Texas House votes to ban cameras

[Ulrich]

Feb. 24, 2005, 2:53PM

Texas House votes to ban cameras to catch red-light runners
By KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

AUSTIN -- The House voted overwhelmingly today to ban the use of cameras to nab red-light violators, another step toward possibly killing Houston's plan to install such a system this year.

The 109-30 vote came after minimum debate in the House, and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who presides over the Senate, said today that he expects that chamber to "look favorably" on the measure.

Houston City Council voted in December to set up cameras in as many as 50 intersections to catch red light violators.

The Legislature voted in 2003 to ban camera enforcement of criminal red light sanctions, but Houston proposes to issue civil citations to red-light violators caught by cameras.

The measure approved by the House today would close that loophole.

"The will of the House shows we are still adamantly opposed to the use of red light cameras," said Rep. Gary Elkins, R-Houston, sponsor of the bill.

Mayor Bill White and Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt, who pushed the council measure for camera enforcement, were not immediately available for comment today.

[C G]

That is very good news. I wish other states would do the same.

[Kaiser442]

Wow.... you mean there was a decision in FAVOR of freedom? What is this country coming to?

That's awesome.

[Vezna31]

Feb. 24, 2005, 2:53PM

Texas House votes to ban cameras to catch red-light runners
By KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

AUSTIN -- The House voted overwhelmingly today to ban the use of cameras to nab red-light violators, another step toward possibly killing Houston's plan to install such a system this year.

The 109-30 vote came after minimum debate in the House, and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who presides over the Senate, said today that he expects that chamber to "look favorably" on the measure.

Houston City Council voted in December to set up cameras in as many as 50 intersections to catch red light violators.

The Legislature voted in 2003 to ban camera enforcement of criminal red light sanctions, but Houston proposes to issue civil citations to red-light violators caught by cameras.

The measure approved by the House today would close that loophole.

"The will of the House shows we are still adamantly opposed to the use of red light cameras," said Rep. Gary Elkins, R-Houston, sponsor of the bill.

Mayor Bill White and Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt, who pushed the council measure for camera enforcement, were not immediately available for comment today.

The City of San Diego voted unanimously to re-install them around the city about a year or so ago.

[Ulrich]

March 14, 2005, 10:27PM

Beleaguered traffic measures to get hearings
Safe Clear and red-light cameras to be debated by House panel

By KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

AUSTIN - Two Houston traffic measures that have drawn opposition from lawmakers will get hearings at the Capitol today, as a House committee considers a bill to ban red-light cameras and one to block the Safe Clear freeway towing ordinance.

Testimony on both bills is scheduled this morning before the House Urban Affairs Committee.

The City Council has voted to install cameras at as many as 50 intersections, issuing civil citations to the owners of cars the cameras photograph running red lights. Tickets written by officers still would be criminal citations against drivers.

The House passed a bill earlier this session, sponsored by Rep. Gary Elkins, R-Houston, to keep the city from issuing civil citations for red-light violators.

The committee today will consider a bill by Rep. Carl Isett, R-Lubbock, that would prevent local authorities from operating a "photographic traffic signal enforcement system."


Money redirected
Although sentiment in the Legislature has run strongly against red-light cameras for several years, Houston Chronicle interviews last week indicated that the Senate is less enthusiastic than the House about banning camera enforcement, and the Senate fate of Elkins' bill is uncertain.

Knowing that, Elkins submitted an amendment to the tax bill Monday that would only allow cities using red-light cameras to keep $1 of paid citations.

The rest of the money would go to the state comptroller and then be redistributed to the school district where the violation occurred. Elkins won easy approval through a voice vote.

The Safe Clear measure, filed by Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, is a companion to a Senate bill by Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston.

Whitmire suspended action on his bill last month after he and Mayor Bill White agreed to changes, including expanding the county's Motorist Assistance Program, which offers help and minor repairs to stranded motorists for free.


Preventing others
The Urban Affairs committee, which Talton chairs, will hear testimony on the bill, but he said he will leave it pending in committee.

