Arizona Legislators Trying (Again) To Ban Traffic Cameras
from the exceptions-abound dept
Seven years after the idea was first proposed, it finally appears as though the state of Arizona might be on the verge of a traffic camera ban.
The movement to outlaw photo enforcement in Arizona advanced on Tuesday with a 5-4 vote in the state House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Members favorably reported a measure that repeals the existing state authorization for the use of red light cameras and speed cameras.Well, sort of. The bill is still undergoing massive invasive surgery from entities unwilling to see this revenue stream dry up. Another proposal to scale back the state's reliance on traffic cam income moved forward after being limited solely to state highways -- basically killing off cameras in only two towns along those roads. This more expansive proposal is experiencing whatever the opposite of growing pains are. The exceptions to the proposed rule are turning the bill into a hollow shell of an idea, despite the ban having widespread support from the public.
During the debate on the issue, key committee members signaled their interest in the amending the measure so that it would allow continued use of speed cameras in school zones and unlimited use of red light cameras.The good news is that several politicians who previously supported a very generous expansion of the state's traffic camera programs have now switched sides -- including one who is a co-sponsor of the new bill. Many of these legislators who backed this expansion campaigned as "supporters of liberty" but apparently secretly harbored a soft spot for cop-less traffic enforcement and the persuasive tactics of American Traffic Solution's lobbyists. After experiencing some backlash, these legislators are now backing the new bill, which may actually scale back use of some cameras if there's anything left when everyone's done rewriting it.
Those arguing for a less aggressive cutback are apparently willing to let individual locales undercut the intent of the proposed law entirely.
State Representatives Richard C. Andrade (D-Glendale), Charlene R. Fernandez (D-Yuma), Matthew A. Kopec (D-Tucson), Noel W. Campbell (R-Prescott) and Karen Fann (R-Prescott) each suggested that as long as a city council favors automated ticketing machines, they should be allowed to hire a private company to deploy them.The other bill -- also approved by this committee -- is nearly completely useless as there are hardly any cameras in use on state highways.
And the state's history with traffic cams is far from comforting, especially if you're someone the cameras are going to be used against. Arizona used to have contracts with Redflex -- now under investigation for bribing government officials in thirteen states -- but dumped it just as it was handing it a "Governor's Award for Innovation." American Traffic Solutions wants to pick up the slack, but it's only a "better" choice in the sense that the company hasn't actually bribed government officials. Instead, it's been responsible for millions of dollars of dismissed tickets -- some because it never sent out notices in time and others because it kept "enforcing" school speed limits when the schools weren't actually in session. The latter is especially notable because the committee approving the bill wants to carve out an exception for school zone traffic enforcement.
With the public behind a ban on traffic cams, an exception-riddled bill that does little to scale back Arizona's use of the technology can't exactly be called "representational" of the public's views. But that's seemingly not going to stop their "representatives" from gutting it anyway.
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: arizona, ban, traffic cameras
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The thought processes in play
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't forget that a lot of these cities have part of their budget PLANNED around revenue collected from red light/speeding camera tickets. Sometimes individual cops even get "quotas" of fine revenues they have to meet (all unofficially of course).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, the second they include revenue from such systems in the budget(much like how some police departments have budgets involving items stolen at badge-point) it shows that they have no interest in decreasing crime, as that would negatively impact the budget. Red light cameras are there for the money, plain and simple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would not be surprised if they implemented an automated paperz checking system. Instead of facial recognition, it would have skin color recognition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simple solution
Should cut out the third party companies, money-hungry little burgs, etc. If a locality is serious about enforcement, no problem, otherwise, they won't bother - there's no money in it for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Simple solution
I see that as a huge win. The lawyers get money no matter whether they win or lose in court. The government is discouraged from using the cameras because there's no money in it. And because the drivers get free lawyer help, they stand a good chance of seeing the charges dropped; anecdotal evidence suggests that charges and tickets seem to have a greater tendency to disappear when lawyers get involved.
Now, if only that would work in the real world.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Simple solution
I mean it would be better than the current system but all it would serve to do is be a very tiny jobs bill for substandard lawyers. I'm for job creation whereever we can do so but bad lawyers are not a target I'd choose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's too bad that in practice they're poorly-implemented for profit reasons.
Speed and light traps on every stretch of road and intersection would be just fine as long as EVERY one was properly calibrated. Unfortunately, too many are being set up as tricks instead of traps.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ban the CAMS
When you have vendors like ATS (and Redflex) even SUE TO STOP VOTER BANS, you know the gig is up!
END THE SCAM AZ!
DO A REAL BAN!
(or at least let the voters do this. OR is ATS afraid of what Tucson voters did and OUTLAW the SCAMERAS!)
www.motorists.org
Ban the Cams on Facebook
Camerafraud on Facebook
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
American Traffic Solutions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ticket scameras
http://www.azleg.gov/alisStaticPages/HowToContactMember.asp
James C. Walker, Life Member - National Motorists Association
[ link to this | view in chronology ]