Red Light Camera News

http://baytownsun.com/news/article_599b2e80-b89f-11df-bac6-001cc4c03286.html

Red light camera firm files lawsuit over election 

Posted: Saturday, September 4, 2010 10:39 pm

MARK FLEMING | 2 comments

American Traffic Solutions, the company that owns and operates the cameras and sensor systems used to enforce red light compliance at several Baytown intersections, filed a lawsuit against the city Thursday seeking to overturn the city’s decision to call an election on an amendment to the red light camera ordinance.

In addition to repeating previous claims the amendment to the ordinance constitutes a repeal of the ordinance and violates state code, the lawsuit also claims the city is violating the federal Voting Rights Act.

City Attorney Ignacio Ramirez defended the city in a hearing Thursday in which ATS sought a temporary restraining order against the city, according to Patti Jett, public affairs coordinator for the City of Baytown. The temporary restraining order to stop the election was not granted, she said. Another hearing has been scheduled on the matter.

In its suit, American Traffic Solutions presents several claims to justify stopping the election, including:

• A claim the amendment to the city’s red light ordinance constitutes a repeal of the ordinance. Under the city charter, there are tight time limits on how soon a petition can be presented calling for a referendum to repeal an ordinance, but not limits on when a petition can be presented to amend an ordinance. An earlier attempt to repeal the red light camera ordinance was rejected by the city on that basis.

• A claim the proposed ordinance includes a definition of “law enforcement officer” that would not allow Baytown police to enforce the law.

• A claim the proposed ordinance seeks to override state law in restricting the use of photo-enforcement equipment.

• A claim the election violates the Voting Rights Act.

The claim of violation of the Voting Rights Act is also being used in a contest to a pending election in the City of Houston regarding its red light camera program. Unlike the Baytown case, the Houston lawsuit is in federal court and was filed by a political action committee supporting red light cameras, rather than by American Traffic Solutions.

The Baytown lawsuit says the Voting Right Act violation comes from the city allowing a referendum petition outside of the 20-day window allowed by law. The suit says “no approval [from the Department of Justice] was sought (or received) to bypass the previously-approved twenty-day limitation on referendum petitions.”

Further, the suit maintains, “By permitting an unauthorized ballot proposition to be placed before the voters, the City has created a scenario whereby voters who oppose the Safety Camera Program — a group that historically tends to vote in a conservative manner — will vote in greater numbers than would otherwise have turned out for a November 2, 2010 election. This change in voting practices and procedures results in the potential for minority voting strength to be diluted through the inclusion of an unauthorized ballot measure.”

In response to a written question asking if the company had previously used the Voting Rights Act as a legal strategy to block elections, ATS Vice President for Governmental Relations and General Counsel George Hittner said, “ATS’ complaint is not based on the premise advanced in your question. ATS’ claims in this lawsuit are based on the calling of a costly and voidable election.”

In response to a written question asking if the company had any studies or other evidence supporting its contention regarding the political leanings of potential voters, Hittner provided the identical answer, “ATS’ complaint is not based on the premise advanced in your question. ATS’ claims in this lawsuit are based on the calling of a costly and voidable election.”

When asked how many of its clients the company has sued, Hittner replied, “None. However, we are required by law to file this challenge before the election occurs for the simple reason that an election contest is not available as a possible remedy after the election occurs.”

Speaking for the city, Jett said the election is still on as of this time.

She was unable to say whether the city had the legal authority to cancel the election at this time even if it chose to do so, as the state deadline for calling November elections has passed.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3250.asp

Red Light Camera Firms Raise Stakes in Court Battle
Redflex and American Traffic Solutions step up legal battle against one another.

While red light camera firms are facing significant legal peril as vehicle owners in California http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3249.asp  and Florida http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/30/3006.aspare fighting citations in court through class action lawsuits, the stakes are even higher when the companies themselves battle one another in the courtroom. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is now reviewing a number of issues brought in the suit filed by American Traffic Solutions (ATS) against its Australian rival, Redflex Traffic Systems.

ATS had sued Redflex for advertising speed camera operations using radars that were illegally imported into the country. As reported by TheNewspaper in May, lost the case on all counts before a jury http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/31/3154.asp with the judge expressing the view that the ATS argument was "weak at every point." Nonetheless, ATS has filed an appeal to the Ninth Circuit. Meanwhile, Redflex is attempting to recover the $4.3 million it spent on the litigation after the firm's lead attorney, E. Jeffrey Walsh, claimed he had spent 12,782 hours on the case. Redflex insists it is entitled to attorney's fees because ATS filed the lawsuit in bad faith.

