Redflex Corruption

[Jim]

I got a ticket in the mail yesterday. Here is the "evidence" against me. If I were doing 79 in the 65 as claimed, I would have been in the trunk of the car in front of me. I am car #2 behind the truck. A car from Colorado is passing me, and he may have been going 79, but I don't know. If he was, it looks like I got his ticket.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH3NTQrE12k

AZDPS and Redflex are clearly lying about the quality control they claim to do, and they have no problems sending a ticket to an innocent victim to help tighten the budget problem and fatten the corporate profits. If they looked at the videos as they claim to do, I never would have gotten this.

Something tells me I am not the first person to whom this has happened. Is anyone interested in starting a class action lawsuit against a company which gathers evidence for the state without a private investigators license, and has profit as its motive behind "law enforcement"?

[hikeaz]

http://www.photoenforced.com/phoenix.html#.VV9ghUazk9M

That site seems a bit outdated. After many meetings I had with city staff and a couple of council meetings as well as inundating council-members with statistics, Tempe finally took down the cameras. By their own reporting, accidents INCREASED at all but one location where the surveillance cameras were installed and that one was statistically a dead heat. One of the intersections had a 75% increase after the cameras were installed.
Peoria had similar results with their cameras. Superior seems to have removed theirs, too.
To me it should be a criminal act that a city would propagate these when there is an predictable and then proven INCREASE in harm to their citizenry.

Patrick Henry did not say "Give me absolute safety or give me death".........

[Jim]

Well, I'm greedy to be able to face my accuser, and fearful that a profit motive causes whoever theoretically reviews the photos of the "violations" to opt to ticket someone, anyone, when the camera goes off, even if they chose to ticket a vehicle that logically wasn't doing what the ticket states. See my video from the original post.

[hikeaz]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2 ... /29076837/

[big_load]

There was a good article in NJ a few weeks ago. The red light companies have set up astroturf organizations to lobby for the reinstatement of cameras. Part of their campaign included videos of accidents in NJ which they claim the cameras would prevent. Astutes observer noted flashes in the videos. Sure enough, they were taken at intersections already equipped with red light cameras. To make matters worse, further investigation revealed that many of those accidents weren't included in the statistics for the intersections in question. A jaded person might note that accidents actually increased after cameras installed. The increase tapered off a bit, but partly as we now know because they began excluding incidents to disguise the cameras' negative impact.

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/201 ... _real.html

[hikeaz]

A jaded person might note that accidents actually increased after cameras installed. The increase tapered off a bit, but partly as we now know because they began excluding incidents to disguise the cameras' negative impact. http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/201 ... _real.html

Then call me 'jaded' (I prefer 'informed').
In Peoria, Az., Glendale, Az. and Tempe, Az., to name a few, accidents increased at almost ALL of the survielled intersections; some as much as a 75% increase. None (statistically) went down.
I have always held that our gub'ment, knowing that lives are being endangered, but voting to put its citizens at risk in exchange for the almighty dollar, are committing a criminal act and should be prosecuted. Especially when they expound about the 'safety' the surveillance cameras provide but knowing differently.

[hikeaz]

Not Redflex, but some of their 'partners in crime', ATS.....

California: Hertz Accused Of Fraudulent Toll Road Deal
09 Jul 2015 01:38 AM PDT 'The Newspaper'

A federal judge has stopped Hertz from teaming up with a red light camera company to overcharge renters who happen to drive across California's Golden Gate Bridge. At the heart of the dispute is PlatePass, a system run by American Traffic Solutions (ATS) that automatically bills Hertz customers when they use a toll road -- and even when they do not.

"Hertz, ATS, and PlatePass have, jointly, implemented a scheme pursuant to which defendants actively withhold the fact that renters of Hertz vehicles are able to pay the toll for the Golden Gate Bridge without utilizing defendants' PlatePass 'service' -- a service that results in millions of dollars in service fees paid by consumers to defendants," attorney Matthew David Carlson wrote to the court in his complaint.

PlatePass photographs the license plate of everyone crossing the toll bridge. If the system detects a rental car without a FasTrak transponder, ATS looks up the renter's information and automatically bills him $4.95 per day for the duration of the rental agreement, plus the highest possible cash rate for the toll. The fee is assessed regardless of whether a toll road is used on subsequent days. This means a renter who has a car for just five days would be charged $32 for making a single, one-way bridge crossing, with $24.75 of that amount going to ATS and Hertz in administrative fees.

