I’m wondering if the ground is beginning to crumble beneath Rochester’s red-light camera program. It’s not like Rochesterians were ever thrilled about the idea to install up to 50 cameras citywide to catch red-light runners, and recently the program has suffered a few knocks.
First was the revelation that because of union contracts, city employees caught running red lights don’t have to pay the $50 fine. They may be disciplined in another way, but the how, what, and when are unknown because the city doesn’t make that information public.
- FILE PHOTO
- James Sheppard
Second was the alleged bribery scandal involving Redflex, which cost the camera vendor its Chicago contract and forced out some top Redflex executives. The fallout from that scandal continues. Redflex is Rochester’s camera vendor, too.
The most recent eyebrow-raiser is the admission that yellow lights were cut short at a couple of intersections on the west side of the city. The problem has been blamed on a software glitch, and the city will “halt, review, and potentially cancel hundreds of red light violations” as a result, says the Democrat and Chronicle. (The glitch has been fixed, reports the D&C.)
I asked Rochester Police Chief James Sheppard yesterday whether the cumulative effect of these revelations would be the erosion of the credibility of the camera program. He said the Chicago situation isn’t relevant to Rochester because the contracts are set up differently. And the software glitch occurred on a state road (only one of the affected intersections has a camera), meaning the light is the state’s responsibility — so no one can fairly say the City of Rochester monkeyed with the timing of the light to increase revenues, Sheppard said.
As far as the exemption for city employees goes, Sheppard said any changes would have to be negotiated with the city’s unions. And there should be one policy across the board, he said.
“I know that’s what the city’s trying to accomplish: moving in a direction where no matter where you work, the consequences should be pretty much the same,” Sheppard said.
But Sheppard’s main point is that too many people are looking at the camera program the wrong way.
“If you look at the volume of tickets that are written through the red-light camera [program], that tells you that a whole lot of people are not stopping for lights,” he said. “It sort of pisses me off that we’re caught up in the game of, ‘If we didn’t have the cameras and if the cops don’t catch me, it’s all right.’ That’s how people are viewing this, like it’s a game. And that’s why we have accidents.”
This article appears in Mar 6-12, 2013.
Define deception: ” . . . a whole lot of people are not stopping for lights,” – Its more than a definition of Fairness when the angle of the camera isn’t the ‘Won-by-a-Nose Angle’ and the Red Light has been Red Only for one-tenth of a second after a Yellow Light that lasted for roughly 3 seconds. Its not just the Yellow is too short the Green is Variable and makes driving dangerous. The vast bulk of these Red Light Robo-Tickets aren’t folks that Clearly Ran A Red Light! These Robo-Cam Red-Light contraptions are an Ugly Festering Painful Reminder that Capitalism’s Greed and Corporations have Taken Over our Once Great Country.
I have to side with Sheppard on this one, more or less.
The “less’ is that this current problem would probably have been detected, identified, explained and resolved sooner were the red light cameras and the ticketing process operated by city employees out of the Public Safety Building rather than by some sleazy out-of-town company.
The “more” is the fact that the fines imposed for running red lights are no less legitimate than the fines imposed on speeding tickets, parking tickets or any other traffic violation. Does the city make a few bucks? Of course. Do they make a few bucks on ALL traffic and parking fines? Of course. So do we dispense with these laws or alter the manner in which they are enforced simply because the city makes a few bucks? Of course not. Bottom line. You break the law, you get fined.
Oh yeah, by the way, I’ve been nailed and fined by one of these cameras for running a red light. But apparently I’m the only recipient of such a ticket willing to admit that I was guilty as hell.
One of the problems with the short yellow lights is a traffic engineer explained it to me is the “dilemma zone”. That is the time when you are close enough to the yellow light that you have to decide:
1. Do I have enough time to safely stop without slamming into the windshield
2. Should I just do the yellow light since I can’t meet #1
Those who say, “well they ran the red light” don’t get the “dilemma zone”. If you are driving at or below the speed limit you should have time to stop safely. If the yellow light is shortened that time disappears and as a driver you are now stuck with a real problem.