"ATS chose to use the courtroom as a forum to embarrass Redflex by, under the guise of proof of willfulness, accusing Redflex officials of lying to federal and state authorities," Walsh wrote in a July 27 filing. "ATS provided salacious fodder for bloggers and other media personnel who attended the trial and damaged Redflex's reputation and integrity... ATS unleashed a crusade against Redflex, its biggest competitor in the photo traffic enforcement industry, to damage it."

Read more: Red Light Camera Firms Raise Stakes in Court Battle

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3249.asp

California: Red Light Camera Programs Face Class Action Suit
Experienced class action law firm takes on red light cameras in California.

A team of experienced class action lawyers is taking on California's red light camera industry, and photo enforcement companies are expressing unease. Last month, the law firm of Pearson Simon Warshaw and Penny, LLP filed suit in San Mateo County Superior Court arguing that tickets issued throughout the Golden State since January 1, 2004 should be refunded where the photo enforcement contracts violated a state law mandating flat-rate compensation to companies like Redflex Traffic Systems. Redflex referred to the case as a particular business risk in an August 25 filing with the Australian Securities Exchange.

"The level of litigation industry‐wide has continued to be widespread with the majority of suits testing the constitutionality or administrative legitimacy of road safety enforcement programs," Redflex explained. "A number of class action lawsuits involving others in our industry and Redflex have been filed challenging the pricing models used in several states alleging violation of cost neutrality laws as well as the admissibility of business records in court. We continue to aggressively defend against these claims."

An aggressive defense will not come cheap. The firm spent $4.3 million to fend off a lawsuit filed by competitor American Traffic Solutions (ATS), even though the Australian firm won the case. Should this class action make it to trial, Redflex and co-defendant ATS could end up financially responsible for contracts in the fifty-nine jurisdictions identified as having the questionable language.

In the city of San Mateo, for example, Redflex is paid $120 for each $446 ticket issued at each red light camera intersection up to a monthly cap of $6030 per intersection. This so-called cost neutrality arrangement allows the city to have a guarantee that the cameras will never under any circumstances lose money. The class action suit argues that such clauses violate a state law prohibiting per-ticket compensation arrangements for automated ticketing contracts.

"Through their employees and agents, RTS, ATS and the Doe defendants, as defined below, entered into illegal contracts with public entities in California, operated automated traffic enforcement equipment in California and caused tickets to be issued to plaintiff and class members throughout California," attorneys Bruce L. Simon and William J. Newsom wrote in the court filing.

The suit does not ask that existing convictions be overturned, but that Redflex and ATS pay damages for the amount of revenue the companies have collected from their unlawful business practices. The appellate divisions of both Orange County (view ruling) and San Mateo County (view decision) courts have already ruled "cost neutral" contract provisions are illegal, but the decisions have not been published. Only a handful of cities like San Mateo and San Carlos have dropped the cost neutral provisions. Contractors in these cities would still be sued for the amount of revenue generated prior to the contract revisions.

The lawsuit asks the court to declare all cost neutral contracts illegal and issue an injunction against all programs operating under such arrangements. It also asks for a full refund of all fines paid, plus appropriate punitive damages

Ban the Cams note:   I find it funny that the scamera side uses the "if you have nothing to hide, than you should have nothing to fear" BS argument YET THE POLICE CHIEF OF PORT RICHEY CLEARLY WANTS TO HIDE A RLC CONTRACT FEE! 

As a post I left on the St. Pete Times (I DON'T hide who I am unlike ATS Front Groups do), I WONDER IF THE CHIEF EVER HEARD OF THE SUNSHINE LAW!

 http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgovernment/police-chief-says-port-richeys-budget-for-red-light-cameras-is-confidential/1118774

Police chief says Port Richey's budget for red-light cameras is confidential
By Drew Harwell, Times Staff Writer
In Print: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 

PORT RICHEY — The question seemed simple enough: How much will the city pay per camera each month to the company that provides red light cameras?

Council members asked Police Chief Dave Brown.

That's confidential, he answered during Monday night's meeting, pointing out that the contract with American Traffic Solutions, an Arizona company, forbids discussing it.

"We entered into this contract," council member Terry Rowe said, "yet we can't talk about it?"

City officials, according to budget estimates, expect to issue about 9,600 camera citations next year, totaling $1.5 million in fines. A large chunk must be paid to the state and ATS. Knowing the exact amount would help city leaders with their budget. 

(Ban the Cams, SO MUCH FOR SAFETY, IT REALLY IS ONLY ABOUT MONEY, but you know that already don't ya!)

"I don't believe there is anything such as confidential when it comes to city finances," council member Bill Colombo said Tuesday. "That's the first time I've heard anything like that."

