The toughest thing about putting this diary together has been coming up with a title. I could have named it "implications of red light cameras", or "do you have a spare $350?", or "have you heard about Redflex?", or, as one Web site has, "highway robbery".
Some of you may have received citations generated by automated traffic enforcement devices, either red light cameras or photo radar units. I didn't start looking into the situation until I received such a citation last fall. Because I didn't have a spare $350 at the time, I decided to "fight the ticket".
My research opened my eyes, and I'm going to relay some of my findings below the fold. To begin with, let me ask you whether you realize that an Australian defense contractor is taking slices out of red light and speeding fines in a number of states and whether you know that the annual reports for that corporation predict that its revenues from such for-profit traffic enforcement will grow to BILLIONS of dollars.
What's wrong with citing people for traffic violations?
Nothing. But why should American cities and states contract with an Australian corporation to install red light cameras and photo radar units under terms which award that equipment supplier percentages of every fine imposed for those traffic citations?
What's wrong with sharing traffic fines with for-profit corporations?
A number of things. In California, there are minimum standards for the lengths of yellow light phases before traffic signals turn red. Those standards provide for slightly longer times when the speed limits for the streets are higher. I received a citation for entering an intersection late on a left turn signal, but, when I prepared for my court appearance to defend against the citation, I discovered that the yellow light had been set below the minimum time. When a for-profit corporation participates in siting red light cameras and photo radar units, that corporation has a strong incentive to trap motorists (and thus maximize its profits) by doing such things as shortening yellow light phases and selecting locations such as downhill grades.
At one point, the Redflex Holdings Limited annual report states that "...the USA enforcement industry remains in its commercial infancy and the potential growth that is expected in red light enforcement and, increasingly, speed limit compliance is IMMENSE." [emphasis added]
My experience turned out well, in that I was found not guilty. Of course, I had to spend time preparing my defense. I didn't win on the ground that the left turn yellow light phase had been set below the minimum, because the judge granted my motion to dismiss the citation for having been processed by an employee of Redflex Traffic Systems (the USA subsidiary of Redflex Holdings Limited) instead of by Ventura Police Department personnel--the confidentiality requirement for automated traffic enforcement had been violated.
Although I was aware of their existence in some cities, I was surprised to learn how widely red light cameras had been installed in California. I was shocked to read in the annual reports for Redflex Holdings Limited that its profits have exploded and that they are forecast to reach BILLIONS of dollars from operations in the USA.
Here is a link to the annual reports page on the Redflex site:
http://www.redflex.com.au/... .
Here is a link to a site which questions and opposes red light cameras:
http://www.highwayrobbery.net/... .