'Revenue Generating' Traffic Cameras Forcing Governments To Refund Millions Of Dollars
from the not-working-out-quite-the-way-they-thought-it-would dept
Technology saves time and labor, but is as ultimately fallible as the humans it displaces. Thanks to the efficiencies of technology, mistakes can now be made faster than ever. Municipalities which have turned over traffic enforcement to cameras probably hoped to generate funds much faster than it could with an un-augmented police force. Instead, they're finding themselves issuing refunds, deactivating faulty cameras, fighting with contractors and investigating corruption. Not much of a payoff.
Two more stories have appeared (nearly simultaneously) showing the incredible number of tickets a set of cameras can rack up in a short period… and the amount of funds generated that no one will ever be able to claim.
The first comes from Nassau County, New York, where overenthusiastic speed cameras enforced school zone speed limits while school wasn't even in session.
Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano has dismissed $2.4 million in speed camera tickets issued over the past month, amid outrage from residents who received thousands of tickets from cameras at six school locations.Mangano went even further than this, declaring amnesty on all tickets issued this summer. Anyone who paid a ticket will be issued a refund and any unpaid tickets will be forgiven. Nassau County has contacted the contractor -- the infamous American Traffic Solutions -- presumably to ask it why its cameras can't be calibrated to issue school zone tickets only when school zone speed limits are actually active. The county officials declined to say whether they'd be asking ATS to refund its share of the "lost" revenue, which is 38% of every fine collected.
Mangano said cameras at five locations malfunctioned, spitting out tickets on days when school was not in session. Cameras at a sixth location -- in Elmont -- went operational prematurely.
Of the $2.4 million the county will be refunding, only about $800,000 of it is for tickets issued while school wasn't in session. The other two-thirds is a good faith writeoff to help the county push through its installation of even more cameras.
In April, state lawmakers approved legislation allowing Nassau and Suffolk to install one speed camera in each of their school districts. Nassau will install cameras at 56 locations. Suffolk, which plans to roll out its program in mid-2015, will have 69 sites. Motorists that travel more than 10 mph over the posted speed limit receive an $80 ticket.Not only will more static cameras be installed, but the county is also planning to send roving traffic enforcement cameras out on a tour of area schools.
Officials could not say how many districts will have mobile units, which can be moved to schools throughout the district at the county's discretion. The mobile units consist of an unmarked van with two cameras and a radar machine.Nassau residents don't seem nearly as pleased with this expansion, especially not after having their mailboxes filled with bogus tickets. But I doubt the complaints of the citizens will be able to overcome the dollar signs in their representatives' eyes.
The speed camera program is expected to generate $25 million or more annually for [Nassau County]... Suffolk expects to generate $6.8 million from the 46 cameras in Western Suffolk, where the county provides police service, said county spokeswoman Vanessa Baird-Streeter.Those are some pretty large numbers, provided the county isn't periodically forced to issue a ton of refunds. Given American Traffic Solutions' track record, it would behoove these county officials to cease counting their revenue before it's extracted by traffic robocops.
Meanwhile, over in New Jersey, malfunctioning systems installed and maintained by -- yes, you guessed it -- American Traffic Solutions have forced the state government to ask courts to throw out 17,000 tickets because drivers were never informed of their alleged infractions. (h/t to Techdirt reader Vidiot)
The state lawmaker who today brought the issue to the public’s attention — Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlon —said it's is just the latest example of why New Jersey’s red light camera should not be renewed when it reaches its December expiration date.Once again, the screwup is all ATS. Apparently, a "server configuration change" resulted in ATS sending out no violation notices from May 28 to June 30, turning 17,000 potential moneymakers into 17,000 potential dismissals, thanks to exceeding the 90-day notification window.
“This wasn't 5 or 10 or even a couple of hundred instances - this total breakdown affected almost 17,000 motorists,” O’Scanlon (R-Monmouth) said in a statement. "These companies incessantly tout the supposed accuracy and consistency of their systems - when the only thing consistent about the camera company representatives is their blatant misrepresentation of what the equipment does and how accurately it does it."