Read more: Port Richey Police Chief "forgets" about FLORIDA SUNSHINE LAW! Claims RLC Contract "confidential"

Ban the Cams note:  This closes the door on the imaginary "loophole" some in the photo enforcement industry and cities use to try to get around CA state law on RLC FINES.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/31/3158.asp

Quote:  "Senate Bill 949, strike down ordinances specifically designed to boost municipal profit margins. The state Senate approved this bill 28 to 0 last Friday sending a warning to jurisdictions like Alameda County, Long Beach, Oakland, Riverbank and Roseville which have set up their own traffic ticketing and red light camera ordinances that bypass the requirements of state law."

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15916964?nclick_check=1

Bill bars Calif. cities from keeping traffic fines
The Associated Press
Posted: 08/27/2010 05:09:07 PM PDT

SACRAMENTO, Calif.—A bill approved by the state Senate on Friday would prohibit local governments from keeping some of the money collected in traffic tickets written under local ordinances.
The bill sent to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Friday would bar local authorities from enforcing their own ordinances that regulate moving violations, such as speeding, if they are already regulated by state law.

Sen. Jenny Oropeza, a Democrat from Long Beach, cites at least half a dozen such recent ordinances by cites and counties struggling with budget problems.

She says the patchwork of local ordinances could lead to confusion among drivers and throw off traffic safety statistics, costing the state millions of dollars in federal aid.

Her bill, SB949, was approved on a 33-0 vote.

(Ban the Cams note:  Don't think this is a "mistake" by anymeans!    Here is one out of TX:  http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2827.asp

Quote:  "The shortened yellow helped boost violations, allowing American Traffic Solutions (ATS) to issue $222,587 worth of tickets in the month of April alone. Of this amount, ATS took a 55 percent cut, even though Texas law specifically bans per-ticket contract arrangements. Baytown cited a grandfather loophole clause in the law as the reason it has continued the practice.")

http://www.kgun9.com/Global/story.asp?S=12976216

Only 2 seconds to beat a yellow light? What the heck?
Posted: Aug 13, 2010 2:04 PM EDT
Updated: Aug 13, 2010 5:50 PM EDT
 
Now you see it, now you don't: the 2-second yellow left turn arrow at Kolb & Speedway
 

TUCSON (KGUN9-TV) - Two seconds to beat a yellow light?  You're kidding, right?

That's what KGUN9 News was wondering.  The question arose after City of Tucson crews began tinkering with the lights at Kolb & Speedway, as part of the process of installing a new set of ever-popular speed and red light cameras.  When the crews left, the timing of the lights had changed.

In particular, when the left turn arrow now switches from green to yellow, it stays yellow for only about two seconds before turning red.  For a typical motorist, if you're entering the intersection at normal traffic speed just as the arrow turns yellow, you might not have time to clear the intersection before it turns red and the camera snaps a picture of your smiling face.  Even if you make it through, any cars behind you would definitely be hosed.

No fair!  What is up with that?

KGUN9 News' Allen Kath put that question the city.  The response from spokeswoman Linda Galindo:  don't worry about it just yet.  Galindo said the traffic unit is "aware of the issues with the yellow light @ Speedway/Kolb.  They are calibrating & it will be resolved before the 30-day grace period is up."

Galindo is referring to a 30 day notice period during which the traffic cameras are operational, but toothless - the city is not issuing citations.  That grace period ends for this particular camera on September 17.

Bottom line: don't panic yet.  KGUN9 News will keep on top of it for you.  In fact, the newsroom can't help but notice the situation with this particular light, which sits astride the route many KGUN9 News employees take to get to work.

ORLANDO, Fla. -- WFTV found out some of the drivers recorded running red lights at Orlando's worst intersection should be enforcing the laws, not breaking them. Time after time after time, police and deputies were caught on camera running the light at Conroy and Vineland roads.

You got to see the video... Unbeilevable....click here

http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/26/just-gimme-a-second/

(from www.wiseupwinnipeg.com   on Facebook).

Just gimme a second
Winnipeg traffic crusaders recently launched the Just One Second campaign

by Julia Belluz on Thursday, August 26, 2010 2:00pm - 0 Comments

ISTOCK
Extending the amber traffic light by a second is all that is needed to cut intersection accidents and red-light violations, according to a pair of self-appointed Winnipeg traffic crusaders who recently launched the Just One Second campaign. Since 44-year-old Larry Stefanuik took early retirement from his job as a traffic cop, he and businessman Todd Dube have been on a mission to make local intersections safer places where people get fewer tickets.

Their “one second” logic was borrowed from the U.S., where the state of Georgia enacted a law this year that added extra time to yellow lights following 2006 reports that showed that accidents at photo-controlled stops were actually on the rise. The campaign was so successful that 12 cities in Georgia dismantled some or all of their photo-enforcement cameras. And the issue became the subject of a U.S. congressional hearing in June, during which a Georgia study documenting increases in rear-end collisions after the introduction of red-light cameras was cited.

