Posted on 07/26/2006 6:06:38 AM PDT by ziggy_dlo
Supporters of red light cameras say project should be low-cost
7/26/2006
Austin City Council members who support red light cameras say they want to find a system that won’t cost the city much money or effort. City Council Member Lee Leffingwell says the goal of a red light camera system would not be to boost the city’s revenues, but he also wants to avoid draining city funds for a network of cameras at busy intersections. “What I would be looking for in a proposal that comes back to us is one that has zero or minimal up-front costs to the city, and as much of the overhead and administrative process that can be done is actually handled by the company,” Leffingwell said.
Some other cities with red light cameras work out arrangements with the private company supplying the gear so that the company is paid based on the number of citations the red light cameras generate.
The Council could ask the City Manager on Thursday to draft a plan for installing red light cameras at busy intersections. But actually purchasing the cameras and ordering them to be installed would require a separate vote
You don't even have a "right" to drive
Before the camera authorization expired here in VA, there were two types, the state-controlled red-light cameras and the city-controlled ones (e.g. City of Fairfax). The state lights were set by state engineers and had normal yellows. The cities did whatever they felt like. One city light in Fairfax City (Fairfax Circle) was changed from a staggered light to clear through traffic to a simultaneous, shortened yellow. You better believe VA legislators heard from people like me and now there are no more red light cameras, mainly because they were abused for revenue generation purposes.
Sorry, but you are wrong about that.
I heard on WTOP that DC speed camera revenues have gone up even as "aggressive speeding" (not further defined by the reporter) as a percentage of drivers has gone down (from 30-something to 2%). In any event, you are part of their amazing revenue stream long after the law enforcement value has ceased.
The biggest problem the Austin metro area has with traffic signals being run, is timing. There are two bad intersections in Cedar Park, 183 at Cypress Creek and 183 at 1431. There are two or three cars running the light after we see a green signal every day.
Cedar Park and TXDOT had all the signals in perfect timing several years ago. You could leave the first signal and make every signal from one end to the other without stopping. Now, you have to stop at every third or fourth light.
People don't like to sit at the intersection for 2 or 3 minutes. What happened to the $2.5 million Austin wanted to spend to get the lights in time on many of the major streets a few years ago?
Gee, I wonder who funded the "studies" that show all the wonderful benefits of red light cameras?
What a bunch of hokum. This is a blatant money raising scheme and nothing but.
"And these companies would purposely make the delay from yellow light to red light shorter so they could catch more runners."
And some techie they tagged will start timing them, take the bastards to court and win. The city will have to pay back a ton of loot and the councilmen will be pointing fingers at each other.
The DC All federal, state, and local government(s) has become a nickel and dime city rape of the producers.
Actually, the big one I mentioned was from an professional engineering organization. All large engineering groups do a lot of studies before making recommendations of what policy should be adopted. God help us all of the politicians decide engineering matters. The politicians may have grabbed onto this as a way to make money, but there are real benefits independent of that, whenther you believe it or not.
I have no doubt that if you and the Internet were around when the first traffic signals were introduced, you would have said exactly the same thing about them. If you have ever tried to get through a busy intersection when the power is out, you should understand why they are needed. You may not understand red-light cameras, but they are no different. The goal is to pass the maximum number of vehicles through an intersection with a minimum number of accidents.
Extending the yellow has NOT been proved to improve safety. I have seen that said here a lot, but many studies do NOT back that claim up.
> a simultaneous, shortened yellow....
I thought that would trip the conflict monitor and start flashing red in all directions?
Numerous studies to the contrary here:
Here is what I know...
1) NC had to pass a law to make it legal to have traffic cameras (we have both speeding and intersection)
2) It is not a criminal offense it is a civil fine (like walking on the grass)
3) The local radio guys joke that it is a speeding tax since there is no way to fight it
I did a quick search for any links, but I could not find any...sorry.
Unfortunately, no. I live here in the democrat bastion of Charlotte, NC and all I know is what the officials have said. If a picture is taken and it was not you, then you have to turn that person in. The person that the car is registered to is liable. I also know that before we got them, the state had to pass a law to even make them legal.
I should have been clearer, the intersection has two separate lights in a row. They used to stagger the yellows to clear out the middle of the island (about 50-60 feet long). When they added the camera (at the second light) they removed the staggering so you would have to run the red or stop inside the island. They also shortened both yellows.
There is red light running and then there's red light running.
Treating a red light as a stop sign at 2:00 in the morning when you can plainly see there isn't another car for blocks is entirely harmless.
Pushing - or misjudging - the yellow and entering the intersection in the first second or two of red only leads to a collision if an approaching driver timed the light and didn't slow down, or if someone waiting floors it at the first wink of green.
Ignoring the light and flying through the intersection when cross traffic has had a chance to get moving again is where the t-bone accidents and fatalities come in to play..
Red light cameras make no distinction between these scenarios. The people pushing these programs use the scapegoat of the third scenario to rake in the dough from the first two harmless behaviors.
That's where the problem started, the idea of infractions, which are unconstitutional. Still, the process of the cameras is all mechanical, and I, for the life of me, don't understand why more people are not exorcised over being stopped for absolutely no reason in the middle of the night at a roadblock and asked questions regarding an actual crime, for which there was absolutely no reason to believe, prior to the stop, that they had committed. I watched a crippled man peform stunts for over fifteen minutes before being released, a few months ago, at one such roadblock. He had had his car driven to the side by officers, then forced to dance like a monkey, all because he had the unfortunate luck of being crippled.
And BTW, in my business, they send people 100 fines and assume everyone is guilty unless you prove yourself innocent and there is no due process at all!
What business are you in?
I did a google search on "Charlotte NC Red light Cameras" and found numerous articles. Several of the articles spell out the process for challenging the camera to prove that the person receiving the ticket was not the driver. Also, there was a case before the NC Court of Appeals that questioned the entire issue of red light cameras. So someone is appealing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.