Red Light Camera News

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/05/MNGJ1N2VRO.DTL&ao=all
Red-light cameras boost coffers, rile drivers
Kevin Fagan

 
Sunday, February 5, 2012

Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

Phuong Nguyen sees the camera at 27th and Northgate in Oakland flicker all day from her family's flower store.

California has the most expensive red-light camera tickets in the world - the fine is so steep that one camera in Oakland generates more than $3 million a year - and a Fremont man is launching a protest group to do something about that.
 

If Roger Jones has his way, that freezing dread that knifes through a driver the moment he sees the overhead flash of a traffic camera will become a thing of the past.
 

But he's facing quite an uphill fight against officials hungry for the cash the cameras sweep in and police who are convinced they make the roads safer.
 

Anyone in California snapped violating a red light pays a fine of $480, and according to the traffic-watch site TheNewspaper.com, no other jurisdiction anywhere has a tab that high. The second-highest fine in the United States is $250, and it is usually more like $100.
 

The Legislature passed two bills in the past two years that would have reduced the fine or limited the cameras' use, but both were vetoed. When he killed the most recent measure, Gov. Jerry Brown said the matter should be left to local jurisdictions.
 

The state Department of Finance has estimated that red-light cameras bring in more than $80 million annually to the state and $50 million to cities and counties - and that, Jones and his supporters say, is the real reason they continue to snap away at motorists.
 

Not all $480 from each ticket goes to the cities or counties that authorize the cameras - more than half goes to the state or to the companies that run the devices. And not all tickets result in convictions.
 

But the haul is still out of proportion to the overall set of offenses, critics say. And so even though the fine for running a red light is the same whether a camera or a live police officer generates it, the cameras draw the fire because they can issue far more tickets than a single cop sitting at an intersection.

'Gotcha'

"Is there a limit to how much 'gotcha government' we have to put up with?" asked Jones, 62, a retired distribution manager who began crusading against red-light cameras after he got a ticket from one in 2009. "Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should."
 

His newly formed organization, the Red Light Camera Protest Group, picketed at Mowry Avenue and Fremont Boulevard in Fremont on Saturday, waving signs to approving honks from several motorists. It was their first protest, and the two dozen who participated plan more in the coming months - all calling for the elimination of red-light cameras and a reduction in the fine.
 

"I think we'd all be better off without them," Jones said. "There are better ways to address the problem."

Read more: Red-light cameras boost coffers, rile drivers

http://warondriving.com/post/16931208149/red-light-camera-truth-2

The Truth Behind Red Light Cameras: Part 2

By Gina Williams

The Accident “Conspiracy”

Red Light Cameras (RLCs) are supposed to prevent accidents.  However, according to various studies http://warondriving.com/redlightcameras, RLCs actually cause harmful accidents and it isn’t all that surprising. 

It makes sense that when people see a yellow light that they’ll slam on their brakes out of fear of being ticketed because they know they’re being watched; given the same situation with no camera, the same people would go through the yellow light. 

After all, yellow lights don’t mean stop, they mean “caution” because a red light is approaching. 

Flawed Studies and Conflicts of Interest

Two extremely biased and thoroughly debunked studies are usually cited as proof that there is some type of safety benefit associated with the use of RLCs. 

The first is a 2005 Federal Highway Administration (FHA) study which gives red light cameras credit for a decrease right-angle crashes.  However, this report made that conclusions based on only 7 jurisdictions which combined have less cameras than the Houston, TX area.

According to photoenforced.com which hosts a database of all RLCs and speed cameras in the U.S., 1,300 cities use RLCs; given this, the sample size that the FHA used to conduct its study was entirely too small to truly represent RLCs effects sufficiently. 

Additionally, said study has been criticized due to conflicts of interest, as well as methodical and analytical flaws in their research and findings. Its co-directors conducted research for the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS) in the past, meaning that the FHA and IIHS financial ties to each other. 

IIHS is a private company that represents the auto insurance industry which has continuously raised rates based on photo ticketing data as that system proliferated during the last decade. See this report http://health.usf.edu/NR/rdonlyres/2511FA2D-6BC2-4091-9FD5-DBF711F420AA/0/2011pp00109FPHROrbanetal.pdf for extended details on the FHA’s study’s methodical and analytics flaws.

The other report that’s usually referred to by companies like Redflex and American Traffic Solutions was conducted by the IIHS themselves. Not only was their data almost completely irrelevant http://warondriving.com/post/9107744878/iihs-traffic-study-reduced-accidents in some cases, but a recent report shows the IIHS study, when reviewed by peers shows an increase in fatalities http://thenewspaper.com/news/36/3699.asp at red light camera intersections.

