[sharky1381]

Rich is the expert in signal maintenance so I will leave the technical aspects of this discussion in his capable hands. I will try to address some of the procedural and other issues with the knowledge I have obtained doing considerable research into red light photo enforcement programs while working on my Master of Science in Emergency Services Administration in 2006 and supervising the Photo Enforcement Unit of my department for some time. With the rapid expansion of the number of red light camera systems throughout the U.S.A. there have been a number of mistakes and misconceptions about these systems as well as some poorly thought out and implemented programs. Most of the cases involving the poorly managed programs occurred when red light cameras were just starting to be installed and there was not any case law or written regulations for their use. A case in point is the city of San Diego which entered into a contract that gave the company operating the system a percentage of the income from fines. There was little PD oversight and as a result there was impropriety regarding the signal interval timing. Thousands of citations were invalidated and case law introduced that precludes contracts that allow payment based on a percentage of fines. It was also ruled that a sworn police officer must review every violation and approve the issuance of any citations thus taking that responsibility out of the hands of the contractor.

The issue of increased rear end collisions is always brought up by opponents and immediately following installation a small increase in such minor collisions is normal. However, this spike is short lived and once people get used to the system being in place such collisions return to the level prior to installation or may even be reduced since people tend to be a little more alert when they know photo enforcement is in place. On the other hand, the occurrence of much more serious, high speed broadside collisions such as those caused by red light runners, are reduced immediately. This is particularly true when the proper criteria are used in choosing intersections to be equipped with red light cameras. Intersections should be chosen based on collision rates and the rate of red light violations. The systems are set up so that clear photos of front and rear plates as well as the driver are taken. There is also a video that clearly shows the sequencing of the light and the position of the vehicle in reference to the limit line. There is a digital clock running in the video that shows how long the light has been red when the car goes through and also shows the speed of the violator’s car.

The digital image is reviewed by an employee of the company that installs and maintains the equipment and if it is their opinion that an offense occurred it is forwarded to the P.D. An officer reviews the video and compares the license photo of the registered owner to the driver in the video. If a positive I.D. is not made a letter goes out to the R.O. asking them to identify the driver. If they can’t or fail to respond then the license photos of all residents of the R.O. address can be compared. Otherwise no cite is issued. Ultimately it is a sworn officer who has to determine if what is shown on the video constitutes a citable offense and if a positive identification can be made of the driver. If so a citation is sent in the mail and the person cited has the opportunity to review the video and fight the citation in court. A few years ago the Grand Jury of Orange County, California did an investigation of photo enforcement programs and determined that while some jurisdictions have a positive income, on average the programs tend to be revenue neutral since just as many agencies lose money. That is the way it should be since the idea is to provide increased safety at problem intersections, not provide income.