Ban the CAMS note:  These "Cost Neutrality" contracts have been found to be ILLEGAL in CA for being per ticket fee.  http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2865.asp

Quote:  Local attorneys Mark D. Sutherland and R. Allen Baylis had challenged the city for its failure to provide the required thirty-day warning period before beginning the program and its use of a prohibited per-ticket "cost neutral" compensation scheme.

also:  http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/26/2624.asp

Quote:  "At least forty cities across the state depend on so-called "cost neutrality" clauses in their contracts with the private companies that operate red light camera programs. These provisions are designed to sidestep a state law prohibiting compensation payments to the companies based on the number of tickets issued. The appellate court last month dismissed the ticket of a Fullerton woman because the city issued a ticket under such a cost neutrality arrangement."

This Miami Contract exactly what those CA towns we doing trying to get around the per ticket fee!

http://www.justnews.com/news/26958624/detail.html#

Lawyer: Cities' Red Light Camera Contracts Illegal
Judge Mulls Legality Of Red Light Camera Contracts
by Roger Lohse

POSTED: Tuesday, February 22, 2011
UPDATED: 8:06 am EST February 23, 2011

 
MIAMI -- The future of the red light camera ticket program in Miami-Dade County is in the hands of a judge.

It is against state law for a private company to make money on a per-ticket basis, and after a lengthy court hearing Tuesday, Judge Steven Leifman was concerned the contract between the cities that use the cameras and the private company that manages the program might be illegal.

Watch: Video

The company, American Traffic Solutions, does not charge the cities to install the expensive red light cameras. Instead, it gets paid a flat monthly fee.

For example, Coral Gables pays ATS $4,750 per camera per month. It collects $75 from each violator who pays the fine. That means each camera in the city must issue 63 tickets per month for the city to break even.

But if the city does not issue enough tickets to cover the fee, it only has to pay ATS whatever money is has collected.

In court Tuesday, ticket defense attorney Ted Hollander argued on behalf of about 250 drivers who received a red light camera violation ticket in the mail that the contract amounts to a per-ticket fee.

"If only a certain number of tickets are issued in a certain month, the city only pays that number of tickets times $75," Hollander said.

But if a city falls short one month, it must make up the difference to the company in the next month. If, at the end of the contract, the city had more bad months than good, ATS said it would forgive the debt and the city would not have to pay the difference.

Michael Popok, an attorney representing five Miami-Dade County municipalities, said it is just the company's way to share the financial risk of using its red light camera program.

"Just because you can take a sum of money and divide it by an amount does not render it a per-fee, per-ticket, illegal scheme or provision," Popok said.

Leifman gave both sides 10 days to submit more arguments on the matter, and he promised a ruling in short order.

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