Protest Letters

http://www.oakridger.com/letter/x1615404449/Traffic-cameras-Whats-the-truth

Traffic cameras: What's the truth?

(Thanks to Kill Tn Traffic Cameras on Facebook for the link!)

OAK RIDGE, Tenn. — To the Editor:

I see the traffic cameras have now extracted over $2.3 million out of the Oak Ridge community -- most of that money going out of state to Redflex ... never to be seen again.

This continues to discourage people from the surrounding areas coming to do business or even passing through Oak Ridge. They don't shop here, dine here, or fuel or service their cars here. They avoid Oak Ridge like any person avoids areas known for pick-pockets. Wonder just how much that costs city businesses?

As I have said before, the way these cameras are being used is the moral equivalent to the city hiring pick-pockets to prey upon those that let their guard down, and then guaranteeing the thieves they will not be prosecuted as long as they split the profits with the city.

That, however, would probably result in more actual improvement in safety because everyone would become much more aware of their surroundings and criminals of all types avoid places where people stay alert. Can't help but notice that the articles are always about how much money is taken ... not safety improvements.

1. What data has been collected that would show these revenue cameras have improved overall traffic safety in the city? The data I see is that many thousands of people still run the lights and speed in areas that are posted as being covered by cameras. Wonder how it is working in the areas without cameras?

2. Just what has been done with the $1,044,045 the city received? Does this include the court costs charged to anyone with the nerve to actually come to court with some explanation and being found guilty anyhow? And how much does Oak Ridge spend processing these confiscations? Are more tickets being issued to the unwary travelers passing through because the locals are getting more accustomed to where the traps are?

3. Are the rumors true that tickets are given for 1 or 2 mph over the speed limit, and that if turning right on a red light you must stay at a complete stop for three seconds or get a ticket?

Steve Mead
Oak Ridge

http://lubbockonline.com/editorials-/-letters/2010-09-17/your-views

Red light cameras not improving safety?

Your recent article “Allstate Best Drivers report ranks Lubbock fourth safest in Texas” (A-J, Sept. 3) noted Lubbock as the fourth-safest driving city in America. The chart accompanying the article contained some interesting information regarding Texas’ worst driving cities.

All six of the lowest-ranked cities, and eight of the bottom nine, are home to those bastions of safety known as red light cameras. The “worst of the worst,” Garland, was the first Texas city to install a permanent red light camera program in 2003.

I thought the cameras were all about “safety and saving lives.” More than 400 red light cameras are in operation in Irving, Arlington, Dallas, Mesquite, Austin, Houston, and San Antonio, and they all rank at the bottom of the chart.

Could it be the high number of rear-end collisions are causing low ratings? I don’t know. But if the cameras are not improving safety, and are a detriment, they should be removed. If it isn’t all about safety, then what is the purpose? I think we in Lubbock figured out the answer a long time ago.

JUDGE JIM HANSEN/Lubbock
 

http://www.antonnews.com/westburytimes/opinion/10021-letter-red-light-cameras-are-unconstitutional-unless.html

Letter: ‘Red Light Cameras Are Unconstitutional Unless…’
Friday, 27 August 2010 00:00

The Village Courts in Nassau preside over violation cases including allegations involving the State’s Vehicle and Traffic Laws occurring within our borders. We are local criminal courts and as such the Criminal Procedure Law and rules of evidence that apply in the case of misdemeanor and felony courts also apply to them. So too do the Constitutions of the United States and the State of New York both of which have right of confrontation clauses contained within their Bill of Rights provisions.

The Bill of Rights, adopted in 1791 as the first 10 amendments of our federal constitution and similar provisions adopted by our State in its own Constitution in 1967 were geared to thwart convictions based upon hearsay and innuendo. This point is driven home, not merely by the constitutional debates of those eras but also by more contemporary examples such as the Broadway play, The Crucible, where rumors allowed for the convictions of humans and animals in Salem, Massachusetts based upon the allegations that they were possessed by evil spirits or witches. The hangings and other executions that then occurred were the by-product of hearsay and trials lacking in the component of cross-examination or juries representing a fair cross-section of the community or even judges who might fairly decide the facts and the law. Certainly defense lawyers and their function of testing the prosecution’s case were non-existent.

