Print Page | Close Window

Traffic Light Cameras

Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Middletown Community
Forum Name: Middletown News, Info and Happenings
Forum Description: Discuss any Middletown Ohio area news story.
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=476
Printed Date: May 31 2024 at 7:32pm


Topic: Traffic Light Cameras
Posted By: VietVet
Subject: Traffic Light Cameras
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 7:16am
Journal- July 22 story- just an observation here- the story states that the city is having problems with the current company managing the red light cameras. Ms. Gilleland mentions the safety advantage to the cameras. There are several references to the revenue aspect of this program, including Russ Carolus's comment that revenue is down significantly for this year and that they are not getting revenue from one of the cameras that has been out since February. Seems to be more of a concentration on the REVENUE in this story than on the SAFETY. The program was pitched with SAFETY in mind but I think we're getting the "hint" of what the true purpose was and they're verifying that by bringing up the revenue drop. This city- always in your wallet!



Replies:
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 8:02am
Vet the cameras have always been about the Cha...Ching.  $$$$$$$$.  At least in Hamilton they were upfront about it being about revenue.  JMHO.


Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 8:54am
I had involvement in this concept early on through the Citizens' Advisory Board to the Police Dept. It was all well-explained by then Chief Becker and Majors Bruck,Hoffman and Schwarber.
 
I was very skeptical due to the Big Brother aspects, small % of "fees" collected. and accuracy/fairness of the citations and appeal process.
 
After learning obout it and watching it in action(AND getting a citation!), I see this activity as a good thing as long as the current maintenence issues are resolved to full satisfaction.
 
A LOT of citations were issued initially, which tells you how dangerous our key intersections had become. Well--citations are now down, mainly due to people stopping at red lights(a good thing). Also, serious accidents at these intersections have also been reduced(another good thing). Violators have been accurately cited without the need for police manpower, which is more needed elsewhere at this time.
 
I have been converted to a supporter of this concept, and really don't see many negatives over the course of the cameras program's operation.
Can someone explain why they would be against this program?


Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 9:12am

I'd be interested in the accident stats at these intersections.  I have see multiple major accidents at at least 3 of these intersections since the cameras have gone in.  Also personally I don't believe in issuing a ticket to a person who is not even  driving the vehicle.  The vehicle did not go thru the intersection by itself when the light was red, the person I lent my car to did.  I know all of the Court rulings and etc.  I just personally don't believe in it.  I think most Cities use these cameras as added revenue.

And no I have not gotten a ticket from any of these cameras.  I avoid the intersections as much as possible, seen to many people do crazy stuff in fear of the cameras.
 


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 10:01am
Spider- I'm not a big fan of government intrusion in one's life. Haven't been since the 60's. The seat belt law, which dictates how one is to ride in their vehicle, is another intrusion into one's personal life. I view this red light camera program as another government intrusion also. The difference- seat belt wearing affects me only as to safety. The red light cameras affect other people. Yet, it is still "Big Brother" watching over your shoulder and with the reputation of ineptness that all government levels have, who could respect them?


Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 12:49pm
PACMAN--I think that you will find that we now have fewer and less serious accidents at the monitored intersections. And we would be trading mostly rear-enders for head-ons and
t-bones. Probably safer to see fewer aciidents caused by drivers trying to stop as required as opposed to drivers running lights into a busy intersection.
 
The citations clearly go to the owners of the violating vehicles. Said owners can sort out who was the driver, and monitor usage accordingly. As with insurance, you are liable to a large degree for whomever is driving your vehicles.
 
Vet--seat belts or red light cameras, both personal restrictions. Both are meant to lead to safer driving practices and less serious injury due to auto crashes. Any "ineptness" here is primarily on the part of the violating driver, and seldom with govt. These two safety measures are hardly anything to fight or get worked up about.
 
Common safety concerns.
Drive safely and according to regulations, and you have no issues here.


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 1:49pm
Spider- I have no intention of "fighting" over these issues. In the end, the "safety patrol people" that are promoting these programs are too influential. Can't beat government people and their little followers , no matter how intrusive they become in one's life. I didn't ask the people who developed the seat belt law for their opinion as it relates to my safety choice in my own vehicle, that's all.It's none of their business what I do, safety wise, in my own car or truck AS IT RELATES TO SEATBELTS.. Drinking in my car,running a red light- that's another story.Not anything to get worked up over, except that it is just one more step for government to control certain freedoms that people once had. Where do we draw the line for gov. invasion and what will we do when we've had enough?