Talton, however, still objects to Safe Clear's exclusive towing contracts, which he called "leasing sections of the state highway."

"Houston just happened to be the first city to do it," he said. "But others will follow."

Under the Safe Clear program, 11 towing companies collectively pay the city about $1 million a year for exclusive rights to serve sections of freeways within the city limits.

Talton's bill would prevent cities from granting "an exclusive right to one or more towing companies to remove a disabled vehicle from a designated segment of a freeway without the consent of the owner, operator or person in charge of that vehicle."

Talton has not polled committee members or representatives but said he does not intend to pass the bill out of committee just yet.

Rep. Kevin Bailey, D-Houston, who also sits on the committee, said he wants to see whether the changes to Safe Clear have been effective.

"If it's still a problem later, we can act," he said.

"And it puts some pressure on the city."

[Ulrich]

April 14, 2005, 11:19PM

Light is green for bill banning traffic cameras
Senate panel hears sides, may vote next week
By KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

AUSTIN - After being stalled for nearly a month, a bill that would thwart a Houston initiative to catch red-light violators by placing cameras at intersections finally got a hearing Thursday in the state Senate.

The bill received overwhelming approval in February in the House, where sentiment has run strongly against red-light cameras for several years.

Sen. Frank Madla, D-San Antonio, who chairs the Intergovernmental Relations Committee, said the panel appears split on the bill. Madla was the only one of the five committee members who listened to testimony Thursday, as senators attended other meetings. He said he hopes the committee will vote on the bill next week.

The bill would prohibit cities from issuing civil citations against the owners of cars photographed running red lights. That is the approach planned in Houston and other cities.

Red-light violators spotted by police officers still would be subject to misdemeanor criminal citations as they are now.

Sen. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, is sponsoring the legislation in the Senate. If the bill passes out of committee, it will be the first time the issue has made it to the floor of the Senate for a vote.

Houston and several other cities are fighting the bill, as are companies that want contracts to provide camera systems.

The cities are promoting camera enforcement as a safety measure. Opponents contend the cities' real motivation is increasing fine revenue. They also raise privacy concerns.

The Houston City Council voted in December to set up cameras in as many as 50 intersections, issuing civil citations to the owners of cars photographed running lights. It had planned to have the cameras installed by this month, but that has been put on hold as the city awaits the fate of the bill in the Legislature.

In another Houston traffic matter, the Senate passed three bills Thursday relating to the city's Safe Clear mandatory towing ordinance.

The bills, sponsored by Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, were part of an agreement between Whitmire and Mayor Bill White to save Safe Clear, a central component of the mayor's traffic-control efforts.

One measure would require municipalities to use money generated from towing contracts on transportation and mobility projects. Another would allow cities to license and permit all tow-truck drivers, giving them authority to perform criminal background checks.

The third bill would place all mobility programs under the review of the Texas Department of Transportation and require it to review the "pricing practices" of towing companies and require disclosure of all towing fees to motorists.


Source: Houston Chronicle

[Ulrich]

May 10, 2005, 7:16AM

Legislature faces jam on traffic-camera ban
Lawmakers may run out of time to vote on Houston's efforts to catch red-light runners
By KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

AUSTIN - Lawmakers' efforts to stop Houston from using cameras to catch red-light runners may hang on whether the Senate can consider the matter before the legislative session runs into a red light.

The Houston City Council voted in December to set up cameras in as many as 50 intersections and to issue civil citations to the owners of cars photographed running lights. It had planned to have the cameras installed by April, but that has been put on hold as the Legislature considers the issue.

The House easily passed a bill that would prohibit camera enforcement. The Senate's five-member Intergovernmental Relations Committee voted the measure out last week, the first time the issue has made it to the Senate floor.

Sen. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, who is sponsoring the legislation, said he doesn't expect it to be taken up before the Senate passes a tax or school finance bill. With less than three weeks left in the session, time is growing short, but Jackson said the camera enforcement ban will pass if it comes to a vote.

Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, said he will "vigorously oppose" any effort to bring the bill up for a vote of the full Senate. "If it does get on the floor, we will have a lengthy conversation," he said.

