Red light camera at FL hospital ticketing those seeking emergency help

Rocky1

Rocky1

New member
While the below article does state there were only 8 fewer side impact collisions with cameras installed, making it difficult to determine their worth, what it doesn't say is... The number of rear end collissions increased substantially at the instersections in Tallahassee, as a direct result of the cameras being installed.

When these cameras are installed, it is not even a little bit uncommon to reduce the delay on the yellow light, as a means of generating more revenue. Wherein, more people tend to slam on brakes trying to avoid the ticket, not affording the vehicle behind sufficient time to stop, therein increasing the number of rear end collisions. In a number of cases it has been proven that yellow light timing was reduced from 6 seconds to 3 seconds, when the cameras were installed.


Quote:Red light camera at FL hospital ticketing those seeking emergency help

By Marianela Toledo / March 13, 2014 / Florida Watchdog


MIAMI — Pay two tickets and call me in the morning.

Authorities installed red-light cameras near the emergency room entrance at University Hospital in Tamarac to nail traffic violators, but those rushing to the facility for medical attention are getting ensnared.

When Jacob Alcahe began to sweat and feel chest pains this past October, he thought he might be having a heart attack.

“That day I felt very bad,” Alcahe said. “I couldn’t breathe and I was sweating and my chest hurt,” he told Florida Watchdog.

DO NOT RUSH: Tamarac officials considered it was a good idea installing red light camera at the entrance of an Emergency Room.

So Alcahe decided to drive himself to the Tamarac hospital. With the emergency room in sight, he stopped at the traffic light at the intersection of University Drive and 72th Street and waited anxiously for the light to turn green. After several minutes, he decided he’d waited long enough.

“I was desperate to get to the hospital because I felt very nervous,” Alcahe said.

Fortunately for him, the episode wasn’t life threatening. Alcahe was prescribed some medicine and was told to go home and rest.

The real heart stopper came a few days later when he received a fine of $158 for running the light.

“I went to court trying to show the judge medical records. I explained that it wasn’t intentional, but it was a medical emergency,” Alcahe said.

But he was told his medical emergency wasn’t a “sufficient excuse” and was charged an additional $125 for the judge’s time.

In total, his rush for help cost him $283.

“I expected at least a fair (trial), but I think the camera is put there intentionally to capture violations of the people who actually have a medical emergency,” he said. “It’s a scam to get the city more money. It’s unfortunate because local authorities should be for us and seem to be against us. I don’t understand and don’t think it’s fair.”

COSTLY FALSE ALARM: Alcahe got to pay an additional $283 on top of his hospital bill.

Florida Watchdog called and emailed city commissioners and Tamarack Mayor Harry Dressler for comment, but no one responded to our requests.

The controversy behind red-light cameras

Tamarac joined the traffic camera party last August, as the first ones were installed on University Drive northbound at Northwest 72nd Street and northbound and southbound at Northwest 82nd Street.

Several more were later installed at other intersections along University Drive.

A commission plan for the program states “the goal of this agreement is to achieve a higher level of public safety, through the use of the remote red light camera systems.”

The Tamarac city clerk’s office told Florida Watchdog that 571 citations were issued between Sept. 1, 2013, and Tuesday at the intersection near the hospital.

Critics doubts whether the cameras truly reduce the number of accidents — and police reports may back them up.

The Doral Police Department reported that over the last two years, accidents increased at intersections where the cameras were installed.

It’s a similar story in Tallahassee.

In the three years since red-light cameras began operating at Tallhassee’s seven busiest intersections — aimed at ticketing in 19 different driving directions — there have been only eight fewer side-impact collisions compared to the previous three years without the cameras.

A real money-maker

A recent report by the Florida Legislature’s Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability revealed the cameras may be more about generating revenue. When the Legislature approved the cameras in 2009, they projected earnings of around $100 million for the fiscal year 2012-2013.

But local taxpayers benefit little from revenue generated by those tickets.

Tallahassee has collected $6.3 million in red-light camera fines in three years, but only about 20 percent of the money was distributed locally. Florida claimed around $3.2 million of the booty, and Affiliated Computer Services, the camera vendor, got $3 million to provide and operate the cameras. The remaining $487,000 was deposited into Tallahassee’s general revenue fund.

Abuses like these have motivated state Sen. Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg, and Rep. Frank Artiles, R-Miami, to introduce bills to ban the use of red light cameras throughout the state.

