Cities Upset That Increasing Yellow Light Time Length Reduces 'Revenue'

from the safety-first? dept

Tue, Mar 24th 2009 1:51pm — Mike Masnick

With the news that Mississippi has passed a law banning traffic light cameras because it's an invasion of privacy, it's worth looking a bit to the east, where some cities in Georgia are taking down their red light cameras not because of privacy issues, but because a new law required them to increase the length of time that a light is yellow by one second -- and that's decreased red light violations so significantly, that red light cameras have become "too expensive" (thanks to Scott Cauthen for sending that story in). This is what critics of red light cameras have said from the beginning: it's always been about the revenue, rather than the safety. If you want safety, all you need to do is increase the length of yellow lights, and you have fewer people running red lights and significantly fewer accidents. But... if revenue is your goal, then you do things like decrease the yellow light timing -- which is what a few cities have been caught doing.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: georgia, mississippi, red light cameras

36 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:05pm

Also . . .
Signaling in Michigan often includes a second where all parts of the intersection are red after a yellow light.

I'm not sure how much that's reduced collision, but it keeps people from gunning it into the intersection when they see the other side turn red (and the last of those trying to beat the light race through).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dave, 25 Mar 2009 @ 6:09am
  
  Re: Also . . .
  In Ontario, there's 3 seconds between red one way and green on the other. People constantly run red lights now. So much so that Red light cameras were brought in.
  
  People ignore yellows much of the time, as they know that they have time once the red lights are on.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Pixelpusher220, 25 Mar 2009 @ 10:04am
  
  Re: Also . . .
  Michigan lights and driver habits...
  
  Both my parents grew up in Detroit, so having been there frequently I can say that 'red-light' running is a bit vague. The general habit was always, stop on yellow and hit the gas just after it turned red.
  
  That extra 'all red' second may be because people were jumping the red's...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:09pm

Wonder what happens...
when people become accustomed to the longer yellow light.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- bulljustin (profile), 24 Mar 2009 @ 4:30pm
  
  Re: Wonder what happens...
  That's what I was going to say. Once people get used to the longer yellow light there will be more red light runners leading to a call for more red light traffic cams.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weird Harold, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:19pm

Yup, in theory, if you make the yellow long enough, nobody will cross on the red - just leave the yellow on!

Serious, when you lengthen yellow lights, there is a period of time where people are use to the shorter ones and won't run at them. When they know it's longer, they will be right back to running them.

The real issue was the places that shortened the yellow when the installed the red light cams specifically to catch more people. That really sucked.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Weird Harolds #2 Fan, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:33pm
  
  Re:
  Lead us!
  
  Free us from thought and responsibility!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 6:05pm
  
  Re:
  Yes, there are bad people out there ... and some of them run red lights, but screwing over everyone else does nothing tofix that problem.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Pixelpusher220, 25 Mar 2009 @ 11:10am
  
  Re:
  you hit the nail on the head. it takes time for drivers to change habits when new rules aren't followed with new training classes.
  
  expecting instant red-light camera obedience is crazy. The people who claim that because accidents go *up* after the cameras are installed the cameras are fatally flawed and must be removed are the most short sighted hypocrits.
  
  Of course accidents go up, but eventually the number and severity of accidents will go down.
  
  This just takes time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - BTR1701, 26 Mar 2009 @ 12:44pm
    
    Re: Re: Eggs
    > Of course accidents go up, but eventually
    > the number and severity of accidents will go
    > down.
    
    Ah, the old "you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelot" argument. I guess you just gotta hope you or your family don't have the bad luck to be one of the eggs.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Me, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:22pm

Amber
It's amber dammit, amber!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The infamous Joe, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:25pm

Yup, leave them yellow.
I agree, leave them yellow all the time, in all directions.

There have been studies showing that having no traffic signals (or stop signs) at all actually decreases accidents.

Google it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Weird Harold, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:31pm
  
  Re: Yup, leave them yellow.
  Call Aarons, I think you can rent a sense of humor from them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 3:21pm
    
    Re: Re: Yup, leave them yellow.
    Call Aarons, I think you can rent a sense of humor from them.
    
