Breaking news in Florida

 

Red light cameras gain traction in New Port Richey

NEW PORT RICHEY — The City Council has taken the first step toward installing red-light cameras across New Port Richey.

Council members voted 3-2 on Tuesday night to proceed with researching how, where and when to install the cameras, with Mayor Scott McPherson and Judy DeBella Thomas dissenting.

In the past the council had given little support for the contentious program. But at a budget hearing last month, members spoke of the cameras as a way to make their roads safer and generate new revenue in their dwindling budget.

Interim police chief Jeff Harrington said the city could, based on vendors' estimates, earn $500,000 a year per intersection in fines.

Harrington pointed to state transportation records that rank New Port Richey among the five worst cities of its size for crashes resulting in injuries or deaths, alcohol-related crashes and crashes involving pedestrians. The cameras, he said, could reduce crashes and allow police a better use of manpower.

If the city approves the cameras during a second reading of the ordinance later this month, officials will begin to consider which contractor and intersections will be involved. State law enacted last month requires red-light tickets to cost $158 – $75 for the city and $83 for the state.

Port Richey, St. Petersburg and Hillsborough County operate similar camera programs. On Monday, Brooksville leaders voted to put a stop to their camera program after an outcry of public dissent.

--
nuvi 785 nuvi 350, nuvi 270, GTM 20, jag in dash, mercedes in dash.

$$$

It's hard for cash-strapped cities to resist the revenue these cameras generate.

New Port Richie

They don't make enough money from all the stops on US 19 every day?
At night the police are like fleas on a dog (all over the place)
Drive on there late at night and it loks like Christmas lights up ahead.
I guess it was only a matter of time till they got them.
The one on US19 & Ridge makes out good.

--
Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things!

US 19

Timantide wrote:

They don't make enough money from all the stops on US 19 every day?
At night the police are like fleas on a dog (all over the place)
Drive on there late at night and it loks like Christmas lights up ahead.
I guess it was only a matter of time till they got them.
The one on US19 & Ridge makes out good.

I always avoided US 19 when I could. The addition of RLCs makes it all the more important for me to avoid it. I'll take Grand or Madison or Little Rd instead as far as I can. Slower but safer.

--
Tampa, FL - Garmin nüvi 660 (Software Ver 4.90), 2019.30 CN NA NT maps | Magellan Meridian Gold

Keywords: "earn

Keywords: "earn $500,000".

Can you say "revenue generator"?

--
OK.....so where the heck am I?

Can you say "reduce crashes"

pkdmslf wrote:

Keywords: "earn $500,000".

Can you say "revenue generator"?

The more complete comments by harrington included

"Interim police chief Jeff Harrington said the city could, based on vendors' estimates, earn $500,000 a year per intersection in fines.

Harrington pointed to state transportation records that rank New Port Richey among the five worst cities of its size for crashes resulting in injuries or deaths, alcohol-related crashes and crashes involving pedestrians. The cameras, he said, could reduce crashes and allow police a better use of manpower"

Who knows what will happen, but if it did both (increase revenue as well as reduce crashes), some family might get to enjoy the grandchildren they would not have had bcause their child was killed by a speeder.

Every time you hear a

Every time you hear a government person say "safety", you need to realize they are really saying "money".

It would seem that

grtlake wrote:

Every time you hear a government person say "safety", you need to realize they are really saying "money".

It would seem that - in your opinion - anyone working for a municipality has been forced to substitute the word 'safety" for "money". The comment on safety was from an interim police chief - it is unlikely that he has any stake in whether or not the municipality makes money.

I repeat myself, but would it not be to everyone's advantage if cameras made the city safer for its citizens and the revenue from the cameras resulted in no tax increases?

So what is the planned reduction

on the police department manpower now that they will no longer be needed to watch for traffic light violations? Can they layoff 20% of the force?

--
260, 295W, 1490T,2455LMT

Hmm...

More proof that these cameras are just "revenue generators" and aren't installed to keep the public safe sad

--
Garmin nuvi 1300LM with 4GB SD card Garmin nuvi 200W with 4GB SD card Garmin nuvi 260W with 4GB SD card r.i.p.

Money talks!!!

Money talks!!!

--
http://www.poi-factory.com/node/21626 - red light cameras do not work

Good LUCK!!!

Chicago is terrible for them. It's not a safety issue one bit, it's revenue!!

--
Garmin III+, Magellan 3100 Maestro, Garmin Nuvi 255WT

$158.00 ?!?!?!

I've never received a red light camera ticket, but have gotten a few speed camera tickets.

All of them were $40 and, of course, no points.

