Posted on 09/01/2006 8:58:53 AM PDT by Snickering Hound
As red-light enforcement cameras start taking money shots at 10 city intersections today, police are warning that it's illegal to try and thwart the technology.
Starting today, owners of vehicles the cameras catch running red lights will receive $75 civil fines. The cameras photograph rear license plates, and citations are mailed to registered vehicle owners.
Officials are cautioning drivers not to use clear sprays and license-plate covers advertised as preventing cameras from taking readable images of plate numbers.
"It's against the law," said Executive Assistant Chief of Police Martha Montalvo, who oversees the camera program.
Most of the stealth products create a glossy covering that sellers say causes a glare when hit by the camera's flash.
Pennsylvania-based Phantom Plate Inc. and other manufacturers of the products have gained business as more cities adopt camera technology for traffic enforcement. Phantom Plate's most popular product, PhotoBlocker Spray, and other items are sold mainly on the Internet.
Phantom Plate has seen an increase in sales in Houston and Texas recently, said company spokesman Joe Scott.
As in many other states, Texas makes it a misdemeanor to obscure a license plate, including use of "a coating, covering or protective material that distorts angular visibility or detectability." Another state law makes it a felony to alter a government document or impair its legibility.
Scott acknowledged that Phantom Plate's PhotoShield clear license-plate covers are illegal in Texas. But state law does not prohibit sprays, such as PhotoBlocker, that are invisible to the naked eye and only affect photos, he said.
New York and Illinois passed laws in recent years against PhotoBlocker Spray, Scott said. An attorney in Houston's legal department said the city has no plans for such an ordinance.
American Traffic Solutions Inc., the company that runs the camera system in Houston, says most such products aren't effective — including PhotoBlocker Spray, which sells for $29.99.
"It's a waste of money. Just stop on red," said Jim Tuton, CEO of Phoenix-based ATS, which also has camera-enforcement projects in Seattle, New York and Philadelphia.
Scott said his company does not condone red-light violators but wants to protect them from overzealous prosecution. Like other opponents of red-light cameras, he says the program is simply a way for the city and vendor to make money.
Houston's $75 fine is low compared with some other cities that use the technology, Tuton said.
Violators have 45 days after the ticket is issued to pay the fine or request a hearing. Violators who do neither will receive a final warning before a collection agency attempts to collect the debt. The city has no mechanism for penalizing violators who don't pay the fine.
Police can still write tickets — misdemeanor criminal citations that carry fines up to $200.
The City Council approved Houston's camera project in 2004, but it was delayed by debate in the state Legislature last year over whether to ban red-light cameras. This year, it was stalled at City Hall for months by rejected contractors who said the vendor-selection process was unfair.
So far, cameras have been installed at 10 intersections, but the goal is to use them at 50 sites. Police are expected to announce the next 10 locations sometime this month.
The list likely will include several intersections that belong to the Texas Department of Transportation. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott recently told the city it's legal to install cameras on TxDOT roads.
City officials project that the program will bring in $6.7 million for the fiscal year ending next June 30.
Of that, about $2.4 million will go to ATS. It also will receive a processing fee for each citation if the number of violators caught daily by each camera exceeds 25. But the per-camera payment is capped at $5,000 a month, to blunt criticism that a per-citation payment structure gives companies incentive to design systems that catch many violators.
Most of the rest of the revenue will go to police overtime necessary because of the department's manpower shortage, said Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt. About $100,000 will help fund driver education for high school students.
Hurtt expects the program to reduce the number of drivers who run red lights and reduce the number of fatalities and injuries at intersections.
But critics of red-light cameras say the technology causes an increase in rear-end collisions because drivers hit the brakes to avoid a ticket when approaching a yellow light.
"It's going to make the streets more dangerous while taking people's money," said Greg Mauz of the Texas chapter of the National Motorists Association.
The city plans to monitor crash data at cameras sites, Hurtt said.
A 2005 study by the Federal Highway Administration showed that in seven communities where red-light cameras were used, right-angle crashes decreased 24 percent while rear-end crashes increased 15 percent. Right-angle crashes, or T-bone collisions, usually are more severe.
> What about increaseing the yellow light by a second or two. If the city was REALLY concerned about accidents, wounldn't that work?
No, it would NOT work. There have been many studies on this. Increasing the yellow time does increase safety for a short period of time, but within 6 months or so, people learn the limits of the new timing and safety drops to where it was before.
So, you end up with more yellow time (which means less green time) with no increase in safety.
Must have read Orlando's tax plan
This seems like a real subtle but important point:
THIS tells me that it's not a misdemeanor, it's more like a parking ticket, and they aren't going to issue warrants to violators.
Ergo: ignore at will.
(I've gotten notices from collection agencies over a Dallas parking ticket: at last I got one that said "Final notice," and I finally replied: "Thank heavens: I'm awfully tired of hearing from you!")
We have a right to run Red Lights. I think its in the Constitution somewhere.
LOL, I don't know about that.
I ran one last week and it scared the bejeebers out of me. I hate to run red lights.
If they truly wanted safety, they'd extend the yellow light time.
I don't believe anything this clown says. Stopping on red would bankrupt his company quickly. The real waste of money is the city's 'investment' in cameras.
Seems like putting a delay between red light on & green light on in crossing direction would do more to cut down on accidents.
If they truly wanted safety, they'd extend the yellow light time.
A year or two ago there was a law passed outlawing polarized license plate covers. Coincidence? I don't think so.
Let the cameras break naturally....
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.