Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Photo Radar
1788 messages, Last post on Nov 14, 2009 at 3:43 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
Maine is the 14th state to ban photo enforcement. The rest will follow in due course.  from: http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2009/June09/061509/061709-03.htm Maine bans use of ticket cameras Lawmakers in Maine say no thanks to revenue enhancements via ticket cameras. They are the 14th state to outlaw the enforcement tool. Maine Gov. John Baldacci signed into law a bill to prevent the state, or communities within the state, from tapping the use of photo enforcement to nab drivers breaking traffic laws. The state joins Mississippi and Montana in banning the technology this year. While traffic surveillance cameras are not in use in Maine, the new law was a proactive step taken to make sure they don’t start showing up around the state. The ban applies to red-light and speed cameras. Previously LD1234, the new rule makes an exception for cameras on the Maine Turnpike to help ensure payment at toll booths. The recent wave of states to prohibit the use of photo enforcement has been a blow to red-light and speed camera advocates who say the devices are about safety and using technology in a helpful way. Others say the devices free up police to address bigger issues. Opponents, including the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, question the claim that cameras are solely intended to keep people safe. Rep. Richard Cebra, R-Naples, shared that concern. “In many places around the country, these cameras have become nothing more than a moneymaker for municipalities,” he said in a written statement. There also is a question about the effectiveness of such cameras. Opponents argue they have the potential to distract drivers and cause more fender-bender accidents. In fact, multiple studies have found that crashes actually increased in cities with red-light cameras. “While on the surface these cameras may appear to increase public safety, recent studies have shown that they actually increase the occurrences of accidents at intersections where the public is aware that there is a camera,” Cebra said. To view other legislative activities of interest for Maine in 2009, click here. – By Keith Goble, state legislative editor
|
|
|
If you don't like photo radar, your shocks will love these. Mayor hits the gas on speed bumps in D.C. (WTOP) "Based on the number of speed bumps and the total miles of local roads, the District averages about one speed hump for every 1.5 miles. In Montgomery County, drivers encounter a speed bump about once every 2.2 miles. In Fairfax County, it's virtually bump-free with an average of one bump in every 14.5 miles."
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jun 19, 2009 8:38 am) No Bumps "Sleeping policemen" are not a legitimate traffic calming device. Unfortunately, traffic calming requires a bit of planning, something most city counsels lack, so it requires a bit of a tear up to implement. I am currently searching for the page that had all the lawsuits from those that experienced personal injury or property damage as a result of the "speed hump," a case that is usually relatively easy to win given that "speed humps" aren't approved for roads.
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Jun 19, 2009 12:22 pm) Gizmodo |
|
|
More data on the "money grab hiding as safety" aspect of scameras, only this time with some unintended consequences. It's all about the money. from: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090629/0206575395.shtml Schaumburg Dumps Redlight Cameras After They Show No Safety Benefit from the good-for-them dept We've seen it in a few other places, but reader Don Gatza let's us know that Schaumburg, Illinois is the latest city to dump its redlight cameras. The city found that, despite promises to the contrary, the redlight cameras did not decrease accidents (not even the "t-bone" accidents that proponents of such cameras insist they help combat). The city claims that even though a single intersection generated 10,000 tickets and over a million in revenue in just a few months, it's going to drop the cameras, because "It was not our intent to use them as a revenue generator." If only other communities were so enlightened. Of course, there was a second potential factor in the decision as well. Apparently pissed off ticket recipients had been complaining and promising to stop shopping at Schaumberg businesses -- leading local businesses to fear a loss in customers and revenue. Of course, this is the same thing that towns with notorious speed traps have found: people avoid going there, harming local businesses. Hopefully more local businesses start recognizing that giving out automated tickets that do nothing to improve safety also tend to harm local businesses as well. In the meantime, if officials want to improve safety in Schaumburg intersections, studies have shown that the best way to do so is rather simple: increase the timing of yellow lights, and then add a longer pause between one direction turning red, and the perpendicular traffic's lights turning green.
|
|
|
Replying to: vcheng (Jul 01, 2009 8:10 am) |
|
|
Yet more data on the "money grab hiding as safety" aspect of scameras. Funny how all the expereinces point to fact that it's all about the money. from: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2830.asp Maywood, California Dumps Red Light Cameras City council in Maywood, California decides to stop using Redflex to run a red light camera program. The Maywood, California City Council on Wednesday dumped the Australian company in charge of the city's red light camera program. Since 2004, Redflex Traffic Systems has had the right to issue tickets at the intersection of Slauson and Alamo. The council voted 3-2 not to renew the five-year agreement, against the wishes of city staff who proposed new "cost neutral" contract terms. "(The) city shall be obligated to pay the cumulative balance invoiced by Redflex, in accordance with terms set forth above, to the extent of gross cash received by the city from automated red light violations," the proposed new contract language stated. Tying the vendor's compensation to the amount of cash received violates a state law mandating flat-rate contracts for photo enforcement systems. A week before the council's vote, the editor of the Highwayrobbery.net website warned council members that an appellate ruling had already found similar contract language between the city of Fullerton and Nestor Traffic Systems (NTS) was illegal (view opinion). Accepting the new deal with Redflex could put the city at legal risk. In May, the city of Turlock also dumped red light cameras over fears regarding the cost neutrality. According to the proposed contract language, cost neutrality would not apply "if the signal amber timings at the photo enforced intersections are not set to the minimum requirements of CalTrans in California." In the past, photo ticketing companies prohibited the increasing of yellow warning times to ensure maximum revenue. If strictly interpreted, this provision would have the same effect by imposing a financial penalty if the city chose to extend the duration of yellow times. A 2004 Texas Transportation Institute study proved that going one-second beyond such bare minimum signal timings yielded a 53 percent reduction in tickets, but more importantly it reduced accidents by 40 percent (view report). |