One hundred and fifty eight dollars is (IMO) an absolute revenue generator and NOTHING more.

Safety indeed. sad

I hope not

kkkelleher wrote:

on the police department manpower now that they will no longer be needed to watch for traffic light violations? Can they layoff 20% of the force?

Police officers are needed to control crime. I like the answer given by IIHS, which says:

"Isn't conventional police enforcement sufficient?
Enforcing traffic laws in dense urban areas by traditional means poses special difficulties for police, who in most cases must follow a violating vehicle through a red light to stop it. This can endanger motorists and pedestrians as well as officers, and police cannot be everywhere at once. Traffic stops in urban areas can exacerbate traffic congestion. Communities do not have the resources to allow police to patrol intersections as often as would be needed to ticket all motorists who run red lights. Red light cameras allow police to focus on other enforcement needs."

http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/rlr.html

Just perhaps

kkkelleher wrote:

on the police department manpower now that they will no longer be needed to watch for traffic light violations? Can they layoff 20% of the force?

That officer you wanted to watch the intersection might just be able to respond to your call for help instead of writing someone a ticket "when he should be out fighting crime."

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Red light Cameras

I am for red light cameras. I have been stopped at an intersection and another car will pass me and run the red light. These people should be awarded with a stiff fine.

True...

FUCCOWIE wrote:

I am for red light cameras. I have been stopped at an intersection and another car will pass me and run the red light. These people should be awarded with a stiff fine.

If it wasn't because of the abuse from some localities/companies in charge of these cameras, I'll be in favor of them too. Too many idiots out there who think the laws don't apply to them.

--
Garmin nuvi 1300LM with 4GB SD card Garmin nuvi 200W with 4GB SD card Garmin nuvi 260W with 4GB SD card r.i.p.

Fuzzy Acceptance

Thanos_of_MW wrote:

]

If it wasn't because of the abuse from some localities/companies in charge of these cameras, I'll be in favor of them too.

We hear/read about abuses all the time but I have not yet seen facts supporting abuses. There have been comments accusing Chicago but that seemed to be only objections to a "yellow" of 2.6 seconds (which was below accepted standards). Recent law in Chicago codified that the yellow had to meet or exceed accepted standards so Chicago is clear.

I doubt that you could specify the point but I'll ask the question anyway. Since there will always be some abuse, what percentage of municipalities would have to demonstrate proper behavior concerning their automated traffic enforcement (ATE) for you to change your mind and support ATE?

Sounds like alcohol not redlights are the problem

Until they come up with an alcohol camera, there is nothing other than "safety checks" by live officers that will reduce alcohol related crashes. Do you thing red light cameras are going to stop a drunk? Focus. Focus on the cause before thinking a magic rabbit's foot or a red light camera are going to stop a drunk. Not a logical argument.

If the ticket is $158, where is the 40% cut for redlight rippoff going to come from? Both the city and state shares of this revenue are going to be less.

--
Zumo 550 & Zumo 665 My alarm clock is sunshine on chrome.

Who made an argument that

dave817 wrote:

Until they come up with an alcohol camera, there is nothing other than "safety checks" by live officers that will reduce alcohol related crashes. Do you thing red light cameras are going to stop a drunk? Focus. Focus on the cause before thinking a magic rabbit's foot or a red light camera are going to stop a drunk. Not a logical argument.

Who made an "argument" that red light cameras are going to stop a drunk?

I agree that Automated Traffic Enforcement is pretty ineffective against drunk drivers, but I am not aware of any claims made saying that they would be.

Extra police?

As far as having extra police because of the use of cameras, I don't think it will make any difference at all. On US19 in the New Port Richie/ Port Richie area in Florida, That area is covered by a few different departments (Pasco County Sheriff, New Port Richie Police, Port Richie Police and the Florida Highway Patrol) I have seen in a 6 mile section as many as 16 different police cars after 3am.(The bars close at 2) Do we really need more?

--
Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things!

Advocate?

jgermann wrote:

We hear/read about abuses all the time but I have not yet seen facts supporting abuses. There have been comments accusing Chicago but that seemed to be only objections to a "yellow" of 2.6 seconds (which was below accepted standards). Recent law in Chicago codified that the yellow had to meet or exceed accepted standards so Chicago is clear.

I doubt that you could specify the point but I'll ask the question anyway. Since there will always be some abuse, what percentage of municipalities would have to demonstrate proper behavior concerning their automated traffic enforcement (ATE) for you to change your mind and support ATE?

If we hear about abuses all the time it is because there are abuses. I'm not going to Google it for you or investigate it for you and post the links. Do it yourself. I don't need to prove anything to you or anyone else.

