Red Light Camera News Gainesville taking Snake Oil from Gatso, might do RLC scam.
Gainesville taking Snake Oil from Gatso, might do RLC scam.
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20111210/ARTICLES/111219993
City will consider installing red-light cameras
By Chad Smith
Staff writer
Published: Saturday, December 10, 2011 at 5:50 p.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, December 10, 2011 at 5:50 p.m.
While cities from Houston to Los Angeles have taken down their intersection cameras in recent months, Gainesville city commissioners on Thursday will vote on whether to install their own and join the roughly 500 communities across the country that electronically monitor red-light runners.
Facts
If you go
What: Gainesville City Commission meeting that has on the agenda: approval of contract for red-light cameras, Butler Plaza expansion zoning, final vote to remove restrictions on Sunday alcohol sales.
When: Thursday, 1 p.m.
Where: City Hall, 200 E. University Ave.
The commission will be voting on a five-year contract that, if approved, would trigger the installation of cameras in the coming months at about five of the busiest intersections in town, the goal being to cut down on traffic crashes and, of course, red-light running.
(Ban the Cams note: HOW DOES A RLC "STOP" non RLR crashes. IT CAN'T. RLC don't even stop RLR crashes in MANY CASES, see http://www.banthecams.org/Red-Light-Camera-News/videos-that-show-rlc-will-not-work-they-didnt-stop-these-crashes-where-they-were-installed.html)
Assistant City Manager Fred Murry said the deal is “cost-neutral” in that if the city's revenue from the tickets isn't enough to pay the monthly fees to the contractor, the city won't owe anything. (Ban the Cams comment: PER TICKET FEE IN DISGUISE, see US PIRG report earlier on that "cost neutral" LIE: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/36/3623.asp)
According to the contract, the city would pay Gatso USA, a Beverly, Mass.-based company (Ban the Cams note: FOLKS GATSO IS really more FROM EUROPE BY THE WAY! http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/search.asp?P=gatso) that runs a similar program in Daytona Beach among other cities, up to $4,750 per intersection per month.
Per state law, violators caught by the cameras — or, more precisely, the owner of the vehicle cited — would be fined $158, with $75 of that going to the city, but no points would be assessed on the driver's license. (Conversely, a motorist ticketed by an officer for running a red light is fined $252 and given four points on their license.)
So for the city to see revenue from the program, each camera would have to issue at least 64 tickets in a month in order to get past the $4,750 mark.
Murry reiterated what officials have said throughout the discussion of the issue — that the city is not pursuing the cameras for the revenue.
“There is really a safety issue for us — to make the public aware that when they get to the intersection, they need to slow down and stop,” he said.
Commissioner Todd Chase, who wasn't on the City Commission when it unanimously gave staff the go-ahead to negotiate the contract in March, said he believes money isn't the motivating factor.
“I still think it's hard to ignore the fact that it could appear that way,” he said last week, adding that he was leaning toward voting against the measure for a host of reasons, including some discrepancy as to whether the cameras make intersections safer.
Even some cities that have endorsed the cameras have backtracked.
Last month, the City Council in Albuquerque, N.M., voted to get rid of its program after 53 percent of voters answered a ballot question that they didn't want it, the Albuquerque Journal reported.
Last year, the City Council of Brooksville in Hernando County voted to get rid of its five-camera program after public support waned and a state law passed that would curb its revenue, the St. Petersburg Times reported. However, in October, the council voted to reinstate its program and install cameras at 20 intersections, the Times reported.
Chase pointed to the growing number of cities unplugging their cameras as a sign it's not a good idea for Gainesville.
“I have a hard time believing that this is what the people want,” Chase said. “People are bringing these things to court and they are bogging down the judicial system, and they are costing the cities a lot of money to defend.”
(Ban the Cams comment: GREAT LET THE VOTERS DECIDE! That would be a GREAT Bill in Tallahassee, LET THE VOTERS DECIDE!)
Murry said if the commission approves the contract, city staff would review accident data and determine the intersections where the cameras would be installed.
(Ban the Cams comment: Wonder if they will even BREAK OUT HOW MANY ARE RLR RELATED and the CAUSES or will they just mask it in total accidents that INCLUDE accidents a RLC WILL NEVER STOP, I am on a roll today on this one folks).
Murry said if the Legislature decides to outlaw red-light cameras, as a bill that died last year would have done, the city wouldn't be on the hook financially.
The contract also states that drivers turning right on a red would not be ticketed, at least at first. There is a provision for allowing the city to start enforcing right-on-red infractions, like rolling stops, if it wants. (Ban the Cams note: Means if we don't get enough "violations" we will just "create" them by right turns).
However, state law currently says that a “traffic citation may not be issued for failure to stop at a red light if the driver is making a right-hand turn in a careful and prudent manner at an intersection where right-hand turns are permissible.”
All infractions would be reviewed by a certified city staff member, possibly a police or code-enforcement officer, before being mailed out, Murry said.
The tickets can be appealed in court, and a number of them have been overturned around the state.
In Daytona Beach, an attorney has challenged and beaten a number of the tickets by questioning whether the system has been tested for accuracy, The Daytona Beach News-Journal reported earlier this year.
Like Chase, Commissioner Thomas Hawkins has his own concerns but wasn't sure how he would vote.
Hawkins said he is worried about the consequences of adding a for-profit company to the public-safety equation that is currently “just between us and our police department and our constituents.”
“That creates a pot for lobbying and for interest. I don't have any concrete reason to be concerned about it. As far as I know it's a reputable company,” he said. “We're creating a system where the intentions might not all be pure.”
BAN THE CAMS NOTE: Don't be too sure. Check this out on Gatso and Columbia, MO: http://www.keepcolumbiafree.com/blog/toni-and-tony-twist-the-truth/
Contact Chad Smith at 338-3104 or This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Articles Menu
Find Info
Latest Comments
Member Login