Though the Winnipeg Sun reported that city council has discussed a possible pilot project for a longer amber, Stefanuik says the city has “completely ignored” them. Meanwhile, a city spokeswoman told the Winnipeg Free Press that the timing of yellow lights is “adequate for the speeds and intersection geometries in the city.” Still, the duo plans to spread their message next month on billboards, in TV commercials and in newspapers. As Dube, 46, says, “Yellow lights aren’t there for the purpose of testing your brakes; they are there to orchestrate your safe clearance through the intersection, but this city is putting them to work like slot machines.” Stefanuik, sounding like the modern-day Robin Hood of traffic violations, adds: “[Cameras at intersections] are just a scheme by rich camera companies who are taking the grocery money right out of people’s pockets.”

(Ban the Cams note:  Thanks to Kill Tn Traffic Cameras for the link!)

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news%2Flocal%2Fpeninsula&id=7625213

Redwood City to review use of red light cameras

Monday, August 23, 2010

REDWOOD CITY, CA (KGO) -- There is an ongoing controversy about cameras used on the Peninsula to catch people who run red lights.

Tonight, the Redwood City Council will consider just how successful they are or whether they should be shut down.

The city's been issuing an average of 500 citations per month based on pictures from its red light cameras. Most of those are from rolling right turns -- what many call a "California stop." Many in the city call the cameras "right turn cameras."

"Well, in the interest of fairness of full disclosure, I have one of those tickets," says Redwood City Mayor Jeff Ira.

Even Ira was nabbed by the red light camera for making a "California stop" on a right turn. In other words, he didn't make a full stop and he was fined about $450. San Mateo County Court CEO John Fitton says the mayor is one of many red light camera violators.

"The majority are for the non-full California stop right turns," says Fitton.

City officials say when the first camera was installed two years ago it was to catch drivers who blow through red lights, they never intended to catch the right-hand turn.

In fact, a police report indicates the two cameras at Veterans and Whipple have not had much of an impact.

"There hasn't been a significant decrease in accidents tied to the red lights," says City Councilman Ian Bain. "And if it's not improving traffic safety, I'd like to see it discontinued."

A recent San Mateo County grand jury report questions whether the cameras are more successful as cash cows for those Peninsula cities that operate them.

"They really should be about safety and not about money," says lawyer Bruce Simon.

Simon filed a class-action lawsuit last week against the two companies that installed red light cameras in the county. Simon says they're violating state law by including a so-called "cost neutral" provision in the contracts.

He says the camera makers reimburse cities when they can't make enough from tickets to pay for the monthly operational costs.

"It can't be a loser for them. The companies will make up the difference and they're picking intersections which are going to be susceptible to the most tickets," says Simon.

There have been court challenges to the cost natural clause. Several Peninsula cities have dropped it, others are in the process of dropping it, among them is Redwood City.

http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=213098&catid=3

Arnold man ticketed for driving in sister's funeral procession

By Mike Owens

Arnold, MO (KSDK) -- A St. Louis County man is angry he received a red light camera ticket from the city of Arnold, while he was driving in his sister's funeral procession August 6.

Michael Daniels opened his mail on Saturday and found the $94.50 ticket, which clearly showed his SUV one car length behind the hearse carrying his sister's body. Daniels' sister, Mary Colletta, died three days earlier.

Creve Coeur police said Colletta was killed by her estranged husband, who has since been charged.

Arnold police at first did not respond to Daniels' call about the red light ticket. He says the funeral home asked the city to provide an escort through Arnold because of the big size of the procession, in excess of 200 cars; he says the city refused the request.

Daniels says if the city of Arnold is so concerned about safety they installed red light cameras, then they should be willing to assign escort officers too.

As soon as Arnold officers learned of the ticket issued to Daniels it was voided, as it was supposed to be. The police chief says of the 200 cars in the procession, only one driver, Daniels, was issued a ticket.

(Ban the cams note:  I wonder on the "only one driver" comment.)  

