http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/10/appeals_court_rules_against_ne.html

Appeals court rules against New Orleans traffic cameras
Published: Thursday, October 07, 2010, 10:55 PM     Updated: Thursday, October 07, 2010, 10:57 PM
Bruce Eggler, The Times-Picayune

A state appeals court Thursday rejected New Orleans' challenge to a district judge's ruling invalidating traffic tickets issued on the basis of red-light and speed-enforcement cameras. However, the court kept a stay on the ruling in place for seven more days, giving the city time to seek a rehearing or to ask the Supreme Court to review the issue.

Times-Picayune archiveOne of four red light traffic cameras at the intersection of Claiborne and Earhart avenues.
Mayor Mitch Landrieu's office said the city will "immediately seek a review" of the decision.

It also said drivers "should note that camera violations issued through Thursday of next week will still be valid."

A three-judge panel of the state 4th Circuit Court of Appeal said it agreed with Civil District Judge Paulette Irons that the City Charter does not authorize the Public Works Department, which oversees the city's traffic cameras, to enforce traffic regulations, assigning that responsibility only to the Police Department.

The city was counting on getting $14 million from camera-generated tickets this year and nearly $15 million in 2011. They generated $9 million in revenue through Aug. 31. Landrieu's office said the 4th Circuit decision, "if upheld, will impact essential city services and could result in additional furloughs and the closing of city facilities."

Adding to the ruling's potential impact, Ed Washington, the lawyer who filed the suit challenging the legality of the camera tickets, has said that if the tickets are finally ruled illegal, he will seek to force the city to refund millions it has collected since the first cameras were installed in early 2008.

The statement from Landrieu's office said the city also is "extremely concerned" that Irons' ruling "puts public safety at risk as these cameras provided a necessary deterrent to unlawful traffic practices. ... We cannot overstate the importance these cameras have played in reducing dangerous traffic practices."

Critics of red-light and other traffic enforcement cameras have attacked them on a variety of grounds in both courtrooms and legislative bodies nationwide, winning some battles and losing others.

Washington, a former longtime deputy city attorney representing four plaintiffs, one of whom is his wife, based his challenge on a single legal argument: that the City Charter "empowers the Department of Police with the sole authority to enforce traffic regulations such as running a red light or speeding." The charter gives the Public Works Department, which oversees the city's cameras, no authority to enforce such regulations, he said.

Irons agreed with him, issuing an injunction Oct. 1 prohibiting the city from issuing any more such tickets.

The 4th Circuit blocked the effect of her order a few hours later, issuing the stay that now is scheduled to expire next week.

In a two-page ruling, Judges Patricia Murray, Charles Jones and Dennis Bagneris of the 4th Circuit refused to overturn Irons' injunction "ordering the city to cease issuing citations for traffic violations based solely upon evidence obtained from traffic cameras."

After reviewing the City Charter, the three judges said, "we find no error in the trial court's determination that it provides no authority for the city to place the enforcement and adjudication of traffic camera violations under the auspices of the Department of Public Works."

They also rejected two other procedural arguments offered by the city.

Washington said Thursday evening that "the court made a good ruling, and hopefully the citizens will have an opportunity to weigh in on the traffic cameras going forward."

Unless the Supreme Court steps in to overturn Irons' ruling, the city appears to have two options to keep the traffic cameras operating: It can shift responsibility for them to the Police Department, or it can seek to amend the charter to legalize the current system for operating them.

A charter change would take several months and would require a vote of the people. In view of the cameras' widespread unpopularity among motorists, it is questionable whether such an amendment would pass.

Shifting responsibility for them to the Police Department would probably require action by the City Council and would take a few weeks. Such an ordinance is likely to stir up considerable opposition. However, council members might be willing to face down some constituents' wrath in view of the cameras' importance to the city's already battered budget.

The city has dozens of cameras in operation, mostly at major intersections and in school zones. Public Works Director Robert Mendoza has said that in the two years after the city began issuing tickets for camera-recorded violations, red-light running and speeding dropped by more than 90 percent at monitored intersections.

The automated camera system employs a combination of still and video cameras and detection equipment. A commissioned law enforcement officer reviews the images to determine whether violations occurred. If the officer finds a violation, a citation is issued to the vehicle's registered owner.

Tickets for running a red light cost $145. Speeding tickets range from $80 to $240, depending on how fast the vehicle was going. There is a $75 late fee for unpaid tickets.

Bruce Eggler can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or 504.826.3320.
 

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Title
Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Email
Write the displayed characters
Subscribe via email (registered users only)
	Add Comment Preview