The Golden Gate Bridge allows drivers to pay tolls without any extra fees. Within 48 hours of crossing, payment can be made at a cash payment kiosk, over the phone, or by mail. The lawsuit argues that Hertz and ATS are hiding this information from consumers and blocking them from taking advantage of it.

"Defendants do not disclose these payment options to Hertz renters and instead allow Hertz renters to believe that PlatePass service fees arising from traveling through the tolls on the Golden Gate Bridge are unavoidable," the suit alleges. "Plaintiff is informed and believes that Hertz renters are in fact precluded from utilizing the [bridge tolling authority's] pay by mail option because, pursuant to the PlatePass system, defendants automatically advance the toll payment for Hertz renters when the renters go through the toll, and, under such circumstances, the [bridge] does not mail a toll invoice to renters."

The suit points out that the ATS PlatePass website falsely states that the tolling system in the San Francisco Bay area "no longer accepts cash" and "no cash option is available." The suit argues that these statements violate the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

"Defendants' failure to disclose the fact that the [bridge tolling authority] does, in fact, accept payments by the above-described means, and its active concealment and partial representations pertaining to this fact, are designed to trick Hertz renters into incurring avoidable service fees, and has resulted in millions of dollars of ill-gained profits to defendants," Carlson wrote.

The suit seeks refunds for all fees collected since March 2013. ATS settled a similar lawsuit in New Jersey for $11 million. US Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero has scheduled a conference in the case for September 25.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
back to Redflex.....
On Wednesday 7/9/15, the US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio formally accepted Karen Finley's admission that she bribed politicians in Columbus and Cincinnati so that they would offer lucrative red light camera and speed camera contracts to Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia.
As part of her plea deal, Finley will spend no extra time in jail from her other crimes at Redflex. Finley signaled that she will plead guilty next month in the Northern District of Illinois for conspiring with John Bills to distribute $2 million in Redflex cash to a Chicago transportation official in return for his help setting up the red light camera program, the world's largest of its kind, which generated $140 million for the Australian firm.
Despite the guilty plea, residents of Cincinnati prevented Finley's corruption from spreading very far. Not long after Cincinnati's city council approved a deal with Finley, the voters banned the use of cameras in a referendum, joining Ashtabula, Cleveland, Chillicothe, Heath, Garfield Heights, Maple Heights, South Euclid and Steubenville, all of which overturned council decisions favoring photo surveillance at the ballot box.
"We always knew it wasn't about public safety," state Senator Bill Seitz (R-Cincinnati) said in a statement. "It was about money; we just didn't know it was about shady money."

[hikeaz]

Remember...."It's all about safety"...... (Looks like they mean safety of their ca$h flow)
I still do not understand how this is not criminal behavior - a city, knowing that they are increasing their citizens' risk of injury or death, but doing it anyway. If a business did that they would be criminally prosecuted the moment it was discovered. (Think GM ignition switches)

Florida: Vendor Tries To Save Red Light Cameras Despite Accident Rise
Posted: 14 Jul 2015 01:50 AM PDT
Accidents are up at the intersections with red light cameras in Hollywood, Florida, but American Traffic Solutions (ATS) is desperate to keep the troubled system alive. City commissioners last week unanimously approved an ordinance to dump the controversial devices, only to back away from the resolution after ATS proposed a last-minute deal. The company will, in effect, pay the council to ignore the city police chief's warning about the impact of automated ticketing since January 2011.

"Just so we're clear, we looked at empirical data, we did a lot of thorough research on accidents and fatalities," Chief Tomas Sanchez said on Wednesday. "We have also seen a dramatic increase in most intersections, with twice as many rear end accidents occurring after the red light camera implementation [compared] to before the red light camera implementation. As a whole, there have been more accidents at each intersection."

The program has also failed to produce the promised amount of revenue to the city, largely due to state-mandated increases in yellow signal warning times that took effect on May 31, 2013. As most of the tickets were written for minor, split-second violations, the extra time has caused citation revenue to plunge. On top of this, a Florida Court of Appeals decision declared the process ATS used to review citations in Hollywood was illegal, so the city has been unable to collect fines since March. ATS will now forgive $100,000 in charges to the city in return for sixty days to find a way to work around the appellate court ruling and create a profitable ticketing program.