Read more: A judges thought on RLC: Letter: ‘Red Light Cameras Are Unconstitutional Unless…

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/11/letter-to-the-president-538-highway-robbery/

Letter to the President #538: 'Highway robbery?'

Tom Foreman | BIO
AC360° Correspondent
 
The more we make the enforcement of laws and regulations into a cash making proposition, the further we stray from the true purpose of government
 
Reporter's Note: I don’t know if President Obama has ever had a speeding ticket. I assume so. Just as I assume that he’d be more likely to get one these days in all sorts of American cities where the streets seem as if they are being patrolled with unusual diligence…the subject of my latest letter.
Dear Mr. President,
I had an idea the other day which has nothing to do with you, but it does have something to do with the idea of good government. Lately I’ve noticed a lot more police activity in and around D.C. I don’t mean big, SWAT teams storming the Quicky Mart activity, but rather speed traps, squad cars eyeballing four way intersections for sign rollers, that sort of thing. You probably aren’t aware of such matters anymore, what with your big fancy limo and team of Secret Service folks, but trust me, it’s there. Or at least it appears to be.
A couple of months ago, I read a story about how municipalities are stepping up enforcement of all sorts of minor infractions because they need the money from the fines.
I’m no scofflaw. I have no problem with laws being rather vigorously enforced. But I think we step into very quick sand when we start looking at our law enforcement agencies as cash cows. Because the minute we start doing that, I think we divert them from the serious, honorable work we hired them to do. (And no, I did not just get a ticket. My last one was some time ago, and I don’t just write here about my personal grudges.)
I’m not accusing police of being unfair. I have great respect for them. What I’m saying is I know how politicians work, and the minute they smell revenue from stepping up enforcement, I think they can’t help but start subtly leaning in favor of more of it…not because it makes us safer, not because it keeps crime down, but purely because it gives them money for other programs that they don’t know how to fund. It is a secret tax of sorts. And making our police officers collect it in the faux name of public safety is terrible.
Take those automated speeding cameras, for example. I think the fundamental purpose for them is revenue, pure and simple. Because if they worked so wonderfully at controlling speeding, don’t you think every single town that installed them would see some monumental dip in all speeding violations and all speed related accidents? Wouldn’t they likely see their revenues go down because everyone would start driving so much more conservatively? And yet, I have not seen reports to that effect, and yet I have heard of towns crowing about how much operating money the cameras produce for the city.
My point is, the more we make the enforcement of laws and regulations into a cash making proposition, the further we stray from the true purpose of government. I trust my police force to keep my streets safe every day. I admire the hard work of dedicated officers who take on that dangerous and often unappreciated work. And I intensely dislike the notion that they might be turned into rolling cashiers for politicians who can’t convince the public to approve enough taxes for all the programs they might want.
Like I said, maybe I’ve got this all wrong, and I’ll look into it some more and let you know what I find. Hope your weekend is going well. How’s the family, btw? Seems like ages since I’ve asked.
Regards,
Tom

http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-news/ci_15473440

Las Crucen plans to sue city over red light, speed cameras

By Diana M. Alba / This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Posted: 07/08/2010 11:34:11 PM MDT

Click photo to enlarge«1»LAS CRUCES - One Las Crucen is taking his concerns about the city's red light and speeding cameras to a new level.

Anthony Avallone, 83, last week formed a trust, a type of legal entity, with plans to file a civil lawsuit against the city over the devices. He said he's seeking donations from the public to hire an attorney for the litigation. Avallone said he hopes it eventually would turn into a class-action lawsuit - one that seeks the return of all fines collected from drivers.

A retired attorney himself, Avallone said the idea was sparked after his son received a traffic camera citation this spring for an infraction at the Valley Drive and Avenida de Mesilla intersection. After a closer look at the citation and traffic cam ordinance, Avallone said, he believes the city's process violates people's rights.

