Committed readers probably remember my tirades over red light cameras and the many controversies surrounding their use. Last November, I dedicated this space to exposing the real agenda (revenue) behind their use in several U.S. cities. Much of my information on red light cameras and photo radar came from the National Motorists Association Foundation, which is a self-funded lobby group based in Waunakee, Wis. dedicated to defending personal freedoms behind the wheel.
The NMA, which has about 7,000 members nationwide, acts as a watchdog group over law enforcement and keeps a close eye on proponents of red light cameras and photo radar. The NMA suggests replacing such enforcement, which it believes to be revenue motivated, with sound, traffic engineering-based solutions. Late last year, the group took a serious shot at several cities in Northern Virginia and Maryland as well as Washington D.C. that were and still are using red-light cameras.
NMA president Jim Baxter issued a challenge offering to donate $10,000 to any city that didn't see a 50 percent reduction in red light violations on camera intersections after applying the NMA's recommended engineering-based solutions. In return, any city which did see the NMA-promised reduction in violations would have to discontinue the use of cameras and employ the legitimate solutions elsewhere. In other words, it was time for the cities in question to put up or shut up.
The NMA's primary beef is with the ever-shortening yellow light duration. According to Baxter, yellow light durations have been getting shorter during the last 20 years as the standards by which engineers base the duration have devolved to allow camera enforcement. Until 1976, yellow duration was based on entry speed; now it's based on the speed limit and whatever traffic engineers or city officials decide.
The letter declaring the challenge was well publicized in and around the Washington D.C. area, appearing in "The Washington Times" and other local papers. That was at the end of 2001. And yet, as of this writing in late March 2002, the NMA has received no response from any of the cities in question.
This is not a surprise; in fact, the NMA didn't really expect a response. Why? Because ten grand is a drop in the bucket when it comes to the cubic mega-dollars the cameras can generate. Take, for example, a recent casein Charlotte, N.C. where the cameras generated $6 million during three years. That kind of money will make any bureaucrat turn up his nose at a measly 10 grand.
"No one wants to make an issue out of it," Baxter says, explaining the cities' motivation for ignoring the challenge. "It would be quickly pointed out that they've got nothing to lose by enlisting our engineering practices. Ten thousand dollars isn't a lot of money, but it's more than enough to cover the cost of paying an engineer to change the yellow duration on one intersection, which would prove our point."
"The cities are seduced by easy money," says Baxter. "They're attracted by the appearance of dealing with a problem and very aware of the political and financial fallout if it is proven they've been fleecing motorists."
Clearly, safety isn't the agenda. According to Baxter, if the NMA is right, the city ends up with vastly safer intersections and if it's wrong, well, the city keeps its cameras and gets an extra 10 grand. I've always assumed that bureaucrats spoke only one language-the almighty dollar, so this should get their attention, right? Not exactly.
Here's the thing: David Speck, city councilman in Alexandria, Va., sees it differently. According to Speck, who's an admitted proponent of the cameras, changing the yellow duration alone won't make people stop running red lights. Speck also says he hadn't heard of the NMA's challenge.
"The measure of success with red light cameras is how well they reduce red light violations, and our cameras have done that very well," he says.
Speck also notes that the city has adjusted yellow light duration at intersections with and without cameras. Still, he claims it's not enough. In fact, Speck is trying to have dummy cameras installed in an effort to further reduce red light violations. "We advertise the cameras with signs and even had some of the cameras painted white to make them more obvious," Speck says.
Without the fallback "safety" agenda, lawmakers are left withlittle justification for their beloved red light cameras. Unfortunately, that doesn't matter when there's money to be made.