"We have some options that we've negotiated," ATS salesman Orlando Torres told the council. "Programs are not shutting down all over the state. Some have, many continue on as they make changes to their process. So allow us to continue to do this. Either we bring something back to you, or we don't, and at the end of the day you'll make your decision."

The proposal raised controversy with Commissioners Traci L. Callari and Peter D. Hernandez, who pointed out that the commission had already voted to dump ATS in a unanimous vote. Red light camera supporters, including Commissioner Patty Asseff, hoped the last-minute monetary offer would vindicate the photo ticketing program. Asseff insisted the cameras saved lives, but Chief Sanchez pointed out that this was not correct.

"So, for public safety and for the accidents, the data is not clear that -- does not show... a reduction in accidents," Chief Sanchez said. "It shows the contrary -- an increase in some places, as much as a three- or four-fold increase in rear end accidents."

The commission voted 4 to 3 to accept the deal under which ATS would not charge the contractual $48,000 monthly red light camera fee that the city would have to have been obligated to pay had it given the sixty-days notice that it intended to cancel the photo ticketing contract. The commission will vote again on a revised deal from ATS. (Likely after ATS has had time to buy each of them a new boat or something)

[big_load]

[hikeaz]

Residents of Tucson, Arizona will be asked whether they want to keep or eliminate the city's automated ticketing machines on November 3. The city council unanimously agreed Wednesday to place citizen's initiative on the ballot, as required by state law. If the public approves the measure, American Traffic Solutions (ATS) would no longer be allowed to issue traffic citations in the city based on photographs.

John Kromko, a former Democratic state lawmaker turned political activist, kicked off the petition drive and soon found himself surrounded by volunteers willing to attend every fair, festival and event in the city to gather signatures. The efforts of his group, Tucson Traffic Justice, proved successful. In June, it turned in over 53,000 petition signatures when only 12,700 were needed to qualify for the ballot. Pima County Recorder F. Ann Rodriguez last month certified the petition, and her sampling suggests the group turned in at least 20,000 valid signatures beyond the minimum required. Kromko says he was motivated to start the effort by the unfairness of the cameras.

"I hear the horror stories about people getting a ticket for missing the line -- getting to the line three-tenths of a second late," Kromko told TheNewspaper. "That's something that an officer on the scene wouldn't even see. It clearly wasn't a threat to safety. I've always thought people should get a fair shake, but the program was clearly set up to trick people."

The Federal Highway Administration agreed with Kromko's assessment in 2009 by taking the extraordinary step of declaring Tucson's unorthodox use of intersection lines "for red light violation purposes" to be illegal (view ruling). Kromko said because of the way photo ticketing profits are distributed and the way the program was carefully structured, a ballot referendum was the only way to remedy the situation.

"They knew there would be no public sympathy for red light runners," Kromko said. "They knew that people who didn't know anything about it would say, 'Well, if you don't want a ticket, don't run red lights.' It was set up so the cops get a cut, and the judges get a cut, and the city gets a cut. There's nobody to stand up for justice because everyone has their fingers in the pie. It was brilliantly done, whoever first thought of this." (Cas$h grab)
"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."
George Bernard Shaw

Prospects for the ballot measure are good. If the 53,000 residents on record calling for a vote to ban cameras turn out in November, they would likely have a majority. In 2011, Mayor Jonathan Rothschild (D) won his election with 46,733 votes. The first ever public vote on the use of speed cameras happened 24 years ago in Peoria, Arizona when 70 percent of residents voted to reject cameras. More recently, 72 percent of voters in Sierra Vista insisted on sending the camera companies packing. More than thirty cities nationwide have similarly outlawed automated ticketing machines (view a list).

A copy of the petition is available in a PDF file at > http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/20 ... sonpet.pdf

[hikeaz]

It appears that tyranny hasn't taken over ALL of our country.

The highest court in Missouri on Monday struck down red light camera and speed camera programs. In three separate cases, the high court judges found that the cameras unconstitutionally shifted the burden of proof by forcing ticket recipients to prove their own innocence. The judges also found that the creation of "civil" citations and administrative hearings for moving traffic violations violated state law.

The decisions were a major blow to American Traffic Solutions (ATS), the Arizona-based vendor that sought to obtain a "first mover" advantage against its competition by opening for business in the Show Me State without the General Assembly's authorization. The company's own lawyers warned that the move was likely to be found illegal. Earlier this year, the firm settled a class action lawsuit over the lack of authority for the programs, but Monday's state Supreme Court rulings raised deeper legal issues.