"I started my usual research on constitutional issues by carefully reading the ordinance and the notice of violation," said Avallone, who retired after a 43-year law career. "I realized there were some serious problems."

Read more: Las Crucen plans to sue city over red light, speed cameras

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/31/3190.asp

Thanks to the www.newspaper.com for this fun sign!

7/4/2010
New Zealand, The Netherlands: Speed Camera Programs Attacked
New Zealand speed camera propaganda blasted with shotgun while Dutch camera pole is decapitated.

Vigilantes attacked a newly installed speed camera in Baexem, The Netherlands on Thursday. The automated ticketing machine had been installed on the N280 on June 24. According to local police, vigilantes decapitated the device, but only 5500 euros (US $6900) in damage was done because the camera and electronics had not yet been installed inside the housing.

In Wanganui, New Zealand, vigilantes took out a billboard meant to justify the use of speed cameras in the area. The advertisement showed a police officer holding a camera with the caption, "How fast are you going?" Residents responded by hurling bottles and bricks on at the sign. According to the Wanganui Chronicle, the sign was blasted by gunfire on several occasions. Officials finally agreed to remove it last week.

Public Relations Guy for House Sub Committee


Jeff Schnobrich


 

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

202-225-9989

 

Public comment guy for House Sub Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

 

Please contact and comment on your feelings of the scameras.

 

Agency Head [or Freedom of Information Act Officer]                        Date
Name of Agency
Address of Agency
City, State, Zip Code


Re: Freedom of Information Act Request


Dear FOIA Public Liasion: (Sir or Madam will also do) 

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552.

I request that a copy of the following documents [or documents containing the following information] be provided to me: [identify the documents or information as specifically as possible].

In order to help to determine my status to assess fees, you should know that I am a representative of the news media affiliated with a public interest organization that publishes or disseminates information, and this request is made as part of news gathering and not for a commercial use.



[Optional] I am willing to pay fees for this request up to a maximum of $[ ]. If you estimate that the fees will exceed this amount, please inform me first.

[Optional] I request a waiver of all fees for this request. Disclosure of the requested information to me is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in my commercial interest. [Include a specific explanation.]

I also include a telephone number at which I can be contacted during the hours of ________, if necessary, to discuss any aspect of my request.
I look forward to your reply within 20 workdays (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays), as the statute requires.


Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,
 
 

Name
Address
City, State, Zip Code
Telephone Number [optional]

Attachments:

File	Description
Freedom of Information Act Request	Freedom of Information Act Request Sample Letter

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/mego/2392250,6_4_NA15_MEGO_S1-100615.article

Are red-light cameras all about the green?
Comments

June 15, 2010

The more people say "it's not about the money," the more I can't help feeling it's about the money. I'm referring, of course, to red-light cameras, which were going to be discussed at tonight's council meeting but will instead be on the July 20 agenda.

At issue is whether the city will continue issuing $100 tickets to motorists who make illegal right turns at the city's three red-light camera intersections. Under current guidelines, which conveniently coincide with one of nine April 23 amendments to the Illinois Vehicle Code, motorists who come to a complete stop before they make a right turn are not ticketed, whether they stop before or slightly after that line on the pavement that you usually can't see anyway.

Illinois law actually stipulates that you have to stop before the line if there is a pedestrian or bicyclist present. To enforce that law, however, requires human judgment, something cameras don't have.

Actually, I would argue that there aren't any laws that can be enforced without the exercise of human judgment.

Right turns are big business. In April, Park Ridge's only camera recorded 154 valid violations (out of 270), 150 of them for right turns.

And they produce big bucks. Schaumburg's one camera, now removed, generated $1 million in 75 days. Chicago makes more than $64 million a year on cameras, which is probably why the cash-strapped Cook County Board wants to install 30 cameras in suburban towns; including six in Schaumburg, which is angry about it.

It's hard to argue the cameras are for safety. UIC professor Rajiv Shah recently found that, while Chicago accidents declined city-wide, accidents at red-light camera intersections actually went up 5 percent.