KSDK

(Ban the Cams note;  PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE COMPLETLY,

Quote:   Oh, but there’s more. Nick Sherwood and his wife Tiffany, operators of the Bancams website, have been Googling everything they can find. They say they’ve uncovered what appears to be a coordinated effort to influence public opinion on the Web. For instance, when stories about anti-camera campaigns show up in local newspapers, the same observation always seems to appear in comment sections, with the same wording, even the same missing comma. It contains this line:

“Seriously, you don't hear non-smokers complain about cigarette taxes so why should we believe these whiners are anything but reckless drivers who don't want to get caught?”
It’s shown up hundreds of times, everywhere from The (Everett) Herald to the Washington Post.   )

http://www.washingtonstatewire.com/home/4779-scottsdale_red_light_camera_firm_stands_behind_astroturf_campaign_in_mukilteo.htm

Scottsdale Red-Light Camera Firm Stands Behind Astroturf Campaign in Mukilteo
Way, Way Behind It -- ‘Citizens Group’ is Out Front, and Faux Campaign Opposes Real One
 

By Erik Smith
Staff writer/ Washington State Wire

 
OLYMPIA, Aug. 24.—In political circles, there’s a phrase people use when a citizens' campaign starts throwing its weight around – and then it turns out there aren’t any citizens behind it.

            They call it “Astroturf lobbying.”

            You know. Fake grass roots.

            In Washington’s capital city, everyone knows the tactic on sight, and on smell. But now it seems it’s come to one of the sleepier hamlets in the state, the town of Mukilteo, where a faux-populist movement is battling a real one – an effort to keep the city government from installing traffic cameras around town.

A band of anti-camera activists has teamed with initiative promoter Tim Eyman to put a measure on the ballot this fall. It would reverse the council’s decision, force a public vote on similar measures in the future, and limit fines to $20.

On the other side, a group – if that’s the right word for it – calling itself Mukilteo Citizens for Simple Government has filed a lawsuit that aims to keep the initiative from the November ballot. And there’s something a little funny about that. Backers of the initiative say it sure looks like the Arizona company that supplies the town with traffic cameras is behind the whole thing.

            That probably doesn't put things strongly enough. In making the charge, the red-light opponents have put Google to work, uncovering a motherlode of websites tailored for every city where a red-light camera initiative has made the ballot, or where automated cameras have come in for serious public scrutiny. In Mukilteo and 17 other cities, each website appears to be sponsored by a citizens’ group; each one uses identical wording on its content pages; each web domain name is owned by the same company, Advarion, Inc., of Houston, TX.

In other states, campaign disclosure documents reveal that Advarion is one of the contractors providing services to pro-camera campaigns financed by American Traffic Solutions of Scottsdale, Ariz. And the main reason these facts must be mentioned in such a roundabout way is that Mukilteo Citizens for Simple Government still hasn’t gotten around to filing campaign disclosure documents with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission, which presumably would make its backing clear.

A sophisticated corporate effort to mold public opinion?

Hardly, says Eyman. For some reason, ATS isn’t saying much about its involvement in the Mukilteo campaign. But in this age of Internet search engines, when information is available at a few keystrokes, it’s hard to keep a secret. “You’d think they would do a better job of covering their tracks,” he said.

 
            Slamming On the Brakes
 
American Traffic Solutions certainly has a fight on its hands. Those same Google searches turn up hundreds of references to battles just like the one in Mukilteo, in communities across the country. Ten anti-camera initiatives have appeared on municipal ballots in the United States, in cities where initiative campaigns are permitted. In every one of them, the cameras have lost.

The cameras snap photos of license plates a millisecond after the lights have changed, or when someone speeds through a school zone. A police officer reviews each photo; the tickets go out in the mail. In Washington some 21 cities have installed cameras since the Legislature authorized them in 2005 – 113 at intersections and 28 along roadways. About half are maintained by ATS.

Backers claim cameras improve safety, because they encourage motorists to drive carefully, and they cite industry studies that show a decrease in intersection accidents where cameras are installed. Over time, the number of tickets issued in a camera-equipped intersection typically goes down as well.

Whether the cameras actually improve safety is a matter of debate. State Rep. Chris Hurst, D-Enumclaw, a police officer for 20 years and the cameras’ biggest opponent in the state Legislature, points out that the stats don’t measure accidents on the other side of the crosswalk. Rear-enders go up because motorists slam on the brakes when they see a yellow, he said.

 
           Populist Movement Brewing
 
Whatever the case arguments, what counts is that there’s a political backlash brewing. Hurst hears it every time he goes on talk radio and the calls start pouring in. Wherever cameras go, furor follows. So far 15 states have banned them. “It’s only a matter of time before they’re banned everywhere,” he said.

American Traffic Solutions presents surveys showing 70 to 80 percent support for the cameras – 78 percent in Seattle – and Hurst doesn’t buy them for a second. His mail runs 100-to-one against.

Reminds him a little of the studies and surveys done by the big tobacco companies in the ‘50s and the ‘60s, he said. “You know, when they said smoking was healthy for you.”

The important point is that people don’t think the cameras are about safety, he said. They’re about money – the modern computerized equivalent of the old-time speed trap.