In the St. Louis case, motorists Sarah K. Tupper and Sandra L. Thurmond successfully argued in circuit court that the red light camera ordinance that they were accused of violating was illegal.The high court agreed that St. Louis could not treat moving violations as a parking ticket-like civil case with a lowered standard of proof.

"For many, a $100 fine is not considered small," the court ruled in Tupper v. St. Louis . "Further, a violation of ordinance 66868 will affect the owner's driver's license because running a red light is a moving violation that requires the assessment of two points. These factors, as well as the quasi-criminal nature of municipal ordinance proceedings, lead this court to apply the law regarding presumptions in criminal cases."

The high court majority went on to strike down the presumption that the owner of the vehicle must also be the driver. This is the fundamental premise of nearly every photo ticketing program in the country, outside of Arizona and California.

"Ordinance 66868 requires that a summons and violation notice be sent to the owner of the motor vehicle without any attempt to determine if the owner was the driver," the court ruled. "The presumption relieves the prosecution from proving an element of the violation charged beyond a reasonable doubt and is impermissible... Therefore, this court finds ordinance 66868 is unconstitutional because it creates a mandatory rebuttable presumption that shifts the burden of persuasion onto the defendant."

In the next case, motorist Bonnie A. Roeder argued that the $110 ticket she received was invalid because Missouri law requires the assessment of points for moving violations. The high court decided that the city of St. Peters could not evade this requirement by creating a fiction that red light camera tickets were not traffic tickets, but the equivalent of a parking ticket for being in an intersection on red.

"Failing to obey a traffic control device, or running a red light, is a moving violation as defined by section 302.010 because the motor vehicle involved in the violation is in motion at the time the violation occurs," the high court ruled in St. Peters v. Roeder (view ruling, 180k PDF). "Accordingly, [state law] requires that a person found to violate ordinance 4356 by running a red light have two points assessed against his or her driving record. On the other hand, ordinance 4536 states that no points will be assessed. Ordinance 4536 conflicts with state law by prohibiting what state law permits -- the assessment of two points for violating ordinance 4536."

Instead of declaring the entire ordinance invalid, the high court decided to strike only the provision stating that no points would be assessed to recipients of photo tickets. Several of the high court judges dissented, arguing the court majority was wrong to suggest in a footnote that cities could issue automated tickets as long as the driver was photographed, positively identified and points applied to his license.

"I suspect that the 'no points' provision was essential to the realpolitik of this ordinance, i.e., to striking a balance between the desire to raise revenues and the risk of outraging its citizens," Judge Paul C. Wilson wrote in a dissent.

In the final case, KMOX Radio personality Charlie Brennan challenged a $124 speed camera ticket that B and W Sensors mailed to him in Moline Acres three years ago. The court found the fatal flaw in this program was that the city presumes anyone driving a vehicle photographed by the program was driving with the owner's explicit permission to exceed the speed limit.

"Even if the court assumes that there is some rational connection between ownership of a vehicle and permission to use that vehicle generally, this connection does not stretch far enough to allow the finder of fact to infer from ownership the very specific permission to exceed the speed limit that the ordinance requires," the high court ruled in Moline Acres v. Brennan . "The city can still charge violations of the ordinance if it can state facts in the notice showing probable cause that the owner gave the driver specific permission to use the owner's vehicle for speeding and if it can prove this element beyond a reasonable doubt at trial, without relying on the unconstitutional presumption."

It is not clear how a city or its camera vendor could ever reach such a standard of proof. The court went on to strike down the program in Moline Acres because it created a system of imposing and collecting fines completely outside of the judicial system.

"The ordinance creates a system by which vehicle owners are accused of violating the ordinance, not in court where their rights are well established and can be protected, but in a letter from the police," the high court ruled. "The owners are told to make payments, not as fines owed upon conviction, but as ransom that will prevent charges from being filed in the first place... the unauthorized system created by the ordinance and implemented by the notice is a shortcut around the judicial system and its protection for the rights of the accused." (Called tyranny in most places)

The court went on to note that by cutting out the judiciary, the photo ticketing programs evaded the Macks Creek law put in place to prevent small towns from earning more than 30 percent of their revenue from traffic tickets.

[hikeaz]

YIPPEE!!!! Citizen-Fleecing City councils might not yet get it, but at least Wall Street does.