Houston and other cities are promoting camera enforcement as a safety measure.

Opponents of the cameras contend the cities' real motivation is revenue, not safety.

[SondraS2k]

I will be perhaps the lone voice of dissention here. I oppose cameras to catch speeders, but I am in favor of red light cameras. Speeding isn't a black and white case of safe or not safe, but running a red light certainly is.

In the four years I've been in Austin, red light runners have become more and more brave, and just a week ago, I very narrowly missed (like by a foot or less) hitting someone who ran a red light in front of me. The problem was worse in Florida, where I lived from '96-'01; there, I would wait for a second or so after my light changed to green before I proceeded, and at least once a week, that saved me a collision. The escalating number of accidents there has earned one roadway that I frequently traveled the dubious honor of being named to the top 5 most deadly stretches of road in the U.S., and that news came as no surprise to me whatsoever. The danger of driving there is but one reason why I left the sunshine state.

[Vezna31]

I will be perhaps the lone voice of dissention here. I oppose cameras to catch speeders, but I am in favor of red light cameras. Speeding isn't a black and white case of safe or not safe, but running a red light certainly is.

In the four years I've been in Austin, red light runners have become more and more brave, and just a week ago, I very narrowly missed (like by a foot or less) hitting someone who ran a red light in front of me. The problem was worse in Florida, where I lived from '96-'01; there, I would wait for a second or so after my light changed to green before I proceeded, and at least once a week, that saved me a collision. The escalating number of accidents there has earned one roadway that I frequently traveled the dubious honor of being named to the top 5 most deadly stretches of road in the U.S., and that news came as no surprise to me whatsoever. The danger of driving there is but one reason why I left the sunshine state.

The only thing I would disagree with is that an investigation in San Diego showed a big increase in rear-end accidents because the first car would slam their brakes to avoid running the light and the car behind them plowed into them because they weren't expecting the car to do that.

[SondraS2k]

The only thing I would disagree with is that an investigation in San Diego showed a big increase in rear-end accidents because the first car would slam their brakes to avoid running the light and the car behind them plowed into them because they weren't expecting the car to do that.

Unfortunately, no one seems to be legislating against stupidity. In a case like that the driver of the first car needs to be ticketed for inattention to the signal in the first place, because without that, no one would need to slam on the brakes.

[Ulrich]

May 13, 2005, 12:34PM

Red-light cameras get boost in Senate
Body won't vote on bill stopping Houston's plan
By KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

AUSTIN - Houston got a positive signal Thursday in its effort to enforce red lights with cameras, as the Senate refused to take up a bill that would have killed the city's plan.

Opponents of red-light cameras are still hoping they can prevail, but they're running out of legislative options.

Sen. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, the bill's sponsor, said he will continue to try and bring the bill to the floor for a vote. Under Senate rules, the bill would require the support of two-thirds of the chamber's 31 members to be considered. The vote Thursday was 16 for, 14 against and 1 voting "present."

Jackson said at least now he knows where senators stand. Among his Houston-area colleagues, only Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, supported the measure. Democrats Rodney Ellis, Mario Gallegos and John Whitmire and Republicans Kyle Janek and Jon Lindsay voted against bringing the bill to the floor.

"I'm still working on the votes," Jackson said. "We just hit a speed bump. Clearly a majority of the Senate is for the bill. We just don't have two-thirds."

While sentiment in the House has run strongly against red-light cameras for years, the measure has never made it to the floor of the Senate.

Jackson's bill would prohibit cities from issuing civil citations against the owners of cars photographed running red lights. That is the approach Houston and other cities plan to use.

Red-light runners nabbed by police officers still would be subject to misdemeanor criminal citations.

In the House on Wednesday, Rep. Gary Elkins, R-Houston, amended a transportation bill to outlaw the use of red-light cameras. But that measure may not survive the bill's final version.


Source: Houston Chronicle

[Ulrich]

June 13, 2005, 12:14AM
Red-light cameras not far up road
City planning to have system at some intersections by end of the year
By MATT STILES
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

A legislative win for the city of Houston could spell a loss for red-light scofflaws by year's end.