Other Studies Suggest An Increase in Accidents

On the other hand, studies conducted by various Departments of Transportation, universities, and media outlets contradict the above study and others. 

According to a 2004 North Carolina A & T University study that examined 17,271 crashes, “When analyzing total crashes…RLCs have a statistically significant (p<0.001) and large (40% increase) effect on accident rates.”  

According to a 2005 Virginia Department of Transportation funded study, in Virginia, RLCs decrease the number of right-angle crashes with injuries.  However, they also lead to an increase in rear-end crashes and the number of overall crashes resulting in injuries.  This study was based on an 18 month study of 7 jurisdictions in Virginia.  Unlike the FHA study above, this study was applied only to Virginia.

Given the funds these RLCs generate for governments, especially in an economy experiencing financial problems, it is difficult to take government studies that support RLCs seriously.  It’s in their interest to continue the programs, and in order to continue them, the programs must be justified to the public; thus “studies” proving RLCs effectiveness are conducted and released to the public.

Gina Williams is a guest post and article writer bringing to us information on RLCs. Gina also writes about motorcycle accident statistics http://www.motorcycleaccident.org/motorcycle-accidents-statistics-and-possible-causes

http://warondriving.com/post/16875838390/red-light-camera-truth

The Truth Behind the Camera: Part 1

by Gina Williams

In the early 1990s red light cameras (RLCs) began to be used in the United States.  Almost 22 years later, 26 states and Washington DC have implemented these cameras in various major cities. 

RLCs are supposed to prevent deadly accidents by making people think twice before gunning it through a yellow light, or blatantly running a red light.  Their proposed purpose and their actual purpose, however, are two different things entirely. 

Looking at government conducted or funded studies will lead readers to believe that RLCs work.  Digging a bit deeper, however, leads to a different conclusion for two reasons.  First, studies demonstrate that RLCs are associated with increased accident rates at intersections. 

Second, the private companies running the red light programs and our government have a vested interest in ticketing people; they want people to run red lights because they make money from it, and a ton of money at that. 

Sadly, the steps both entities have taken to ensure their own financial benefits pose safety threats to citizens.

Why They Want Us To Run Red Lights 

How Things Seem 

Here is how RLC programs generally work:  Private companies are contracted by local municipalities to install camera surveillance systems.  If someone runs a red light, multiple pictures are taken of their vehicle.  The pictures are later “inspected” by a law enforcement official; if it is deemed that the citizen ran the red light, they are sent a ticket in the mail.

Sounds straight forward, right?  People who break the law are ticketed and others that would break the law think twice.  Lives are saved.  World peace is probably achieved somewhere in there as well. 

How Things Are

Remember how people always say that nothing is ever as it seems?  That’s the case here.  It seems like our government is trying to protect us, but like everything else in life, the government’s motives are based on financial gain. 

Contracted, private companies, such as Redflex, American Traffic Solutions, and Affiliated Computer Services, actually have quota clauses written in their contracts with municipalities; as a result of that and the desire for financial gain, municipalities gladly take actions that encourage motorists to run red lights. 

According to The Atlantic Cities, “The problem [with RLCs] is that many of the contracts signed with these companies force cities to commit to standards that encourage the running of red lights. Some of the contracts, written by the companies themselves and later signed by municipal governments, require each camera to record a certain number of red light-runners every year and for police departments to issue a minimum number of tickets.

Read more: The Truth Behind the Camera: Part 1

New Port Richey RLC about the MONEY!

Ban the Cams note:  We believe this was a split second "violation".  Most drivers see the yellow and that is it.  Most of these "violation" are more the result of short ambers.  If New Port Richey were to use 5.5 second yellow lights (like was tried in VA years ago), the violations would drop 90% for the striaght thus.  http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/fairfax  (Be warned that cities that are this small also tend to do stop line and right turn on red "violations".)

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/letters/readers-react-to-red-light-cameras-and-gas-prices/1213647

Red-light breach hard to believe

I am now more than certain that I was victimized in a scheme to fill the coffers of the city of New Port Richey by its red-light camera operation.

I am 83 years old and I have been driving for at least since I was 20 years old and have not received a citation of any kind in probably the last 50 years. When I received a citation in the mail, I said to my wife I don't believe I went through a red light, but after seeing the picture I had to believe.

Now seeing a Jan. 15 column in the Pasco Times I can understand how the camera picked me up as the timing is probably off. I would appreciate it if the city would take another look at this particular intersection timing so as not to deceive other drivers in the interest of making money.

I do believe in the program of safety but I believe this operation is not about safety but it is about the vendor and the city of New Port Richey taking the opportunity to collect a fine on the unsuspecting drivers.

Furthermore, they should do the right thing and return the so-called fine of $158, which I think is outrageous for a first infraction of the law.