Redflex Stock Collapses In Wake Of Turmoil
Posted: 21 Aug 2015 11:55 PM PDT
It has been a bad week for the photo enforcement industry. On Monday, the Missouri Supreme Court issued three separate rulings declaring the red light camera and speed camera ordinances unconstitutional. This was followed Thursday with Karen Finley's plea of guilty to photo enforcement corruption in Chicago. Finley is the long-time leader of Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia, once one of the world's leading vendors of automated ticketing machines. Now the company is fighting for its survival.

Redflex shares traded Thursday at fire-sale prices on the Australian Securities Exchange. The stock tumbled to an all-time low of 30 cents per share, off from the peak price of $4.15 per share. As numerous cities have abandoned the use of automated ticketing machines, the company's profits have tumbled -- down 414 percent in the past year. Now many jurisdictions fear being associated with Redflex given the nature of the ongoing federal investigation, adding to the financial woes.

"As the CEO of Redflex Traffic Systems Inc, Karen funneled cash and other personal financial benefits to a city of Chicago official and his friend, knowing that the payments would help persuade the city to award red-light camera contracts to Redflex," a US Department of Justice press release explained on Thursday. "The benefits included golf trips, hotels and meals, as well as hiring the city official's friend as a highly compensated contractor for Redflex."

For her crimes, Finley faces a maximum of five years in jail and a $250,000 fine. Despite her guilty plea in Ohio, her deal with federal prosecutors has her serving her prison sentences concurrently, which means she will only be behind bars for a single sentence, not longer than five years. US District Judge Virginia M. Kendall said she will hold her sentencing hearing on February 18, 2016. Another part of the deal forces Finley to testify against any government or corporate officials involved in the bribery scandal.

"This cooperation shall include providing complete and truthful information in any investigation and pre-trial preparation and complete and truthful testimony in any criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding," Finley's plea agreement states.

[hikeaz]

Report: Southern California Red Light Cameras Fail To Reduce Accidents

Posted: 26 Aug 2015 01:06 AM PDT

Los Alamitos City Council Red light cameras are disappearing from California. Once the state had more than a hundred cities using automated ticketing machines, but by now a greater number of jurisdictions have canceled their programs than have functional cameras. On Monday, the Los Alamitos city council decided to keep its cameras despite a new report showing the devices have not improved safety.

Jay Beeber, Executive Director of Safer Streets LA, provided his analysis of the safety impact of photo enforcement use to the city councils in Los Alamitos and nearby Garden Grove, which is also mulling an extension of its contract with embattled Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia.

The analysis examined accident records from 2001 to 2014 at the two photo enforced intersections in Los Alamitos and the eight cameras locations in Garden Grove. Despite being in place for several years, there has been no statistically significant reduction in accidents. Beeber considered both rear end collisions and accidents where red light running was cited as the cause of the accident. In many camera locations, the overall number of collisions and injuries increased, though the results are less than conclusive because in most cases cameras were installed in locations where red light-related accidents were rare before the cameras were installed.

"Determining whether changes in collision rates are statistically significant is a crucial step in any analysis of collision data, especially where the actual number of collisions is relatively low, which is the case at Garden Grove intersections," the report explained. "This is because small changes will be magnified giving the appearance of a large percentage change when, in fact, the actual change in the number of collisions is small and due only to random fluctuations or regression to the mean."

At the Los Alamitos intersection of Katella Avenue and Los Alamitos Boulevard, for instance, there was no change in the average number of annual red light-related collisions after a decade of photo enforcement. In an entire year, however, the location averaged only 1.6 crashes per year, both with and without the cameras. At Katella Avenue at Bloomfield Street, the annual average dipped from 1.2 to 0.4 after cameras were installed, but the total number of accidents is already so low that it is not statistically possible to tell whether the difference was due to random variability or the presence of cameras.

At the Garden Grove intersection of Brookhurst Street and Orangewood Avenue, rear end, broadside and red light related collisions increased 73 to 107 percent, though the difference was not statistically meaningful. At Valley View Street and Chapman Avenue, rear end collisions jumped significantly from 0.24 per year to 2.0 per year. The location only had a single red light-related accident prior to having the camera installed.

