New State Ban on Red Light Camera's Could Doom Santa Fe Program

Today The State Transportation Commission banned red light camera's and speed vans on state or federal roads. All communities with red-light cameras installed on state or federal roads have 60 days to remove them. A policy which was approved during a meeting held in Clovis outlined the ban. According to a story at cnjonline.com Santa Fe Police Department’s Capt. Anthony Robbins argued in favor of red-light cameras, citing statistics showing a more than 50 percent drop in red-light and speed violations at lights where cameras are installed. He also said the severity of crashes at those intersections is changing because of the cameras.

I am unsure of where those statistics came from because Santa Fe has not yet installed the camera's that were approved over 1 year ago. In February of this year the Santa Fe New Mexican reported that installation of the red light camera's were on hold pending state approval. All four cameras that were to be installed in Santa Fe were to be on four Cerrillos Road intersections — at St. Francis Drive, St. Michael's Drive, Richards Avenue and Zafarano Drive. Cerrillos Road is a State Highway and under the new ban all four of these intersections will be unable to have red light camera's installed. The speed van currently in use by the city of Santa Fe would also be banned from use on state or federal roads. This could doom Santa Fe's red light camera program . Redflex, the company the city is contracting with to install the camera's and run the program provides the equipment in exchange for a lease fee and a cut of the fines and administration fees to run the program. They require high traffic areas for the camera's in order to ensure the volume needed to provide adequate profit margins for the program.

Readers of my blog know I am not in favor of the types of red light programs being used by municipalities and the company redflex. State law requires citations to be given by a uniformed certified officer who must witness the infraction. The only exception is in the case of an accident when the officer can rely on evidence at the scene and witness statements to issue the citations. So how do New Mexico cities use red light camera's to issue citations? They do this through a civil action.

The citations issued are civil summons issued by the city. The only cause of action if you do not pay the citation is for the city to take civil action and boot your vehicle under civil forfeiture ordinances until you pay. If you do pay the citation then the only penalty is the cash you send to the city. No matter how many citations you get for running red lights by the cameras you will not receive points on your M.V.D. records. Your insurance companies will not know you even received a citation. The penalty is cash and or impoundment. The city saves on storage fees by impounding your car in your own driveway by booting the vehicle.

Because it is a civil action your only recourse if you want to dispute a ticket is to appeal the ticket to a hearing officer hired by the city to hear the appeals. The hearing officer only judges whether or not you ran the light not extenuating circumstances like a judge would. So lets say a car is skidding into your rear end at a light you have already stopped at or are slowing to a stop. Your only choice is to step on the gas and continue through the intersection or get rear ended. You step on the gas and avoid the accident but the camera snaps your picture and you get a ticket. The hearing officer will not take the circumstances into account only whether or not the photo adequately shows evidence that you did or did not run the light.

A judge can take all factors into consideration and make a ruling. Now cities and redflex do not want these tickets going to a judge because judges tend to take plea agreements and dismiss tickets more often than a hearing officer would. Thereby reducing dramatically the revenue from red light tickets. And of course because of state law which says that an officer must witness the infraction any judge who gets a red light camera case would be obligated to throw the case out. I have always said that if red light camera's were legitimized by state law and offenders could go before a judge and plead their case I would be more amenable to the program. Although I still think the jury is out on whether red light camera's actually work to reduce accidents and save lives or if their only good for raising revenue. As of February the city of Santa Fe has issued $170,000 worth of speeding tickets from the speed van. A big chunk of that money goes to redflex and the rest is split between the city and the state. What has yet to be determined is whether redflex will be interested in putting camera's on smaller city roads as both Cerrillos Road and St Francis Drive are state roadways. I applaud the decision of the State Transportation Commission.

For lots more on Red Light Camera's click Here.

.

City of Santa Fe Candidate Forum

Tonight I attended the Santa Fe Police, Fire and AFSCME forum for the City Council and Mayor candidates. I was interested for several reasons but primarily because the forum would be to address public safety issues. I also have some lingering interest in the city police having started my police career at the city and being a former president of the Santa Fe Police Officers Association which is the city police union and one of the sponsors of the forum.

The questions asked were remarkably similar to the forum I attended in 2006 when the same unions held a forum for city council and mayor candidates at the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge#3. The questions focused on the annexation, paying for public safety, the economy, and union/management relations.

The format of the forum led to a long and tenuous forum to sit through. Because there were three mayor candidates and seven council candidates, two running unopposed. For anyone else out there looking at putting on forums I suggest separating the mayor and council candidates into two forums and leaving out the candidates running unopposed. The forum started about 6:45 and ended about 10:15pm. With all the candidates they only had time to answer 7 prepared questions and they each had a short introduction and a short time at the end to give a final speech. I counted one hundred and twenty people at the beginning but by 9:40 the crowd thinned down to seventy.

Many notables were in the crowd including Police Chief Aric Wheeler, Deputy Chief Robin Contreras, City Fire Chief Barbara Salas, New City Attorney appointee Geno Zamora, District Judge Michael Vigil and his wife, County Commission Candidate Angelica Ruiz, Magistrate Judge David Segura, Congressional Candidate Adam Kokesh, and probably a few others I missed.