The proposal would prohibit the installation of any new red-light cameras starting July 1 and would limit fines to $83. Cities can still add a “surcharge” to cover the administrative costs of operating the cameras, however.

That bill is now advancing through the state Senate.

http://watchdog.org/132348/red-light-camera-hospital-emergency/
 
According to the Model Traffic Code that most states subscribe to using, a Yellow light is to remain on a minimum of 4 seconds before the change to red...If a city or other government entity has manipulated the timers to a shorter period (something that is a probability) they are leaving themselves wide open for a decent law suit for damages incurred, as well as improper enforcement...I have very little trust in the Camera Companies as they get a substantial income form the violation income generated....
 
Agree OT,the city gov usually has no idea how the system is operated and as you said private owned camera companys are in it for profit. do the city lights and traffic routes fall under the state DOT ?
 
There are few things that tick me off worse than a driver speeding through a red light. It's a situation I see almost every day. But, I do not condone the use of cameras to catch these people, because I feel that we don't need the surveillance in our lives, at least not that aspect of it.
 
This sheds a whole new light and just makes things all that more interesting... It's nice to know that these cameras are all about saving lives, but hundreds of thousands of dollars are being spent to lobby legislators!! Gee... I'm sure everyone involved here, has "our safety" in mind.

Another thought that crossed my mind in reading this was, that of the nearly $1 million dollars spent lobbying, mentioned in this article, that was only one of the red light camera companies being used... NOT all of them.

Quote:Red-light cameras ignite fight in Tallahassee


March 8, 2014|By Aaron Deslatte, Tallahassee Bureau Chief


TALLAHASSEE — Florida's accelerating use of red-light cameras to ticket drivers is fueling a war in the Capitol this spring as lawmakers consider whether to apply the brakes to the controversial law-enforcement tactic.

At the heart of the fight: Are red-light cameras making roads safer or more dangerous?

A study by the Legislature's policy analysis office determined that across the state, crashes had increased 12 percent at intersections with cameras. But the report also said fatalities at the 230 camera-equipped intersections on state roads went down 49 percent.

Broward and Miami-Dade counties accounted for more than nine out of 10 additional rear-end and crashes at other angles at red-light camera intersections on state roads, according to the report by the Legislature's Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability.

Conversely, Orange and Seminole counties showed some of the steepest declines in those wrecks most commonly associated with running red lights.

"We have drastically different results in Orange County," said Sen. Geraldine Thompson, D-Orlando. "We've had success in Orange County."

Some intersections showing the steepest reductions in crashes are in Cocoa, Winter Springs and Polk County, according to an Orlando Sentinel analysis of the Department of Transportation wreck data used in the state study. Meanwhile, those with the largest spikes are mostly in South Florida – Pembroke Pines, Sunrise and Miami, although Apopka also led the pack in more crashes.

But Orlando and other cities and counties argue the study is flawed, and their data suggest the intersections are actually safer.

Orange County, which began installing cameras in 2011, reported through mid-2013 that its side-impact crashes at camera-equipped intersections had decreased 23 percent and rear-end crashes had dropped 15 percent.

Critics of the state report point out the state switched forms for wrecks in 2011, creating the appearance of an increase in crashes when that might not be accurate. The study doesn't consider overall traffic-accident trends in the cities, differing traffic volumes between cities, or compare the camera-intersections to jurisdictions without cameras.

"We just need a lot of data that we don't have," Sen. Tom Lee, R-Brandon, said last month when the report was presented.

Cities also vary in the other steps they've used to reduce wrecks, such as using longer yellow lights. And they differ in what kinds of tickets they give out — Orlando, for instance, doesn't ticket for right-hand "rolling stops" on red lights.

The push to regulate the cameras already has run into a campaign by local governments and the vendors who gross tens of millions of dollars from them.

House Speaker Will Weatherford and Senate President Don Gaetz have both said they'd like to repeal Florida's 2010 law authorizing local governments to install the cameras.

But local governments argue they should wait to see how 2013 changes shake out.

"We think it may be better to wait a year and see if those changes are effective," said League of Cities lobbyist Casey Cook.

The biggest vendor selling cameras, Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions, spent about $345,000 to lobby lawmakers last year when they approved a bill creating a new appeals process for motorists caught by the cameras.