Winnie Comfort, a spokeswoman for the state Judiciary, said that the issue was brought to its attention by the company — American Traffic Solutions (ATS) — on Aug. 10. Under New Jersey law, Comfort said, drivers must receive notices of the infractions within 90 days.
An ATS spokesman spun this as a "technical issue" that only "impacted" a small percentage of issued tickets. (Oh, and the automated revenue generator is apparently called a "red-light safety camera" in ATS jargon.) Two things: if 17,000 tickets is only a small percentage of tickets issued, then ATS is definitely firing off way too many tickets. Thing, the second: it's only ATS having problems with its servers.
Automated Traffic Solutions operates traffic cameras at about half of New Jersey's 76 intersections that are equipped with them. The other company, Redflex, did not have the same problem.Of course, Redflex bribes local politicians to secure contracts, so it's not as if this company doesn't have its own issues -- ones that also negatively affect the citizens being policed by unreliable camera systems.
As noted above, Assemblyman Scanlon indicated he'd rather not renew the state's contract with ATS. Given Redflex's moral turpitude, it might be prudent not to renew its contract either. But this would leave the state with very few options for low-cost revenue generation -- and once localities become hooked on a source of income, there's very little chance they'll give it up readily, no matter how corrupt/incompetent/terrible it is.
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: failures, nassau county, refunds, speed cameras, traffic cameras
Companies: american traffic solutions, ats, redflex
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
This has a few minor issues such as the problem with faulty or poorly calibrated equipment. There are also the speed "traps", cameras that are placed in a way that lures drivers into going past the speed limits (ie, different speed limit signs very close to each other) or very short yellow lights in intersections. Some people here started putting warning signs about such "traps" and during some time the Govt was mandated by law (and some judicial prod) to actually warn drivers in advance that in the next few hundred meters there would be a camera and banned mobile radars (this was mandated exactly because of the abuses).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
he then tells me i was going 35 in a 25 MPH school zone, and since i'm 17, i'll loose my licence, I point out that the speed limit is 35 because it's not a school day, he says my kids are still in school, i say:
"then you don't live in Washington township, because i go to school, and schools out. But you don't have to believe me officer, if you look on the sign infront of the school, it lists the last date as May, 22, and it's the 23rd"
He was pissed. kept me there for half an hour inspecting my car looking for anything he could write me up on. Never did find anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Interesting. I have some friends who became cops, and they told me that part of their training was that they should be able to find three citable offenses in literally any car they come across. To accomplish this requires knowing all kinds of arcane laws that don't appear in the driver's manual and nobody really knows exist (such as: there's a law requiring cars to have a trash receptacle in the front half of the vehicle.)
Maybe that cop just needed a refresher course.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That's not law in all states. I would agree, however, that it is odd that a police officer would not be able to find at least one offense on a car unless it is brand new - I suppose that could depend greatly on where he lives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So basically cops, after they stop you for whatever reason they like and search your car, even if you're not doing anything wrong they can still getcha?
And police wonder why people don't like them...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
They KNOW without shadow of a doubt why people hate them, because in their mind, we are all criminals waiting to be caught by them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Intentional mistakes for revenue
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Intentional mistakes for revenue
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Intentional mistakes for revenue
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cities are scamming yellows for cash, killing drivers
If you catch a yellow light that lasts less than the national standards, report the city to the state.
25 MPH -- 3.0 Seconds
30 MPH -- 3.5 Seconds
35 MPH -- 4.0 Seconds
40 MPH -- 4.5 Seconds
45 MPH -- 5.0 Seconds
50 MPH -- 5.5 Seconds
55 MPH -- 6.0 Seconds
http://www.shortyellowlights.com/standards/
While there are no laws mandating these timings, these are the values recommended for traffic safety. Truncating them for increased revenue streams WILL lead to more accidents and possible fatalities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cities are scamming yellows for cash, killing drivers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Cities are scamming yellows for cash, killing drivers
Thus leaving it to the states to make the laws or ignore the issue.