The crowd had about equal Kepler and Coss mayoral candidate supporters with T-shirts, stickers, and buttons. Kepler supporters also carried signs. Other candidates went without supporters with campaign materials. Clearly these two candidates had the most organized support. Both Coss and Kepler had many supporters who I recognized as active in Santa Fe politics and unions over the years. I did notice that some of Keplers supporters were Coss supporters in 2006 when he ran for mayor. The candidates participating in the forum were as follows:

Incumbent David Coss, Asenath Kepler and Miguel Chavez for mayor

Incumbent Chris Calvert, Doug Nava and Russell Simon for City Council in District 1

Incumbent Rebecca Wurzburger and Stefanie Beninato in District 2

Incumbents Carmichael Dominguez and Ron Trujillo, each running unopposed in District 3 and 4

The first Question asked what the candidates priorities for restructuring were and what if any functions would you privatize. Kepler and Chavez did not address privatization while Coss stated he has always been against privatization and that cuts could be made where needed. Miguel Chavez stated he would concentrate on basic city services such as police, fire, and senior citizen services. Asenath Kepler said she would conduct a thorough analysis of the budget in every department, she blamed the managers and department heads for putting the city in its current situation she says she would bring them all in cut their pay and lay them off before she affected any of the line workers. Wurzburger stated she would look for efficiency's and places which could be cut and work to increase tourism in order to bring in more revenue. Calvert said he would rely on workers to suggest cuts and efficiency's. Simon said he would look to diversify Santa Fe's economy and do more than just go after tourists. Beninato pretty much agreed with Simon.

The heated question of the night was the annexation question, the city recently entered into an agreement to annex 10,000 acres over the next few years with phase one taking place in November of last year. The annexation has been discussed and put off for about 30 years and finally began to come to fruition in 2009. It has been a sore subject for police and fire in the city with fears that current staffing levels are far too inadequate to cover the areas when annexed. There has been a large debate over just what the staffing levels should be and how to pay for the additional staff.

Kepler hit the ground running as she raised her voice in answering this question. She said she wants to stop all further annexation not knowing how it will be funded. She said "it was unconscionable to put lives in danger" referring to officers fears it will be unsafe with inadequate staff, she added again with a raised voice and serious expression on her face "this is no joke!" Mayor Coss was much more relaxed as he stated the city had developed a good relationship with the county and that the counties deputies were not going anywhere, He also added that the city had already increased police by 30 officers, fire by 20 firefighters and added 3 new fire stations since he was elected. The mayor went on to say the annexation should have happened in the 1980's but we flinched at the costs. He went on to say the city was committed to adding 40 more officers in the future to help meet needs. Miguel Chavez said we need to move forward with the annexation, there are benefits as well as challenges, he pointed out that in phase one the costs are estimated at $200,000 while the revenues from the area are $187,000 so he went on to say we are generating revenue as we annex these areas.

Incumbents Ron Trujillo and Carmichael Dominguez joined Coss in saying the annexation needs to happen while all other candidates said they would re-look at the annexation agreement and perhaps spread out the time period for the additional phases of the agreement. Ron Trujillo also mentioned that the red light cameras which he was the leading proponent of would create additional funds for police and fire. He brought up red light camera's again later in the forum as a source of revenue for public safety. The camera's are not yet installed but are slated to go up in the next few months. I thought this was particularly interesting since all along the cameras were pushed as a safety issue and not intended to be for generating revenue. Councilor Trujillo also lamented the governor of the state pushing legislation to have half the revenue from red light camera's diverted to the state.

Much of the remaining questions and answers dealt with the economy and the need to diversify and bring new jobs to Santa Fe. Many candidates advocated taping the cities reserves to avoid further furloughs and any layoffs. Kepler again heated up the room when she said "the tapping of reserves was avoidable, a good city manager and finance director would have known the economy would crash, I will save millions with audits" She also said there were allegations of fraud and waste in the city and audits were needed. Coss replied he knew of no fraud and waste and stated the city had saved for times just like this and had eleven million dollars above the minimum required reserves.

I took pretty extensive notes on the rest of the questions but I have no doubt that if you have read this much you probably won't read much more. One last thing I have to mention is the crowd looked pretty much in shock when during the forum Coss supporter Morty Simon was standing up front taking pictures with the flash on his camera turned on, of the mayor candidates or perhaps just the mayor it was hard to tell. Kepler was about to answer a question when she stopped the forum and told Mr. Simon "You have taken enough pictures, I don't know if you are taking them of me or one of the other mayor candidates but you have taken around 50 and you have enough pictures!". Mr. Simon sat down and as far as I know took no more pictures. The forum was interesting but long, even the reporters had to leave half way though to go and get their stories written and submitted. I am glad I went by and watched I always learn from watching these both from the perspective of the constituent and as a political candidate.

.

Governor, Sign Red Light Camera Legislation.

The legislature has passed Senate Bill 519 which forces local cities which use Red Light Camera's to turn over most of the revenue to the state. I applaud this bill and urge the Governor to Sign it into law. My biggest problem with red light camera's is that cities tend to use them not as deterrents to red light running but as revenue generation tools. This bill removes most of that incentive and forces mayors and city councilors to judge the use of red light camera's on their effectiveness and not their ability to generate revenue. The final change needed in a future piece of legislation would be to force cities who have red light cameras to have protests to violations heard by a real judge, whether it be a municipal or magistrate judge. If this final change was made I could then support red light camera's.

For those who are not aware. Cameras have been in use in Albuquerque for several years, and in Las Cruces for about a month. The City of Santa Fe is placing cameras at four Cerrillos Road intersections within months also. State Law requires citations to be given by a uniformed certified officer who must witness the infraction. The only exception is in the case of an accident when the officer can rely on evidence at the scene and witness statements to issue the citations. So how do New Mexico cities use red light camera's to issue citations? They do this through a civil action.

The citations issued are civil summons issued by the city. The only cause of action if you do not pay the citation is for the city to take civil action and boot your vehicle under civil forfeiture ordinances until you pay. If you do pay the citation then the only penalty is the cash you send to the city. No matter how many citations you get for running red lights by the cameras you will not receive points on your M.V.D. records. Your insurance companies will not know you even received a citation. The penalty is cash and or impoundments. The city saves on storage fees by impounding your car in your own driveway by booting the vehicle.