His study is not alone.

Another of those April 23 amendments requires a statistical analysis of accidents before and after each camera is installed. But ambiguities in reporting, frequent changes in what constitutes a reportable accident, and some officials' desperate attempts to justify the cameras no matter what will probably let the pro-camera forces conclude whatever they want.

If it really is about safety, then we should address the traffic light yellow interval. Most yellows are 3 seconds, but it has repeatedly been found that adding even one second can reduce accidents dramatically, making red-light cameras uneconomic.

In California, if the posted speed is 45, the yellow has to be 4.3 seconds, and if the actual driving speed is 50, it's 4.7. How many accidents would there be if our lights had 4.7 second yellows, a two-second all-red clearance, and "prepare to stop" warning beacons like we have on Naper Boulevard at Plank Road?

If we're not willing to find out, then it's about the money.

Contact Bill Mego at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
 

http://www.theledger.com/article/20100613/EDIT02/6135012/1398?tc=ar

Red-Light Cameras Offer No Protection, Cause Crashes

Published: Sunday, June 13, 2010 at 12:01 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, June 11, 2010 at 6:32 a.m.
It seems come July 1 the state of Florida will be in the red-light-camera business, collecting millions of dollars using the tool "our safety" for installing these cameras. (And the greed sets in on how to share the golden egg.)

Study after study has proved that, rather than improving motorists' safety, red-light cameras increase crashes and, therefore, raise insurance premiums.

The most recent study revealing the truth about these cameras was done by The University of South Florida College of Public Health. In fact, the only studies done showing a benefit to red-light cameras that I have seen were either done by the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety or researchers it funded.

Studies from North Carolina, Virginia and Ontario have all reported that cameras cause a increase in crashes, increasing costs and injuries. This information has been known since 2001. A paper by the office of the Majority Leader Of The House Of Representatives reported red-light cameras are "a hidden tax levied on motorists."

With these cameras also comes corruption, and six cities reported by "Motorists.Org": Union City, Calif., Dallas and Lubbock, Texas, Nashville and Chattanooga, Tenn., and Springfield, Mo., have been found shortening the yellow signal to increase profits.

The Ledger had some questions about the city of Lakeland's cameras and found it hard to get answers.

Lakeland city commissioners have created a Pandora's box with these cameras and have placed a unjust burden on the citizens in order to increase revenue. It is a cash cow, along with Lakeland Electric, and they know it.

The citizens of Lakeland have only one chance to correct their mistake and that is placing a referendum on the ballot, come election day, to remove these cameras. This type of referendum has been placed on the ballot in other cities and has won every time.

RICHARD GEBO

Lakeland

(Thanks to Kill TN Traffic Cameras for the heads up).

(My thanks to Camerafraud Facebook for the link on this).

http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2010/jun/13/brooksville-changing-tune-red-light-cameras/#comments

Brooksville changing tune on red light cameras
 
Hernando Today

Published: June 13, 2010

Ironic is the word of the day now that the new state red light laws are going to take effect in July. Ironic because now Brooksville and Police Chief George Turner don't like the content of the new law.
The new law doesn't cite drivers who don't come to a complete stop before turning right as long as they are prudent and don't hinder traffic flow. Saturday's Hernando Today quoted Chief Turner's statistics that more than 60 percent of red light camera tickets or 3,334 of the 5,477 tickets issued were for right on red violations. Now the state of Florida is going to take an $83 cut of the new fines for camera violations, which leaves only $75 of which $40 goes to the light vendors.
Add that up and Brooksville winds up with just $35. Wow! Now Brooksville and Chief Turner are screaming bloody murder and want to renegotiate with the vendor for a bigger cut.
I wonder what happened to the chief's earlier quote, "It's all for safety and not about the money." Ironic, huh?
James T. Woods
Brooksville
 

Ban the Cams note:  If you think people in the US are the only ones fed up with the SCAMERAS, there are people world wide who are seeing the SCAMERAS for WHAT THEY REALLY ARE!  A CASH SCAM Dependent upon long term VIOLATIONS for their existance!