Most of the other locations saw no clearly positive result. At Trask Avenue and Magnolia Street, red light related accidents dropped from 3.0 to 1.4 while rear enders increased from 1.0 to 2.9 -- yet neither change was statistically significant. The number of injuries, however, increased. This basic pattern repeated at Brookhurst Street and Chapman Avenue; Valley View Street and Lampson Avenue; and Brookhurst Street and Trask Avenue. Only Harbor Boulevard and Trask Avenue bucked the trend with a statistically significant drop from 2.7 red light-related accidents to 0.73 per year.

The report recommended further engineering improvements that have shown demonstrable benefits. In January, the city increased the duration of yellow lights at each camera intersection by 0.5 seconds in compliance with new state regulations. The number of automated tickets issued citywide plunged 61 percent overnight.

"This decrease in violations is significantly greater than anything achieved during the 10-plus years of ticketing at red light camera locations and mirrors the kinds of reductions we have seen in other cities when they have increased their yellow signal timing," the report explained.

Red light/Intersection surveillance companies HATE extending the yellow, as they know that adding a mere half second will reduce their income so drastically. Oh wait... it's all about safety, not income. SURE it is.

[hikeaz]

Amazing that Redflex is so concerned about citizen 'safety' that they are willing to bribe everyone in sight to keep the citizenry safe.

Third Guilty Plea In Redflex Red Light Camera Scandal
Posted: 06 Oct 2015 01:04 AM PDT
A lobbyist for Redflex Traffic Systems on Friday became the latest to fall in the ongoing federal photo enforcement corruption investigation. John P. Raphael, 60, told the US Department of Justice that he would plead guilty to arranging campaign donations from the Australian firm in return for local political support for the use of automated ticketing machines in Columbus and Cincinnati, Ohio.

In 2005, Redflex hired Raphael, one of the most prominent figures in Columbus, to lobby city hall. Rapahel leveraged his close personal ties to then-city council president (now mayoral candidate) Andrew J. Ginther to secure the red light camera and speed camera contract for Redflex. In total, $70,000 in campaign donations secured the deal that proved to be worth $10 million for Redflex. These donations were laundered through friends, family members and business contacts to prevent anyone from realizing that that donations were tied to the red light camera company.

Oddly, prosecutors decided to charge Raphael with a Hobbs Act violation for "extorting" money from Redflex, the company he worked for. In a series of emails, Raphael told former Redflex Executive Vice President Aaron M. Rosenberg that the company would have to make the campaign donations, or else it would lose the contract.

"That is, the defendant obtained and attempted to obtain the property of [Redflex] and its executives, with [Redflex's] and the executives' consent, induced by the wrongful use of fear of economic harm," Assistant US Attorney J. Michael Marous wrote in a court filing. "The defendant's actions obstructed, delayed and affected and attempted to obstruct, delay and affect, in any way and degree commerce and the movement of articles and commodities in commerce."

[hikeaz]

In many states, the only penalty for failing to pay a red light camera or speed camera ticket is a black mark on a driver's credit score. That leverage is no more, thanks to a $6 million settlement reached between thirty-one state attorneys general and credit reporting agencies Equifax, Experian and TransUnion. The sweeping agreement will protect consumers by limiting the ability of for-profit photo ticketing companies from affecting the credit of vehicle owners.

"We've had many complaints over the years about credit reporting agencies not fixing their own mistakes on peoples' credit reports, and it has been difficult, and in some cases impossible, for consumers to push them to correct it," Attorney General Tom Miller said in a statement in May. "Credit reports are vital to consumers. They can affect peoples' abilities to secure jobs, homes and vehicles. These reports must be accurate."

As first reported by the Cedar Rapids Gazette, Miller confirmed that the agreement does apply to Iowa's red light camera and speed camera programs. A spokesman for Miller's office directed TheNewspaper to a section of the settlement that explicitly covers citations.

"The credit reporting agencies shall prohibit collection furnishers from reporting debt that did not arise from any contract or agreement to pay (including, but not limited to, certain fines, tickets, and other assessments)," section E(1)(c) states.

In states where there is no specific law prohibiting the reporting of citations to credit agencies, vehicle owners could find out after applying for a loan that their application was denied over a photo ticket that they never received, or in some cases that was the result of a mistaken camera reading. Legally, the window to challenge the underlying ticket would have expired, leaving innocent vehicle owners without recourse.

The agreement is retroactive, meaning existing credit black marks from unpaid tickets must be cleared. Equifax, Experian and TransUnion complied the demands of the attorneys general in the face of a multistate legal action alleging violation of federal and state consumer protection laws over the industry's deceptive and unfair practices. By agreeing to adopt reforms and paying the states $6 million, the credit reporting agencies will have all potential charges dropped.