Because it is a civil action your only recourse if you want to dispute a ticket is to appeal the ticket to a hearing officer hired by the city to hear the appeals. The hearing officer only judges whether or not you ran the light not extenuating circumstances like a judge would. So lets say a car is skidding into your rear end at a light you have already stopped at or are slowing to a stop. Your only choice is to step on the gas and continue through the intersection or get rear ended. You step on the gas and avoid the accident but the camera snaps your picture and you get a ticket. The hearing officer will not take the circumstances into account only whether or not the photo adequately shows evidence that you did or did not run the light.

A judge can take all factors into consideration and make a ruling. Now cities do not want these tickets going to a judge because judges tend to take plea agreements and dismiss tickets more often than a hearing officer would. Thereby reducing dramatically the revenue from red light tickets. And of course because of state law which says that an officer must witness the infraction any judge who gets a red light camera case would be obligated to throw the case out. This brings us back to the State Legislature. What is needed now is a state statute either legitimizing red light cameras so the cases can be heard in a real court, or a statute eliminating them all together.

Finally the ball is still up in the air on whether or not Red Light Camera's prevent accidents or cause them. I was hoping Albuquerque would do an honest study on this factor but I have not seen it yet. You can find studies that show both results so the whole thing appears inconclusive.

Here are three studies which shows that accidents increase at intersections with red light camera's due to motorists making abrupt stops in order to avoid the citation.

Maryland county's red light cameras net $2.85 million, increase accidents

Georgia: Accidents Increased with Red Light Cameras

Washington study

Now I really believe the Red Light camera's will prove to be a bad fit for Santa Fe and locals will pressure city officials to do away with them in the next couple of years. It will be interesting to see.

.

If it weren't for lawyers, we wouldn't need them.....

The voters in the City of Santa Fe are getting ready to vote on an amendment to the City Charter which would require those who want to run for Municipal Judge to hold a law degree. The local newspapers have advocated for this in editorial after editorial each election year where the municipal judge is on the ballot since the days of Judge Tom Fiorina.
In my teenage years I remember getting a ticket, Ok, maybe more than one, and appearing before Municipal Judge Rumaldo E. “Cuate” Chavez. I had to research his real name since no one knew him as anything more than Judge Cuate Chavez. I remember sitting in his office with my mother and handling the whole thing pretty informally. No passing through a metal detector, standing in one line to check in, then waiting in a packed courtroom for the judge to appear and taking in case by case and everyone wondering if the judge is going to be as tough or lenient as she is to the case she is hearing now. It was the true peoples court. Judge Cuate scolded me and then went easy on fines, He knew my mother, a single mother of four children, working two jobs to get by, would be footing the bill. He also knew that my mother would be much more harsh on me than anything he could meat out.

This was true peoples court. No big formality's, no "please rise" as the judge entered the court room and you got true one on one time with the judge to plead your case. Quite a stark contrast to the Red Light Camera era upon us now. Granted it is a court of law and the city has grown tremendously since these days in the early 80's. But has the true premise of a "peoples court outgrown Santa Fe? Have we progressed so far that we must give up the idea of a peoples court and decide that what we need for petty misdemeanors and misdemeanors is beyond the common sense judge and what we need is someone who has gone to law school?

If voters want a lawyer couldn't they just elect one during election times? Currently while you do need a law degree to run there is nothing to preclude any and all lawyers to run. It would be interesting to see a good non-lawyer candidate face a lawyer candidate and see really how the voters would decide. I was interested in seeing such a race this time around however no one challenged the incumbent lawyer candidate.

I feel that more important than a law degree is a person of good common sense. Someone who decide cases within the law but having true compassion and understanding that this is a court which commonly handles not real criminals, but real people dealing with daily problems and who may have made a mistake, or maybe they are innocent. Ayn Rand a Russian born American Writer once said “The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.” Sometimes I believe this to be true. It is usually in the misdemeanor category that this is most true.

Things like the Cell Phone ordinance in the city are perfect examples. The Police have many options to give citations to those who drive badly or are inattentive to their driving due to cell phone use. The actual hands free cell phone ordinance in my opinion is not needed and only causes some people who are actually good careful drivers to break the law. I know of no one who has not broken this law even just long enough to tell someone they will call back or to tell them to hold on while they pull over. These kinds of laws I believe are just the things that require a common sense judge and not a law degree to make a decision on. In my profession I have appeared before many a Judge, many of them with or with out law degree's. I have seen good and bad on both sides. On felony cases and in courts of record I fully believe we need judges who are lawyers. In misdemeanor and courts which are not courts of record ie- Municipal and Magistrate I believe we can still have citizen judges who may or may not have law degrees.

I urge the public to vote no' on Amendment Seven, which would require candidates for Municipal Judge to hold law degrees. Those lawyers who want to run will not be precluded and we will not preclude good candidates who do not hold degrees from running.

"I busted a mirror and got seven years bad luck, but my lawyer thinks he can get me five." Steven Wright, Comedian

Will Red Light Camera's Leave Albuquerque?

The two of you read this blog regularly,(lol) will know that I have often derided Albuquerque's Red Light Camera Program. I have always felt that the program was more geared towards revenue than it was towards safety. Especially when you look at the exorbitant fees the private company that runs the program charges. Now Mayor Chavez has announced he is forming a task force to investigate whether or not the camera's are effective at preventing accidents. Many States and locality's have done similar studies after trying out the camera's and ended up canceling the program.

Below is KOAT TV's coverage of the Task Force.



