A report by a town committee in Swampscott, Massachusetts recommends against red light cameras on the grounds of safety. A committee established to determine whether Swampscott, Massachusetts should install red light cameras concluded Monday that the devices were not suitable for the town.

“The limited number of angle crashes, combined with the likelihood that RLCs increase rear-end crashes, led the committee to conclude that the installation of RLCs is contra-indicated at all signalized intersections in Swampscott. Strictly on the basis of public safety, the committee recommends against the use of RLCs in Swampscott.”

On the positive side, the committee did find that red light cameras did not endanger privacy and that they could generate up to $490,000 in revenue in the first year. The report also discusses a number of engineering changes, including lengthened yellow warning times, that could improve safety without any downsides.

But the selectmen are pushing forward with an attempt to install the red light cameras despite the town meeting vote and a committee recomendation against their use. A town meeting will be held on November 13 where officials will make a second attempt to sell residents on the proposal.

Read Full Story
And Part 2

The [Arlington, Texas] Police Department got the green light Tuesday to install cameras at 10 of the city’s most dangerous intersections. The cameras will photograph red-light runners, and eventually, police hope, cut down on fatal accidents, Police Chief Theron Bowman told the City Council.

The cameras will be operational by February, police said.

Since 2003, red-light violations have led to six fatalities and 1,508 collisions in Arlington, police said.

Several other Texas cities have implemented red-light cameras, such as Garland, Plano, Richardson, Rowlett and Frisco.

Bedford, North Richland Hills, Dallas, University Park, McKinney and Farmers Branch are also considering the idea.

Each camera would lead to 20 citations per day, Bowman said, with net revenue expected to exceed $3.8 million.

Garland installed the cameras at four intersections in 2003. Since then, crashes related to red-light violations have declined by 50 percent. (Texas Transportation Institute study says otherwise)

Bowman also said the Federal Highway Administration reports a 25 percent average decrease in crashes after installation of photo traffic enforcement systems. (That’s just FALSE!)

Read Full Story

City leaders held a public hearing Tuesday night to discuss using cameras to catch people who run red lights.

Some drivers are worried the wrong people will be ticketed. Others said they hope the cameras cut down on dangerous driving.

If approved, Kansas City would be one of four cities in the state using the red-light cameras.

Read Full Story

Cleveland, Ohio is expanding its lucrative red light camera and speed camera program to include the confiscation of cars. The city council is considering an “emergency” ordinance to make it a crime to own a vehicle that “displays license plates that are associated with four or more of any combination of unpaid parking infraction judgments and/or notices of liability for… or red light or speeding violations.” The guilt or innocence of the owner to the original charge is irrelevant to the city.

The proposed ordinance also blocks the renewal of car registrations for anyone the city claims has not paid all fines. It also allows the city to contract with private bounty hunters to collect on unpaid tickets. The cash-strapped city is looking to these private contractors to collect millions in outstanding fines.

Under the proposed ordinance, seized vehicles will only be released if the owner admits guilt and pays towing, storage, impound and administrative fees on top of cost of the original tickets. Cleveland Police have already admitted that they do not review all photo enforcement tickets for accuracy before the private vendor ACS issues them. The city plans to make $4 million a year from camera tickets.

Last August, a judge in Albuquerque, New Mexico struck down a similar camera seizure ordinance as unconstitutional.

Read Full Story

Along a gritty stretch of street in Brooklyn, police this month quietly launched an ambitious plan to combat street crime and terrorism.

But instead of cops on the beat, wireless video cameras peer down from lamp posts about 30 feet above the sidewalk.

They were the first installment of a program to place 500 cameras throughout the city at a cost of $9 million.

Hundreds of additional cameras could follow if the city receives $81.5 million in federal grants it has requested to safeguard Lower Manhattan and parts of midtown with a surveillance “ring of steel“ modeled after security measures in London’s financial district.

The city already has about 1,000 cameras in the subways, with 2,100 scheduled to be in place by 2008. An additional 3,100 cameras monitor city housing projects.

Privacy advocates say the NYPD’s camera plan needs more study and safeguards to preserve privacy and guard against abuses like racial profiling and voyeurism.

The department “is installing cameras first and asking questions later,” said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.

She concedes cameras can help investigators identify suspects once a crime has been committed, but argues they can’t prevent crime. She cited a 2002 study that concluded surveillance cameras used in 14 British cities had little or no impact on crime rates — just as they didn’t keep terrorists from bombing the London subway system last year.

“The London experience shouldn’t be misconstrued that the ‘ring of steel’ prevents terrorism,” she said. “But that’s how it’s being pitched.”

Read Full Story…