Aaron Weinberg, Trinity

Could Farragut RLC be UNPROFITABLE since city can no longer cite for right turn on red scam??

Ban the Cams doesn't know Redflex's mininum number of citations it needs per installation.   But information from a shut down ATS site in Lubbock, TX years ago indicated they needed 20 per day (10 per 12 hours) to break even.  http://lubbockonline.com/stories/041807/loc_041807033.shtml  "The city needs 10 violations per every 12 hours to cover the cost of the system."

(Thanks to www.motorists.org for the link).

http://www.farragutpress.com/articles/2012/02/15064.html

Town releases camera stats
- Thu, Feb, 2, 2012

Farragut saw fewer red-light camera recorded traffic violations in the final three months of 2011.

According to the Town’s traffic enforcement program statistics for Oct. 1 through Dec. 31, 2,703 incidents were created and 1,400 citations actually were issued.

“The number of citations was up from the 2011 third quarter, possibly due to the increased traffic during the holiday season,” said Ben Harkins, Farragut’s Traffic Enforcement Program manager.

“We averaged less than four citations per intersection per day with a total of just over 15 citations issued per day,” he added.

Incidents were down, however, from the same period in 2010, perhaps because of a recent change in state law, subject to a lawsuit from Farragut’s traffic vendor Redflex.

(Ban the Cams note:  TN BANS CITIES FROM ISSUING RIGHT TURN ON RED RLC TICKETS.  Redfex and ATS are suing saying their "contracts" should override the legislature! http://www.farragutpress.com/articles/2011/11/14817.html

Quote:  "Farragut’s photo enforcement manager, Ben Harkins said the Town has since seen its citations drop by nearly half since it stopped ticketing illegal right turns on red. Knoxville reportedly has seen its citations drop by almost 90 percent." )

“Due to the change in State of Tennessee law, fewer incidents were recorded in the fourth quarter since citations cannot be issued to those that continue to violate the law by failing to stop before turning right on red,” a Town press release stated.  

 
Of the incidents created in fourth quarter 2011, approximately 48 percent were rejected and did not result in a citation being issued.

Of the incidents that weren’t cited, Redflex did not process 901 because of technical issues of lack of information and 402 were rejected by Harkins.

For more information about Farragut’s traffic enforcement program, visit www.townoffarragut.org/

http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_19880077

Group to protest red-light cameras in Fremont
Group wants longer yellow-light times
By Rob Dennis
The Argus
Posted:   02/02/2012 03:53:56 PM PST
Updated:   02/03/2012 06:38:48 AM PST

A small group of red-light camera opponents will protest Saturday in Fremont at the intersection of Mowry Avenue and Fremont Boulevard.

The Red Light Camera Protest Group of Southern Alameda County will begin the demonstration at noon. The group plans to hold more protests in the future at other places around the county.

The group was organized by Roger Jones, who has urged cities to increase yellow-light times to allow drivers more time to stop.

Jones ultimately would like cities to get rid of the cameras, or at least reduce fees for those who turn on red lights.

"The group hopes to bring the public's attention to the fact that these cameras are much more about revenue, and not safety," he said.

Police and city officials, though, say cameras reduce the number of collisions and pay for themselves.

In Fremont, officials say their yellow light times already are a second longer than state Department of Transportation standards.

Fremont, Newark, Union City, Hayward, Oakland and Berkeley are among the cities that use cameras to catch drivers who run red lights.

The cameras snap a photo of the front and rear license plates of any car that enters an intersection when the light is red. Some systems, including those in Fremont, also shoot video.

Fremont installed its first cameras in 2000. The City Council in 2010 approved a new contract with Redflex Traffic Systems to upgrade the 10 existing cameras and

install up to five new ones.

Online
For more information about the protest, go to www.meetup.com/Red-Light-Camera-Protest-Group-of-Southern-Alameda-County.

http://economicharmonies.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/putting-out-the-red-light/

Putting Out The Red Light

By Joel Poindexter
When looking to find out why something is the way it is in government, the best advice is to ask Cui Bono, or “to whose benefit?” The natural progression then becomes following the money. Applying these two rules to the issue of Red Light cameras, it quickly becomes clear who benefits and to where the money flows, and we arrive at our answer to the question: why?

Last week the KCMO Police Department released the details of a study concerning the safety record of Kansas City’s red light cameras. Surprising many, the study revealed that wrecks have increased at intersections with cameras, while intersections without them saw fewer crashes. According to the report, wrecks increased 18% on average at most of the intersections overlooked by cameras. Injury accidents increased at three quarters of these intersections, including the only fatality in the study’s timeline.

 American Traffic Solutions (ATS), the corporation which holds the contract for the cameras has denied the validity of the study. ATS spokesperson Steve Glorioso declared in an interview with Fox4 News that the cameras are indeed working. How else might we expect the company’s representative respond?