Mayor Chavez announcement came after two different T.V. stations did investigative pieces over just where the money was going. KOAT TV's investigation revealed that between 2005 and 2007, New Mexicans paid $10.6 million in red light and speed tickets. The city spent $4.8 million to run the safety program, which means $5.8 million is in the city general fund - all generated from the red light and speed program. When KOAT TV asked the city's chief financial officer, Gail Reese, how a program Mayor Martin Chavez claims is not out to make money is making millions. She responded with "Over time this program's costs will equal the revenues.
"It is an expensive program. Safety is an expensive thing,".

Here is the KOAT piece on the profits the City of Albuquerque has made from the program.



As I said earlier RedFlex charges Exorbitant fees to Albuquerque. The city spends about $200,000 a month leasing these cameras and speed vans, and on top of that the company leasing the cameras to Albuquerque, RedFlex, also charges for every single ticket: $18 for red light runners and nearly $25 for speeders. What I hope is that the task force appointed by Marty Chavez or one of the news outlets does a comparison between the contract RedFlex has with the city of Albuquerque and other contracts the company and similar companies have with other cities across the state. I have a feeling there are vast differences and communities that fight for a good deal and want to save taxpayers money are successful in doing so.

This red light program needs to be completely restructured or ended all together. One of the things that we who are law enforcement administrators often try to do is to eliminate the perception that we have quota's or that we make money from tickets. Most agencies do not. The Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office gets about $6000 a year back from magistrate courts from tickets we issue. We issue about 30,000 tickets a year so as you can see it really is not much. Especially when you consider the over ten million dollar budget we have in the Sheriff's Office. This program flies in the face of trying to get rid of the perception that tickets are to generate funds. What tickets should be about is education and deterrence.

Here are some links to past blog posts I have had on red light camera's. When you read them you will see that you heard it here first. The things this task force will study are the things I have advocated looking at all along.

Sheriff Greg Solano Red Light Camera Blog Posts.

Note: I use KOAT TV a lot for embedded video in my blog posts because they are nice enough to post their video on YouTube. Its a great convenience and I think a great way to get free publicity for their station.

Red Light Camera News Escalates.

I had laid off of the Albuquerque Red Light Camera's for a while even though it is the number one reason new people from across the nation find my blog. Not being from Albuquerque and after the City of Santa Fe gave up on trying to place them here I figured I would move on. However, late developments have piqued my interest. First I have seen the city of Albuquerque writing many tickets without much challenge to drivers who have Photo Blocker License plate covers installed. For a while they were also confiscating them as evidence. The validity of the tickets when written based on the state law is iffy at best. If the City of Albuquerque passed a local ordinance they might be better justified. Knowing Albuquerque's propensity for writing new laws I am surprised they have not done this. I am expecting a serious challenge to this soon, if not the legislature may jump into this issue next session.

Why the legislature? In the last session the legislature passed a bill that would have effectively killed red light camera's in New Mexico but the governor vetoed it after receiving assurances that the fines would be lowered to a more fair rate in Albuquerque. The fines were lowered slightly but not enough to stop the legislature from addressing this issue again next session. The unpopularity of these camera's will probably not allow the governor the latitude to veto another bill. Interestingly enough the Governor cited traffic accident reduction as a reason to veto the bill. I have a feeling the next time one of these bills is on his desk there will be a lot of doubt as to whether there has been true accident reduction.

Unpopularity of the camera's reached new heights when a very public battle broke out in the last few weeks between 770 Kob Radio talk show host Jim Villanucci and Mayor Martin Chavez. With 770 Kob having one of the largest listening audiences this will not bode well for Mayor Chavez or his campaign for Governor. Mayor Chavez escalated the battle on his weekly talk show as well.I have mentioned before that I felt the Red Light Camera's were not going to be a plus for Mayor Chavez's Governor Campaign. Many are questioning whether these camera's reduce or increase accidents. The timing of the yellow lights as well as the reliability of the camera's themselves are being questioned. All questions I brought up in my earlier posts. A.P.D. has managed to put out statistics which have always been contrary to findings in other states. I hope, but doubt their statistics are correct.

Also in the news in the past few weeks is a class action lawsuit brought about by Attorney Rick Sandoval. The lawsuit passed a major hurdle when it received certification as a class action and all citizens who have received or will receive a red light camera ticket are included in the case.

As in previous posts I feel the fines are too high, the private company "RedFlex" which the City of Albuquerque contracts with makes too much of a cut, the lights must be timed correctly, and I am too worried that Red Light Camera's cause more accidents then they prevent. I am going to go out on a limb here and predict that the end of the Red Light Camera's will be upon us by the end of 2008. Whether it is constituent pressure, the legislature, the courts, the media, or all of the above I see it happening.

Red Light Camera's not infallible.

I had made a note to blog about this back in early May but it kept getting put off. After a KOAT TV employee got a red light camera citation which he felt he did not deserve he went back to the intersection and found a flaw in the timing of the camera which caused innocent drivers to receive citations. It would be interesting to see how many innocent people paid the $100 to $300 fine and never fought the ticket. Also how would the average citizen fight the ticket? As the news cast shows the evidence photo only shows the vehicle supposedly running the red light. The evidence is deceiving and would have held up to the yes or no, no room for argument hearing provided on these cases.



What is missing in this system besides reasonable fines is a human judge who can use common sense and compassion in making decisions. If you are taking your dying family member to a hospital and get pulled over for a traffic infraction by an officer, the officer can make a human decision whether or not you should be cited. If you are about to be rear ended by a driver who is not paying attention the officer who observes the incident can use his discretion to determine what really happened. The red light camera is a robot with no ability to use discretion or understand variables. Unfortunately the hearing officers unlike real judges in Albuquerque's red light camera civil process also are robots who only look at the photo and say yes or no.