Last month, a company lobbyist wrote talking points for Orlando, other cities, counties and sheriffs to combat the state report.

"Our message is the point of [cameras] is to reduce fatalities and make intersection safer," ATS lobbyist Ron LaFace wrote in a Feb. 12 email. "Breaking out certain types of crashes and saying a certain type is up or down has no real relevance, it's lowering the risk ... and the harm."

The company also has given $520,000 to politicians in three years, sending $190,000 to the state Republican Party, along with $10,000 checks to funds for incoming Senate President Andy Gardiner, R-Orlando, Senate budget chief Joe Negron, R-Stuart, and others.

One impact is clear: the cameras are delivering a big payday to local governments and vendors.

By last summer, cameras were installed at 922 intersections in 26 Florida counties — the vast majority located in Central Florida, and Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade counties. Together, they generated $119 million in tickets. The fine is set at $158 a ticket.

Roughly half that revenue went to the state, and the local governments pocketed $56.4 million of it — using half of that to pay vendors, according to the OPPAGA report.

About half of that local revenue went to just 15 local governments — including Miami, Apopka, Orlando, Hollywood, Boca Raton, Kissimmee and Fort Lauderdale.

"The red-light camera vendors masked the real intention of red-light camera revenue: revenue to the cities. They hide it under safety," said Rep. Frank Artiles, a Miami Republican who wants to repeal the cameras. "This is not about safety. This is about money."

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2014...s-intersections
 
Originally Posted By: OldTurtleAccording to the Model Traffic Code that most states subscribe to using, a Yellow light is to remain on a minimum of 4 seconds before the change to red...If a city or other government entity has manipulated the timers to a shorter period (something that is a probability) they are leaving themselves wide open for a decent law suit for damages incurred, as well as improper enforcement...I have very little trust in the Camera Companies as they get a substantial income form the violation income generated....


OT, I'm not sure Florida is required to subscribe...

Found this article on repealing the law that allows them. I would think if municipalities were required to subscribe to said recommendations, there would be no need in the study sited herein to suggest that municipalities "should" follow them. Should is kinda defined as the gray area between what is and what oughta be!! Although that may have simply been the reporter's choice of language in writing the article, the recommendation therein does suggest that some municipalities are not following the code to which you refer.


Quote:RED LIGHT FOR RED-LIGHT CAMERAS?

Almost since they were approved by the Legislature with the Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act of 2010, red-light cameras have faced a vocal group of critics looking to roll back or get rid of the robotic intersection overlords. And a report out this week from the Legislature’s Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability is fueling the drive to scrap the cameras.

According to the OPPAGA report, there were fewer fatalities but more crashes at electronically monitored intersections, and fines issued due to the technology cost motorists nearly $119 million last year.

The study recommends that local governments demonstrate a safety need at each intersection where cameras may be installed, that local communities should be required to follow standards on the length of yellow lights, and that revenue local governments generate from the cameras be restricted to public and traffic safety uses. But foes of the cameras want to go even further.

“I think we should go all in for full repeal,” Senate Transportation Chairman Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg, said during a press conference at the Capitol to highlight the study. “I think this data clearly shows that this program is not working as the Legislature intended, that we’re not seeing a reduction in accidents, (and) that we’re seeing a clear, dramatic increase in revenues that are being generated from this.”

But camera opponents have some other ideas — just in case a repeal doesn’t happen. Rep. Frank Artiles, R-Miami, who has filed a measure (HB 4009) to repeal the 2010 law, said if legislators are unwilling to support repeal, they should enact the series of recommendations included in the legislative study.

“I still firmly believe that this program should be repealed, but if we cannot repeal it I’m willing to modify it significantly,” Artiles said.

Artiles also proposes that the amount local governments can fine be reduced from $158 to $83.

Unsurprisingly, perhaps, local governments were not at all convinced by the report. The Florida League of Cities quickly questioned whether the study was fair. Lobbyist Casey Cook maintained that the cameras do improve safety and called the study “biased and inconsistent.”

“The report’s conclusion is not surprising given that it was requested by a legislator who sponsored a bill to repeal Florida’s red-light safety camera law,” the release said.

Those opposed to the red-light cameras have one powerful ally: Weatherford, who made clear Wednesday he wants to overhaul the state’s red-light camera law. Weatherford described the report as “scathing.”

