Thanks to http://www.stpetecameras.org for the link!

http://www.newsherald.com/articles/red-88831-florida-light.html

EDITORIAL: Red lights, black ink
Comments 4
November 24, 2010 08:00:00 AM

It took them nearly a decade of failed attempts, but Florida lawmakers earlier this year finally approved usage of red-light cameras at intersections. Although the legislation bore the name of an innocent victim of a red-light collision and was promoted by supporters as a necessary safety measure, it suspiciously passed only when the state was facing a serious budget crunch and was searching for additional revenues.

The new law went into effect July 1. So how has it been working?

The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reported this week that in West Palm Beach, injuries have increased fivefold at the city’s four camera intersections compared with the same period last year. The city has been making $10,000 per month on camera fines, and the number of accidents at the camera intersections decreased to 26 compared with 38 a year earlier.

(Ban the Cams note:  What isn't mentioned is 1.  Traffic Flow before and After, Control Sites.  Further after what happened in towns like Winnipeg, one has to wonder if certain accidents are "omitted".  http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2806.asp )

But rear-end collisions increased from 13 to 17, and the number of recorded injuries rose. That’s exactly what has happened in other communities around the nation that have installed the cameras — T-bone collisions declined, but rear-end collisions increased as people slammed on their breaks to avoid running a red.

The new law caps fines for running red lights at $158 — $100 of which goes to the state’s general-revenue fund. The rest is split between the community where the red light was run ($45), the state’s Department of Health ($10) and the Brain and Spinal Cord Injury Trust Fund ($3).

According to Edmunds.com, Florida is the 10th state to add red-light cameras on a statewide level; 16 other states also permit the use of the devices, but are limited to certain locations by local laws and ordinances.

Interestingly, red-light cameras were on several ballots during the Nov. 2 elections — and all lost, often by huge margins. Houston voters rejected the cameras that had been used since 2006 and had delivered $44 million in fines. As a result, the city said it will have to close a $10 million budget hole.

Wait a minute. How can the city count on a fairly static revenue figure from red-light cameras if the devices are supposed to improve road safety by discouraging motorists from running through stops? After four years, shouldn’t revenues be declining because so fewer people are violating the law?

Elsewhere, voters in Anaheim, Calif., approved a camera ban by a nearly 3-to-1 ratio. Suburbs near Cleveland and Seattle approved measures to end or limit the cameras. Police in Vero Beach recently abandoned a plan to put up red-light cameras after newly elected members of the city council objected.

The cameras have always been more popular in Central and South Florida than the Panhandle (indeed, Orlando is being sued for millions of dollars for collecting fees before the state made red-light cameras legal). Even after the law passed, several law-enforcement officials in Bay County, as well as Rep. Jimmy Patronis, said they opposed installing the cameras here. They questioned their effectiveness and worried that they would be used primarily to generate government revenues.

That’s not to deny the danger of red-light runners. Everyone who regularly drives 23rd Street knows the risks of entering an intersection right after a light turns green, especially at night. But there are better solutions, such as increasing the length of yellow lights, that genuinely address safety, not government budgets.

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