http://streetcorner.com.au/news/showPost.cfm?bid=14870&mycomm=SC&comment=success#comment

Speed camera fines rip off, Governments out of control

by Larrisa Beale
11/06/2010
I’m sick of both State and Local Governments of creating an extra tax on residents, such parking fine or speeding cameras.
The recent NSW State Government Budget showed last financial year the Government generated $291million from fines, but this is expected to rise to $428 million by next year and almost double to $570 million the following year. [That’s a 100% increase, and on what justification? Government needs more money.]
This is unacceptable and it makes me sick when I hear the Premier and other misters roll off statements like ‘We’d prefer not to have these cameras, or increase revenue from cameras.”
Premier, then don’t do it, if you’d prefer not to.
Why not get out the printing press and print some more, and be even more fiscally immoral.
Maybe if you didn’t waste $500 million Sydney Metro, $100 Million automated ticketing system plus countless others Government wouldn’t have a need to find extra money to prop up its mismanagement.
If Governments run out of funding they never consider cutting costs or not spending OUR money elsewhere, they simply install a ticketing system to collect more revenue and hide behind a lie and claim it’s for safety and reducing the road toll.
THAT IS A LIE!
Like all parents or decent people no-one wants to neither speed in school zones nor harm a child. So with all the hundreds of millions of dollars raised, why hasn’t every school had installed decent flashing warning lights?
The insulation revolution and building revolution show the public with two simple examples just how incompetence the public service and government are at running a commercial venture. Because they are one off events with a budget and transparency the community can easily compare outcomes to the private sector and show how clearly the massive discrepancies in costs between what the public would pay, verses how much the Government pays [and gets ripped off]
Its us the poor public that are getting slugged by the extra taxes for missmangemt and incompetent public sector.
Are the public servants ever held accountable like in the private sector?
NO
Speed cameras and aggressive parking fines are anti community building and its time governments were pulled back into line.
Stop artificially taxing us, and hiding behind spin to justify it.
 

Ban the Cams note:  It is not just people in Florida who are getting fed up with Traffic Cameras, go look at Cleveland, OH where residents are signing petitions TO DEMAND A VOTE!

Enjoy what this one citzen echos of many people there!

http://www.facebook.com/ban.the.cams.cleveland

http://www.clevelandcitizenechoesonline.com/election_200912.htm#June%209,%202010

To the Citizens of Cleveland

 
Members of Cleveland City Council,
Mayor Frank Jackson. 

I received an email from a reader that urged me to stop promoting the Cuyahoga County for Liberty’s ambitious drive to put the traffic camera issue on the November ballad, by inviting registered voters to currently sign petitions.

No, I will continue promoting the Cuyahoga County for Liberty Web site  for several good reasons. The following is just a few that are on the minds of citizens. When Council members voted on the Codified Ordinance 413.031 (the traffic cameras) on July 13, 2005, did they, as all "ethical" legislators should do, encourage constituents to review their own thoughts on the issue (gather votes for or against), than act on the findings before Council as a whole in finalizing the main vote? If this was not done, leaders who side stepped this important procedure, made a mockery out of democracy. Citizens vote officials into office as representatives, to do what they cannot do, carry their opinions on issues (THE MAJORITY OPINION), which may or may not; be the way officials wish to vote, but must abide and finalize the vote based on people’s choice. There are rare actions to the rule, but in most cases anything less, is an act of defiance against voters who had put their trust in Council members when votes were cast.

There has been a lot of backlash from citizens over the traffic cameras since they had been raised. In newspapers, on TV and courtrooms, and from hundreds of citizens who received traffic violation citations, via bloggers, public gatherings, in homes and so on. Although many people feel helpless in removing the streets of the cameras, the six years of hell raising for good reasons was not a lost cause. If people who feel politicians have betrayed them, they should think about moving beyond the frustrations and complaints.

Assist in anyway possible in helping groups like the Cuyahoga County for Liberty, rid the streets of cameras that only put on display, how low this government (elected officials) had come in the business of profiting from non-profit safety services.