KOAT TV Story on Legality of Photo Blocker License Plate Cover

Deputy Caught with Photo Blocker on License Plate

Bad Day at Work!

Fear of getting a Red Light Camera citation led at least one Bernalillo County Deputy to put a Photo Blocker cover on the license plate of his squad car. Unfortunately he parked his car near a news conference and was caught by none other than City of Albuquerque Police Chief Ray Schultz.

Talk about a bad day at the office.

Return to Blogging

I am back after a short break from blogging. First off my condolences to Julia Goldberg on the loss of her dog Kita. My wife and I have 4 dogs, (yes that is four). We really enjoy them all though I was happy with just two but my kids keep bringing more. We absolutely have to stop at four. Dogs quickly become part of your family and when you lose one it can be devastating. My wife and I will pray for you and Kita.

I am dismayed to learn the Governor vetoed the Red Light Camera Bill. The good thing is that all this attention has brought some light on the downfalls of Albuquerque's Red Light Camera Program and may bring about needed change. Marty Chavez has hung his hat on this program and the amount of discontent it is brewing in Albuquerque could affect his poll numbers in his own district when the Democratic Primary for Governor comes around.

Deaths involving Alcohol continued to mount in the Santa Fe Area in the last few weeks. This even as all the publicity over the Pabst case, and as we have just increased the number of D.W.I. officers at Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office from two up to six. I am at a loss for why all of this does not scare anyone into not driving drunk.

More on the Albuquerque Red Light Camera Saga

There is much more on the Albuquerque Red Light Camera Saga. Numerous bills are flying through the legislature aimed at changing if not killing the Red Light Camera's in New Mexico. The first was a bill to force the installation of flashing warning beacons at intersections with Red Light Camera's. This morphed into a bill which would lower fines cities could charge to equal State Fines for a red light violation. This would kill programs as we know them because in Albuquerque's case the fines which are now $100 for a first time offense, would drop to $15. This would definitely take any profits out of the programs and would cause ticket revenues to be much less than the cost of the program. The third bill being considered would force Cities with red light camera's to fork over a majority of the fines collected to the state. All of these bills are flying though the legislature with uncanny speed. They are also going through committee and floor votes on unanimous or near unanimous votes.

The pressure from complaints at Albuquerque City Hall have caused the city to have a Town Hall Meeting tomorrow to allow those for or against the Red Light Camera's to have their say. I can't imagine the ratio of those against the program as it is now being implemented to be less that 10 to one against the camera's.

At the same time Las Cruces has decided to be a glutton for punishment by beginning to look at the program for its city. The town council will have a presentation from RedFlex, (the company making millions from Albuquerque running its program), and a representative from the Albuquerque Police Department.

As my regular readers know I began keeping track of the red light camera issues when Santa Fe City Police began looking at placing the cameras in the city. This seems to have been put on the back burner in Santa Fe. I posted a few entries about this in my blog and since that time it is the number one reason visitors come to my blog. A minimum of 20-30 visitors per day come here after searching for information on Red Light Camera's on popular search engines. Still I don't want to make this just a blog about red light camera's so I am going to try and balance this issue with other posts on my blog.

Senate Bill could put halt to Red Light Camera's

As reported by KOB TV, the New Mexico State Senate passed legislation limiting the ability of cities to profit from the use of red light cameras. Senator William H. Payne (R-Albuquerque) originally introduced a bill to place beacons at intersections, but the Senate approved a version limiting the price of photo citations to those already established by state law by a 41-0 vote. According to Senator Payne "They are a guise for making money for the city of Albuquerque".

This would put an immediate halt to the Red Light Camera Programs anywhere in New Mexico. The State fee schedule would barely cover the costs of running a red light camera program. It would still be cheaper than putting officers at these intersections every day. However Albuquerque and other cities currently considering Red Light Camera's (Santa Fe) would not make the enormous amounts of money that they once thought they would.

Albuquerque charges $100 the first time the registered owner of a vehicle is mailed a photo ticket. A second mailing brings a $250 plus 30-day car seizure and on the third occasion, a $500 fine plus 90-day car seizure is imposed. State law provides a $15 first-time fine that rises to a maximum of $200. Albuquerque has raised over Five Million Dollars in the short time they have had the camera's. The Mayor claims all but a small amount has been used to fund the program. Unless Redflex Traffic Systems is way over charging Albuquerque then it seems unlikely that the program has cost over five million dollars.

It will be interesting to see how this bill now does in the House and then if the Governor would sign it. The Camera's could still be used and if the cities who want to use them really care about safety and not making profits, then they might still use them and try to just break even or perhaps subsidise them from the General Fund. My objection to these camera's all along is the involvement of for profit companies and the use of them across the nation to make huge profits for municipality's and the private companies involved.

Click here for more on my blog about red light camera's

Traffic lights to be timed. Preparation for Red Light Camera's ?

Russell Simon of the Albuquerque Journal reports that the State will begin a traffic study and synchronize the lights on Cerrillos and St Francis Drive. Although Red Light Camera's are not mentioned in the press release one of the big issues with the City of Santa Fe's consideration of using Red Light Camera's has been the timing and synchronization of lights on Cerrillos Road. Residents who posted to the New Mexican's Comments section on the issue actually timed the lights and compared the timing with national recommendations and found the yellow lights were well below the recommended length of time to be on before turning red.