    Saw it when you were there shopping for a brain, eh?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Matt T., 24 Mar 2009 @ 4:03pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Yup, leave them yellow.
      Zing!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 6:50pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Yup, leave them yellow.
      Why? Are you missing one?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nathan, 24 Mar 2009 @ 4:02pm
  
  Re: Yup, leave them yellow.
  Yeah, I remember seeing a video or something, I don't remember where. Some town in Europe, I think the Netherlands, did away with all traffic lights/signage, except for informational things like street signs.
  
  Anyway, this apparently forced drivers to pay more attention and be responsible for their own safety and accidents decreased greatly. I'm not sure how feasible this might be on a larger scale, but it is interesting at the very least.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 24 Mar 2009 @ 4:36pm
  
  Re: Yup, leave them yellow.
  
  There have been studies showing that having no traffic signals (or stop signs) at all actually decreases accidents.
  
  Google it.
  
  Or Techdirt it. :)
  
  http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040520/0110225.shtml
  http://www.techdirt.com/articles/2004 1207/0932232.shtml
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tgeigs, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:34pm

This is what happens
...when government gets too big. I'm not talking Republican/Democrat big government here, I'm talking simply about numbers of constituents. When federal and state governments (which I'm assuming are the level at which these Dept. of Tran. decisions are made) don't actually have to answer to their constituents in a relatively face to face manner, we all become dollar signs instead of people. Its the reason that Presidents can order us to go to war w/o the effect on their conscious that they probably ought to have: when you don't SEE the people who are DYING, they just become pieces on a Risk boardgame.

I'm not sure how to fix this, beyond the broad idea of filtering more responsibility to County and City governments, but this just seems to be a trend I'm seeing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:36pm

Should lengthen them by a second for about a month and then cut back on that one second and kind of mix it up so people can't really get used to it anymore
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- chris (profile), 25 Mar 2009 @ 7:23am
  
  Re:
  Should lengthen them by a second for about a month and then cut back on that one second and kind of mix it up so people can't really get used to it anymore
  
  brilliant! or better yet, have a minimum of say 7 seconds, followed by an random number between .01 and 10.0 seconds. that way every yellow light at ever intersection is different every time.
  
  i don't know if it will make things safer, but it would be a lot of fun to watch the mathematicians and the gambling addicts drive around the block again and again and again.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:48pm

A government large enough to provide for all your needs is large enough to take deprive you of everything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tgeigs, 24 Mar 2009 @ 2:51pm

Anonymous Coward
Then maybe it's high time we redefined our needs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 4:25pm
  
  Re: Anonymous Coward
  maybe it's time we understood the difference between "needs" and "wants"...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Ron, 24 Mar 2009 @ 4:30pm
    
    Re: Re: Anonymous Coward
    You mean as in:
    We "need" the money but we don't really "want" you to die - please be safe enough to survive so you can repeatedly pay the fine because we shortened the yellow light for maximum profitability!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Levente Orban, 24 Mar 2009 @ 3:03pm

increasing yellow light length
It would be useful to know more about the effects of increased yellow light length. Would people eventually habituate or learn the new timing of the yellow light? If yes, the number of red-runs might return to pre-change levels...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris, 24 Mar 2009 @ 3:03pm

Solution
There are some intersections (rare in most parts) where there is simply a countdown clock that shows on the side that people look at when walking across the crosswalk...If we actually put these in intersections people would have a much better idea of how much time they have to either slow down or speed up. IMO this is FAR safer, however some will argue that it will cause more people to "speed", but I don't really think it will, as people are much more likely to act rationally and safely if they know what state the light system is in as they approach, rather than the dumbed down Green-Yellow-Red system that catches you off-guard depending on the yellow-light timing at THAT particular intersection.