Posted By: arwendt
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 3:00pm

The safety factor will sell it to the public. The income will make it irresistible for the government.

This somehow reminds me of a new Blog I started last week called http://wordsoffreedom.wordpress.com/ - Words of Freedom .
 
 


Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 22 2008 at 7:49pm
Regarding the red light cameras:  I've changed my habits.  (You wouldn't believe the number of squealing brakes, honking horns, and expletives I heard while driving around in Atlanta over the weekend!)
 
Regarding seat belts:  I refused to wear them for years.  Now I don't move my car, even a few feet, without buckling up.  Had I been wearing a seat belt 10 years ago, I might still be able to walk today...and I'd still have my career as a migrant tomato picker.


Posted By: Bwood
Date Posted: Jul 23 2008 at 10:46am
If you want to know which intersections in Middletown have the red light cameras, just look for the skid marks.


Posted By: arwendt
Date Posted: Jul 23 2008 at 10:51am

My wife thinks those tiny cams on the top of the pole arms are red light cams. It took months to convince her otherwise.



Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 23 2008 at 11:45am
Hey arwendt, when I first moved here I thought they were cameras also and that the City was monitoring them.  I didn't know for months that they weren't.  Never lived anywhere where the loop wasn't in the the roadway.Confused


Posted By: tkunkle
Date Posted: Jul 24 2008 at 8:57am

The red light cameras are better to have in bigger cities like Middletown but I think in small towns like where I live that they shouldn't be used because it is not as busy and crowded as a city like Middletown.



Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 24 2008 at 9:11am
Middletown Crowded you have to be kidding.LOL


Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Jul 24 2008 at 10:28am
I don't like the red light cameras, but I don't like people who go through red lights even more.
 
So, red light cameras seem to be a solution to the problem.


-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page



Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Mar 26 2009 at 7:32am
Journal article announcing the return of the red light cameras, but in different locations. I don't travel the streets named as the new locations for the cameras. Seems the cameras at the old locations have done the trick! Because our city installed cameras, we can now be assured that we are driving safer at the Briele/Roosevelt intersection and other locations around town, that is, until the people figure out that the cameras are no longer at the old locations. Having four or five cameras and playing the relocation game with them- exactly what does that accomplish in a city of 51,000? (other than to obtain additional revenue, of course)When the folks have figured out that you have moved the trap, they'll start the same activity in the former location of that trap. Aren't we just moving the problem around as we move the cameras? Is it really worth concentrating on this program when we have so many other "city health" issues to tend to???


Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Mar 26 2009 at 7:53am
Just follow the money Vet. Fewer Tickets written, Decreased revenues.  Decreased revenues means time to move the cameras.  Give it 3 years and revenues will decrease again and they will  move them all over again. 
 
"However, the city became dissatisfied with the company's service since 2007, and had seen a decrease of tickets and revenues as well as one camera that was inoperable for months.

City officials decided in 2008 to re-bid the contract and Traffipax opted not to submit a bid for the new contract.

In 2006, the city's share of the revenues amounted to $142,250, according to Finance Director Russ Carolus. He said the revenues dropped to $107,518 in 2007. Revenues dropped to $55,800 in 2008."



-------------
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

Thomas Jefferson


Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Mar 26 2009 at 8:08am

Mike
It is because I DIDN'T have a seat belt on that I’m alive today. A guy ran a red light and hit me on the driver side door going 65 mph. Needless to say he planted his car into mine. If I had been in a seat belt I would have been crushed.



Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Mar 26 2009 at 9:07am
Vivian I had the same thing happen to me back in the 80's.  Car ran a red light going about 60 slammed into my drivers door.  I heard the brakes and was able to move just enough into the front passenger seat to not become his hood ornament.  Seat Belt on I would not have had the time to undo it.

-------------
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

Thomas Jefferson


Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Mar 27 2009 at 1:54pm

MARCH 27, 2009

Get the Feeling You're Being Watched? If You're Driving, You Just Might Be

Cameras to Catch Speeders and Scofflaws Are Spreading -- And Sparking Road Rage

  • http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123811365190053401.html?mod=yhoofront#articleTabs=article - Article
  • http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123811365190053401.html?mod=yhoofront#articleTabs_video - Video
  • http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123811365190053401.html?mod=yhoofront#articleTabs_comments - Comments (110)
more in http://online.wsj.com/public/page/news-world-business.html - US »

By http://online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=WILLIAM+M.+BULKELEY&ARTICLESEARCHQUERY_PARSER=bylineAND - WILLIAM M. BULKELEY

The village of Schaumburg, Ill., installed a camera at Woodfield Mall last November to film cars that were running red lights, then used the footage to issue citations. Results were astonishing. The town issued $1 million in fines in just three months.