The agreement applies to the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

[hikeaz]

Red Light Cameras Fail To Reduce Accidents In Tucson, Arizona

Accident analysis shows no safety benefit to photo enforcement in Tucson, Arizona.

As voters in Tucson, Arizona head to the polls today to decide the fate of automated ticketing machines, an analysis shows the use of red light cameras since 2007 has failed to reduce accidents. Peoria resident Ryan Denke produced the report using the Arizona Department of Transportation's database of traffic accidents covering the years 2005 through 2014.

Denke observed that the number of crashes statewide rose or fell in sync with the number of miles driven in every year but 2005. This makes sense since the more time cars spend in traffic, the greater the statistical chance that they will be involved in an accident. In Tucson, Denke calculated a 92 percent correlation between miles driven and accidents.

At the intersection of Grant Road and Tanque Verde Road, the total number of accidents almost exactly tracks the citywide crash trends. The only difference is that the photo enforced intersection saw the number of injury collisions climb after cameras were activated in 2007. The results were similar at each of the other photo enforced locations.

"A comparison of trends between the intersection and the city shows a general correlation," Denke explained for the intersection of Nogales Highway and Valencia Road. "There is no significant difference between the city wide trend and this intersection, indicating that this camera has had very little impact on crashes."

This finding runs counter to the claims of Tucson officials who have insisted that accidents have plunged thanks to the use of automated ticketing. An alternative explanation is that crashes did decline when the housing market bubble burst in 2007 and the US economy plunged into recession. This resulted in a significant drop in miles driven, especially in Arizona.

"By using a simplistic approach to crash data that did not account for miles driven or other factors, city officials have mistakenly attributed reductions in crashes to photo ticketing equipment," Denke explained. "This limited analysis has lead Tucson to erroneously celebrate the success of their photo ticketing system rather than scrutinizing the performance and the results."

Denke found that state records showed only 6.7 percent of crashes were caused by exceeding the posted speed limit or running a stop light, as compared to 27.4 percent of accidents being caused by drivers who were distracted or using a cell phone. Denke argues these data show that red light cameras and speed cameras could never have more than a marginal effect on accident rates.


http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/20 ... ncrash.pdf

[big_load]

@hikeaz Unfortunately, I'm not the least bit surprised. That finding seems consistent wherever red light cameras are deployed.

[hikeaz]

When these atm machines are not initiated by some end-around by our (no so) illustrious gub'ment and the payola that fuels the fire, the voters act as Dorothy, pulling back the curtain to reveal the REAL motive behind these cameras, they go down-in-flames. I wonder how many folks have been injured or worse by the increase of accidents that these cause?

Tucson, Arizona on Tuesday became the third Arizona city to outlaw the use of red light cameras and speed cameras at the ballot box. By a margin of 65.5 percent to 34.5 percent, residents approved Proposition 201, which will send the city's private vendor, American Traffic Solutions (ATS), packing.

The successful vote came as a result of the work of Tucson Traffic Justice, an all-volunteer group that collected 53,000 signatures on a petition forcing the city council to put the measure before voters. The organization's leader, former state lawmaker John Kromko, believes ATS may attempt to keep the city's photo ticketing contract alive, as it has done in other cities where the people have rejected photo enforcement. In Tucson, the new voter-approved ordinance prohibits the use of photo evidence for traffic tickets, regardless of the status of the contract.

"I wrote [the initiative] so that they just can't use that evidence," Kromko told TheNewspaper. "So we're protected against drone tickets in the future."

The public opposed cameras in the end, despite the efforts of unidentified camera supporters who attempted to influence the results by going around town defacing and removing the "Yes on 201, Ban red light cameras" campaign signs. Kromko spent $300 to replace the advertisements.

Kromko's case against the use of cameras was bolstered by a recent analysis of state accident records that showed no safety benefit to the use of red light cameras.

"Red light cameras and automated photo radar enforcement supposedly protect us from reckless drivers," the Tucson Traffic Justice website stated. "A closer look at the situation, however, reveals that the tickets are little more than a revenue generator for American Traffic Solutions and the city of Tucson."

