Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CA: Red-light cameras paying off for Gardena
The Daily Breeze ^ | 8/1/05 | Eddie North-Hager

Posted on 08/01/2005 10:00:38 AM PDT by BurbankKarl

Some nights as Chuck Kesterson watches TV, it seems like there's a neon sign flashing "Eat at Joe's" outside his second-story apartment window.

But he doesn't get irritated, he smiles only because he knows the flashing is just the newest member of the Gardena Police Department doing its job.

Just a few feet from his backyard fence sits a 15-foot-high camera that takes a picture and a video every time a driver blows through a red light at Rosecrans and Budlong avenues.

"You used to hear cars gun their engines and trucks honk their horns to let people know they were going to run the light," said the 59-year-old salesman.

Now drivers who might have run the light before slow down or screech to a stop -- or say hello to the candid camera.

A red-light camera issued the first $351 ticket in Gardena on March 11 and, while officials say money has nothing to do with the primary purpose of the system, the city banked about $450,000 in the first four months of operation. Over the next year, the tally should hit $800,000, according to the city's budget.

"I'm more interested in seeing the number of accidents and fatalities that have been eliminated because people are more mindful of not running red lights," Councilman Ron Ikejiri said. "Revenue is secondary."

That may be true. But the money is sorely needed in this city, which is barely making ends meet with a $35 million general fund while facing a $26 million bill for a debt that's due Aug. 31.

Under the city's contract with Redflex Traffic Systems, the equipment will cost the city about $6,000 per month. Redflex also contracts locally with Hawthorne, Inglewood and Culver City, for now the only other South Bay cities with these systems.

It's too early to tell if the lights have had an effect on accident rates. But about 33 percent of traffic fatalities in Gardena resulted from red-light violations in previous years. And according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, photo enforcement programs have reduced red-light violations by about 40 percent and reduced injury crashes by about 25 percent.

The city now has five intersections covered, each one coming online about a month after the other.

About 2,144 tickets have been mailed.

In the same period, Gardena officers wrote a total of 450 citations, for everything from broken tail lights to red-light violations.

The sixth and last red-light camera was activated July 20 and after a 30-day grace period will start issuing tickets Aug. 19.

The system is activated when a vehicle trips sensors in the road about 8 feet before the intersection begins.

And the cameras are activated if the car is going too fast to stop for the red light, said police assistant Yecenia Correa, who reviews the videos and photos before tickets are sent to violators.

A camera will record video for about six seconds, in addition to taking photos.

"If you're in the crosswalk, we'll reject it," Correa said.

Already 25 percent of the photo tickets are rejected, said Sgt. Thomas Kang, the program's supervisor. He said the city's policy is to give citizens the benefit of the doubt.

Redflex downloads to Gardena police computers the video and four photos that show the driver's face, the vehicle license plate, the position of the vehicle and the color of the light. Images will be accessible online at the Police Department for alleged violators to review.

"This is a great deterrent and it frees us up to do other things," said motorcycle officer Victor Gomez, who works with the program.

While some see the cameras as obtrusive and worry about Big Brother's expanding presence, Kesterson is ready to take the next step. He wants the cameras to catch speeders.

They already have that capability, Kang said. "As soon as they allow it in California," Kang said, "we will work to use them here."


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: donutwatch; photoradar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-71 next last

1 posted on 08/01/2005 10:00:40 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

From experience I know you have to witness someone driving to cite them. How does this law get enforced if the picture is only of the car and the driver cannot be seen. Most times I am sure the driver can be identified through interviews and paper trails but if you claimed the car was stolen or you lended it out...


2 posted on 08/01/2005 10:04:31 AM PDT by One Proud Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: One Proud Dad

Not in CA you dont!

These newer cameras are really clear....and this system has video too. They just match your picture to your DMV photo if you decide to fight it.


3 posted on 08/01/2005 10:06:08 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
Here's an interesting link to help those of you who are victims. Cameras don't capture all the events going on and stopping at a red light is not an absolute law if there are other circumstances.

http://www.helpigotaticket.com/stra/redlight.html

4 posted on 08/01/2005 10:06:42 AM PDT by 11th_VA (Thanks CAFTA - I'm voting 3rd Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

What if the picture is unclear or glare is in it? I just wonder because in Texas we cite the person not the vehicle and it must be proved that you ( the suspect ) was driving at the time.