The city is moving ahead with plans to install cameras to photograph motorists who don't stop at traffic lights, now that the idea has survived a move to block it in Austin.

"They are going up, you bet," said Mayor Bill White, during a recent news conference. "Every time that somebody is killed or seriously injured in an intersectional collision, where somebody was speeding through a red light, I and council members take that as a personal responsibility."

The timetable isn't certain for setting up the cameras, which the City Council approved in December. The goal is to have some working by the end of the year, city officials said.

The city had planned to get cameras installed by April, but that was delayed while the Legislature considered the issue. The House approved measures to outlaw red-light cameras, but none made it through the Senate.

Precisely where the cameras might go isn't yet clear. The mayor, council and several city departments are working out the details of the plan before soliciting bids from prospective private vendors, who would install and maintain the cameras.

The mayor and the police department have said the city's most dangerous signal-controlled intersections would be first on the list. The initial rollout of the system could involve as few as 10 sites, eventually growing to as many as 50.

"Whether we do all 50 all at once, I'm not sure," said Councilman Adrian Garcia, whose public safety committee will discuss the issue today.


Reducing crashes
White and other proponents said the devices reduce serious crashes in the communities where they are installed across the country, including Garland, Plano and Richardson in North Texas.

But critics charged that the city's real motive was increasing traffic ticket revenue.

"I don't want this to be another parking meter thing — all about money," said Councilwoman Addie Wiseman, one of two council members who opposed the measure. She said the city still ought to explore other ways to make intersections safer, such as extending the time for yellow lights.

"I want it to be about safety. That's how it was pitched, and that's how it should be followed through."

Lt. Robert Manzo, a Houston police spokesman, said one system under review would include sensors connected to traffic lights.

Cameras would take four digital images of any vehicle that entered an intersection when sensors indicated the light was red. The infraction also would be captured on video.

Those images then would be wired electronically to the city's vendor for identification of the registered owner through state records. A police officer would approve each citation before it was mailed.


Citations to car's owner
The citations would be civil documents technically issued against a car's owner rather than its driver, and would carry lower penalties than tickets written by officers who witness infractions.

The camera fine likely would be $50 to $75, compared with the criminal penalty of $215. Additionally, the camera citations wouldn't affect motorists' insurance rates because they wouldn't be noted on driving records, city officials said.

The city — which might give the vendor a cut of ticket revenue to save money on the installation — also is exploring the option of setting up decoy cameras in some places to serve as deterrents, officials said.

Garcia said his committee likely will discuss the technology, as well as methods to ensure that motorists aren't unfairly cited.

He agrees that each identified intersection ought to have several cameras, and video capability, so all suspected violations would be clearly documented.

"If we don't have a good triangulation of the intersection, the light and the angle of the camera, then we're going to have to be subjective about it, and that's not fair," he said.


Source: Houston Chronicle

[WestSideBilly]

June 13, 2005, 12:14AM
The city — which might give the vendor a cut of ticket revenue to save money on the installation

Surefire way to turn it into a money grab

[Ulrich]

Spray-On Mud Makes a Splash

By Robert Andrews
02:00 AM Jun. 10, 2005 PT

It's sold as a must-have accessory to give urban SUVs a whiff of the outback. But U.K. officials say drivers who use spray-on mud to avoid identification by police speed cams face hefty fines for obscuring their license plates.

Targeting self-conscious 4x4 owners whose rugged vehicles seldom see obstacles bigger than a speed bump, the enterprising British e-tailer behind Sprayonmud sells the scent of the countryside in a squirt bottle.

For 8 pounds (about $14.50), buyers get 0.75 liters (.85 quarts) of genuine filthy water, bottled from hills near the company's premises on the rural England-Wales border. The aim, says the website, is "to give your neighbors the impression you've just come back from a day's shooting or fishing -- anything but driving around town all day or visiting the retail park."

"The mud is from Shropshire," said Sprayonmud proprietor Colin Dowse, a financial consultant who has been selling the product in the United Kingdom for 12 months. "It contains mud plus some secret ingredients to improve stickability so that it dries before it runs off the paintwork."