How many more illicit tickets need to be issued, and how many more tax payers’ dollars must be wasted before Rochester simply dismantles this idiotic program? In LA it was found that because the driver does not sign a promise to appear in court they can simply ignore the ticket without fear of prosecution. LA became so overwhelmed with the backlog of non-paying alleged red light runners that the entire program was ultimately ignored and dismantled by the city officials. Oh, let’s not forget how many millions of dollars LA was expecting to earn ended up costing them millions more in unexpected costs while Redflex did just fine. What a waste there, and here, too. For me my vote will do my talking when it comes to upcoming elections, where the fools who bought into this little sham will not get my nod of approval.
The one issue that no one has talked about is that this idiotic red light camera program gives suburban drivers one more reason to avoid going downtown. The city of Rochester desperately needs suburbanites to spend $ downtown in High Falls and the East End. One or two $50 tickets will make them think twice and could be enough incentive for them to decide to spend their hard-earned money at Tinseltown or the neighborhood bar instead.
Think about that, City Council…
(NOTE: Sarcasm Alert !)
Cicero – If as you posit , these suburbanite drivers are going to stay away from Rochester because so many of them will be receiving tickets for running red lights, then perhaps we city dwellers will be a lot safer if so many poor drivers stay off our streets.
The red light camera$ are $uppo$ed to be for $afety. The obviou$ interpretation i$ that the City of Roche$ter $ee$ it$ citizen$ as nothing more than ATM$.
When I $ee a red light camera inter$ection and I think I might be at ri$sk, I take 1 of 2 action$: either I $lam on the brake$ to avoid the ticket, thu$ ri$king getting rear-ended, or I jam on the ga$ to get through before I get bu$ted.
I, for one, do not feel any $afer with the$e uncon$titutional robocop$, nor with law enforcement being done by private for-profit companie$.
Yugoboy – If as you claim these red light cameras are unconstitutional then some court must have issued a ruling of which I am unaware as only the courts, not you nor I, are qualified to do so. So could you post the link to that decision?
I’ll avoid repeating the obvious fact that the violation of ANY traffic law can result in a fine (or worse) and that Rochester’s use of red light cameras is therefor no more mercenary or unjust than is the enforcement of any law, and instead focus on those two decisions that plague you when you approach a red light with an attendent camera. You say you have to decide either to brake and risk being rear-ended, or stomping on the gas to beat the light. Out of curiosity, how does this differ from the available options in pre-camera days? Surely you’re not implying that you would have violated the law and run a red light in former days because you knew that the chances of being caught were practically nil?
MJN – I know it’s been a month. I didn’t see your response.
First, I recommend spending an hour or two perusing thenewspaper.com, you’ll come away as pissed off at the way government treats its citizen drivers as I am.
Second – Admittedly, until the City of Rochester decides to start enforcing the tickets with more than just strongly worded letters, they aren’t “unconstitutional” in the strictest sense. However, it is still creepy as hell.
Third – Court decisions: Sixth Amendment violation decision: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/37/3714.a…
Due process violations: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/38/3802.a…
Certainly there are cases on the site wherein courts have accepted some red light systems as well, but the execution of these systems, in the main, is a tale of corruption, graft, or otherwise poor judgement due to using private industry to do public safety jobs. From all I’ve heard and read, the city is learning from past mistakes, and the current lack of effective enforcement (requiring people to be fearful enough of a letter with the photo and the police shield to send money is not as effective as a personal stop by a cop) only leads me to believe that it is nothing but a money-grab.
While going through the articles on that website, be sure to pay particular attention to the articles about how cameras actually compromise traffic safety and that there are a whole bunch of other, more cost-effective and less intrusive/less constitutionally questionable methods to increase safety.
Update:
A law suit has been filed in NYS Supreme Court challenging the red light cameras all over Rochester as unconstitutional based on violating the 5th Amendment right to due process.