“The cameras are like crack cocaine,” he said. “Cities put them in because they make a fortune off them. After a while they get hooked on the money and they don’t care about the safety issue.”

            Even worse, Hurst said some Washington traffic judges have gone out with stopwatches and have timed the yellow lights in camera-equipped intersections. The national standard is three seconds. Where there are red-light cameras, they’re as low as 1.7 seconds. Gotcha!

Read more: Washington State Wire: ATS Stands Behind Astroturf Campaign in Mukilteo

 
 http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7169043.html
 
Houston & Texas News
 
 Redlight camera ban petition certified
By BRADLEY OLSON HOUSTON CHRONICLE
Aug. 24, 2010, 10:53AM
 
 
A petition to ban red light cameras in Houston has been certified by the city secretary, making it all but certain that voters will decide in November whether the 70 devices at intersections across the city will be taken down.

"This is a great day for Houston," said Michael Kubosh, one of three brothers that collected more than 20,000 signatures required to get the proposed charter amendment on the ballot in this election cycle. "People just need a right to vote, that's all we're saying. Now the citizens will have a chance to decide."

Jim McGrath, a spokesman for Keep Houston Safe, a political action committee advocating the cameras, said the petition is illegal and represents an abuse of the city charter amendment process. He noted that Paul Kubosh, another brother behind the petition, is a lawyer who specializes in defending traffic ticket recipients and has a business interest in the outcome of the election.

"Mr. Kubosh has repeatedly stated that he went to his own clients to sign his petition, so no one should be surprised that a traffic ticket attorney and the clients he has defended are against holding red light runners accountable," McGrath said. "We'll see what the council has to say and we'll abide by their decision."

Keep Houston Safe is funded in part by American Traffic Solutions, Inc., the Arizona-based contractor that administers the red light camera program together with the Houston Police Department. An attorney representing the PAC has said it intends to challenge the validity of the ballot initiative in court.  

City Council is scheduled to vote on the petition today and that vote cannot be delayed for a week as some items generally are at the discretion of individual council members, according to a memorandum City Attorney David Feldman sent council members Monday. He also advised them that it is their "mandatory ministerial duty" to order the charter amendment election.
 
 

Thnaks to http://www.facebook.com/killtncams for the link!

http://www.wsmv.com/news/24733194/detail.html

Petitioners Want Mt. Juliet Red-Light Cam Ban
Some Concerned About Rear-End Crashes

POSTED: 3:59 pm CDT August 23, 2010
UPDATED: 4:22 pm CDT August 23, 2010

MOUNT JULIET, Tenn. -- People in Mount Juliet hope to get red-light cameras on the ballot in November.

Melani Stephens is circulating a petition to ban red-light cameras in Mount Juliet. She said the issue is not that people are angry because they've received tickets for running red lights; instead, she said, people are afraid they'll be involved in rear-end crashes because of drivers who make sudden stops at traffic lights with the cameras.

"Probably (for) 85 percent of the people, the issue is the safety," said Stephens. "You know, you're always going to have the small portion that, you know, they don't want the ticket. But it's not about the tickets; it's about the safety."

Supporters of the ban hope county leaders will listen to them and remove the cameras voluntarily.

Organizers must have 1,100 signatures from registered voters to force a referendum in November. Stephens said she plans to get a lot more than that.

http://www.longislandpress.com/2010/08/20/multiple-nassau-county-red-light-cameras-vandalized/

Multiple Nassau County Red Light Cameras Vandalized

By Lindsay Christ on Aug 20th, 2010

Fourteen cameras that were installed to catch cars running red lights were spray painted in Nassau County, the Associated Press reported.

Police are looking for whoever spray painted the cameras at five intersections on August 1 between 2 a.m. and 4 a.m. The intersections that were vandalized were in Carle Place, East Garden City, East Meadow and Westbury.

The cameras were installed almost a year ago and are projected to generate more than $13 million for Nassau County this year. They sit on poles as high as 16 feet at multiple intersections.

The tapes from the cameras are in the process of being reviewed and investigated by authorities. They were put back into service within a day.
 

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/new-port-richey-shouldnt-add-red-light-cameras/1116299

New Port Richey shouldn't add red-light cameras
In Print: Friday, August 20, 2010

The New Port Richey City Council shouldn't be looking at out-of-focus data when it considers installing red-light cameras at U.S. 19 intersections.

The council also shouldn't be disingenuous about its motives: trying to balance a budget strapped by falling property tax values. The idea of installing the cameras didn't arise publicly until a July budget workshop. To sell this exclusively as a safety measure insults the public. This is about cash, as much as $500,000 per year per intersection, the police estimated.