I feel the timing and synchronization is very much needed. According to According to the Santa Fe's traffic operations engineer, Rick Devine, the timing for traffic signals on St. Francis hasn't been updated in at least a dozen years. Neither has the timing for the signals on Cerrillos Road. Studies have shown that proper timing is the most effective way to reduce accidents caused by red light runners. I also feel this is probably being done as a precursor to actually installing red light camera's at Santa Fe's intersections. Regular readers of my blogs know I have concerns over the use of red light camera's to raise income for cities. If we did have red light camera's installed I would like to see it be a fair program that is not overly excessive in fines and is not run by a private for profit company and rather run by the city itself. The city is considering going into this venture with a private company which provides the cameras and administers the program in exchange for a hefty cut of the fines generated.

In another Albuquerque Journal story

Sen. William Payne, R-Albuquerque, introduced legislation Monday to force the city to post flashing yellow beacons at 15 intersections where cameras are mounted to catch motorists running red lights or speeding.
The beacons, if flashing, would alert the motorists that the traffic light would turn red before they passed through the intersection, Payne said."Using public safety as a profit center is bad policy," Payne said.
His measure to warn motorists was met with strong bipartisan support Monday. Almost every senator endorsed the legislation by signing on as a co-sponsor.
"It was not a hard sell, and it won't be on the House side, either," Payne said. "Everybody I've talked on the House side says, 'Go get 'em.' ''

As of last month, Albuquerque has collected $5.2 million in fines on nearly 80,000 citations issued to motorists since May 2005.
But Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chávez said the city doesn't make a dime. He said the city funnels the collected fines back into the program to expand it.
For example, the proceeds recently paid for cameras at two additional intersections around the city to supplement the 13 already on line.
And Chávez argued that speeders and people who run red lights actually pay for the program, not taxpayers.
"It's just unfortunate that the senator doesn't have his facts straight," the mayor said.
Payne said that, while the fines go toward the program now, it is only a matter of time before they will be diverted to the city's coffers.
"How much will that raise if they double the number of cameras?" the GOP lawmaker asked.
Payne's legislation would require the city to post and synchronize the flashing yellow beacons with the traffic signal on all roads leading up to the camera-mounted intersections.
If the beacon was flashing, a motorist would know the traffic light would turn red before they got through the intersection.
The beacons would improve on the signs the city has already posted roughly 100 yards or so from each camera-mounted intersection, Payne said.
But Albuquerque Police Chief Ray Schultz said the flashing beacons could "cause more harm than good" by encouraging motorists to speed up to clear the intersection.

The interesting thing about this story is that the company Albuquerque uses for the Red Light Camera's is Redflex Traffic Systems. This company has contracts in 106 cities* world-wide and, with 90 USA cities under contract, is the largest provider of digital red light and speed enforcement services in North America. It is also the same company who is proposing to supply them to Santa Fe. In most cities the company provides the camera's and administrative support in exchange for a cut in the revenues provided from the fines. I don't know what kind of contract the city of Albuquerque has with Redflex and the city does have to review all citations and photo's before they are sent out as well as provide for hearings on protested citations. This all cost the city money in salaries etc. but it almost seems impossible to me that the costs were 5.2 million dollars. It would be interesting to have one of our news outlets review the contract with Redflex and compare the costs of the program to the income. Although keep in mind that Redflex takes a hefty cut in most states that they have contracts.

I still have yet to see any data on rear end collisions at the intersections in Albuquerque where camera's are installed. Many other states have seen an increase in rear end collisions at intersections where camera's are installed. In some area's the increase was so bad that the camera program was ended. Here is a link to a previous blog post that refers to some of these studies.

This Article "Senator calls Red-Light Cameras traps" was posted by the Albuquerque Tribune as I was writing this blog post.

Finally to see all my blog posts on Red Light Camera's Click here.

Red Light Running Prevention Web Site tied to Camera Industry

The Free New Mexican has posted a link on its Red Light Camera Story to a web site called www.stopredlightrunning.com. The web site purports to be part of The National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running . Some cursory checking shows the site and the National Campaign is sponsored by the Red Light Camera Industry. Among the sponsors is Redflex Traffic Systems. This company has contracts in 106 cities* world-wide and, with 90 USA cities under contract, is the largest provider of digital red light and speed enforcement services in North America. It is also the same company who supplies the cameras to Albuquerque and is proposing to supply them to Santa Fe.

The Executive Director of the National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running is Leslie Blakey. She is a hired gun from the firm Blakey & Agnew, LLC. This is a public affairs and communications consulting firm based in Washington, DC. The web site www.stopredlightrunning.com is an advertisement for the Red Light Camera industry. All the news listed in its news section pertains to Red Light Camera's. The only solution listed to preventing red light running accidents is the camera's. Nothing about proper light timing, enforcement by officers, or education of the driving public. Why do I bring all this up? This highlights one of the big concerns I have about this industry.

The movement for these camera's is being developed by private company's with an intense profit motive. The company's charge up to 40% of the fine to provide equipment, technical support and administer the program. Cities cannot install the cameras without contracting with these companies to provide the complete package with a percentage of ticket fines going to the company. Because of the high cost of administering the program the fines are set extremely high usually with entities using the excuse that the fines need to be high in order to be an effective deterrent.

These companies gloss over safety concerns brought about involving rear end collisions when drivers stop suddenly to avoid a red light camera ticket. That message would reduce sales. Since most states require citations to be issued by an officer who witnesses the violation (New Mexico included), these companies promote a civil violation program which skirts the state law.

As I stated in an earlier blog post that goes into more detail about the safety concerns, don't get me wrong there are a lot of good reasons to have red light cameras and I would not be as opposed to them if they were put in such a manner as to not be a revenue generating scheme. Proper procedures must be put in place to protest the citation, and the driver is photographed also to prove who was driving. We must also look at the amount of time the yellow light is on, Many cities have reduced accident just by adjusting the timing of the yellow lights. We should also look at educational programs to educate the motoring public.