Weatherford said he would support passing a bill to repeal the cameras, though he acknowledged that likely will not happen.

http://flaglerlive.com/64232/red-light-cameras-review/
 
The city managers want to put cameras in our town but there was such an outcry from the population they backed off some so far,but it is bound to happen.
 
Originally Posted By: armed infidela high powered laser pointer would fix the problem quickly


The red light cameras in question aren't on all the time, they trip on motion through the light after it turns red. It takes back and side pictures I believe, and is equipped with flash so they get pretty pictures at night too. We've had our pictures taken several times, down on highway 27 in central Florida, but have yet to receive a ticket in the mail.

In my personal opinion, the cameras on that stretch of road were/are definitely rigged. Many of them are on stretches of the hhighway allowing speed limits up to and including 60 mph, and I have seen yellow lights on that road cycle in as little as 2 seconds. When you're driving a loaded truck, it doesn't stop that fast from 50 - 60 mph, PERIOD.

We encounter 49 redlights in 80 miles of Hwy 27, at one point there were about 15 or 20 of them that were camera equipped. Not sure how many are any more, but there are a few. Those lights that were not camera equipped do not change on a timed cycle at night, none of them. Traffic has to pull up to the intersection to trigger the light. Those lights that were camera equipped, especially those on stretches of road with higher speed limits, would frequently change without a physical trigger from the crossroad sensors. There would be no one at the intersection, not another car in sight anywhere, you would be 4 - 5 seconds from the redlight, it would change for no reason, and the yellow light would be long gone by the time you got to the intersection, even when not touching the brakes, or accelerating. I'm not talking just a little gone either, I'm talking 2 seconds gone at times. Then you enter a scenario where you are forced to make an UNSAFE stop in a loaded truck, for NO reason, or run the damm light. Which we have been known to do on several occasions.

Unfortunately, when you have some yo-yo in a 2500 lb car, in front of you, in a truck grossing 50 - 60 thousand pounds, they in yo-yo fashion will slam on brakes and come to a stop in less than half the distance you can. And, while someone will I'm sure say I shouldn't be following that close, the yo-yos will frequently dive into the lane in front of you when the damm light turns yellow, so they can try and get off the line faster than the car they were behind in the other lane. Not utilizing the split second of thought process required to register that they are about to get run the [beeep] over!!! I in fact had one cross 2 lanes to dive in front of me at one of these interesctions, forcing me into the turn lane to avoid a rear end collision.

 
I know this will shock some here, but these cameras are one of my pet peeves. The town I live in has several and I hope each day will be their last. My opinion, the best argument for fee grabbing / policing for profit around.
 
Smart Citizen Sticks it to The Man by Fighting his Traffic Ticket
Posted by Faith Braverman on 05 Feb 2014 /

WASHINGTON, D.C.–Nate Cox received a notification in his mail last year that would intimidate most U.S. citizens. According to the Washington D.C. DMV, Cox’s car was caught speeding on camera. The Photo-Enforced Speeding ticket captures Cox’s car, complete with its abundant libertarian bumper stickers and “ENDW4R” license plate.

The DMV clearly didn’t know who they were dealing with.

“I am in the habit of not taking ‘plea deals’, and I am always in the habit of fighting my tickets and NOT pre-paying them so I don’t have to go to court – like many folks do,” Cox said in his post on VirginiaCopBlock.org.

“[T]hese criminals issuing these tickets are hoping that the people will just get scared and pay, or not want to waste their time with it. However the government has to provide evidence that it was actually ME driving, it’s their burden of proof. Just because they got pictures of my car doesn’t mean I was driving. So, in response to the first letter, I mailed them back the following letter:

To Whom it May Concern,

I received a letter claiming I committed a violation of a speeding law in the District of Columbia on 04/21/2012. As per the instructions, I am writing to plead ‘not guilty’ to this charge. Although this option is said to result in this matter going to court; it is my suggestion that the charges simply be dropped. This suggestion comes out of respect for tax payers, and my request that their hard-earned money not be wasted in such proceedings. As there is no evidence of my involvement with this alleged ‘crime’, as well as the fact that I am not granted my 6th amendment right to face my ‘accuser’ (a camera); I see no way the government could prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I also see find no legal requirement for me to implicate someone else in this process, as it is the government’s responsibility to prove a person’s guilt. It is also my 5th amendment right to remain silent on the matter.