It is an overly generous projection. Under a new state law, municipal governments keep just $75 of every $158 civil citation issued for running a red light. From that, the city still must negotiate a split with the camera-owning vendor. If the city and private company divide the proceeds evenly, it means the cameras would have to generate 13,300 tickets at each intersection annually, or a combined 1,000 citations each week at the four lights, to match the revenue estimates. Those traffic lights aren't red, they're rosy.

The previous net for local governments also must be discounted. Under the same state law, motorists no longer can be cited for failing to come to a complete stop before making a right-hand turn at a red light. In Brooksville, for instance, the so-called right-on-red tickets accounted for more than 60 percent of the city's camera ticket revenue.

Brooksville's City Council incidentally just voted 3-2 to end its nearly 2-year-old red-light camera program after protests from the business community who feared a tarnished city image and because some council members didn't buy the safety statistics.

It's easy to see why. In Pasco County, U.S. 19 was the scene of 14 traffic fatalities in 2009, none at the four municipal intersections likely to be targeted for cameras: Trouble Creek Road, Marine Parkway, Gulf Drive and Main Street. Likewise, the city's own police statistics contradict the notion that red-light running is a common contributor to accidents. Over the past five years, there have been seven crashes at six of the city's busiest intersections on U.S. 19 caused by a motorist running a red light. Only one of those crashes resulted in an injury.

Government efforts at making U.S. 19 safer have been on­going for several years after a 2001 spike to 38 fatalities, twice the annual average of previous year. The city of New Port Richey has a three-officer grant-funded traffic enforcement team to patrol the road, and Pasco County and the state Department of Transportation plan to add continuous right-hand turn lanes and to channelize median cuts along the highway.

The goal of the cameras, said police Chief Jeff Harrington, is to modify driver behavior. It's a nice thought, but speeding, reckless driving, improper lane changes, not wearing a safety belt, failing to yield the right of way, impaired driving and distracted drivers aren't covered by red-light cameras.

Making U.S. 19 safer will take more than this proposed cash grab.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3236.asp

(go to www.saferbaytown.com for more info).

Red Light Cameras Increase Accidents in Baytown, Texas
Accidents increased 40 percent one year after red light cameras went live in Baytown, Texas.

After a year of use, red light cameras have failed to deliver the promised safety benefits in Baytown, Texas. The Houston suburb activated the majority of its cameras on July 13, 2008. Since then, the number of accidents at eight camera locations has increased 40 percent, contrary to predictions from city officials. The increase in accidents has not been in minor "fender benders," as is frequently claimed by photo ticketing advocates. Rather, the number of collisions resulting in an injury jumped 75 percent. Rear end collisions increased 39 percent. Results from comprehensive, independent studies elsewhere in the country have yielded similar results.

"Clearly this shows no remedial effect on driving habits over time," Byron Schirmbeck, the leader of a grassroots effort to ban the cameras in Baytown, told TheNewspaper.

The accident figures are based on the annual reports city officials by law must provide to the Texas Department of Transportation. Schirmbeck insists that the accident jump is evidence that automated ticketing has failed and that the automated ticketing machines should come down. Last week, the city clerk certified that a sufficient number of Baytown residents agreed, forcing the city council next Tuesday to vote either to adopt a ban on red light cameras or place Schirmbeck's ban on the ballot for voters to decide. City leaders so far have been reluctant to back away from the lucrative program.

"Despite widespread evidence that red light cameras actually increase accidents many cities like Baytown and Houston continue to cling to the revenue generating red light camera program," In light of this new information that demonstrates no safety improvement and increased accidents at camera monitored intersections we urge the council to immediately adopt our resolution and break their contract with the red light camera company that has engaged in numerous examples of voter intimidation and spent over $230,000 to fight the citizens of Baytown and Houston to keep the issue off the ballot."

Schirmbeck believes that the harder camera vendor American Traffic Solutions (ATS) battles the public vote, the less residents are inclined to support the company's red light cameras. ATS is especially anxious to keep the measure off the ballot because no photo enforcement program has ever survived a public vote.
 

http://bancams.com/more-front-groups/

More camera company front groups discovered
More Evidence Shows that Traffic Camera Vendor, ATS, Falls Short of Meeting Washington State’s Ethical Standards.

BanCams.com uncovers a mountain of front groups that American Traffic Solutions (ATS) has used to deceive citizens across the country. This discovery builds on top of the evidence that was uncovered in our previous post. Last Friday we wrote about the deceptive tactics that ATS has been using here and in Texas. We got curious and did a little detective work and found 13 additional front group websites, on top of the 3, from College Station (website no longer up), Baytown and Houston Texas, that we were already aware of. All of them are registered to Advarion, Inc. a company that makes websites for ATS.