Analogy, police chase car. Car stops. Person flees into mall with hundreds of persons. Police cannot ID driver. Some time later owner arrives to claim car. Said he was called to come get it. Can you legally cite the owner? I think not.


5 posted on 08/01/2005 10:11:30 AM PDT by One Proud Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: One Proud Dad

I wonder if this system would stand if it went to an appellate court.


6 posted on 08/01/2005 10:12:31 AM PDT by One Proud Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: One Proud Dad
From experience I know you have to witness someone driving to cite them.

Cool, so if you commit a crime and there are no witnesses, you get off scot-free?

You don't need to witness a violation, you simply need to prove a violation... beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal matters, by a preponderance of the evidence for civil matters. To prove the violation, you need evidence. Eyewitness testimony is one form of evidence, but not the only form.

How does this law get enforced if the picture is only of the car and the driver cannot be seen.

According to the story, these particular cameras can get a shot of the driver.

Most times I am sure the driver can be identified through interviews and paper trails but if you claimed the car was stolen or you lended it out...

Oh, that'd be just bloody brilliant. You realize that to claim such a thing, you'd have to testify about it under oath, and you'd thus be committing perjury? The penalty for which is a heck of a lot higher than that for a moving violation? I can just see the cross-examination now:

"So it's your testimony that at the time of the incident, the vehicle was stolen? Did you report it to the police? Why not? Where were you at the time of the alleged offense, if not in your vehicle? Did anybody see you there? Has the vehicle been recovered? It has? What good luck for you! When did you get the vehicle back? How did you get it back? Did the thieves just have a sense of remorse and return it to you? Did you report that to the police? How long was the vehicle stolen? Oh, just long enough for the thieves to run a red light, and that's it? What a coincidence! Did you tell anybody that your car was stolen? Are those people available to testify under oath that you told them that your car was stolen?" And so on, and so forth. Sheesh.

I support this. It's a cheap way to enforce the law, and it's devoid of human frailties such as prejudice or nepotism. If the citizens don't like this method of enforcing the law, they can change either the method or the law.

7 posted on 08/01/2005 10:12:37 AM PDT by Politicalities (http://www.politicalities.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

Just curious for those who get these tickets, does the owner of the vehicle have these tickets added to his driving record, even if he was not the one driving? I can understand making him liable for the speeding ticket as the owner of the car, because he can always go and get the money from the guilty culprit. But to add these tickets to his driving record, I don't agree with that, if it is done. Does anyone know?


8 posted on 08/01/2005 10:16:44 AM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
We all hate red-light runners. However, these bringers of "safety" are not generally implemented that way.

First, studies have shown that accidents can be reduced by 50% by engineering improvements (timing the yellow properly, ensuring signal visibility meets modern standards).

Second, this creates a perverse incentive for the government to WORSEN safety, and to CAUSE more red-light running (that revenue can be addictive). It makes it "expensive" for a city to improve signal engineering, because revenue will drop. This has occurred in Oregon, where certain signals with the cameras were found to have unjustifiably shortened yellow durations.

Whatever happened to putting a cop on a motorcycle at an intersection with red-light running problems? (I know, they are all out enforcing unjustifiably low speed limits on the safest stretches of highway.)
9 posted on 08/01/2005 10:17:41 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities

He would be really mad if I told him about PlateScan....and most people in LA dont even know its out there yet!


10 posted on 08/01/2005 10:19:23 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
First, studies have shown that accidents can be reduced by 50% by engineering improvements (timing the yellow properly, ensuring signal visibility meets modern standards). Second, this creates a perverse incentive for the government to WORSEN safety, and to CAUSE more red-light running (that revenue can be addictive).

Then change the law. As long as the law says what it says, it should be enforced, and as long as it's enforced, it should be enforced as cheaply and effectively as possible.

Whatever happened to putting a cop on a motorcycle at an intersection with red-light running problems?