Of course they’ll attempt to discredit the Police Department study and highlight only the perceived benefits in safety that their hand-picked studies indicate. The simple fact is that independent researchers, such as Professor Rajiv Shah, whom the Star’s Christine Vendel referenced, support the current findings. While red light running tends to fall in cities with cameras, the total number of accidents rise dramatically.

If the cameras are not providing the boost in safety which City residents were promised, the only alternative purpose must be to generate revenue from local motorists. To that end it simply comes down to collusion on the part of big business and city government, where the two join forces in order to extract money from the population.

The business model is, roughly, as follows. ATS and other similar companies develop red-light cameras. They next move to use the long arm of government to sell this equipment and collect payments. In some cases it’s so lucrative that cameras are installed free of charge, because they’ll easily collect enough fees to offset the initial loss.

The municipal government then agrees to employ a handful of officers reviewing footage and writing tickets. The two groups then share the proceeds from the racket. ATS rakes in profits and the city enjoys a new flow of money without having to impose new taxes. They both win. The losers end up being the tax payers who have less money, fewer police on the street to protect them, and a much higher risk of being involved in a collision while moving about town.

It’s unclear exactly how much has been collected over the previous couple of years, but estimates could put the number in the tens of millions. If the data showed that we all had a much safer and less stressful commute I suppose the cost might be worth it. But that’s not even a debate we can have right now, since we know that safety concerns have not been met, and the company responsible is trying to suppress this fact.

A public meeting will be held on February 28 at city hall concerning the issue. With luck, residents will attend and voice their concerns over safety and the true purpose of the cameras. Demonstrators with the Liberty Restoration Project were at one camera intersection this past weekend and they plan additional protests in the coming weeks to help educate motorists. A petition to remove the cameras has also begun to circulate. Let’s hope they’re successful.

http://www.ksgf.com/podcasts/reedpodcast/138324579.html

01.30.12 Hour 3 Are red light cameras really a safety issue (Springfield, MO).
Monday, Jan 30, 2012

How many Springfield council members are co-sponsoring turning back on the red light cameras?  What does councilmember Bieker want with the cameras?  How much do accidents increase when red light cameras are installed?  How could this issue break Bob Stephens campaign for mayor?  What was the initial intent of red light cameras in Springfield?

Length 43:41

http://media.jsonline.com/audio/KSGF_Nick_Reed_013012_Hr3a_PODCAST-Red_Light_Cameras.mp3

Ban the Cams note: This is a must listen podcast!

I get a kick out of the former police officer (Steve) who called claiming that his reason was "reducing fatalities".    (32:32 into the podcast)  HE DOESN'T MENTION AT ALL HOW MANY RIGHT ANGLES WERE RLV RELATED!  Ever notice the scamera side doesn't like to mention RLV crashes, but Right Angle.  see:  http://www.banthecams.org/2170-the-a-anglea-scam-how-cities-use-angle-crashes-instead-of-rlr-crashes-to-manipulate-the-truth.html

Ban the Cams note II: 

It is has been KNOWN EVEN SINCE THE 90S that RLC DO NOT IMPROVE SAFETY.  Witness this study done in the early 90's on it.  (from Australia, where Redflex is from).  http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/andreassan-study  "A Long Term Study of Red Light Cameras and Accidents" (1979 thru 1989 data was used).

Quote:  The results of this study suggest that the installation of the RLC at these sites did not provide any reduction in accidents, rather there has been increases in rear end and adjacent approaches accidents on a before and after basis and also by comparison with the changes in accidents at intersection signals.

There has been no demonstrated value of the RLC as an effective countermeasure.

RLC FAILS TO PREVENT WRECK IN HIT AND RUN ACCIDENT!

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/accidents/police-still-seeking-hummer-driver-in-kenneth-city-hit-and-run/1213374

Police still seeking Hummer driver in Kenneth City hit and run
By Marissa Lang, Times Staff Writer
Marissa LangTampa Bay Times Posted: Feb 01, 2012 12:08 PM

KENNETH CITY — Police are still seeking the driver of a black H2 Hummer that slammed into the rear of a Jeep and sent a 45-year-old passenger to the hospital.

The Hummer was caught on video taken by a red light camera at the intersection of 62nd Street and 54th Avenue N just before 7 p.m. on Jan. 24. It made no attempt to stop or see if anyone had been hurt in the collision, officials said.

Driver Crystal Michell Palomino, 37, and passenger Daniel Jesus Palomino, 44, of St. Petersburg were stopped at a red light in the curb lane of 54th Avenue N, when the black Hummer crashed into the backside of her vehicle and then continued north on 62nd Street without stopping, police said.

