Local activists are upset that Aurora, Colorado is doubling the size of its red light camera program even though the existing devices have failed to produce a demonstrable safety benefit. According to the public statements of officials, however, the sole motivation for the change is accident reduction.
“The city has approved plans to expand the system to cover ten additional intersections for the purpose of reducing the number and seriousness of accidents and injuries at additional intersections,” the police department’s annual report explained.
That reduction has never happened, according to official data obtained by the group Citizens for Responsible Aurora Government (CRAG) under a freedom of information request. The city admitted accidents increased at three of the four intersections monitored by red light cameras. All together, 168 accidents were recorded a year before installation and 169 documented a year after ticketing commenced.
“Since the total combined number of accidents has remained almost identical at the combined red light camera intersections, it appears the city’s main objective is to generate an ongoing, increased revenue stream for the city budget,” CRAG leader Jim Frye wrote. “The ‘collection machine’ that will be in place with the new contract, should ensure the city with a bounty of fines from it residents.”
The existing program has allowed the private company Affiliated Computer Services (ACS) to issue 43,431 tickets worth $3,257,325. Documents suggest that boosting this figure may have been on the minds of the officials directing the expansion.
“The selection committee notes improved technology of the proposed new systems provides the capability of capturing an increased number of photo red light violations, which could increase the anticipated monthly city surcharge revenues and net profit from these systems,” a city memo dated January 22, 2010 stated.
CRAG activists hope to pressure Aurora into dropping the automated ticketing machines.
“With other cities removing their red light cameras, Aurora ought to discontinue this program and this ongoing process of trying to extract more money from its voters,” Frye wrote.
A copy of the city’s summary data is available in a 25k PDF file in the source link below.
Source: 
Response to James Frye (City of Aurora, Colorado, 9/27/2010)
[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]
If it gets bad enough, the people who are able should just stop commuting by car, and bike to work. Then see how long it takes before police start “cracking down” on “unsafe” cyclists with hefty fines.
Thanks for reminding me why I don’t like being east of I-25 anywhere near and within Denver, and especially anywhere near I-225.
Just saw a “Green Hornet” trailer where a traffic cam is at the losing end of an encounter with the “Black Beauty.” Unfortunately I don’t have a link.
The traffic camera companies send grifters into towns promising riches beyond the wildest imagination just for the taking. Dazzled by the camera company’s briefcases full of Power Points, City Leaders drink the Kool Aid and approve signing a commitment for hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars of City money to the carpet baggers.
With gleeful back-slapping and handshakes all around, the City leaders began proclaiming “It’s all about safety!” and “It’s for the kids!”.
The camera companies push the belief short three-second yellows increase intersection safety (?!?) to civic leaders and the public with what charitably could be described as “harebrain” evidence and notions. The next thing you know the Mayor, City Manager, Council Members, City Treasurer, and Police Chief begin chirping “It’s all about safety!” and “It’s for the kids!”.
Three-second yellows are a proven money maker. In fact, if city spending is really out of control, camera companies suggest cranking down the yellows down even further. Cities are routinely caught setting the yellows at 2.6 and 2.7 seconds for the nice spike in revenue this creates.
Unfortunately, the truth is Three-Second Yellows Kill. Three-second yellows create Legal Red Light Runners–get use to the term–that motor through the intersections and crosswalks against the lights because the yellow is too short to stop and too short to clear the intersection.
This is how you fight this and win
Dig out the city code governing “yellow light change intervals”. You will find it leads to the IE “Kell and Fullerton” yellow light formula. Throw everything you can to show it is horribly flawed (it is) and the minimum yellow should be 4.5 seconds. Expect the City and camera company to fiercely battle higher minimums and fiercely battle to keep a winning verdict “unpublished”.
Win at City Hall or the courtroom and you’ll be rewarded with much safer intersections and a dearth of traffic cameras.
What’s not to like about that?
These cameras are merely devices to collect taxes
People will break the speed limit, rolling stop at stop sign, drive knowing lights don’t work on a vehicle and so on, knowing they are braking a law. I cannot imagine there are that many people who deliberately run a stop light. My point? Its like driving on the wrong side of the road, it does not even need to be a law. If you can’t work out why it is dangerous to run a stop light you should just simply not have a licence to drive… It is not an offence that should need monitoring. However, offenders that cause accidents should be heavily punished.
In Calgary, Alberta the red-light cameras were introduced a few years ago. These cameras were (at first) accepted by the public because, as everyone knows, red light runners pose a much greater threat to public safety than those guilty of traveling at 10 or 15 km/hr over an artificially-low, revenue-generating speed limit do.
But of course you can always count on the bean counters and nanny-state bureaucrats to have a hidden agenda. Those who foresaw this agenda were dismissed as paranoid flakes— until their predictions came true.
First, some intersections with cameras seemed to have shorter yellows. Not much shorter mind you, only a quarter-second or so. But enough to snare drivers too close to the intersection to make a safe stop— even from traveling at the posted speed limit— without risking being rear-ended.
But the stake through the heart of those who swallowed the program whole came in the form of “speed-on-green” cameras, later introduced at those same intersections. That’s right: if you speed up to beat that stale green light or that yellow rather than risk being smacked from behind they nail you for speeding! Slippery slope, ain’t it folks?
Calgary (and Alberta in general) is a predominantly conservative area, long on common sense and short on tax-and-spend liberal fiscal irresponsibility. But by some freak of nature Calgary City Hall has been run by ultra-left elitist snobs with a penchant for introducing municipal legislation that’s designed to siphon pockets dry and then dumping said revenue into pet projects that make little sense. How these morons keep getting elected in that environment is anybody’s guess.
So if bureaucrats in your city, province or state starts broaching the possibility of red-light cameras be afraid. Be very afraid. And fight them tooth and nail.