http://www.stpetecameras.org/home/letter-to-the-city-council

Sent October 3, 2011:

Dear Members of the City Council,
 
I have seen the Mayor's TV ad about red light cameras and how they are about safety and saving lives, I saw the flier that the city put in with my water bill, with some questionable statements on it(see response flier http://www.stpetecameras.org/home/st-pete-rlc-flier), and I've made note of the intersections that the Mayor and his staff decided to put the red light cameras at in our city, and then I looked those intersections up in the $99,000 consultant intersection safety report and I was quite puzzled. It reminded me of that sesame street song, "which one of these is not like the others...", the intersection of 54th Ave. N. and 4th St. N. stuck out like a sore thumb. It is ranked 83rd most dangerous intersection in the city, 30th in red light running crash frequency and 136th in red light running crash severity. The only explanation I could think of was, maybe there was a fatal crash here that explains why it got red light cameras, so I got the list of the 11 fatal crashes that happened in the city in the last 3 years, nope, in fact there were no fatal signalized intersection crashes north of 30th Ave N in the city in the last 3 years.

So I decided to call and email with various members of the city staff and police department. No one on the staff can tell me why this intersection was chosen over the 72 more dangerous intersections in the city that are not getting cameras. The Mayor has talked so much about safety and saving lives, yet one of the more dangerous intersections that was not chosen for red light cameras, MLK and 22nd Ave. N., has had repeat fatal crashes in just the last three years with a total of 5 people dead. In fact, NONE of the signalized intersections where people have actually died at in the last 3 years were chosen to receive red light cameras http://www.stpetecameras.org/home/other-pinellas-rlcs/st-petersburg#map, NONE. The only answer I got back was that the intersection of 54th and 4th was NOT chosen because it was a dangerous intersection, it was chosen for other factors. I am still waiting on an answer for why those "other factors" were more important at this intersection than the 72 more dangerous intersections in the city that did not get the cameras.

I would also like to give you an update on what American Traffic Solutions(ATS), the company that you have decided to outsource this law enforcement function to, has been up to for the last few months since the city council voted to sign a contract with them in April.

Los Angeles, California canceled their contract with ATS, ending their 10-year red light camera program which more than one city council member classified as "ineffective"

Here in Florida, the city of Hialeah canceled their contract with ATS, ending their red light camera program

ATS has threatened to sue the city of Houston, Texas for $25 million if they tried to get out of their contract after citizens voted to remove red light cameras in that city. More than $2 million of that amount is from ATS' own campaigning efforts leading up to that referendum.

ATS tried to get a restraining order against Houston's Mayor Parker to prevent her from turning off their red light cameras, it was dismissed by the judge

ATS sued the city of Bellingham, Washington to try to stop a citizen petition on red light cameras from appearing on the ballot. The Superior Court judge fined ATS $10,000 for a SLAPP violation(that's "Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation") and also ordered ATS to pay the defendant's court costs.

A new multi-million-dollar lawsuit against ATS was filed in several Missouri cities where red light cameras were recently ruled as illegal

ATS fired their VP of sales, Bill Kroske, after evidence came out that he was caught posting pro-camera messages online using a fake name as well as attempting to collude with a Mayor in Washington state to stop a red light camera referendum there.

ATS issued almost 1,000 invalid citations in the city of Gallatin, Tennessee

In New Port Richey, ATS issued a red light camera ticket to a man going through a green light, even after a supposed multi-person review

In Opa-Locka, Florida, ATS issued several red light camera citations to members of a police-escorted funeral procession. ATS even denied dismissal upon appeal.

ATS offered the city of Davie, Florida deferred payment up to 6 months of their camera rental fees to convince them to start up their program after the City Council was dragging their feet. They also issued a thinly veiled threat of a $1 million lawsuit if the city did not activate the cameras.

A Sun Sentinel report came out about ATS' aggressive and misleading lobbying tactics here in Florida where it has 17 registered lobbyists and has spent $1.5 million on lobbying just at the state government level.

In part because of the above issues, the city of Clearwater decided to go with red light camera vendor Redflex instead of ATS for their camera systems.

The above events were all just from the last few months.

And on the subject of the contract with ATS, I have a copy of the final signed contract http://www.stpetecameras.org/home/st-pete-rlc-contract-with-ats and I really would like to applaud the city's legal staff for writing in the following escape clause: (from point number 4),

"Termination due to Legislative Action: If legislation is passed that repeals HB325/Chapter 2010-80, the Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Program, or if any laws are enacted that prohibits the operation of the Intersection Public Safety Program (as known as the Traffic Infraction Detector program), or IF ANY OTHER LEGAL AUTHORITY PROHIBITS THE OPERATION OF THE INTERSECTION PUBLIC SAFETY PROGRAM (as known as the Traffic Infraction Detector program), this Agreement shall automatically terminate with no notice required to be given by either party."

According to the portion I put in ALL CAPS, a simple reversal of the City Council's vote on the ordinance authorizing red light cameras in the city would mean that the program could be ended at any time with no financial penalty. In light of this, I would like to encourage you to vote to repeal the ordinance authorizing the use of red light cameras before they have a chance to cause damage to our city.

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