Photo enforcement cameras are temporarily disabled in Albuquerque, New Mexico after a study by the University of New Mexico failed to offer a complete justification for the program. Mayor Richard J. Berry announced that he would eliminate six of the twenty red light camera intersections where accidents increased the most. He also will stop issuing speed camera citations at intersections — although he plans to keep three vans to set up mobile photo radar traps. While the contract with Redflex Traffic Systems is expired, Berry is seeking a better deal from other photo ticketing vendors.
Albuquerque started the automated enforcement program with a pair of red light cameras in 2004 and gradually expanded to cover both speed and red light tickets at twenty intersections (although three locations were shut down by the state in May). The combination has resulted in the mailing of 527,250 citations, each worth between $100 and $400. Total revenue exceeded $37,931,000 with another $5,676,000 expected in fiscal 2011. Of this amount, Redflex has taken home $15,947,000 with another $3,498,000 expected in 2011.
With that much money at stake, the study, which was funded by the city of Albuquerque, presented automated enforcement as favorable a light as it could. The study measured the number of accidents in thirty-eight camera-free control intersections used for comparison with the twenty photo-enforced intersections. The total number of crashes at the photo enforced intersections increased while camera-free intersections saw a decrease. While injury accidents decreased at the camera intersections, the decrease was much more prominent, 29 percent, at camera-free locations.
The report dismissed the increase in the overall number of crashes by providing an accident cost analysis not based on any examination of the collisions in Albuquerque, but by applying a generic formula designed to downplay the importance of rear end collisions. The report recommended that the city use engineering countermeasures to improve safety. Mayor Berry issued a statement confirming his willingness to do so — including giving drivers longer yellow times.
“I have asked the city’s municipal development director to look at ways to improve these intersections with better traffic engineering, signage, adjustments to the length of yellow lights and enhanced signalization,” Berry said.
A copy of the full study is available in a 2mb PDF file at the source link below.
Source: 
Albuquerque Red Light Camera Study (University of New Mexico, 10/26/2010)
[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]
Mayor Dick Berry is careful not to mention the role slashed green light times play as the setup light to crash+cash grab short yellows.
I’m still amazed that living in Gallup, taking visits to Albuquerque several times a year + the way I drive, I never got ticketed.
Anecodotally, red light cameras increase panic braking and rear-end collisions as a result thereof. Also, a combination of timing lights at intersections so all points have a solid red hold for a brief second will do more to reduce accidental or run-and-gun red-light running ACCIDENTS than anything else.
Simple fact: Accelerating and trying to clear a yellow light and ending up blowing through a red by a second is a misjudgement and improper driving manner, but does NOT cause major fatalities; drunk, tired, distracted, and high motorists who blow through red light SECONDS after the other way has turned green kill people and cause serious accidents.
Locally, St. Pete is trying to use a recent tragedy where some local brother blazed on marijuana and hopped up on Four Loko blew through a red light and killed a family of four on vacation as the imputus for installing 30+ red light enforcement cameras. Guess what? Cameras wouldn’t have stopped this ass from irresponsibility.
Oh, the gall of a public funded educational institution, to publish scientific research that shows that the government made a mistake! Their role is to study and prove that traffic cameras save lives. Think of the children!
And the measure of a well indoctrinated public, is the extent to which they, even for a split second, fall for the “a study proved…”, “it’s scientifically proven…..”, “statistics show….” etc, etc. kind of gibberish, desperate to show that they to, can play sophistimecated by regurgitating the nonsensical drivel their overlords tell them to keep them meek, pliable, working and paying.
Bet if we didn’t give Marty Chavez the boot, the cameras would’ve been multiplying no matter what.
Unfortunately, no mayor can widen the Martin Luter King Jr. back. “Engineering measures” my posterior!
(… And they’re doing the same %^$* thing to Lead and Coal now!)
I’m not a Marty fan, though his determination to plow through the bosque to build the Montano bridge is a decision of his that I benefit from every day on my commute.
Aside from dreams of revenue, why do politicians OK the cameras?
1. They think we like the cameras!
Early this month a blog exposed Astroturf Lobbying in the red light cam Industry. (To read it, Google Rynski and Astroturf.) Astroturf Lobbying is when a PR firm manufactures a fake grassroots movement via comments posted on news articles like this one.
The politicians, sensing strong community support (they read these comment columns too), give the OK for cameras.
2. Politicians – and their extended family – are immune to the tickets.
In California 1.5 million privately-owned cars have plate numbers protected from easy look up, effectively invisible to agencies trying to process red light camera violations. Such “protected plate” lists exist in other states, too. (In CA the list includes local politicians, bureaucrats, retired cops, other govt. employees, and their families and ADULT children!) Someone should check to see who and how many are ‘protected’ in each state and province.