after public outcry

Plaquemines Parish Sheriff Lonnie Greco says he will ask the Parish Council to withdraw his proposed ordinance allowing traffic cameras in the parish. (

By Paul Purpura, NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune The Times-Picayune
on May 17, 2013 at 1:39 PM, updated May 17, 2013 at 3:22 PM      Email 
 

Less than a month after he announced he wanted to use mobile traffic cameras http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/04/plaquemines_parish_sheriff_see.html to catch speeders in Plaquemines Parish, Sheriff Lonnie Greco said Friday he is dropping the initiative. "The public outcry against the implementation of the proposed traffic camera system in Plaquemines Parish has led me to withdraw the ordinance that was before the Parish Council," Greco said through a spokesman.

Greco announced his about-face Thursday night during a town hall meeting in Belle Chasse. He said last month that he proposed using Redflex, the controversial company that Gretna and Westwego officials use for their traffic enforcement programs.

"The Plaquemines Parish Sheriff's Office will explore other avenues to address the speeding problem, in addition to stop sign violations, that are occurring throughout Plaquemines Parish," Greco said .

"I want to personally thank all of the citizens and elected officials who either contacted me or I met with over the last month," he said. "I value and respect everyone's opinion. I ask that drivers on Plaquemines' roadways obey speed limits and stop signs and drive safely."

Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser told NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune last month that he opposed Greco's proposal. "It takes more money out of residents' pockets and is just another burden on taxpayers," Nungesser said.