Then again, we'd have fewer people running red lights so there'd be less revenue from that, so I'm sure we'd end up paying more for other violations or property taxes, etc...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ron, 24 Mar 2009 @ 3:55pm

Traffic circles!
Skip the reds, yellows and greens; install traffic circles and keep traffic moving at all times in all directions. It works in other countries. However, like the metric system, we in the US, believe our way is always the best even when faced with evidence to the contrary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- bulljustin (profile), 24 Mar 2009 @ 4:37pm
  
  Re: Traffic circles!
  Really, traffic circles? Ever try to get out of one of those during rush hour? Just because traffic is moving doesn't mean that it's more efficient IF vehicles have to circle two or three times to get where they can safely exit the circle. The only way traffic circles work in high traffic situations is if the traffic influx can be regulated, which requires stop lights, which negates the benefits of a traffic circle.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ryan, 24 Mar 2009 @ 5:04pm
  
  Re: Traffic circles!
  Thats ridiculous. Im in MA and theres a nearby town that people avoid from 3 to 7pm because of the trafic. try 7 roads hitting eachother at the same spot.
  
  Anyways, I think that there are a lot of lights/stop signs that are uneeded. I really dont like bringing my 3500lb vehicle to a stop and then getting it moving again in the middle of the woods when there is no one there, kinda a waste of gas I think. Yield signs would be much easier
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 3:56pm

Redlight Cameras Devalue City Civil Planners Work
It used to be that intersections with abnormally high accident rates were scrutinized by city planners, who in turn came up with REAL ways to mitigate accidents. Their suggestions may have included lengthened yellow lights, speed controls, changes to speed limits or re-engineering of the intersection.

This was generally accepted practice of the trade. Now, cash-strapped city governments seem to have replaced some of these jobs, which were in a way, an overhead expense, with Red Light Cameras which are cash-positive revenue-generating.

It's not surprising that there is and will be much debate over Red-Light Cameras: They generate revenue and don't speak up to the real issues, which may include an overhaul of the design to an intersection... Which could be a costly budget item.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tim Schmidt, 24 Mar 2009 @ 4:51pm

Pricey tickets
I left a Car Pool lane at the wrong spot and was hit with a $450 ticket in December. It's cheaper to get caught driving solo with a mannequin...which is $281.

Instead of focusing on red lights, just raise the fine on all tickets across the board.

I'll never leave the car pool lane again after that hit to my wallet. And I believe red light tickets are cheaper, but WAY more deadly, that my manuever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2009 @ 5:03pm
  
  Re: Pricey tickets
  It's cheaper to get caught driving solo with a mannequin...which is $281.
  
  Hah!
  That brought up memories. :-)
  http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/6468593/detail.html
  http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog/ archives/126927.asp
  http://blog.oregonlive.com/nwheadlines/2008/01/really_bad_mannequin_for_cheat.h tml
  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,321745,00.html
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Pixelpusher220, 25 Mar 2009 @ 11:05am
  
  Re: Pricey tickets
  I left a Car Pool lane at the wrong spot and was hit with a $450 ticket in December. It's cheaper to get caught driving solo with a mannequin...which is $281.
  
  so you're upset that you got caught breaking the law? and that you'd just break it in a cheaper way next time?
  
  The focus on red light running is that it has very serious consequences when it goes bad. Carpool cheats generally just slow things down rather than inflict serious bodily injury...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - nasch, 26 Mar 2009 @ 10:31am
    
    Re: Re: Pricey tickets
    We don't know exactly what this situation was. Maybe he swerved across solid white cross-hatching and cut someone off. But if he just exited a lane across a solid line instead of at the dashed line where he was supposed to, in an otherwise safe manner, does a $450 fine make any sense?
    
    It's perfectly appropriate to point out disproportionate punishments, and does not necessarily have anything to do with being upset about getting caught.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thomas, 25 Mar 2009 @ 8:13am

More into revenue
Sadly, too many cities are more interested in the revenue from red light cameras than preventing accidents. If shortening the timing on yellow leads to a 25% increase in tickets PLUS a 20% increase in accidents, do you really belive they would care about the accidents? They just blame them on stupid drivers and rake in the cash.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]