The first ever public vote on the use of speed cameras happened 24 years ago in Peoria, Arizona when 70 percent of residents voted to reject cameras. More recently, 72 percent of voters in Sierra Vista insisted on sending the camera companies packing. Nationwide, voters have banned the use of automated ticketing machines by referendum thirty-three times. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/36/3655.asp

________________________________________________________________________________

ATS's NEW scam is cameras on school busses - taking photos of passing vehicles.

[hikeaz]

Maryland: Speed Camera Tickets Stationary Bus

The Maryland Drivers Alliance has uncovered evidence that the state's speed camera programs continue to be plagued by accuracy problems. Last year, Baltimore made national headlines when an audit revealed it had been mailing automated speeding tickets to parked automobiles and drivers who were obeying the speed limit. Now the city of College Park and its for-profit camera vendor Optotraffic have been caught accusing a motionless bus of speeding.

The motorist rights group used a freedom of information act request to obtain copies of emails from city officials discussing erroneous photo citations. The heavily redacted documents describe a series of embarrassing errors. In October, for example, the University of Maryland complained about a ticket issued to one of its shuttle bus drivers.

"The photos purportedly show the bus moving at 38 MPH, but it is clearly stopped at the light at Calvert Road," a university staffer wrote in an October 16 email to the College Park public works director.

The university went on to prove that the GPS tracking system installed on the bus confirmed that, before the shuttle bus came to a stop, it had been traveling at 14.9 MPH, well under the speed limit. All of the university's buses are tracked in real time, allowing passengers to know exactly when their ride will arrive.

"I ran a report of the driver's entire shift, and he never went over 32 MPH, which is consistent with that driver," the university staffer explained. "Also, the way the lights are timed, when making the left from Guilford as that route does, the light at Calvert will always be red upon the bus's arrival."

The unapologetic public services director, Bob Ryan, consulted with Optotraffic and decided to cancel the clearly erroneous ticket. This was not an isolated incident. The Maryland Drivers Alliance confirmed at least thirty cases where innocent drivers were wrongly accused because the Optotraffic automated system misread the license plates and nobody verified the vehicle information against the photograph.

One driver ticketed on May 4 wrote the city to complain.
"The name given on the ticket is mine," a handwritten letter explained. "All the other information about the vehicle I am completely unfamiliar with. This is information about a vehicle that does not belong to me and which I know nothing about."

[big_load]

Yikes! I visit College Park a couple times a year.

[hikeaz]

Well, I guess that we cannot STOP the tyranny, but we can at least slow it down some...

18 Dec 2015 12:54 AM PST

Judge Julie A. Schafer of The Ohio Court of Appeals was not impressed by a local judge's attempt to save Akron's speed camera program from a handful of minor restrictions imposed by the General Assembly. A three-judge appellate panel reversed Summit County Court of Common Pleas Judge Thomas A. Teodosio, who had given Akron and its camera vendor American Traffic Solutions (ATS) permission to continue issuing automated tickets without restriction.

In March, a law that was incorrectly described as a "ban" on speed cameras took effect. This measure specifically authorized photo ticketing as long as a police officer was stationed near the automated device. Municipalties and ATS objected, as the requirement significantly raised the cost of running a camera program Wait! isn't it all about safety? Saving lives vs. cold hard ca$h... hmmm. . Judge Teodosio heard the complaints and decided to strike down the restrictions as unconstitutional.

"This requirement appears to have no impact on the operation of automatic enforcement devices other than to place a prohibitive cost on their operation, and essentially defeats the benefits, and indeed the very premise of such automatic devices by requiring the presence of law enforcement," Judge Teodosio ruled.

Not so fast, said the appellate judges.

"All acts of the General Assembly are entitled to a strong presumption of constitutionality. There's that pesky Constitution thing obstructing the would-be tyrants Judge Julie A. Schafer wrote for the three-judge panel. "Here, the trial court's judgment entry ruling... never referred to the presumption of constitutionality... Consequently, we conclude that the trial court failed to apply the necessary first principle that is implicated in all challenges to legislative enactments' constitutionality -- the presumption that the challenged enactment is constitutional."

The panel found another significant error in the lower court's decision. Judge Teodosio struck down the speed camera restriction law without applying the legally required analysis of which provisions of the law could be saved if others happen to be found unconstitutional.

"The city's and ATS's motion for summary judgment also fails to identify which specific provisions of the act are unconstitutional and severable," Judge Schaever wrote. "Moreover, the trial court's judgment entry contains no reference to the severance test promulgated by the Ohio Supreme Court."