But drivers caught by the unforgiving enforcement -- which mainly snared those who didn't come to a full stop before turning right on red -- exploded in anger. Many vowed to stop shopping at the mall unless the camera was turned off. The village stopped monitoring right turns at the intersection in January.

Once a rarity, traffic cameras are filming away across the country. And they're not just focusing their sights on red-light runners. The latest technology includes cameras that keep tabs on highways to catch speeders in the act and infrared license-plate readers that nab ticket and tax scofflaws.

Drivers -- many accusing law enforcement of using spy tactics to trap unsuspecting citizens -- are fighting back with everything from pick axes to camera-blocking Santa Clauses. They're moving beyond radar detectors and CB radios to wage their own tech war against detection, using sprays that promise to blur license numbers and Web sites that plot the cameras' locations and offer tips to beat them.

Cities and states say the devices can improve safety. They also have the added bonus of bringing in revenue in tight times. But critics point to research showing cameras can actually lead to more rear-end accidents because drivers often slam their brakes when they see signs warning them of cameras in the area. Others are angry that the cameras are operated by for-profit companies that typically make around $5,000 per camera each month.

"We're putting law enforcement in the hands of third parties," says Ryan Denke, a Peoria, Ariz., electrical engineer who has started a Web site, Photoradarscam.com, to protest the state's speed cameras. Mr. Denke says he hasn't received a ticket via the cameras.

%5bred-light%20cameras%20phoenix%5d

Protests over the cameras aren't new, but they appear to be rising in tandem with the effort to install more. Suppliers estimate that there are now slightly over 3,000 red-light and speed cameras in operation in the U.S., up from about 2,500 a year ago. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says that at the end of last year, 345 U.S. jurisdictions were using red-light cameras, up from 243 in 2007 and 155 in 2006.

One traffic-cam seller, Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions Inc., recently reported it had installed its 1,000th camera, with 500 more under contract in 140 cities and towns. Rival Redflex Holdings Ltd. says it had 1,494 cameras in operation in 21 states at the end of 2008, and expects to top 1,700 by the end of this year.

Municipalities are establishing ever-more-clever snares. Last month, in a push to collect overdue taxes, the City Council in New Britain, Conn., approved the purchase of a $17,000 infrared-camera called "Plate Hunter." Mounted on a police car, the device automatically reads the license plates of every passing car and alerts the officer if the owner has failed to pay traffic tickets or is delinquent on car taxes. Police can then pull the cars over and impound them.

New Britain was inspired by nearby New Haven, where four of the cameras brought in $2.8 million in just three months last year. New Haven has also put license-plate readers on tow trucks. They now roam the streets searching for cars owned by people who haven't paid their parking tickets or car-property taxes. Last year 91% of the city's vehicle taxes were collected, up from "the upper 70s" before it acquired the technology, says city tax collector C.J. Cuticello.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123811365190053401.html?mod=yhoofront#">video 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123811365190053401.html?mod=yhoofront# - 'Smart Intersections' Coming to a Street Near You

3:16

WSJ's Stacey Delo explores efforts to develop "smart intersections" which advocates hope can create a better informed driver and safer roads.

Not that it's been smooth sailing. Mr. Cuticello recalls the time he tried to help tow the car of a woman who owed $536. She knocked him over, jumped in the car and drove away. She was later arrested for a hit-and-run.

City leaders have generally maintained that while revenue is a welcome byproduct of traffic citations, the laws are in place to improve public safety or reduce accidents.

But a study in last month's Journal of Law and Economics concluded that, as many motorists have long suspected, "governments use traffic tickets as a means of generating revenue." The authors, Thomas Garrett of the St. Louis Fed and Gary Wagner of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, studied 14 years of traffic-ticket data from 96 counties in North Carolina. They found that when local-government revenue declines, police issue more tickets in the following year. Officials at the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police didn't respond to requests for comment.

George Dunham, a village trustee in Schaumburg, says installing the red-light camera at the mall "wasn't about the revenue -- no one will believe that, but it wasn't." On the other hand, he says, with fuel taxes and sales taxes falling, its retreat on the camera has had a "painful" impact on Schaumburg's $170 million budget.

Cameras to catch speeders on highways, which are common in Europe, are just starting to spread in the U.S. Last June, Arizona added a provision for speed cams on highways to its budget bill, with an anticipated $90 million in fines expected to help balance the budget.