All traffic cams in my area were forcibly removed after the 3rd injury accident because the yellow lights were truncated (to half the safe value). Citizens are preparing to file a a criminal negligence suit against the city for intentionally making the intersections unsafe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Cities are scamming yellows for cash, killing drivers
The 2003 MUTCD recommends a minimum duration of 3 seconds for the yellow change interval.
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08024/chapter5.htm#5.7
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cities are scamming yellows for cash, killing drivers
This really comes into play when traffic is light and you're going 35-37 and approaching a light. About 200 yards out you need to start slowing just in case the yellow pops up (many don't have the countdown timers). If yellow comes you hit brakes pretty hard to come to almost pit stop like stop as 3 sec comes up really quick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The solution is obvious
The annoying thing is that it has been shown that red light cameras on dangerous intersection makes those safer (not taking into account external factors such as yellow light periods that are [too] short).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The solution is obvious
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The solution is obvious
Here is a summary (in Dutch I'm afraid):factsheet, page 5 & 6.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The solution is obvious
Please read a bit before posting obvious kool-aid findings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The solution is obvious
And a minimum yellow timing must be mandated by federal efforts to prevent any entrapment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The solution is obvious
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The solution is obvious
So next time actually bother to read before putting up post reflexively dismissing anything that doesn't fit your blinders up view of the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The solution is obvious
It just doubles or triples the accident rates when they do.
In our area, the number of accidents rose by 67% after the lights were installed, and that was with standard yellow light timings.
An area that shortened the yellow light had an increase of over 130% for 3 days before the city received complaints from 2 lawyers and a judge threatening criminal negligence charges as well as major monetary lawsuits to be filed on behalf of everyone in 3 counties that drove over the roads in question.
So yeah, I did see the note about "external" factors, but they were irrelevant to my comment.
Thanks for trying, and for the record, it's spelled "Kool-Aid" in the United States, which is also relevant to this discussion.
Have a grumpy day
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The solution is obvious
Was the intersection considered dangerous before the cameras were installed (another of the points I raised)? Or was it put up as a revenue generator? How long was the original yellow light period, was it short already? Are the cameras clearly announced to drivers?
So yes you reacted as a bull to a red rag on the fact that I defended the placement of the cameras in some situations and didn't bother to read what I wrote. Might want to follow the studies in the factsheet link I posted to another comment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Um
An unmarked van parked near a school? What could possibly go wrong?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Um
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Um
What about if the school is near a river?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Um
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Um
I have zero tolerance for unmarked vans parked near schools, TAKING PICTURES!
Arrest these pedos!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Reason for Percentage of the Tickets
My company like many has a security system with back-end software to utilize it. We don't get charge per video or picture taken by those cameras. We paid them for the installation and purchase of the cameras and software and then a yearly maintenance fee for support and software updates.
Not that I think camera's are a great thing to begin with, but if more cities pushed back on this requirement, maybe we would see more sanity with how these things are being used since half the revenue won't be going back the manufacturer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Reason for Percentage of the Tickets
This way, it's paid out of the pockets of the people who are given tickets for violations they didn't commit.
Also, who does the company send to court when you ask to face your accuser? I'd want the camera itself, along with the source code for the software used, the login / passwords of the people who "Certify" the tickets, as well as the the raw footage and edited footage to compare ESS between the two, if they could not provide that then I'd ask the judge for summary dismissal as it would be obvious that they forged the evidence and can't guarantee the software to be bug free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
routinely takes pics of licenses of folks who perform a LEGAL right on red after stop.
i might know a little bit about that. i saw a flash one time when i was turning left on a turn arrow. the police station was nearby so i went in, hot as a pistol, and the lady told me that cameras take a series of pics whether you do it right or not. she said a retired cop reviews the pics and the sequence would show that i made a legal turn. as she said, i never heard from them.
i despise those things and feel we've gone way into the deep end here, but their taking pics of legal moves is probably more about snooping than revenue generation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's a Safety Program, right?
Odd how they never seem to mention how many lives will be saved, or how many accidents will be prevented. Makes it easy to see what their true motivation is, I guess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's a Safety Program, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For all of you math-challenged politicians out there, if this is generating $31.8m, it is costing the people of those counties $83.3m in fines.
