From Time magazine back in 2014 --
"Earlier this year, the city [Chicago] began issuing tickets to motorists who drove through yellow lights that turned red fractions of a second shorter than the three-second city minimum. The change was slight, but the effect for the cash-starved city was real: nearly $8 million from an additional 77,000 tickets, according to the city’s inspector general."
http://time.com/3505994/red-light-camera-problems-tickets/
From USA Today in 2015 --
"In 2013, Florida quietly reduced the timing of its yellow lights and generated more than $100 million in extra revenue. Likewise, a study of New Jersey intersections found that the contractor had shortened virtually every yellow light below the minimum timing to generate tickets."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/03/15/speed-trap-red-light-column/24820783/
"Earlier this year, the city [Chicago] began issuing tickets to motorists who drove through yellow lights that turned red fractions of a second shorter than the three-second city minimum. The change was slight, but the effect for the cash-starved city was real: nearly $8 million from an additional 77,000 tickets, according to the city’s inspector general."
http://time.com/3505994/red-light-camera-problems-tickets/
From USA Today in 2015 --
"In 2013, Florida quietly reduced the timing of its yellow lights and generated more than $100 million in extra revenue. Likewise, a study of New Jersey intersections found that the contractor had shortened virtually every yellow light below the minimum timing to generate tickets."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/03/15/speed-trap-red-light-column/24820783/
Sounds like the two cities need to reimburse the "violators" for their fines plus interest and then be fined tens of millions of $$$$ as punishment for doing sneaky chit like this and what seems to be purposely breaking the laws.
I haven't looked, but I'm betting those cities are run by dimocrats that are suffering revenue shortages because of their practices, and have added a new source of revenue to supplement the city coffers.
I could be wrong though.
I assure you, it's more than two cities. I can't speak as to those two, but a lot of cities have been caught at it. Even without adjusting the timing, a number of cities have been shown to be placing the cameras at the most profitable intersections, not the most dangerous ones. Some studies have even shown that cameras make us less safe, not more, by encouraging drivers to slam on the brakes (to avoid a ticket) rather than get through safely under yellow.
This is more about revenue than a particular party.
This is more about revenue than a particular party.
^^Agreed. Or maybe I should say, a-GREED.
Doing a quick internet search, I was actually looking for a story from Maryland where city officials were caught sending a directive to underlings, instructing that the period of time for yellow traffic lights be shortened so as to generate more tickets and thereby more revenue.
I agree that the cameras change driver behavior; according to one story I saw, camera-generated ticketing got so bad that Chicago drivers said they avoided those intersections. And yes, people would suddenly slam on the brakes at a yellow light, resulting in crashes.
The corrosive, corrupting influence of raising revenue.
More and more cities around the country are removing the red light cameras for a number of reasons. Lawsuits seem to be a big one with expected "revenue" not being what was promised and actual increases in auto accidents at the enforced intersections. Our city, Costa Mesa, got rid of them for all three reasons listed above in about 2010.
Sounds like a criminal conspiracy. Shouldn't the DoJ investigate these cities under RICO statutes for these extortion schemes?
Nah. Can't "civil asset forfeiture" a gov't entity.
Similar threads