Dowse got the idea during "idle chat in the pub after work" and said the sprays, available only online and by mail order, are bought as "novelty gifts" by city folk. Asked if they take advantage of those who are either too lazy to bottle their own grime or too precious to take their 4x4 on the open road, he said "all of those."

But, while the site promises SUV owners a route around social stigma flung by a growing anti-4x4 lobby, motorists of other stripes are thought to use the same technique to freely flout speed limits.

Tipsters in motoring forums advise canny drivers they can smear mud over their license plate to avoid detection by police speed cameras, which photograph plates' registration details to ID lawbreakers using a national vehicle database. A few squirts of dirt, and snapped speeders would become as good as invisible.

Sprayonmud strongly warns customers against such practices, but the retailer last week took out an online advert that described the "speed camera special" spray as "a loophole" for those "thinking of being nicked for speeding."

"Clearly, it is aimed at blocking speed cameras," said James Bancroft, an anti-speed-camera campaigner whose Speedcam website gives away the location of many English speed-detection zones.

The U.K. government's Department for Transport said such use of mud carries a hefty fine.

"It is an offense to treat a number plate in a way that obscures the characters of the registration mark and I would imagine that this would include obscuring a plate with mud," said Scot Marchbank, a spokesman.

"We are aware that a number of products designed to obscure number plates are being marketed on the internet and through mail order and (we) have warned the small minority of motorists who might be tempted to purchase these sprays that they are illegal and could result in a fine of 1,000 pounds ($1,820).

"However, many cameras used by the police do not rely on flash photography but on Automatic Number Plate Recognition equipment using infrared radiation. The use of such an aerosol spray would not, therefore, have any effect."

Dowse acknowledged obscuring registration marks with his dirt "could be illegal," but suggested it is "conceivable that mud could get onto a number plate if, when spraying, one wanted a more authentic distribution over the car."

Mud in a can is just the latest tactic used to outsmart traffic police, whose policy of fining motorists caught speeding is seen by some as merely a revenue-generating exercise, despite helping to cut road deaths.

Other retail products include a high-gloss spray and an angular license plate cover that, when hit by camera flash, overexpose photographs to obscure registration marks. Drivers can even download cameras' locations to a dash-mounted GPS device that gives an audible warning when a camera is just around the bend.

Britain's Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, which regulates license plates, said Sprayonmud itself was not breaking any laws, but added it was concerned by the emergence of such sprays and would report to relevant authorities anyone marketing them for illegal uses.

"(The spray) is an inevitable response to bonkers and counterproductive speed enforcement," said Paul Smith, an anti-speed-camera campaigner with the Safe Speed group who claims to have conducted more than 8,000 hours of research into speeding. "I think that the average copper would be mildly amused."


Source: Wired

[Ulrich]

But, while the site promises SUV owners a route around social stigma flung by a growing anti-4x4 lobby, motorists of other stripes are thought to use the same technique to freely flout speed limits.

...or red-light cameras.

[Ulrich]

June 27, 2005, 9:27AM

Capitalism — red-light cameras' latest hurdle
Company says spray-on product creates a glare that spoils photos
By JOE STINEBAKER and MATT STILES
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Plans to install cameras to catch people who run red lights in Houston have sparked public rancor and legislative scrutiny.

Now there's entrepreneurship.

A Pennsylvania company expects to make money from red-light scofflaws by selling them a spray-on product that prevents the camera from picking up license plate numbers.

But before Phantom Plate Inc. can start counting its money in Houston, it may face a battle in the City Council or the Legislature.

Houston Police Department Lt. Robert Manzo said the city may want to consider an ordinance or a state law against PhotoBlocker.

"So people are already gearing up to defeat the system, huh?" Manzo asked. "We're not happy to hear this product is available and already being marketed to Houston before the cameras are even installed. This is obviously going to be a concern, and it may be something we have to address with the Legislature."

Then again, according to a company official, that could increase sales, which was the case after Illinois officials recently banned PhotoBlocker.