Red Light Camera's Tested in Santa Fe

The City of Santa Fe moves closer to installing red light camera's after a test done on November 17, 2006 at several Cerrillos Road intersections. As reported in our local daily papers a test was done in order to test the camera's effectiveness. As those who regularly read my blog know I have reservations about bringing the camera's to Santa Fe. Some of those reservations include:

National highway safety experts concur that the cameras cut crashes but the number of rear end accidents are going up in some areas as motorists slam on their brakes to avoid a crash, only to be struck from behind. In some cases a 50% increase in the number of accidents at a particular intersection have occurred where camera's have been installed. On the other hand the severity of the rear end collisions and injures are usually less then the side impact collisions which show a decrease when camera's are installed.

Here are three studies which shows that accidents increase at intersections with red light camera's due to motorists making abrupt stops in order to avoid the citation.

Maryland county's red light cameras net $2.85 million, increase accidents

Georgia: Accidents Increased with Red Light Cameras

Washington study

Some studies show increases in injuries from the rear end collisions verses the red light running collisions.

The movement for these camera's is being developed by private company's with an intense profit motive. These company's have even been ensnared in bribery investigations in order to get cities to enact ordinances which allow the camera's. The company's charge up to 40% of the fine to provide equiptment, technical support and administer the program. Because of the high cost of administering the program the fines are set extremely high usually with entities using the excuse that the fines need to be high in order to be an effective deterrent. This leads to resentment from the citizens when they see the government entity (the City) raising large sums of money from the red light camera's. In Albuquerque the city has raised millions with the camera's and Speeding camera's and slowly there is resentment building from the community. On 770 KKOB Radio a few days ago the host Jim Villanucci was bragging about his photo blocker license plate cover while callers were complaining about "Mayor Marty Chavez's Money Making Scheme".

Up to 80% of the tickets issued from red light camera's can involve split second violations where the violator just missed the light and would not have been cited by a police officer who witnessed the violation as opposed to the camera which makes no distinction. There have even been reports of entities adjusting light timing in order to encourage citations. Because the citations do not go on your driving record and do not cause points on your license or cost you increased insurance rates there is not as much pressure to ensure accuracy.

Don't get me wrong there are a lot of good reasons to have red light cameras and I would not be as opposed to them if they were put in such a manner as to not be a revenue generating scheme and proper procedures were put in place to protest the citation, and the driver is photographed also to prove who was driving. I hope the City of Santa Fe considers these factors as they move ahead with this plan. Many cites and even one state has removed the camera's after using them for a year or two when they found they did not work, were not safe, or were not well received by the public.

More on Red Light Camera's

I ran across this Blog Post from M.G. Bralley a retired Law Enforcement Officer blogging from Albuquerque. Besides the Anti Mayor Marty Chavez sentiment at the end of the post, he does give an excellent description of how the Albuquerque Ordinance works and how they managed to get around the state law which requires traffic citations be given out by a Law Enforcement officer who witnesses the incident and is displaying his or her badge of office on a uniform.

I also ran across two more studies which shows that accidents increase at intersections with red light camera's due to motorists making abrupt stops in order to avoid the citation.

Maryland county's red light cameras net $2.85 million, increase accidents

Georgia: Accidents Increased with Red Light Cameras


Add these to the Washington study as well as others I mentioned on my last blog about Red Light Camera's coming to Santa Fe which show increases in rear end collisions which are equal or increased over the reduction which usually occurs in red light running crashes. Some studies show increases in injuries from the rear end collisions verses the red light running collisions.

Red Light Traffic Camera's May be Coming to Santa Fe.

Last Tuesday the City Police Department asked for and received the go-ahead from the Public Safety Committee to research the installation of cameras to catch drivers in the act of running red lights. You may remember a post I had discussing the Red Light Camera's in Albuquerque in April of this year.

The City Police Department will be looking at starting a pilot program to catch red light runners on cameras similar to those used by an Albuquerque program that has been in operation since May 2005. The city is looking at placing the camera's at five Santa Fe intersections in the pilot project: St. Francis Drive and Zia Road and Cerrillos Road's intersections with Airport Road, Zafarano Drive, St. Francis Drive and St. Michael's Drive.

The use of these cameras to issue official criminal traffic citations is illegal in the state of New Mexico. State Law requires citations to be given by a uniformed certified officer who must witness the infraction. The only exception is in the case of an accident when the officer can rely on evidence at the scene and witness statements to issue the citations. So how does Albuquerque use the Red Light cameras to issue citations? They do this through a civil action.

The citations issued are civil summons issued by the city through a private company. The only cause of action if you do not pay the citation is for the city to take civil action and boot your vehicle under civil forfeiture ordinances until you pay. If you do pay the citation then the only penalty is the cash you send to the city. No matter how many citations you get for running red lights by the cameras you will not receive points on your M.V.D. records. Your insurance companies will not know you even received a citation. The penalty is cash and or impoundment. Violators are fined $100 the first time, $250 plus a 30-day impound of the vehicle for the second time. For subsequent offenses, there is a $500 fine plus a 90-day impound. The city saves on storage fees by impounding your car in your own driveway by booting the vehicle.