Read more: RLC FAILS TO PREVENT WRECK IN HIT AND RUN ACCIDENT!

PA RLC SNEAK for Philadelphia.

 
http://www.landlinemag.com/Story.aspx?StoryID=22132

Quote:  A separate provision extends Philadelphia’s red-light program through 2016.

Currently, the city of Philadelphia is authorized to use the revenue generator. The revenue from the program is split between the city and the state for use in other communities.

The new law changes how the revenue is divvied up around the state. The City of Brotherly Love is no longer assured an equal cut with the state.

According to a state analysis, about $30 million has been raised since the inception of the program in 2005.

1/31/2012

Pennsylvania law covers medical certification, red-light cameras
By Keith Goble, state legislative editor

Pennsylvania lawmakers won a game of beat the clock with the deadline to comply with a federal truck rule.

Gov. Tom Corbett signed a bill into law Jan. 27 to bring Pennsylvania in line with federal rules on medical certification. Separate provisions in the bill extend the Philadelphia red-light camera program and increase the fine for out-of-state trucking operations that avoid licensing requirements.

Read more: PA RLC SNEAK for Philadelphia.

Will the Voters of Springfield, MO get to decide??? or will scamera money trump the people????

http://www.ktts.com/news/138375029.html

City Council Debates Future Of Springfield's Red Light Cameras
Monday, January 30, 2012
 

City Council in Springfield has two weeks to mull over two different bills on the future of the city's red light cameras.

Several members of council are sponsoring a bill to turn them back on. Police Chief Paul Williams sides with them, saying the cameras not only encourage drivers to be safer, they also make enforcement cheaper.  (Ban the Cams comment:  Sure about that chief???   Don't think LA felt the same way.  They LOST MONEY! http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/35/3501.asp Or are you just reading the scamera vendor's boil plate response???)

Williams says it would take a minimum of two officers at each of Springfield's eleven intersections that have the cameras to catch red light runners as effectively. Even factoring dawn-till-dusk hours only, the estimated costs for manpower run close to $2.5M in taxpayer money every year.

There's a separate ordinance that's also before City Council. It seeks to put the future of Springfield's red light cameras in the hands of the voting public.

One person supporting that measure is Adolph Belt. His lawsuit against red light cameras went all the way to the Missouri Supreme Court. The court's ruling stated Springfield's administrative process for handling red light violations did not comply with state statute. Ultimately, City Council decided to halt the program.

Belt and his lawyer both spoke at City Council's meeting Monday night, opposed to using red light cameras at all. However, Belt feels voters should have the final say because, as he puts it, "you cannot enforce any laws, or ordinances, that the people do not believe in".

Both red light camera bills will go before City Council at its next meeting.

BAN THE CAMS:  LET THE PEOPLE VOTE!!!!!

Scamera Alert Kissimmee, FL  (CITY WILL BE DOING RIGHT TURN ON RED SCAM!)

http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news/2012/january/375901/Kissimmees-first-red-light-camera-to-go-live-this-week  Article by John W. Davis

Ban the Cams note:  The city will be doing the right turn on red scam here:

Quote:  City leaders are touting the new red light cameras as a matter of public safety, citing a Kissimmee video survey that showed 70 red light violations in a 12-hour span.

City leaders said the cameras will not only catch red light runners but people who don't stop long enough when making a right turn on red.

Ban the Cams addition note II:  Wonder what the Redflex Survey said here?????  We know from another vendor ATS, in Mulkiteo, WA that the vast majority of the "violations" were RIGHT TURNS!  http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20110807/NEWS01/708079938

Quote:  ATS surveyed six Mukilteo intersections for red-light runners on a typical day.

Here's what they found: 16 drivers who blew straight through the light; 13 who turned left after the red and 150 who turned right on a red light at speeds of more than 10 mph.

More than 3,300 possible violations involved what the company called "slow right" turns.

(also see:  http://www.banthecams.org/Studies-Show/ats-mukilteo-survey-proves-most-of-the-qviolationsq-were-right-turns.html for a copy of the survey).

Scamera Locations:

• Main Street and Neptune Road.
• Main Street and Columbia Avenue
• Vine Street and Bass Road
• Vine Street and Dyer Boulevard
• Vine Street and Thacker Avenue
• Vine Street and John Young Parkway
• Vine Street and Michigan Avenue
• John Young Parkway and Carroll Street
• John Young Parkway and Emmett Street
• Michigan Avenue and Osceola Parkway

Ban the Cams found it funny that a person that was interviewed would use Haines City, FL as a poster child for RLC "acceptance".

Quote: “Yes we have them in Haines City and they work great and I'm glad they are coming here,” Lorne Greenspan said."

Haines City is the town that got so upset over the Right turn on red RLC ticketing that THEY VOTED OUT THE RLC MAYOR!

READ:  http://www.lakewalesnews.com/articles/2011/04/13/county_page/doc4da5bac36b441609367959.txt

Quote: 

By a 3-1 vote, Haines City Commissioners on Thursday, April 7 ended the ticketing of motorists caught on camera making illegal right turns on red lights.
 

“We’re half way there,” Commissioner-Elect Don Mason after the meeting.

 
Mason, who takes office May 5, defeated incumbent Philip Hinkle winning 70.4 percent of the vote April 5, partly because he campaigned for elimination of the cameras.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/No.red.light.cameras/posts/357834627560558

Abolish Red Light Cameras in Redmond
Tuesday the 31st is the big day! The cameras will be turned off forever at midnight. All of our hard work paid off. We are gathering at the Canyons tomorrow at 7:30p-9:30 to celebrate. Come join us and say "Hi". We'll be in the lounge.

Scamera Alert Toledo, OH.

Ban the Cams note:  You are going to love this, the city basically has admitted the real reason is money. 

http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/01/30/Sites-for-new-red-light-cameras-set-1.html#slogin BY CLAUDIA BOYD-BARRETT

Quote:  The city hopes the red-light enforcement cameras, if approved by council and installed by April, will generate $320,000 to help fund public recreation programs which could otherwise be shut down.

Ban the Cams note II:  They might even dump Redflex for ATS too who did the "surveys".  No doubt a lot are techincal fouls.

Quote: Finance Director Patrick McLean said the city selected the new intersections with the help of the Arizona-based company American Traffic Solutions.

The firm used a computer program to analyze traffic volumes and patterns across Toledo to determine intersections at which red light violations are most likely to occur, he said.

(Translation: where the most traffic was.)

Scamera Locations:

• The southbound and northbound lanes of Secor Road at West Alexis Road, a congested intersection near Whitmer High School;
• The northbound and southbound lanes of the Anthony Wayne Trail at Glendale Avenue southwest of the Toledo Zoo;
• The eastbound and westbound lanes of West Bancroft Street at North Reynolds Road;
• The eastbound and northbound lanes at Heatherdowns Boulevard at South Byrne Road;
• Northbound North Detroit Avenue at Dorr Street;
• Northbound Talmadge Road at Monroe Street, close to Westfield Franklin Park mall;
• Southbound Collingwood Boulevard at Dorr Street.

Conflict of interest????  "He's getting a salary from taxpayers *and* from the scamera company."

(Thanks to CameraFraud for sharing this).

CameraFraud National
Meet the guy who lobbies for scameras in Chicago. He's getting a salary from taxpayers *and* from the scamera company.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/10211474-452/sewage-official-with-ald-mell-ties-flush-with-deals.html

THE WATCHDOGS: Sewage official with Ald. Mell ties flush with deals
 

THIS WEEK BY TIM NOVAK AND CHRIS FUSCO January 30, 2012 12:48AM
 

Commissioner Michael A. Alvarez of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago attends a Jan. 19 board meeting. | John H. White~Chicago Sun-Times
Alvarez’s lobbying clients Updated: January 30, 2012 9:36AM

By his 28th birthday, Michael A. Alvarez — whose family is close to influential Chicago Ald. Richard Mell — already had worked for three powerful politicians: Richard M. Daley, Rod R. Blagojevich and Barack Obama.

Now, at 31, Alvarez’s political connections are helping provide him with an annual income topping $200,000 from three separate jobs in or involving government:

† He makes $70,000 a year as one of nine elected commissioners of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, the billion-dollar, government sewage-treatment agency that he hopes to lead after its longtime president, Terry O’Brien, retires in December.

† He has a $60,000-a-year public relations contract with the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority, the state agency that owns U.S. Cellular Field.

† And now he has a lucrative, fast-growing lobbying practice at City Hall — having first registered as a city lobbyist in July, six weeks after Rahm Emanuel was sworn in as mayor.

Two of Alvarez’s clients — Globetrotters Engineering Corp. and St. Anthony Hospital — have agreed to pay him a combined $120,000 a year, according to documents Alvarez has filed with the city. Fourteen other clients — including operators of the city’s parking meters and red-light cameras — have paid him a total of $39,000.

Read more: Conflict of interest???? "He's getting a salary from taxpayers *and* from the scamera company."

ARNOLD RLC "VIOLATIONS"  DROP 90.1% in December 2011 due to LONGER AMBERS!

Here is a Quote from Matt Hay of www.wrongonred.com!

City of Arnold Missouri December 2010 red light camera citations were 920. December 2011, after MoDOT lengthened the yellow intervals in the city, there were only 91, the citation rate dropped by 90.1%. ATS claims of longer yellows being adjusted to by drivers rings hollow.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/79795069/Photo-Enforced-Red-Light-Camera-Statistics-for-the-City-of-Arnold-December-2010

Citations issued BEFORE AMBERS WERE INCREASED:  920 for Dec 2010

http://www.scribd.com/doc/79786098/Photo-Enforced-Red-Light-Camera-Statistics-for-the-City-of-Arnold-Missouri-for-the-month-of-December-2011

Citations issued AFTER AMBERS WERE INCREASED: 91 for Dec 2011

Attachments:

File	Description
Photo-Enforced-Red-Light-Camera-Statistics-for-the-City-of-Arnold-December-2011.
Photo-Enforced-Red-Light-Camera-Statistics-for-the-City-of-Arnold-December-2010.

http://crossroadstoday.com/Port-Lavaca-Red-Light-Cameras/12097293

Posted: Wednesday, 25 January 2012 3:45PM

Port Lavaca Red Light Cameras

 
    The Port Lavaca Citizens Against Red Light Cameras group has spent the last four to five months collecting signatures on a new petition, and then presented it to City Secretary Mandy Grant Wednesday morning.  
    The issue is making headlines in Houston and tonight the Port Lavaca citizens against red light cameras are one step closer to hitting their goal. A Petitioners Committee has collected hundred of signatures for a second time and this morning the group handed the paperwork over to the city.
    I am at the intersection of 35 and the Port Lavaca Highway. As you can see, this is one of the intersections in Port Lavaca where the cameras are up and working. But tonight, petitioners are hoping they will not be operational for much longer.
    After months of collecting signatures, Carl Baugh walked into City Hall Wednesday morning and placed 32 pages full of John Hancock’s on the City Secretary’s desk; all from citizens who want one thing, the removal of red light cameras in Port Lavaca.

    "A lot of people are angry about the red light cameras. It affects a lot of people…People who drive through our county every day and it affects businesses…A lot of people don't even want to come through our town," commented Carl Baugh.
   

Read more: Port Lavaca Red Light Cameras (Petition Submitted)

http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=42780

No action on red light camera settlement yet
Jan 26th, 2012 by Charles Kuffner.

Going, going...
Houston City Council voted to wait two weeks http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Council-delays-red-light-camera-suit-settlement-2704258.php before deciding whether or not to accept the settlement agreement http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=42692 with camera vendor ATS.

The City Council on Wednesday delayed approval of a $4.8 million settlement with its red-light camera vendor amid questions about the effect of an appeals court ruling that lets two Houston lawyers intervene in the lawsuit.

On Tuesday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that brothers Michael and Randy Kubosh should be allowed to join in the lawsuit.

Though the city and American Traffic Solutions plan to ask for the case to be dismissed if the settlement is approved by City Council, the Kuboshes said they want to keep the case alive to overturn a judge’s ruling that invalidated the November 2010 charter referendum they organized to ban the use of cameras in Houston. Their attorney also argued in a hearing after Wednesday’s council meeting that the Kuboshes should have standing in the contract dispute. U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes granted them a hearing on Feb. 6 to make their case.

Should the judge allow the Kuboshes to intervene in the contract dispute, City Attorney David Feldman said, he will not bring the settlement back to the council on Feb. 8 as planned.

“I’m not walking into quicksand,” Feldman said. The Kuboshes’ intervention could undermine any deal the city reaches with ATS, he said.

Feldman says that dismissing the suit would wipe away the ruling that invalidated the election; the Kuboshes disagree. They want it enshrined in the charter that cameras can’t be put up again without a popular vote. The city and ATS say that’s already the case, and besides, changes to state law http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=548 enacted after the city installed its cameras would make re-installing them more onerous and expensive to do. I’m not a lawyer, I’ll let the courts sort all this out, but I do want to comment on this http://blog.chron.com/houstonpolitics/2012/01/kubosh-plans-to-continue-fight/:

David Furlow, an attorney for the Kuboshes, said in an interview following Tuesday’s Council meeting, “The real issue is vindication of the people’s constitutionally protected right to vote.” In Furlow’s view, Hughes has ruled that a local ordinance trumps state constitutional rights. The people’s right to challenge an ordinance should last more than a month, Furlow said.

I don’t necessarily disagree with that. Seems to me the way to address the issue is with a charter amendment. Surely that’s preferable to taking your chances with a judge. Houston Politics http://blog.chron.com/houstonpolitics/2012/01/red-light-camera-settlement-delayed/ has more.