ATS had the nerve to use it’s cookie cutter formula for deception even after Oscar Halpert of HeraldNet.com reported that George Hittner, ATS vice president for governmental relations, said that ATS is not providing financial assistance in the lawsuit against the citizens of Mukilteo. Sounds like the ATS recipe for success doesn’t include honesty. Why do they need front groups? What are they trying to hide?

>>Update: Since this was posted, we have discovered 2 more front group websites, pictures of them are now included below. Bringing the total websites to 18. To top it off we have also discovered another 25 website domains, all with similar names, all registered to Advarion, Inc. These don’t have any content on them, but it does show intent.  These are the domain names (you can click them to see who they are registered to): SaferCARoads.com, SaferCreoleRoads.com, SaferLouisianaRoads.com, SaferNewYork.com, SaferNYRoads.com, SaferTexasRoads.com, SaferTucson.com, TexasSafe.com, CreoleRoadSaftey.com, KeepIllionoisSafe.com, KeepJacksonSafe.com, KeepCaliforniaSafe.com, KeepCookCountySafe.com, KeepTennesseeSafe.com, KeepTNSafe.com, SafeCreoleRoads.com, SafeLouisianaRoads.com, SafeAmericanRoads.com, SaferCajunRoads.com, KeepNolaSafe.com, KeepNYCSafe.com, KeepLASafe.com, KeepLincolnSafe.com, KeepMesaSafe.com and KeepNassauSafe.com.

Click below to see pictures of the Websites.

Read more: Ban Cams WA: 18 ATS FRONT GROUPS UNCOVERED!

http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/columnists/tom_brodbeck/2010/08/17/15056646.html#pf-

News Columnists / Tom Brodbeck
Longer amber safer
Let’s make politicians see the light

By TOM BRODBECK, Winnipeg Sun

Last Updated: August 17, 2010 10:50pm

It’s probably not an issue city councillors and candidates in the upcoming civic election were expecting to deal with.

But the idea of extending amber lights at red-light camera intersections to reduce collisions has gained so much momentum over the past week, candidates — including Mayor Sam Katz — will have little choice but to tell voters where they stand on the issue.

Several councillors have already been in contact with WiseUp Winnipeg, the pro-traffic safety group that has spearheaded the idea. And come September when the municipal election will be in full swing, the proposal to extend amber lights to reduce collisions and improve traffic safety will be one of the hot topics of debate.

Evidence from U.S. states like Georgia and Arizona have shown giving drivers additional warning to stop for red lights through longer amber times has reduced collisions by as much as 80%.

Read more: Longer amber safer, Let’s make politicians see the light

Ban the cams note:  we have made some comments on this article, but don't assume every town will obey the rolling right citiation prohibition, THE VENDORS WON'T.)

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/columnists/fl-red-light-cameras-mayocol-b081610-20100816,0,4848209.column

Red-light camera tickets drop with new law
 

Looser enforcement triggers 77 percent decline in right-turn violations

Mercifully, at least one South Florida city has stepped on the brakes when it comes to overzealous enforcement at red-light camera intersections.

Hallandale Beach's lone red-light camera has generated more than $1.3 million in fines since it went live in January, but there has been a huge decrease in right-turn violations since a new state law took effect on July 1.

The law says cities are no longer supposed to cite offenders who make slow-rolling right turns "in a careful and prudent manner." Before July 1, cities could fine anyone who didn't come to a full stop before turning at a camera intersection.

Hallandale Beach has apparently complied with the spirit of the new law, with a 77 percent drop in right-turn violations from June to July.

There were 263 right-turn citations in July, down from 1,114 in June and 2,103 in April.

Read more: Citations drop 77% in Hallendale after they STOP RIGHT TURN ON RED SCAM!

http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/2010/08/16/ats-van-caught-speeding-failing-to-signal/

ATS Van Caught Speeding, Failing to Signal

American Traffic Solutions or Above The Statutes, Inc?
An American Traffic Solutions / City of Mesa “photo enforcement” vehicle was caught red handed early Saturday afternoon breaking various traffic laws.

The incident occurred early Saturday afternoon on westbound US-60 in Mesa, Arizona near exit 181. A CameraFRAUD volunteer witnessed and recorded the incident.

 The white Chevrolet Uplander was observed exceeding the posted speed limit on the US-60 and failing to signal a right-hand turn onto north Stapley Dr.

CameraFRAUD Tyranny Response Unit issues "Notice of Violation" to American Traffic Solutions
CameraFRAUD has collected details about the “tali-van” scofflaw, and in a twist of roles, will issue a “Notice of Violation” to American Traffic Solutions on Monday.

Read more: ATS: ABOVE THE STATUTES! Camerafraud Humor!