If it is the government’s decision to move forward in this matter, I would request copies of any evidence the prosecution may have of my involvement in the “offense”; as well as, all maintenance records for the camera(s) involved.

Sincerely,

Nathan Cox
United States Army Veteran

Finally, over six months later, Cox was informed that his ticket had been completely dismissed for “the government’s failure to meet its burden of proof”. He was understandably thrilled that he’d won his fight against his ticket, and encourages others to do the same, saying, “If there is NO VICTIM, there is NO CRIME!”

| The Libertarian Republic http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/smart-citizen-sticks-man-fighting-traffic-ticket/#ixzz2wWXBEtY4
 
Originally Posted By: azmastablastaSmart Citizen Sticks it to The Man by Fighting his Traffic Ticket
Posted by Faith Braverman on 05 Feb 2014 /

WASHINGTON, D.C.–Nate Cox received a notification in his mail last year that would intimidate most U.S. citizens. According to the Washington D.C. DMV, Cox’s car was caught speeding on camera. The Photo-Enforced Speeding ticket captures Cox’s car, complete with its abundant libertarian bumper stickers and “ENDW4R” license plate.

The DMV clearly didn’t know who they were dealing with.

“I am in the habit of not taking ‘plea deals’, and I am always in the habit of fighting my tickets and NOT pre-paying them so I don’t have to go to court – like many folks do,” Cox said in his post on VirginiaCopBlock.org.

“[T]hese criminals issuing these tickets are hoping that the people will just get scared and pay, or not want to waste their time with it. However the government has to provide evidence that it was actually ME driving, it’s their burden of proof. Just because they got pictures of my car doesn’t mean I was driving. So, in response to the first letter, I mailed them back the following letter:

To Whom it May Concern,

I received a letter claiming I committed a violation of a speeding law in the District of Columbia on 04/21/2012. As per the instructions, I am writing to plead ‘not guilty’ to this charge. Although this option is said to result in this matter going to court; it is my suggestion that the charges simply be dropped. This suggestion comes out of respect for tax payers, and my request that their hard-earned money not be wasted in such proceedings. As there is no evidence of my involvement with this alleged ‘crime’, as well as the fact that I am not granted my 6th amendment right to face my ‘accuser’ (a camera); I see no way the government could prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I also see find no legal requirement for me to implicate someone else in this process, as it is the government’s responsibility to prove a person’s guilt. It is also my 5th amendment right to remain silent on the matter.

If it is the government’s decision to move forward in this matter, I would request copies of any evidence the prosecution may have of my involvement in the “offense”; as well as, all maintenance records for the camera(s) involved.

Sincerely,

Nathan Cox
United States Army Veteran

Finally, over six months later, Cox was informed that his ticket had been completely dismissed for “the government’s failure to meet its burden of proof”. He was understandably thrilled that he’d won his fight against his ticket, and encourages others to do the same, saying, “If there is NO VICTIM, there is NO CRIME!”

| The Libertarian Republic http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/smart-citizen-sticks-man-fighting-traffic-ticket/#ixzz2wWXBEtY4




Will have to send this one to co-worker... Radar camera in Sioux City, IA got him. They mailed ticket to the truck's registered owner, boss mailed it to the driver. I don't have a big issue with radar cameras, I have a speedometer and speed reported on my GPS. My Garmin tells me what the speed limit is, and is usually accurate to within a car length or two of changes therein, and it tells me if I'm exceeding the speed limit. If I get a ticket out of a radar camera it's my fault. ESPECIALLY when I know the speed zone is photo enforced, as was the case in Sioux City.

Red light cameras on the other hand, do NOT make intersections safer. As has been proven time and time again in studies of intersections where these cameras were installed, the number of side impact collisions are only marginally decreased, while rear end collisions see double digit increases in numbers. In more than one case the reduction of time in yellow light cycles have been documented. And, it's obviously a very profitable venture for the private contractors involved, if they can afford millions of dollars annually in lobbying and campaign contributions. It's not rocket science, as is typically the case, the government doesn't really give a damm about the people, it's all about the money, and they're giving half of it to the contractor, who's in business to make a profit.

I mean seriously... How many redlight camera companies have you seen being named as recipients of humanitarian awards? HELLO!!!
 
There should be volunteers handing out that letter in front of every DMV licensing office. I agree, the camera's are totally there for revenue and any bureaucrat that says different has his lips moving.
 
Back
Top