Last I heard, the law regarding compliance with traffic signals said nothing about enforcement only at "problem intersections". And a camera is a heck of a lot cheaper than a motorcycle cop, and a lot less likely to let family, friends, and cute women off with a warning.

11 posted on 08/01/2005 10:21:47 AM PDT by Politicalities (http://www.politicalities.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities

http://www.redflex.com.au/traffic/pdfs/RedflexSpeed2V2.pdf

Check out this van they have to park in school zones....haha...this would make a fortune in my neighborhood....and a lot less kids would get creamed


12 posted on 08/01/2005 10:24:32 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities
and a lot less likely to let family, friends, and cute women off with a warning.

Those same people will get their ticket taken care of by the corrupt cops.

13 posted on 08/01/2005 10:25:08 AM PDT by Living Free in NH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
"...Councilman Ron Ikejiri said. "Revenue is secondary."

That may be true. But the money is sorely needed in this city,....facing a $26 million bill for a debt that's due Aug. 31.

Exactly. The City of Gardena is facing a $36M balloon payment due on a city council approved bogus business deal. Oh, it's the money all right.

14 posted on 08/01/2005 10:25:38 AM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities

I was a State Trooper for 4 years and worked undercover narc for 8. About half of the perps lied under oath it was not them I bought from. When I did traffic I had several sit there and say straight faced it wasn't them but their brother or sister had their drivers license and seeing as the case comes to court several months ( and sevarl hundred violators ) after the infraction if they have a lawyer or the judge is a nut you have to be asked can you verify it is the same person and the show begins.

I can see you have not had much experience with the lower parts of society. They lie just to lie.

As for witness it is common in Texas if the officer cannot witness or prove you were driving he cannot cite you. I also have experience with this trying to arrest DWI suspects that wrecked a car and left the scene before anyone arrived.

I guess the left coast does it different.


15 posted on 08/01/2005 10:25:45 AM PDT by One Proud Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities

"change the law"

Except that in cases where the revenue generated is significant, it doesn't matter if you have the whole town voting against it. The town government won't let go of a revenue source.

"...a camera is a heck of a lot cheaper than a motorcycle cop, and a lot less likely to let family, friends, and cute women off with a warning"


And a lot less likely to be able to make spot judgements on whether the violation was unavoidable, and much more likely to be "engineered" by the town to increase income through shortening the yellow light, or ticketing even marginal violations.

Traffic enforcement is one of the easiest ways to bring in added revenue when it is wanted, and towns will jigger the system to keep it flowing as long as they can.


16 posted on 08/01/2005 10:27:56 AM PDT by Little Pig (Is it time for "Cowboys and Muslims" yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
And according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, photo enforcement programs have reduced red-light violations by about 40 percent and reduced injury crashes by about 25 percent.

This is an interesting way to phrase this! Why not say that red-light violations have dropped along with the number of accidents at red lights? Why pick accidents with injuries to highlight? Could it be that several studies have shown that accident rates at red lights with cameras have actually gone up, with most of the increase being in rear-end collisions (as people slam on the brakes to avoid any chance of running the light)? So we just pick the benefits, and ignore any possible negatives, eh?

Typical reporting, really. Anything that funds government is good to these people...

17 posted on 08/01/2005 10:29:25 AM PDT by Charles H. (The_r0nin) (Still teaching... or a reasonable facsimile thereof...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 11th_VA

http://hadenoughyet.com/

Red Light Cameras are a SCAM ! ! !


18 posted on 08/01/2005 10:33:29 AM PDT by Jimbaugh (They will not get away with this. Developing . . . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: One Proud Dad

In LA....if you are caught street racing, you lose your car.....confiscated...and sold upon conviction.


19 posted on 08/01/2005 10:33:40 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: elbucko; BurbankKarl
And it is, {Gardena's budget] by all accounts, quite a mess, dating to two programs begun in 1993 -- a city-backed insurance company and a first-time home-buyers program. Both failed and left Gardena a $26 million bill that had to be paid in December 2004.

The reason that the City of Gardena, CA, is in serious debt to the tune of $36M. Traffic safety is commendable, but good government is a pre-requisite.

20 posted on 08/01/2005 10:35:06 AM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-71 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson