ATS Issues "ultimatum"  Turn back on our scameras or pay up 20 million.

Ban the Cams note:  Be aware that the city of Houston is really trying to thwart ANY ATTEMPT to REMOVE THE SCAMERAS!  They actually had early termination clauses in the original contract.  They were removed to try to prevent the TX legislature from banning the cameras.  http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/33/3336.asp

Those obligations are iron clad, ATS argued, thanks to the city's own actions. The firm pointed out that Houston did have a contract provision that would have allowed a "termination for convenience" without financial penalty. Just three days before this provision would have taken effect, the city signed a new agreement with no termination provision in an attempt to avoid a proposed ban on new red light camera contracts, House Bill 300, that passed in the state House but was blocked in the Senate.

"The city, fearful of HB300, did not want to be forced to terminate the agreement upon the passage of a new state law and therefore, removed the termination provisions of the agreement entirely by clearly stating in the amendment that it 'remains in effect until May 27, 2014,'" Taylor explained. "The city also removed 'unless sooner terminated under this agreement' phrase that appeared in the original agreement. Had the city intended to keep its termination options available to it, it could have easily done so."

IT IS TIME FOR HOUSTON TO STOP TRYING TO DENY A VOTE AND TAKE THE SCAMERAS DOWN!  THEIR CITIZENS HAVE SPOKEN! 

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8201320

 
 
HOUSTON (KTRK) -- The company that runs Houston's red light cameras has given the city a deadline now that a judge has ruled the referendum on the cameras was illegal.

American Traffic Solutions hand delivered a letter Monday to give the City of Houston until August 1 to decide what to do. The city can either turn on the cameras or pay damages, and both actions carry negative consequences.

ATS claims the election on red light cameras -- Proposition 3 on the November ballot -- was improperly called because the city did not have the legal authority to hold a special election on the issue.

United States District Judge Lynn Hughes ruled against the city and in favor of ATS last Friday.

The judge said the election never should have taken place because it was not actually a charter amendment, but rather an "improper and untimely" referendum. 

The city could try to fight the judge's ruling and leave the cameras off. If they choose that option and the ruling is upheld, however, the city could end up owing as much as $20 million to ATS.

Unless ATS hears otherwise from the city, the company is taking steps to turn on the cameras and resume processing red light violations beginning at 12:01am on August 1.

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