Red Light Cameras: Government’s ‘It’s For Public Safety’ Lie

Red light cameras are a mixed bag across the USA. Big cities love them, small cities increasingly less. But one thing is universal where ever they are tried. The whole thing is about revenue generation, not public safety. Most city administrations try desperately to hide their greed behind hoary claims of safeguarding the public, but at least Toledo, Ohio has dispensed with some of that subterfuge and is admitting straight out that making money is a main goal.

Last month Toledo’s finance director told the city council that they were installing 11 new red light cameras with the expectation that the project would “raise” $320,000. What did the city need that new revenue for? More government spending, of course.

Oh, and it’s for the children, too. Toledo Councilman Steve Steel was excited to get the new revenue. “It does restore the biggest thing we were looking for, which was giving kids something constructive to do in a positive atmosphere,” he crowed.

So, now officials will berate you if you stand against these useless devices that are just a means to give government more money to spend on pet projects because, darn it, it’s for the children! WHY do you hate kids, taxpayers?

Unfortunately for Toledo’s city fathers, red light cameras are increasingly failing at both revenue generation and public safety. Many cities that once had them have pulled them out because revenues dropped over time while maintenance costs continued to rise not to mention that some cities have found that the red light cameras actually cause more accidents instead of improving driver safety.

Worse, some cities have played games with the cameras in order to keep revenues flowing into their profligate hands. At least six cities were caught shortening yellow light times in order to catch more drivers running red lights.

But we don’t even have to stray from Toledo to show that new red light cameras won’t bring in a never ending stream of spending cash. Ohio native Maggie Thurber notes that Toledo has already seen revenues fall from other red light camera installations.

The problem, as I’ve detailed previously, is that the more people get used to red light and speed cameras, the less the revenue there is from violations. Since 2009 when the city added speed cameras and negotiated a higher percentage of the fines, the revenue has steadily decreased. This means that the city, in order to continue to collect their targeted budget amounts, must constantly expand the big-brother-type surveillance.

Yet, here they are trying for more red light cameras. Why? Because they imagine a pot o’ gold under every red light in the city. When politicians get dollar signs in their eyes its hard to shake them from the dreamy dream of more cash to spend on their pet projects. If it’s all about bringing in money they can spend. It has zip to do with safety.

Shortlink:

Posted by on February 6, 2012.
Filed under Big government, corruption, Culture Of Corruption, Democrats, Economics, Liberals.


Both comments and pings are currently closed.
  • jim_m

    People learn where the cameras are and avoid them.  In the case of Chicago, people just stop going into the city.  With parking costs rising faster than the national debt and people being assaulted in broad daylight on Michigan Ave., reason to go downtown is rapidly vanishing.

    • Gmacr1

      I don’t idly call it ‘Mordor by the lake’ …

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7FMXY3DZP7JF7SGSPIOSLLXNE Stephen

    These kind of “revenue enhancements” are BS. More and more cities are ditching the red light cameras from what I’ve read recently.

    • jim_m

      It may be more accurate to say that states are banning these kinds of cameras, whereas the cities are trying to install them.  10 states (11 when Iowa passes their new law shortly) have outlawed red light cameras and the like due to growing community anger over the over-reaching of the municipalities. 

      Since the States don’t get any value from red light cameras the state elected officials are more persuadable than city officials. Interesting that this is not a right or left issue as both red and blue states have banned these monstrosities.

  • 914

    Hang the politicians  from the traffic lights and donations to city coffers would likely swell.

  • http://otisthehand.blogspot.com/ OTIS the hand

    Tennessee decided that there were so many complaints about “right on red” tickets that they  banned the practice if a red light camera is the only evidence. That caused a big fight with the vendors because, as it turns out, that’s where 90 percent of their revenue was coming from. Not that many people just blow through the intersection. I had no idea.

  • jim_m

    Last week I was listening to the radio here in Chicago.  A man was ticketed for running a red light because some gangbangers pulled up next to him and threatened him with a gun.  He reported it t police, who caught the punks, who were caught on the red light camera and who confessed.  The victim/driver was fined $100.  He appealed and the fine was upheld and he was fined a further $100 in court costs.  In Chicago you can save your life if you are willing to pay the fine.

    It’s about the money.

    • herddog505

      Jebus…

  • herddog505

    I thought that the cameras were verboten because a judge determined that they violate one’s right to face his accuser.  Meh.  We had them here in No. Carolina for a while.  Perhaps some cities still do have a few.  Personally, they always filled me with a desire to get my air rifle out and take a bit of target practice.

    • Brucehenry

      Still have ‘em in Raleigh and Cary.

  • http://www.wizbangblog.com David Robertson

    Gee, red light districts aren’t what they used to be.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

    “one camera in Oakland generates more than $3 million a year”  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/04/MNGJ1N2VRO.DTL#ixzz1lfSqPeGR

  • TomInCali

    Not to mention this:

    The city of Denver is bringing in thousands of dollars in fines every
    year by ticketing people who stop at red lights. They are ticketed
    because their tire goes over the white line that marks where the vehicle
    should stop.

    http://denver.cbslocal.com/2011/11/03/denver-collects-fines-on-drivers-who-stop-at-red-lights/

  • Wild_Willie

    The City of Houston installed them at busy intersections. The citizens went nuts and put it on the  ballot. The citizens voted overwhelmingly to take them down. Accidents increased do to people stopping short on yellow lights causing rear end collisions. The city said they couldn’t take them down because they had a ‘no out’ contract with the vendor. Well anyone in business knows you do not enter into a no out contract especially with something or someone you are trying for the first time. So someone go their hands greased. So, now we  the city is paying for them but not using them.

    I heard someone say if you get a ticket in the mail with your picture, pay the fine by taking a picture of your check and mailing it back. :)      ww

  • jim_m

    Yesterday Illinois gave permission to turn the red light cameras into speed cameras as well.

    “I think that you’ve got to understand that if you save even one life, you are saving the whole world,”  – Gov Patrick Quinn (D, stupidity) Seriously?  Even the dems can do better than that idiotic nonsense. 

    As The Chicago Tribune comments ” Red-light cameras generated $69 million for the city in 2010, and speed cameras likely would grow that amount considerably.”  http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-02-06/news/ct-met-chicago-speed-cameras-20120207_1_speed-cameras-red-light-cameras-mayor-rahm-emanuel

    I guarantee that if it were costing $100 per ticket instead of making that money they would find a reason to compromise on the “safety of our children”.  What transparent BS!

  • Commander_Chico

    Are these run by private companies who get a cut of the action in return for installation and operation?

    They privatized the parking meters in Chicago, it was a big rip-off. Now the city has to pay the company if they close a street for a parade.

    • jim_m

      But on the brighter side the City of Chicago is becomming a big supporter of 2nd Amendment rights.  They just wrote a $399,950 check to the Second Amendment Foundation. http://www.dailypundit.com/2012/02/07/civil-rights-victory-2/

      Oh, Wiat.  Never mind. They wrote that as a result of violating people’s rights.  Seems like Chicago is developing a pattern of making bad judgement calls that they end up paying a lot of money for.

      • Commander_Chico

        Great, I’m a big 2nd Amendment supporter, along with all of the Bill of Rights.  You never know when you might need it. 

  • olhardhead

    Wild Willie,
     ” I heard someone say if you get a ticket in the mail with your picture,
    pay the fine by taking a picture of your check and mailing it back. :)
     If ya do that just make sure it’s a “red light” ticket not a real traffic ticket…the cop’s might just send ya a picture of some….handcuff’s..

    just sayin’,
    ol’