A city police officer reviews each citation before it is issued. The Citations are issued by a private company "Redflex" who supplies the camera's, prints and mails the citations, collects the payments and in turn keeps a portion of the fees collected. Redflex is a rapidly growing company whose year end revenue for the year which ended June 30, 2005 increased 39.7% to $46.3 million, while net profit after tax increased 171% to $9 million. Most of the revenue and profit came from traffic camera installations in Australia and the US,

Albuquerque has generated $1.2 million in revenue for the city since the city began using camera's in October of 2005. During the Santa Fe City Public Safety Committee meeting last Tuesday, members of the committee cautioned city staff not to bill the cameras as a revenue generator, but rather as a way to alter driving habits and ultimately save lives. This came after Deputy Chief Ray Byford said any estimate of how much Santa Fe could earn from a similar system would be a "shot in the dark," but added that "it could be way up there."

The ACLU has begun challenging Speed and Red Light Camera's in different parts of the nation. They have begun pointing to Studies (one in Washington in particular) which seem to show increases in accidents in some areas where Red Light Camera's are used. Santa Fe is a much more liberal and outspoken community than Albuquerque, it will be interesting to see the publics reaction to any camera's installed in Santa Fe especially if the fines are as hefty as those set in Albuquerque.

The Washington Times reported in June of 2005 Red-light cameras in Northern Virginia were shut down after a 10-year pilot program expired. A state legislative committee voted not to continue the automated traffic-enforcement program, which had been operating in six Northern Virginia localities and Virginia Beach. Critics, including delegates who voted to end the program, said the cameras are money-making devices that invade a residents’ privacy and cause rear-end collisions. Interestingly enough the program in Virginia charged $50 as compared to the hundreds in fines charged by Albuquerque. Virginia reported a loss in revenue for the program costing the government entities up to one million dollars in 5 years. Apparently the rear end collisions occur when drivers stop for the red lights even though they are being tailgated for fear of receiving the citation. It has been argued that otherwise the driver may have run the light to avoid the rear end collision.

Some County Commissioners have brought up red light camera's as a tool to be used in the county over the last few years. This is something which I feel has both positive and negative connotations. I have really looked at disdain when the media researches citations issued by Red Light Camera's in Albuquerque and look for politicians, government workers, police officers and other notables who are caught running the lights. They then show the photos or videos of these people in news reports. I would like to see them show reporters and media staff who are caught as well. I know that public officials have much less expectation of privacy but this is a low way to just have a another titillating story.

I also really see a problem when traffic citations are used as a revenue source. Unlike the view of many cited motorists, there are no quotas. We do not raise the Sheriff's Office Revenue by issuing citations. Quota's promote abuse and bad citations issued by deputies who just need to pull over citizens in order to reach their quota. We do receive $1 (one dollar) for every citation that is plead or found guilty in court. Most are not, usually people go to driving school or get a deferred sentence and we do not get the dollar. Last year I believe we got about $10,000 from the thousands of citations we issued. This was out of a taxpayer provided 2006/2007 budget of just under nine million dollars. The bottom line is we give citations as educational tools, not to raise money.

Red Light Camera's

One item that has come up in Santa Fe County recently is the use of Red Light Cameras at Santa Fe County intersections. The use of these cameras to issue official criminal traffic citations is illegal in the state of New Mexico. State Law requires citations to be given by a uniformed certified officer who must witness the infraction. The only exception is in the case of an accident when the officer can rely on evidence at the scene and witness statements to issue the citations. So how does Albuquerque use the Red Light cameras to issue citations? They do this through a civil action.

The citations issued are civil summons issued by the city. The only cause of action if you do not pay the citation is for the city to take civil action and boot your vehicle under civil forfeiture ordinances until you pay. If you do pay the citation then the only penalty is the cash you send to the city. No matter how many citations you get for running red lights by the cameras you will not receive points on your M.V.D. records. Your insurance companies will not know you even received a citation. The penalty is cash and or impoundment. Violators are fined $100 the first time, $250 plus a 30-day impound of the vehicle for the second time. For subsequent offenses, there is a $500 fine plus a 90-day impound. The city saves on storage fees by impounding your car in your own driveway by booting the vehicle.

The number of cameras in Albuquerque that will catch those running red lights has doubled in the last month and will increase five times in a year. Critics say that the city is expanding the program not to prevent red light accidents but rather because the cameras are huge moneymakers for the City. In February of 2006 a traffic camera at Coors and Paseo del Norte caught 1,353 motorists driving through the intersection after the light turned red. Assuming that all citations were first time violators the city raised $338,250 in one month at one location.

A real disturbing trend is the local media searching the records of who was cited and publicizing politicians, government workers, police officers and other notables who are caught running the lights. I am someone who really does not media bash or blame the media for all the worlds ills however, how many searches have been done for media workers who are caught by the camera's. If you make a mistake and are caught by the camera is public embarrassment for the select few who work for the government or whom are public figures an intended punishment of which only those individuals should be subjected? Granted everyone’s driving record is public record but its not as likely that you will ever see a public officials citation written by a regular officer published on the front page or on the ten o’clock news.

I really see a problem when traffic citations are used as a revenue source. Unlike the view of many cited motorists, there are no quotas. We do not raise the Sheriff's Office Revenue by issuing citations. The public would probrably not re-elect me nor should they if we had quotas. These promote abuse and bad citations issued by deputies who just need to pull over citizens in order to reach their quota. We do receive $1 (one dollar) for every citation that is plead or found guilty in court. Most are not, usually people go to driving school or get a deferred sentence and we do not get the dollar. Last year I believe we got about $10,000 from the thousands of citations we issued. This was out of a taxpayer provided budget of just under seven million dollars.

The bottom line is we give citations as educational tools, not to raise money. They final question I have is do we approve that the owner of the vehicle should pay the price no matter who is driving when the red light is run? Drivers are not usually identified so the car and the owner are cited not the actual driver. So what do you think? Do the problems of red light runners and the high amount of accidents they cause justify the use of the red light cameras? Feel free to comment on this post.