"Right after they did that, our sales just picked up in Illinois," said Joe Scott, the company's marketing director. "For us, it was a marketing tool. By them making it illegal, they are admitting that this is a very effective tool."

Councilman Adrian Garcia said he doesn't think such camera blockers are effective. He likened them to buying "swamp land" as a sound investment.

"I have yet to find anyone who can offer, with any degree of credibility, that it works," said Garcia, who chairs the council's public safety committee. "It's much easier to comply with the law than to put at risk your vehicle, your time, your effort, just to find out that it doesn't work. ... Obey the law, and all of this is irrelevant."

Scott said the company has been getting calls from Houston since the city announced it wanted to install the cameras.

"And this is just the beginning," Scott said. "As soon as they start putting in the red-light cameras and people start getting stung by these cameras, the numbers will increase."

Scott's company offers several products designed to help drivers protect themselves from traffic tickets, but the most popular is PhotoBlocker, a high-gloss spray for license plates that creates a glare when photographed.

The gloss, which is unnoticeable to the naked eye, renders photographs useless in identifying plate numbers.

The product, offered only on the Internet, is legal here and sells for $29.99 for a can containing enough spray to cover four license plates for life.

In December, the City Council passed an ordinance approving the use of cameras to catch red-light runners.

The plans were stalled while the city fought legislative attempts to ban red-light cameras. After winning in Austin, Houston officials have begun the process of seeking bids to install the technology.

HPD has said one system under review would include sensors connected to traffic lights. The cameras would take digital pictures of vehicles entering the intersection when sensors indicate a red light. The infraction would be captured on video.

The images then would be wired to the city's vendor for owner identification. The city also is considering giving the vendor a cut of the revenue and setting up decoy cameras as deterrents in some areas.

The photo on the right shows how a treated license plate would appear in a photo, Phantom Plate says on its Web site.

Source: Houston Chronicle

[Ulrich]

June 28, 2005, 1:44AM

City targets product that beats red-light cameras
Officials to make sure spray-on that makes license plates unreadable in photos is banned
By KRISTEN MACK
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Existing state law probably prohibits chemically treating license plates to make their numbers unreadable to red-light cameras, City Attorney Arturo Michel said Monday.

As a precaution, though, the city's Legal Department will research the matter and ask the City Council to change local ordinances if necessary before the city begins enforcing red lights with cameras later this year.

The Houston Chronicle reported Monday that a Pennsylvania company is marketing a spray-on product it claims will prevent cameras from picking up license plate numbers without affecting their visibility to police. Two laws already on Texas books prohibit obscuring of a license plate and altering a government document.

"On the face of it, it sounds like these laws would cover any attempt to distort a license plate," Michel said.

During the 2003 legislative session, lawmakers added a section to the Texas Transportation Code making it illegal to "have a license plate that has a coating, covering or protective material that distorts angular visibility or detectability or alters or obscures letters or numbers on the plate, the color of the plate, or another original design feature of the plate."

Violation is a Class C misdemeanor. The law was designed to crack down on attempts to evade cameras installed to enforce payment of tolls.

The other law, part of the Texas Penal Code, makes it a felony if a person "intentionally destroys, conceals, removes or otherwise impairs the verity, legibility, or availability of a governmental record." The code defines licenses as governmental records.

Michel said his staff will study whether the city needs to strengthen its own laws.

Houston civil appellate lawyer Scott Rothenberg, who specializes in interpretation and analysis of statutes, said the laws on the books in Texas already are clear enough.

"The people in Houston who buy this should not be under the perception that their use of it is legal; in fact I think it's illegal," Rothenberg said.

Joe Scott, the marketing director for the company that sells the spray-on product, Phantom Plate Inc., maintains he is doing nothing wrong by making his product available.

"Buying and selling it is not illegal," he said.

In December, the City Council passed an ordinance approving the use of cameras to catch red-light runners.


Source: Houston Chronicle

[S2112]

I will be perhaps the lone voice of dissention here. I oppose cameras to catch speeders, but I am in favor of red light cameras. Speeding isn't a black and white case of safe or not safe, but running a red light certainly is.