|
|
Replying to: vcheng (Jun 18, 2009 3:36 am) So, what's wrong with the violators contributing to the municipalities? Observational cameras photograph you coming and going, driving and walking, and any technology that helps law enforcement is highly recommended by law abiding voters. |
|
|
Here is a nice story from the Chicago Tribune, following the money in quite interesting and revelaing ways: Part 1: from: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-red-light-cameras-part-two-jul13,0,- - 6603390.story On Thanksgiving eve in 2005, a Metra express train plowed into five cars at the busy Grand Avenue crossing in west suburban Elmwood Park, leaving behind piles of twisted metal, 16 injured people and a golden, moneymaking opportunity for the politically connected. State lawmakers were quick to propose a crackdown on drivers who swerve around lowered crossing gates. But as so often happens in Springfield, one of the bills aimed at preventing a repeat of the near-tragedy experienced a metamorphosis during the legislative process. Thus emerged the 2006 law that brought red-light cameras to the suburbs. Advocates said it was all in the interest of safety. But in the fun-house mirror that is Illinois politics, explanations of how and why things get done are rarely so simple. Moving with a lightning speed befitting its name, a then-2-year-old British traffic camera-maker called RedSpeed latched onto savvy Illinois political insiders and came to dominate Chicago's lucrative suburban market even though it had never before operated in the U.S. So aggressive was the push that one suburban police chief recommended that his town hire RedSpeed a week before it was even incorporated in Illinois. Just as happened when Chicago debuted red-light cameras in 2003, the devices in the suburbs have infuriated drivers surprised by $100 tickets in the mail, fattened municipal treasuries and intensified a roaring debate about whether their purpose was to reduce crashes or extract cash from motorists. The spawning of RedSpeed may represent a textbook example of how to cash in on this state's clubby intersection of public policy and clout. But it's an Illinois story with an unusual foreign accent. The ownership of RedSpeed is obscured in public records, but the firm is part of a closely held Israeli-owned conglomerate that does most of its business in Kazakhstan, the former Soviet Republic that Americans perhaps know best -- maybe unfairly -- from the mockumentary "Borat." There are other curiosities. RedSpeed's sole U.S. operation is in west suburban Lombard, and it markets itself as the only Illinois-based firm in the highly technical red-light camera business. Yet the corporate structure is topped by a holding company whose CEO lives in Staten Island, N.Y., and works in the office of a Manhattan ophthalmologist. RedSpeed is not the only traffic camera company to benefit from the 2006 law, but it is by far the most successful. Company officials boast that they have lined up contracts with more than 50 Illinois municipalities -- more than all competitors combined. RedSpeed got a jump-start by quickly signing up a core group of suburbs -- among them Bellwood, Berwyn, Bolingbrook, Elmwood Park, Melrose Park and Rosemont -- with ties to a close network of clout-heavy lobbyists and former public officials. The company's sales director is Greg Zito, a former state senator from Melrose Park who also is a longtime Illinois lobbyist for British banking and credit card giant HSBC and the local loan giant it bought, Household International. Those two firms have long been a major source of campaign cash for the red-light legislation's chief sponsor, state Rep. Angelo "Skip" Saviano (R-Elmwood Park). RedSpeed also has become something of a gathering spot for associates of Zito and his longtime friend Al Ronan, another former Illinois lawmaker and a lobbyist for RedSpeed since 2007. Ronan -- who lobbied for the red-light camera legislation on behalf of Melrose Park -- was a name partner in a lobbying firm that pleaded guilty to federal bid-rigging charges in 2004, though Ronan personally was not charged. He also was a major fundraiser for both former Govs. George Ryan and Rod Blagojevich. According to minutes of meetings in several municipalities, the sales force pitching RedSpeed in Illinois has included Scott Okun, who once ran the Illinois Toll Highway Authority's I-Pass program but quit after being suspended in 2006 amid questions about a printing contract. Ronan's name appeared as political sponsor for Okun on a 2003 list of state job-seekers kept by Blagojevich's office. Another past Ronan political operative from Berwyn also has served as a RedSpeed salesman, according to village board minutes and interviews. Robert Liberman, managing director of RedSpeed-Illinois, said in an e-mail exchange that his firm's success here was a testament to "careful planning and well-managed strategies." That, Liberman added, has "allowed the growth, whilst rapid, to be managed so that the company is fiercely proud of its reputation and its ability to deliver on promises." The city of Chicago's red-light cameras come from a different vendor, Australian-owned Redflex, the largest company in the field with operations in several states. Ronan contended that the city and Redflex were the main forces behind the suburban camera push, not RedSpeed, which formally entered the Illinois market only after the legislation passed. Chicago officials, he argued, feared a legal challenge to the city's then-3-year-old program and were looking for legislative cover. "The suburbs got involved because the city wanted to be protected," said Ronan. "Suburban towns saw the city program as a success." Zito said his first involvement concerning RedSpeed came at the end of June 2006, a month after the red-light camera bill was signed into law. He said then- Naperville-based Current Technologies, a company whose owners became involved in RedSpeed-Illinois, asked him to help analyze the new legislation. Daniel Zaydman, the head of RedSpeed's British parent, declined to be interviewed for this article. Saviano did not respond to interview requests. Just how fast did RedSpeed move in Illinois? Less than two months after the red-light legislation was signed into law, Berwyn Police Chief William Kushner urged his city's mayor and council to hire the company, according to a memo dated July 11, 2006. RedSpeed incorporated in Illinois a week later -- on July 18, state records show. Kushner told the Tribune that he looked at other vendors but preferred RedSpeed because of its British track record and because its system could be used for railroad crossings as well as red-light intersections. (contd.)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Photo Radar
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
