Those of us on the mailing list of the ATA got an email today, 3/22. with a subject line "Red light camera update from your advocate"

I mildly disagreed and sent an email reply to Ethan Spotts, ethan@biketraffic.org and suggest you pass along your comments too.

Email copy of what I sent:

With all due respect, I have to disagree and express my intolerance:

On 3/22/2010 3:36 PM, Active Transportation Alliance wrote:
If you're having trouble viewing this email, you may see it online.


 

Update on red light camera legislation

You support safety in your community

 
  • Allow red light cameras to be used in the Chicago and St. Louis metropolitan areas.
  • Require tickets issued in Chicago to be reviewed by a technician and a third party that is unaffiliated with the red light camera company.
  • Require tickets issued in communities outside Chicago to be reviewed by a technician and a current or retired police officer
  • Allow anyone ticketed to review the footage online


This seems to me to be putting an extreme burden on those that install
and maintain these cameras and systems.

I'd feel a lot better if a driver who was ticketed could ask for (a) a
review, and (b) to review it themselves electronically.

The important difference is that this request would need to be issued
by the ticketed driver and not automatically available to each and
every person ticketed.  I would request a payment for this service,
refundable if the ticket was found defective.





  • Ticket drivers who pass the stop bar and enter a crosswalk only when pedestrians or bicyclists are present.

This is too extreme.  First, every red light meant stop, no
exceptions.  Then we allowed right turn on red.

Currently you are required to stop behind the stop bar.  Now you are
going to allow an exception for that too? 

I disagree. 

If someone passes the stop bar in order to see better in making a right
turn then give them a ticket for crossing the line whether they
actually make the right turn or not.
----------------------------------------

Am I being a little harsh and too strict here?




Views: 49

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Clark said:
Bob:
we need to bend over backward to be fair to the ticketed drivers; so that we don't ignite outrage at the whole system causing it to be ripped out in its infancy. Once the Red Light system becomes established, say in 2015, we can fine tune and adjust.
Consider the outrage already fully ignited in this (almost a non) ATA member.
Double Post (here and orignal red light forum):

WTF????

From today's Trib:
city engineering plans obtained by the Tribune through the Freedom of Information Act show programming instructions dictate three-second yellows at almost all signals tied to cameras. The instructions for the rest of the signals call for four-second yellows
.
OK, maybe I was too harsh when I condemned the endorsements of the Active Transportation Alliance in a recent newsletter. Specifically the items they were endorsing were:

1. Allow red light cameras to be used in the Chicago and St. Louis metropolitan areas.
2. Require tickets issued in Chicago to be reviewed by a technician and a third party that is unaffiliated with the red light camera company.
3, Require tickets issued in communities outside Chicago to be reviewed by a technician and a current or retired police officer
4. Allow anyone ticketed to review the footage online
5. Ticket drivers who pass the stop bar and enter a crosswalk only when pedestrians or bicyclists are present.

All of these items seem to me to be making too many concession to car drivers just to make the red-light-cameras acceptable to them. Instead of making it easier for drivers, I think we should make it harder for drivers.

I did get a nice phone call from Dan Perskey of the ATA, explaining that they were trying to minimize the anti-red-light impact of the car driving group.

With all due respect I'm getting tired of just trying to be accommodated. I want to see us as full and equal. But I can understand their strategy even if I don't agree with it.

There are more car drivers than bike riders, but we're better organized and active than they are. Let me suggest that all of us, each of us individually, contact our state legislators (many of whom are up for re-election this year) and let them know we support the red-light-cameras, that we'd like to see the Right-Turn-On-Red law abolished, that we'd like to see the cameras used for speed monitoring as well as turn monitoring.

You may not even know your state representatives; here's a way to find them:

Go to http://www.chicagojwj.org/ - Chicago Jobs With Justice website
On the right side, "Find Elected Officials"
Fill in your Zip Code - 9-digit is better
Click "Find", Click "State"

Send an email to EACH of your state representatives. Even better, write or call them. Remember that each of you has one Representative and one Senator at the Illinois State level.

We need to "take the lane" in legislative support as well as in the street.

I'll double-post this, since I didn't really know a discussion was already taking place.
The mistaken identity is not something of particular concern, technology can and does eliminate the problem of getting a ticket for legally turning right, etc. I used to actually have my own video security business and wrote motion detection code. All it takes is making the camera software company pay the city back for court expenses when people successfully fight tickets, they'll improve the software right away without any onerous regulation or oversight. Accountability always works better and results in the intended behavior.

So I agree these regulations are 1. only going to increase costs but not really protect anyone, and 2. not addressing the core issue of safety at intersections.

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service