People should not have to give up their civil liberties to live, work, play or just drive in the city. I am the Plaintiff in the court case. Read more and follow the case through court at:
https://twitter.com/KriegerLaw
Driving is serious business. Traffic laws may not be perfect, but they should always be obeyed. If in the middle of the night, a red light is taking forever to turn green, the driver must patiently wait. The laws exist for a reason. In addition to following the letter of the law exactly, a driver should always be on the lookout for anything out there with even the remote possibility of developing into an unsafe situation and respond accordingly. One thing that puzzles me is why so many people are still running these red lights, even when they know the cameras are there, or at least that there are cameras out there.
I thought about this long and hard, did some driving and tried to figure out some method for going through an intersection safely and with zero chance of running a red light. The conclusion that I arrived at is that this is really hard to do.
Would it be helpful if the yellow light were replaced by a yellow countdown timer light. The extra information would make my decision easier, right? Wrong! I did a Google search and it turns out that this was tried many years ago, with the result that people would speed up trying to beat the light and misjudge the distance to the stop line resulting in more violations.
The fear of getting a ticket from a red-light camera is also something that would cause people to speed up with the result being more violations!
No wonder there are so many tickets and and there is so much money being made!
There aren’t enough police officers to catch all the incredibly stupid and dangerous drivers who try to beat the light. I have come to a stop while the light was still yellow only to have the car behind me go around me and through the intersection.
Because the action of these drivers are so dangerous, I support the use of the red light cameras.
One time I was driving on 390 and a driver cut me off!
Because that action was so dangerous, I support the use of cameras every 30 feet along the expressway as well.
The large number of tickets issued from red-light camera violations confirms that they are effective law enforcement tools for police. The income generated from this program is much appreciated and needed by the police department.
The program is not fair because most government workers don’t have to pay the $50 fine and there are rights violations,etc.
Also, $50 means much more to a poor person than someone who is rich. But, who cares? Life is not fair right?
I want this program to continue to teach, condition, or be a monetary incentive for people to be better drivers. I want less accidents. I want my insurance rates to go down. These red-light cameras are not doing that and the continued high numbers of violators is proof.
Message to the new Mayor: Please scrap the red-light cameras. This unwanted and unjustifiable program is flawed and unfair. It drains money from the local economy and sows the seeds of ill will and mistrust among the population. Rochester becomes viewed as unwelcoming; thus discouraging tourism and visits from suburbanites anxious to spend money.
I do have an issue with these red light cameras because they are not 100% accurate. I recently receive a ticket in the mail for a so called ” failure to stop at a red light violation.”
1):Making a legal right turn after a complete stop at a red light does not constitute you receiving a ticket from the city of Rochester Red light program. In my opinion that an illegal action made by the city and unconstitutional.
It is correct that Rochester’s red-Light program is deeply flawed. City council will probably still vote to continue this super-easy method of revenue generation. The RPD is getting ever more costly to fund; especially pensions.
It would be nice if the cameras were turned off and eventually removed. However, the fiscal realities are such that many think an expansion of this program is justified. The cameras supposedly are keeping us safer, yet the evidence isn’t there. Rear-end accidents have actually increased.
Police have a duty to enforce laws. However, with so much talk about how fees are unfairly burdening the poor, wouldn’t not extending the city’s contract with Redflex be a step in the right direction?
I won’t make a right on red if I know that a red-light camera is watching me. I don’t trust the cameras enough. Even if the car behind me is honking, I still won’t do it. Also, I don’t think I’d even make an exception for an emergency vehicle behind me with sirens and lights going. That’s how much I don’t want a ticket.
red light cameras is is just a way to open the door for invasion of privacy next they will be used to monitor city residents and there will be one on every street every corner this program changes nothing except the city now can get more money from its already poor residents its funny it only affects non city officials just like many other programs
Photo enforcement is a misuse of advanced computer and camera technologies. The privacy issue is a red herring. The real issue is that these red-light cameras are money machines. They will be removed when income stops being generated. It’s too good to be true that a safety benefit can also be a money maker. We really need our federal leaders to wake up and put an end to these abuses.