Quantcast

Jump to: site navigation, content.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Dallas will inactivate some red light cameras that worked “too well”

By Scott Henson of Grits For Breakfast

Email Print Tell us your story Comments (7)

One of the things that makes me skeptical about red light cameras are the dramatic success rates touted by vendors. Since the companies make their profits off of each ticket, if they really worked as well as proponents, say, they quickly would not be cost effective to operate.

That's supposedly what's happening in Dallas after they implemented red light cameras, much to my surprise (I'm not sure I've heard of cities having the "too much success" problem before). Cities installing red light cameras all inevitably say they're doing so for public safety, but now that they turn out not to be a revenue generator, the City of Dallas will scale back plans to expand the cameras further. As a result, reports the Dallas News:

One likely recommendation to the council is scaling back Dallas' plans to expand the red-light system to 100 cameras.

The council in September voted to expand its camera vendor contract with Dallas-based Affiliated Computer Services, from five years and $13.3 million to seven years and $29.1 million, in order to install the additional cameras.

Initial plans envisioned most of the additional cameras operating by spring. Ms. Basora said installing fewer cameras would probably be more cost-effective.

Another idea staff may recommend to council members is idling cameras on a rotating basis, which the city already has begun doing, or operating them at different intersections where red-light running is more habitual.

In the first case, cameras will remain perched above the intersections they monitor but won't snap pictures of red-light runners, and therefore, won't generate $75 civil citations, which the city mails to the offending vehicles' owners.

Ms. Basora noted, however, that most motorists won't realize this and behave as if the cameras are operational.

Dallas pays ACS a guaranteed $3,799 per month for each operational camera, and just a fraction of that to maintain inoperative cameras.

Safety vs. money

The results of Dallas' 2-year-old red-light camera system are mixed blessings for City Hall, Mayor Tom Leppert said.

"The good news is it's having the effect everyone in this community wants: fewer red lights being run. The goal was not to make money on this," Mr. Leppert said. "But these are numbers and realities we'll have to deal with."

The mayor added that under no circumstances does he expect a decrease in red-light camera revenue to affect the city's public safety budget, although the overall budget may not enjoy as much revenue, perhaps resulting in the city streamlining other items.

So the city not only implemented the program anticipating new revenue, they shortchanged taxation for basic services anticipating the difference would be made up with revenue from these cameras! As they say on South Park, "Officer Barbrady, I call 'shenanigans'!"

Doesn't it seem like, if red light running is as big a public safety concern as proponents said when the cameras were installed (when anyone who criticized them was said to oppose "saving lives") they should be worth the money to operate?

The only reason to inactivate cameras is if their real goal was to generate a revenue stream, and they've been installed in places where red light running isn't a big safety concern.

I don't know quite what to say about this news story. Part of me wanted to write a post that said, "Well, maybe they do work," though I'd like to see more detail about the revenue dropoff, payment rates, etc.. But the hypocrisy of Dallas now idling cameras because they don't generate revenue, especially after so much whining and dramatic rhetoric about safety and Bad Ol' Dangerous Red Light Runners, leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and makes me think the cameras really were just about revenue all along.


Pegasus News content partner - Grits For Breakfast

See more stories in:

Comments

Pavel Lishin

Pavel Lishin Verified

I, for one, want to know how much it costs to keep them running. I mean, ideally the only cost should be electricity, right?

6 months, 3 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle

Scott Doyle Verified

I figure there's a decent amount of costs to administer everything. Equipment to store the vids, processing tickets, etc.

But yes, exactly how much would be interesting.

6 months, 3 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

James Scott

James Scott Verified

The attached story says "Dallas pays ACS a guaranteed $3,799 per month for each operational camera, and just a fraction of that to maintain inoperative cameras."

I'd be for a rotating schedule of operating cameras, such that you never really knew when it was operative. I think the cameras are a good idea for safety, but not for generating a profit (coming from someone that may, by chance, have already received a lovely $75 ticket).

Even if I thought there might be a chance the camera I'm coming up to is not turned on, I'd probably go ahead and stop anyway.

6 months, 3 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

David Gouldin

David Gouldin Staff

Apparently, ACS is in a bit of trouble for allegedly backdating stock options.

6 months, 3 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle

Scott Doyle Verified

Interesting. I guess the ACS board is bringing the suit? Not everyday that a founder is sued by the company he built.

Either way, I'm on board with James Scott's idea. Since it's publicly funded I'm pretty sure transparency issues would force the schedule to be made available somewhere. But how many people would study the schedule so they know when and where they could try and beat a light?

It's $3,800 for an operational cam...but how much of a fraction are we talking for inoperable ones? And is there any cost involved with activating or deactivating a cam?

I was at the Preston & Plano Pkwy light yesterday at about 6:15 - the southbound Preston light had changed and I saw 3 flashes from the camera. Can't say I've never tried to beat a light, but ever since cams have been up I'm more conscious to stop on yellow at major intersections.

6 months, 3 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

doodlefay Anonymous

Yes...I got a ticket and I paid it...I didn't like it but so what?! As a Grandmother I say, "Hooray. Thanks for saving my grandchildren's lives!!" I'm driving a lot to my volunteer jobs, chores, etc. and see way too many drivers going thru red lights even now. Leave those cameras alone and pray they work when we need 'em - like when our kids are out driving around. In this city they need all the help they can get!

6 months, 3 weeks ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

David Gouldin

David Gouldin Staff

Seems Dallas has been caught in some shenanigans too.

6 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Post a comment

(Requires free PegasusNews.com account.)


Password: (Forgotten your password?)


Find...

an event a Pegasus Pick
a restaurant a garage sale
a drink special a movie showtime
a band an organization
a job a political contribution
a house a deal

Add...

an event a garage sale
a lost pet a band
a story a photo

Today

GlamAmour's Bewitching Burlesque Remember Abe Weinstein's Colony Club? How about Jack Ruby's Carousel? Dang, you're old. (And dirty!) Hearken back to the golden days of Dallas burlesque with women who tease to please. More info

Blogs

See more

Latest comments

See more recent comments

Latest reviews

See more recent reviews