Read more: Letters for Cleveland (from See Red Cleveland---Ban The Cameras)

Dear Governor Crist,

 

It is extremely unfortunate that you signed the red light camera bill.  While the new Florida law will be better than the laws in some states,the new law will almost certainly lead to an increase in crashes in many places where these predatory revenue-generators are installed.

 

Using red light cameras trades off revenue for the state, the cities and the camera vendors in exchange for higher crash rates in many cases.  Any data that you used from the IIHS to make your decision was simply false when it claimed improved safety.  Higher crash rates often result, see

www.motorists.org/photoenforce     
and read both the links to Studies and Articles.

 

MUCH greater gains in safety can be achieved at very low or almost no cost by simply timing the yellow light intervals properly for the ACTUAL 85th percentile approach speed of free flowing vehicles under good conditions and correcting any other simple engineering defects at the intersections.

 

For that reason the cameras are completely immoral and should be banned or restricted to the point they are not deployed at all, as is the case now in 15 states.

 

With luck, various grass roots organizations will be formed to put the deployment of the cameras on the ballot in referendums.  This has been done in at least 10 venues and the cameras ALWAYS get voted out.  I hope your unfortunate decision is soon overturned by the people.

--

Respectfully sent,

This was sent to Gov., Lt. Gov., FLDOT, FL State Police, House leader, Senate Leader, and Att. General


James C. Walker

JCW Consulting

Member - National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org

2050 Camelot Road

Ann Arbor, MI 48104

Below the text of a Alert the NMA sent out to its members.  It is very appropriate here:

Governor Crist is getting increasing pressure to veto the bill that will legalize red light cameras in Florida.A recent letter from AAA asking the Governor to veto the bill has just upped the stakes. Even if you wrote the Governor previously, call or send another e-mail now, letting him know how you feel about legalizing ticket cameras. Governor Crist's email address is This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . His phone number is 850-488-7146.

Please pass this alert to anyone opposed to RLC in Florida.  Do so tonight!

The National Motorists Association sent out this alert which I have copied here.  USE IT TO CONTACT GOV CRIST Tonight  (Call him in the morning if you have time too, list your address too so he knows you are not a paid caller from the camera side!

NMA ALERT Below:
 
On February 18, 2010, we sent an email alert to you in which our FL State Activist Henry Stowe noted:
"The Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act (House Bill 325) will officially sanction  red light cameras  used by cities and counties for use on state roads as well as on local streets. It will end the DOT prohibition on state roads.  If the legislation takes effect, red light cameras will proliferate across the state with a perverse revenue sharing arrangement to go along with it."
Word comes today that the Florida Senate passed HB325, which means it will be on Governor Charlie Crist's desk any time now for his signature to turn the bill into state law.  As Florida Attorney General, Crist actually ruled red-light cameras to be illegal.  He is now expected to sign the measure unless Florida residents immediately flood him with letters demanding that he veto HB325.
 
Governor Crist's email address is This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .  His phone number is 850-488-7146.  Time is too short to send a letter by postal service.  PLEASE CONTACT GOV. CRIST RIGHT AWAY TO LET HIM KNOW THAT MANY OF HIS CONSTITUENTS ARE OPPOSED TO HB325 AND RED-LIGHT CAMERAS.
 
Case study after case study indicates that ticket cameras do more harm than good, creating higher accident rates while heavily penalizing motorists with tickets for ill-defined right-turn-on-red violations and (literal) split-second entries into intersections between the yellow and red light cycles.  In fact, it is well-established (Loma Linda, San Carlos among others) that lengthening yellow light intervals by as little as 0.5 to 1.5 seconds can virtually eliminate all but the most egregious red-light running incidents.  But while properly set yellow light durations and reasonable right-turn-on-red enforcement practices are proven solutions to making intersections safer, they don't create the ongoing revenue stream for local municipalities that ticket cameras are known for.
 
