Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Scottsdale's Speed-Camera Scam

Since early 2004 I’ve been researching automated enforcement in metro Phoenix, especially Scottsdale. That wealthy suburb has been the most aggressive in the country in finding new applications for red light cameras. They make heavy use of photo radar vans as well. And they were the first to install cameras in a mid-block location where there’s no traffic light, just plenty of targets rolling past. This year they installed six cameras on heavily traveled Loop 101, also a first.

After two years of doing speed surveys, intersection analysis, studying accident stats and poring over thousands of pages of documents, I’ve started working on the story. Scottsdale won’t like it.

What I’ve found is that Scottsdale:

· Never bothered to do a traffic study on Loop 101 to justify the installation of the speed cameras
· Has no idea what the fatal accident rate is on the Loop (it’s an outstandingly safe freeway)
· Developed no criteria by which to judge the effectiveness of the nine-month “trial program”
· Expects to issue 300,000 tickets during this period, grossing $47 million
· Spent over $400,000 of public funds on a publicity campaign to convince residents and the witless local press that speeding is a problem on the Loop and elsewhere
· Conducted a rigged traffic-speed survey on the Loop to support this contention
· Stonewalls investigative reporters looking for data that should be freely available under the state’s Open Records law
· Uses separate accounts to show a net loss on their automated enforcement program while concealing millions in profits
· Routinely lies to the press
· Installs red light cameras at intersections with no history of excessive accidents caused by red-light running
· Has never done a study to see if their red light cameras reduce red-light running
· Neglects to mention that most Scottsdale intersections monitored by red light cameras experience up to a 35 percent increase in accidents after cameras are installed. The remaining intersections have accident rates little different than non-camera intersections.
· Began issuing speeding tickets (called Speed On Green) with their red light cameras without bothering to mention it to the public
· Writes 600 percent more $178 speeding tickets than $157 red light tickets at intersections with cameras (some drivers get hit with both)
· Relocates their cameras to follow shifting traffic patterns. When traffic volume increased in the northeast part of town, the cameras followed. I’d call this practice “following the money.”

And Scottsdale’s not alone. Neighboring Mesa, facing a $30 million budget shortfall this year, responded by increasing their red light cameras from 13 to 30. And they added Speed on Green at every one. This was announced to the press in a two-paragraph press release that was almost totally ignored. I calculate the changes should boost their automated enforcement revenue by at least $4 million this year.

Good thing I’ll be moving from Mesa shortly after the story appears on Radartest.com.



2 Comments:

At 7:10 PM , Blogger Veil Guy said...

Craig, its great to finally see in you the blogsphere! Welcome.

Reading your redlight camera story really got my blood boiling...When will the public see (and the media report) these developing trends for what they really represent: corruption of the worst kind as the very institutions "entrusted" to establish & maintain traffic "safety" are actually creating "unsafe" conditions all in the name of the (not so) almighty dollar.

Where's Nader on this issue? He was all bent out of shape about the raising of the national speed-limit from a paltry 55mph speed limit to a still paltry 65mph (his position also based upon dubious "statistics")...

This sounds far...far more sinister!

Not to sound so gloomy - but institional collapse appears to be running rampant these days!

 
At 7:18 AM , Blogger Wickenburger said...

I have to laugh at your blog. You miss the biggest reality and that is common sense. My wife and I drive 101 often. Before the cameras I drove 75 in a 65 and watched cars pass me like I was standing still. (I don't need a study to verfiy that.) After the cameras I drive 70 (on cruise) and still watch the cars passing me. (I don't need a study to verify that.) My wife got picked off by the cameras and I took her to driving school and paid the fine and fee. Both of us feel that she broke the law and can't believe she did so knowing the cameras were there. This may be a surprise in this day of "it's everyone elses fault" but the feeling that if you do something knowingly wrong "I" am responsible is not popular. All the rest of your argument is garbage. If speeders don't speed and red light runners don't run red lights then the money is beside the point.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home