Anyway. We’ll see what happens with the hearing in Judge Hughes’ court. In the meantime, since I brought up the question of how much money the city currently has in the escrow account that holds previously collected fines, I heard back on my inquiry to the Mayor’s office. According to them there is now about $3 million in that escrow account, meaning that the up front payment and most of the first year’s payment after that are covered. The city – presumably, an agent on their behalf – would take over collection duties from ATS. We’ll see how that goes.

Finally, in red light camera news elsewhere, League City residents will vote on whether or not to extend http://galvestondailynews.com/story/288130 that city’s contract with a red light camera company. The contract runs through 2014, and a proposition about it will be “in the next special municipal election”, whenever that is. Red light opponents have a pretty good track record in these elections, and I’m sure they will be gunning for this one as well.

http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/stickney/features/x690035918/Editorial-Red-light-cameras-not-about-public-safety

Editorial: Red-light cameras not about public safety.  

Berwyn Life

Posted Jan 26, 2012 @ 09:28 AM

Berwyn, IL — Berwyn police said that a whopping one traffic accident has occurred within the intersection of Harlem Avenue and Cermak Road since June 2008.

Three years later, city official believed this single incident was so dire that they needed to install a red-light camera there. Between July 7 and Dec. 28 last year, the Berwyn Police Department issued more than $227,000 worth of tickets for red-light camera violations at this intersection.

Most of these tickets were for drivers not coming to a complete stop before making a right-hand turn at a red light. Never mind that this act is among the least hazardous traffic “violations.” When you have one accident at an intersection in a three-year period, action must be taken.

But, hey, it’s not about the money. It’s about doing whatever is necessary to ensure another accident doesn’t occur at this spot.

Police report that 23 accidents have occurred near the intersection between July 7 and Dec. 28, but not in it. Could any of these accidents have resulted from an increase in traffic at locations surrounding the intersection? Perhaps, as drivers have admitted to cutting through other nearby sections to avoid the camera.

But that’s merely speculation. We can’t rely on such statistics to suggest driving is becoming more problematic in the areas encircling the protected intersection, however persuasive this evidence may be. As long as the city keeps that one accident from happening within the intersection, what else matters?

Fining drivers for engaging in minimally hazardous behavior is definitely a sound public safety plan. And by that, we don’t necessarily mean effective.

We mean the noise that a cash register makes when money comes in: Cha-ching, cha-ching. That kind of sound. To pretend otherwise is silly.

http://heraldnet.com/article/20120125/NEWS01/701259735

Monroe mayor says it’s unlikely traffic cameras will continue after contract expires
The city is stuck in a contract for the traffic cameras, but it is unlikely to be extended, the mayor says.

By Rikki King, Herald Writer
 

MONROE -- Monroe's mayor now says there is "zero" likelihood that the city will continue to use traffic-enforcement cameras after 2013.

Meanwhile, officials already have quietly scaled back the program, which new numbers show has been losing money for months.

Critics have been calling for Monroe to dump the cameras now, but Mayor Robert Zimmerman on Wednesday said that moving too quickly could make the city vulnerable to more expensive litigation.

City officials are waiting to meet with legal counsel before responding to a judge's ruling last week http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20120124/NEWS01/701249894 that the city mishandled an initiative aimed at eliminating the camera program. That discussion now is expected to take place in early February.

"Because this is a matter of potential litigation, council was not able to have any discussion (Tuesday) night, because we're required to have our lawyer present," he said.

He expects there to be some confusion over how the ruling relates to recent traffic-enforcement camera rulings in other cities.

The city must move slowly because the contract with Redflex Traffic Systems is legally binding, Zimmerman said. If the city arbitrarily breaks the agreement, the cost of that decision "has the potential of being millions," he said.

That doesn't mean the city is wed to cameras.

In late November, city and police officials agreed they should back off on plans to install more.

Monroe uses enforcement-cameras to catch red-light runners at one city intersection and speeders in two school zones.

The city's original 2007 agreement http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20110628/BLOG48/706289861 with the vendor also included posting red-light cameras at the intersection of U.S. 2 and Chain Lake Road.

The cameras weren't installed at the same time as the others because the intersection was under construction.

In the meantime, Mukilteo activist Tim Eyman and the Monroe-area group Seeds of Liberty submitted an initiative calling for all the cameras to be removed until approved by voters. They also wanted ticket amounts reduced and advisory votes on cameras to be held each year as long as cameras were in Monroe.

The city challenged the initiative in court, claiming it wasn't legally sound. At the same time, the city put its own measure on the ballot, asking voters if the camera program should end when the contract expires in 2013.

After voters made clear they don't want the camera contract extended, Zimmerman said he asked Police Chief Tim Quenzer to see if Redflex would agree to "delay or permanently postpone" the Chain Lake cameras until legal and political uncertainty about the devices is resolved around the state.

Read more: Monroe mayor says it’s unlikely traffic cameras will continue after contract expires