My guess is people would be happy to lose the cameras and just increase their taxes enough to cover the $31.8m - it will be cheaper.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The speed camera program is expected to generate $25 million
So over time these "safety cameras" see a reduction in tickets generated and revenue earned, right?
I'd be ok with that, collect money from those who break laws so we can educate them and reduce the number of broken laws thus making our streets safer!
But when safety is NOT the ONLY goal then these cameras have no business being deployed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The speed camera program is expected to generate $25 million
This is especially true in regions where the city traffic management offices boost the revenue streams by playing with the yellow light timings during the heaviest traffic flows.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear Citizens,
As you know, the StasiXXXXXDepartment of Homeland Security urges you to report suspicious people and items. Surely an unmarked van with multiple cameras parked in a school zone qualifies: could be pedophiles, could be rapists, could be ZOMG terrorists! So be sure to report this van every single time you see it. Make sure that your friends and neighbors do the same: after all, we can't be too careful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you're going to San Francisco (or elsewhere in CA)...
Now that I've got your attention...
We've had cameras here for almost two decades. At one time we had more than 100 cities with red light cameras. Now it's down to 43 cities, with recent closures being the large systems operated by Redflex in the Cities of Hayward, Oakland, Santa Ana, Inglewood, and Riverside - 82 cameras in those five cities. In many of those cities the police chiefs and/or mayors made on-the-record statements about the (lack of) efficacy of the cameras. If anyone would like to read those statements, do a search on red light camera candor and then search that Industry PR page for the word candor. But if you're too busy to go there and read what they said, I will summarize: The cameras made no measurable difference in the number of accidents or injuries.
For those readers who are in California or travel here, here is some semi-secret info about how to deal with our very special flavor of red light cameras. Here's what to do - first thing - if you get one of our tickets.
1. Check to see if it is a Snitch Ticket, the fake/phishing tickets California cops send out to bluff car owners into IDing the actual driver. Snitch Tickets say, at the top, Courtesy Notice-This is not a ticket, and you can ignore them! Skeptical? Search: Snitch Ticket. (Snitch Tickets are one of those "only in California" things.)
2. REAL camera tickets from ANY city (or sheriff) in LA County can be ignored, as the LA courts do not report ignored camera tickets to the DMV. Search: red light camera no consequence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And...what about records?
I don't know how it works in New Jersey (apparently literally everything is different there, like Texas but more so) but here in Alabama, while parking tickets are handled by the local city and not part of your state Department of Public Safety record, all speeding tickets, even from local cops, DO go on your statewide public record (which anyone can pull online for a measly $8, or in Montgomery in person for probably more than $8 worth in gas to get there, heh.)
So is everyone's record being expunged for free? If not, I'd rather pay the $80 ticket and sink a weekend into one of those diversion programs. Especially so that a future employer doesn't think I was speeding 30MPH over the limit with a bunch of poor innocent children desperately trying to get out of my way.
Just saying. This story could get MUCH worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BUT... BUT... BUT...
Do you want the terrorists TO WIN?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
38% goes to the camera manufacturer!?
In any other market, it would be regarded as highway robbery for a tooling machine or other manufacturing device to cost a portion of the proceeds. For that amount they could put a cop on every single street.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 38% goes to the camera manufacturer!?
They don't call them "red light" cameras because of what is on the pole (unless it's a stripper pole).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Talk about drawing the wrong conclusion. Perhaps the issue is that just way too many people run red lights. Have you ever considered that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If too many people run red lights
When too many people do an illegal thing, it means somethings wrong with the system, compelling people to do the illegal thing.
Either it needs to be decriminalized or there needs to be a legal alternative that people will want to choose.
Wait! This sounds like copyright infringement discussions we've had countless times!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SCHOOL ZONE CAMERA
"APPROACHING SCHOOL ZONE,25MPH CAMERA ENFORCED".....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DO YOU NEED A LOAN : TRUST ME WE CAN SOLVE YOUR FINANCE PROBLEM, WE GIVE OUT LOAN AT 3% INTEREST, FROM $3000-$150,000, Contact Us At : zennitloanfirm@ {gmail}. com.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]