« | »

LA To Exempt Arizona Red Light Contract

From an irked Los Angeles Times:

Red light camera pact would need exemption from Arizona boycott

By Rich Connell, Los Angeles Times

June 21, 2010

Two much-debated City Hall issues are expected to converge this week when the Los Angeles Police Department’s red light camera program moves to the front of the line for an exemption from the city’s contracting boycott of Arizona over that state’s new immigration enforcement law.

On Tuesday, the City Council is scheduled to consider — and appears likely to approve — an exception to the boycott allowing a 10-month extension of a multimillion-dollar agreement with Scottsdale-based American Traffic Solutions.

The firm operates cameras at 32 city intersections that catch tens of thousands of red light violators each year. The council’s Public Safety Committee says the exception is justified because red light cameras provide a "significant benefit to public safety."

Or, more accurately, “the exception is justified” because these tens of thousands of violators pay a lot of money into the Los Angeles coffers.

In addition to extending the current red light camera agreement, the council is scheduled to consider asking for bids on a new contract to operate and expand the photo enforcement program to more intersections starting next year.

That action could further entangle the two issues. In addition to the current vendor, a top competitor for the new contract — Redflex Traffic Systems — also has its headquarters in Arizona

What a conundrum. Isn’t there some firm owned and operated by illegal aliens that makes these traffic cameras?

Councilman Ed Reyes, whose district stretches from Koreatown to Lincoln Heights, has been an outspoken supporter of the boycott. But he said he would support the one-time exemption to temporarily continue the contract and prevent a sudden shutdown of the traffic enforcement program. "I would not jeopardize Angelenos," he said

Oh, our sides…

Despite fines and fees for running red lights, which can total more than $500, the city’s chief administrative officer this month issued a report concluding that the camera enforcement program costs about $300,000 a year after all income is considered. Most of the fines and fees paid by motorists go to the state and courts. American Traffic Solutions receives up to $3.1 million annually under the contract, the report says.

And we are supposed to believe them.

Supporters of the program say there are indirect savings because there are fewer accidents, injuries and deaths, and there are benefits from freeing up traffic patrol officers for other tasks

Doesn’t getting people without drivers licenses or car insurance off the roads also prevent accidents and deaths and save money?

So obviously, safety or savings are not the real concerns for the Los Angeles City Council.

This article was posted by Steve on Monday, June 21st, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

8 Responses to “LA To Exempt Arizona Red Light Contract”

  1. heykev says:

    It’s never been about safety with the Red Light Cameras. It’s always been about the money. For municipalities that have them, it’s like an invitation to print money.

    Chicago now has yellow lights in those intersections that have Red Light Cameras that as shorter than normal. One of the suburbs near me stopped giving tickets for not coming to a “full and complete stop” when turning right onto the interstate. They send out hundreds of tickets daily until residents complained about them.

    Red Light cameras have never been about money, they are a simple and easy way for cities to make money because you have to prove your not breaking the law.

    • proreason says:

      Drive to the corner store and you will commit 3 to 4 traffic violations.

      “Rolling stops” are about as serious a crime as stepping on the cracks in the sidewalk. I once was ticketed for a rolling stop at 11:30 pm at an intersection with no traffic and no buildings, one mile from my house. There wasn’t a car in sight in any direction. The cop was hiding half a mile down the road in a direction that nobody would have any reason to go at night, with his lights off, partially obscured by a tree.

      Getting traffic tickets is entirely random.

      Police cars are in violation of traffic laws as frequently as civilian cars. Probably more frequently.

      So of course these cameras are for business, not public safety. The business of shaking down citizens to grow government power.

    • tranquil.night says:

      “Chicago now has yellow lights in those intersections that have Red Light Cameras that as shorter than normal.”

      We know this story in California too.

      “There wasn’t a car in sight in any direction. The cop was hiding half a mile down the road in a direction that nobody would have any reason to go at night, with his lights off, partially obscured by a tree.”

      And this one too.

      Meanwhile, the missing poster of Amber Dubois’ face is in every coffee shop in San Diego County. A year later Natalie Holloway is killed by a public miscreant serial-killer living in violation distance from a school that should’ve never been out of prison.

      As we say here on the Golden Coast: Dude.

  2. TwilightZoned says:

    “Or, more accurately, “the exception is justified” because these tens of thousands of violators pay a lot of money into the Los Angeles coffers.”

    My exact thoughts. The BS meter is swinging wildly to the right side. This all about revenue. So, so predictable…

  3. Mithrandir says:

    So……L.A. is against the so-called Arizona Police-State, only so much as it doesn’t infringe on the functioning of L.A.’s money-grabbing Police-State?

    Tickets, whether by actual police or by machines, are HUGE money makers for balancing budgets.

    It is the Police-State circling around like sharks saying, “Don’t worry, they will screw up some time, and some day, and then we will attack them in their wallet!” ~predatory government, just what the Founding Fathers envisioned…..

  4. tranquil.night says:

    “But he said he would support the one-time exemption to temporarily continue the contract and prevent a sudden shutdown of the traffic enforcement program.”

    Oh my sides indeed! The roads would just be chaos if the cameras went off! Whoa Nelly sometimes it feels like there’s just no stopping criminality this cancerous. It’s so stupid too.

    “Despite fines and fees for running red lights, which can total more than $500, the city’s chief administrative officer this month issued a report concluding that the camera enforcement program costs about $300,000 a year after all income is considered.”

    Actually I totally believe this. If there’s anyone who can take a perverse cashcow of a scam and find a way to get even more money out of the taxpayers for it, it’s our government. Doubly so for the state of California, and to the ludicrous degree in Los Angeles city.

  5. Tater Salad says:

    One word can only describe Los Angeles: HYPOCRITEs

  6. JohnMG says:

    Question; If an illegal alien runs afoul of a red-light camera and is given a summons and/or fine, does this make him a victim of racial profiling? Have the constitutional rights to which he’s not entitled been violated? Has a hate crime been committed?


« Front Page | To Top
« | »