In the four years I've been in Austin, red light runners have become more and more brave, and just a week ago, I very narrowly missed (like by a foot or less) hitting someone who ran a red light in front of me. The problem was worse in Florida, where I lived from '96-'01; there, I would wait for a second or so after my light changed to green before I proceeded, and at least once a week, that saved me a collision. The escalating number of accidents there has earned one roadway that I frequently traveled the dubious honor of being named to the top 5 most deadly stretches of road in the U.S., and that news came as no surprise to me whatsoever. The danger of driving there is but one reason why I left the sunshine state.

Sondra, I'll line up behind you. I really don't feel violated by losing my right to run red lights at will. And trust me, you don't want to be T-boned by a Suburban doing 40 mph in one of these little cars. I live in the Dallas/Ft Worth area, and red light running is a way of life here. I see it nearly every day on my way to and from work, almost always committed by pickups and SUVs.

[photodavo]

Sondra, I'll line up behind you. I really don't feel violated by losing my right to run red lights at will. And trust me, you don't want to be T-boned by a Suburban doing 40 mph in one of these little cars. I live in the Dallas/Ft Worth area, and red light running is a way of life here. I see it nearly every day on my way to and from work, almost always committed by pickups and SUVs.

At some of the busier intersections in Plano (Dallas 'burb) they actually have red signs posted listing the number of red light citations issued to date as a subtle reminder. When I am in the front row at a light and there is a large vehicle to my left, I always let them go first just in case someone decides to run the light since I wouldn't even see them coming.

[Ulrich]

Aug. 22, 2005, 2:03PM

Coming this fall to intersections near you: red-light camerasBy MATT STILES
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

The waits at some Houston red lights can seem an eternity, but it won't be nearly that long before cameras start catching motorists who give in to temptation and speed through.


If all goes according to plan, a new red-light camera system could be up at some city intersections — and catching scofflaws — by Thanksgiving, city officials say.

A committee headed by Assistant Police Chief George Buenik last week began reviewing proposals from potential vendors who are vying for the contract to install and maintain the system.

The panel is expected to review the various proposals — which aren't yet public — some time in the next two months. Calvin Wells, the city's purchasing agent, said the leading contenders then will take the unusual step of demonstrating their systems at about 10 intersections for another month.

Red-light runners caught by demonstration cameras will receive mailed warnings, not the civil citations that will be issued after the winning company installs the cameras at up to 50 of Houston's most dangerous intersections.

"It's a two-prong process: One is to test the vendors; the other is to start getting the citizens acclimated to this idea," said Larry Yium, the Houston police budget and finance director.

Though the city awards many contracts based solely on written proposals, items including vehicles and electronic equipment often are demonstrated before any money is spent. But those tests usually are behind the scenes.

The plan to require a public demonstration before picking a vendor reflects the city's desire to ensure that the system works well and avoid the public backlash that could occur if motorists were cited unfairly.

Houston Mayor Bill White and other proponents — who fought back several efforts in the Legislature to block the cameras — say the cameras have reduced the number of serious crashes in the North Texas cities of Garland, Plano and Richardson.

Opponents contend that the city's real motive is increased ticket revenue.

The city plans to pay the vendor a fixed monthly fee and a per-citation charge for its services, including installation of the cameras. Controls in the contract would ensure that the city doesn't lose money, Yium said.

Exactly how the system will work depends, in part, on the various proposals. Generally, the city asked potential vendors to propose a system that would take digital images of any vehicle that entered an intersection after sensors indicated a light had turned red.

Those images likely then would be wired electronically to the city's vendor for identification of the registered owner through the vehicle's license plate number. A police officer would review each case and approve citations before they were sent, Yium stressed.

Such citations would be civil documents issued against a car's owner, and would carry lower penalties than those for officer-witnessed infractions. City officials have said the camera citations would cost motorists up to $75 and would not appear on driving records.

The misdemeanor criminal citations written by police officers carry fines up to $215 and are noted on driving records, possibly affecting insurance rates.



Source: Houston Chronicle