Use this information when contacting Charlie Crist.  Point him to the dedicated page on the NMA site that dissects the topic of photo enforcement, and provides many more academic studies, investigative reports and irrefutable logic in the argument against red-light ticket cameras.   http://www.motorists.org/photoenforce/
 
Unless you want to give free reign to the proliferation of red-light cameras throughout the state of Florida, you must let Governor Crist know right now that you are opposed to the cameras for all of the reasons stated here.
 
 

(TIRED OF RLC, WANT TO LET GOVERNMENT KNOW YOU HAVE HAD ENOUGH!  Join us for our next protest on Saturday 4/17/2010 TARGET LAKELAND!)

There will be a Red Light Ticket Camera Protest Scheduled for 4/17/10 in Lakeland, FL

Members of the Florida Civil Rights Association, the National Motorists Association, Banthecams.org and other groups are scheduling a joint protest against ticket cameras in Lakeland, FL on 4/17/10 at 12 noon at the corner of Memorial ...Blvd and Florida Ave. The purpose of this protest is to highlight the injustice of ticket camera programs, said J. Willie David, president of the Florida Civil Rights Association. David explains that ticket cameras violate a number rights guaranteed under the constitution. These include the presumption of innocence, the right confront your accuser, and the right to a trial. We have been receiving an increasing number of complaints about these cameras since the beginning of our campaign in late 2007 with the National Motorists Association.

Henry Stowe, the lead activist in Florida for the NMA as well as the FCRA Transportation Chairman believe that Lakeland, FL is another flashpoint in the debate over traffic cameras. Lakeland is the home to State Senator Paula Dockery, the GOP gubernatorial candidate. Dockery was the sole no vote on the red light camera bill in the Senate Transportation committee. Her action has had a significant impact on the course of the bill to sanction red light cameras throughout the state. The bill is horrible said Henry Stowe. He explained that the state gets huge windfall from every camera ticket issued in the state, receiving $80.00 per citation issued. Stowe states that is reckless profiteering on the part of Florida for doing absolutely nothing. In addition, the department of Health receives $20.00 per ticket. Its about the money Stowe stated. Public safety, on the other hand, will be compromised. Intersection accidents increase wherever they are installed according to independent studies of the cameras, Stowe said. Ticket cameras are highway robbery, said Stowe. Those are just some of the reasons that we are protesting these pernicious devices, he said.

Participants are invited to come to the protest by registering at www.banthecams.org, sending an email to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or simply by showing up to the site between 11:30 and 12:00 on 4/17/10.

 Please contact the California Senate Transportation Committee and urge them to vote no on SB 949.

TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 2010

TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING ALAN LOWENTHAL, Chairman 1:30 p.m. - John L. Burton Hearing Room (4203) S.B. No. 949 Oropeza. Vehicles: local authority: assessing penalties.

JURISDICTION:   Bills relating to the operation, safety, equipment, transfer of ownership, licensing and registration of vehicles, aircraft and vessels. Legislation affecting the Department of Transportation and the Department of Motor Vehicles. Bills relating to waterways, harbors, highways, public transportation systems and airports. Bills relating to housing and community development, including those that affect state housing programs for low- and moderate-income families, housing elements and land use approvals for housing developments, the housing obligations of redevelopment agencies, manufactured housing, building codes and standards, common interest developments, and enterprise zones.
Members:
Senator Alan Lowenthal (Chair)
Senator Robert Huff (Vice-Chair)
Senator Roy Ashburn
Senator Mark DeSaulnier
Senator Tom Harman
Senator Christine Kehoe
Senator Jenny Oropeza
Senator Fran Pavley
Senator Joe Simitian
    Addresses & Staff:
Chief Consultant:
Carrie Cornwell
Consultants:
Art Bauer, Jennifer Gress and Mark Stivers
Assistants:
Tracey Hurd-Parker and Mark Teemer
Phone:
(916)651-4121
Room:
2209 

The NMA knows that engineering solutions are the real way to prevent red-light violations and accidents at problematic intersections. In fact, we are willing to wager $10,000 to prove that engineering will work better than ticket cameras.

Read more: $10,000 Ticket Camera Challenge