State police started placing the cameras on highways around Phoenix in November. In December, a trooper arrested a man in Glendale while he was attacking a camera with a pick ax. In another incident, a troupe of men dressed as Santa Claus toured around the city of Tempe in December and placed gaily wrapped boxes over several traffic cameras, blocking their views. Their exploits have been viewed more than 222,000 times on YouTube.

Republican state representative Sam Crump has introduced a bill in the legislature to remove the cameras, which he says were approved "in the dead of night...as a budget gimmick."

In the meantime, the cameras are still being rolled out, and have already issued more than 200,000 violation notices since September. They are set to take a picture of cars going more than 11 miles over the speed limit, and they also photograph the driver.

Some entrepreneurs are trying to help camera opponents fight back. Phantom Plate Inc., a Harrisburg, Pa., company, sells Photoblocker spray at $29.99 a can and Photoshield, a plastic skin for a license plate. Both promise to reflect a traffic-camera flash, making the license plate unreadable. California passed a law banning use of the spray and the plate covers, which became effective at the beginning of this year.

A free iPhone application available on Trapster.com lets drivers use their cellphones to mark a traffic cam or speed trap on a Google map. The information on new locales is sent to Trapster's central computer, and then added to the map.

Other anti-cam Web sites counsel people to examine the pictures that come in the mail with citations. If the facial image is too blurry, they say, drivers can often argue successfully in court that no positive identification has been made of them.

Studies are mixed on whether traffic cameras improve safety. Some research indicates they may increase rear-end collisions as drivers slam on their brakes when they see posted camera notices. A 2005 Federal Highway Administration study of six cities' red-light cameras concluded there was a "modest" economic benefit because a reduction in side crashes due to less red-light running offset the higher costs of more rear-end crashes.

A study of crash causes released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration last July found about 5% of crashes were due to traveling too fast and 2% were from running red lights. Driving off the side of the road, falling asleep at the wheel and crossing the center lines were the biggest causes identified.

Write to William M. Bulkeley at mailto:bill.bulkeley@wsj.com - bill.bulkeley@wsj.com



-------------
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

Thomas Jefferson


Posted By: dkauffman
Date Posted: Apr 01 2009 at 5:14pm
Regarding red light cameras.
Whenever I had the idea that the government was going to use cameras, I had envisioned cameras placed in areas where there was high crime! real crime! crime with victims, not cameras placed at intersections of traffic where they have no intention of helping with traffic flow or to help investigate accidents, but only the sole purpose of fining people for victimless acts. This city has has sold  out its citizens once again for the almighty dollar. It has been clearly established
that these red light cameras do not significantly reduce accidents but in some cases, actually increase rear end collisions!I am all for outlawing red light cameras, because they serve no useful purpose other than aggravate individual law abiding motorists. I think the city may be more useful with the red light district, not red light cameras!



Posted By: scrapmonkey
Date Posted: Apr 08 2009 at 12:55am
Instead of all the wasted money on red light cameras lets put up some on street corners and monitor drug dealers. Percentage wise I'm betting there are more drug deals on the corner than there are cars running red lights.

-------------
scrapmonkey

"Civilization begins with order,grows with liberty,and dies with chaos"~Will Duran


Posted By: Truth Teller
Date Posted: Apr 08 2009 at 3:05am

In view of last night's projection that there may be a budget deficit of $750,000+ in 2009, the all-knowing City Manager will likely become even more fixated on imposing other revenue generating measures besides renewed red light camera and expanded housing code violation fines.  Our fair City is on the verge of becoming the "punitive capitol" of Ohio!

The truth will set the captives free!


Posted By: Wots
Date Posted: Apr 10 2009 at 11:26pm
Red light cameras used just for “safety”??  I don’t think so. I've been out of Middletown for a few years now, living in Chicago, where we were told that we were getting a few of these cameras for “safety” That was there selling point. Now we have more then 140 of them (and adding). The city has dropped there pretense of installing them for "safety" and now openly admit that they are a big money maker. Every time I come up to one of these camera intersections I don't know if I should floor it or slam on the breaks. ($100 fine)  So much for "safety" I have seen more then my share of close calls.  Don't yea all feel that the government is getting far to intrusive yet?

-------------
Wots
Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers.


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Apr 23 2009 at 7:32am
Courtney Combs is introducing red light camera legislation. Problem is, it doesn't apply to cities like Middletown. What good is it? Doesn't eliminate our problem with the cameras here in town. Big Brother is still in control here.



Print Page | Close Window