Using your same attitude, how about you prove it to me (links and all) that what you defend is true? Are you an advocate for the corrupt cities? Prove to me that cities or the camera companies don't rig yellows or have the sensors trip them early, and I don't take their word for it, so quote independent sources or consumer advocates IF you want to change my mind. I'll take 99.9% municipalities across the USA demonstrating proper behavior before I support their cameras.

--
Garmin nuvi 1300LM with 4GB SD card Garmin nuvi 200W with 4GB SD card Garmin nuvi 260W with 4GB SD card r.i.p.

compare to WMD

Thanos_of_MW wrote:

If we hear about abuses all the time it is because there are abuses. I'm not going to Google it for you or investigate it for you and post the links. Do it yourself. I don't need to prove anything to you or anyone else.

It was not my intent to upset you, and I apologize because I have obviously done so.

I would ask you to consider back when our administration made the decision to invade Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction. While we made the case to the world and thereby convinced others to support our actions, we still have yet to find any WMDs.

I do not think it is improper to ask someone to produce support for a position, but again I appologize.

Afraid to stop !!!

I will have to admit it would be nice to stop for a red light without fear of the runners slamming up your tailpipe. Around the Tampa area if you jump when the light turns green you might just as well paint a bullseye on your car door.

OK...

jgermann wrote:
Thanos_of_MW wrote:

If we hear about abuses all the time it is because there are abuses. I'm not going to Google it for you or investigate it for you and post the links. Do it yourself. I don't need to prove anything to you or anyone else.

It was not my intent to upset you, and I apologize because I have obviously done so.

I would ask you to consider back when our administration made the decision to invade Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction. While we made the case to the world and thereby convinced others to support our actions, we still have yet to find any WMDs.

I do not think it is improper to ask someone to produce support for a position, but again I appologize.

Sorry if I came down hard, but it seemed that you were just pushing an agenda. So please disregard my other message in the Long Island thread as well. You can see in that one where I'm coming from. I have many friends and relatives who got burned by the soulless one eyed boxes and I was in their vehicles a couple of those times, so I believe them. As you see, no way to post a link or prove anything to a 3d party. You'd just have to take my word for it wink

As far as Mr. Bush invading Iraq with our troops, and Mr. Obama not pulling them out, it has to do more with the oil in the region than the WMD. Friendly governments sell their oil cheap. Some rumor the WMDs were moved to Syria, but I guess the troops would be there if that was true.

--
Garmin nuvi 1300LM with 4GB SD card Garmin nuvi 200W with 4GB SD card Garmin nuvi 260W with 4GB SD card r.i.p.

No Harm

Thanos_of_MW wrote:

Sorry if I came down hard, but it seemed that you were just pushing an agenda.

Not a problem.

I do not have an agenda. I am swayed by facts. That is why I try to collect links both supporting and opposing Automatic Traffic Enforcement (ATE).

I have always agreed that revenue generation is likely a reason for ATE and see no problem with that. The traffic laws are already on the books and no one objected to the laws when they were enacted. I would like to feel that my children and grandchildren are not at risk when they are driving but I know that there are far too many distracted and/or aggressive drivers on the road not to worry.

There are enough home invasions and crime in my city that I do not want police officers waiting at intersections to catch violaters - I would rather have police officers solving crimes. In fact, if ATEs could produce enough revenue to hire more police officers, I would be for that - especially since the people who would provide that revenue are plain and simply law-breakers.

Well, Florida has no income tax

so the government has to get its money from somewhere, right?

At least you can try to avoid this little bit of taxation by watching how you drive. What gets to me are states like California that tax you to death and throw in the red light cameras, to boot.

Why do we put up with

Why do we put up with it?

VOTE THE BUMS OUT!

subject:: red light cameras

what does "I would ask you to consider back when our administration made the decision to invade Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction. While we made the case to the world and thereby convinced others to support our actions, we still have yet to find any WMDs." have to do with red light camera's

red light camera's would not be bad if they didn't game the system, a lot of municipalities have ordinances that make the yellow light just like the red light, they change the timing for the yellow lights.

158.00 fine

The money will be distributed this way: $100 goes to the state, $45 to the local government, $10 to help fund trauma centers and $3 for brain and spinal injury research.

If the red-light violation occurs on a locally maintained road, the fine is still $158, but the breakdown is like this: $75 to the local government and $70 to the state. The rest is distributed the same way.

http://tinyurl.com/39r8slg

--
Jerry...Jacksonville,Fl Nüvi1450,Nuvi650,Nuvi 2495 and Mapsource.

Red LIghts in Jacksonville FL

Jacksonville Florida is got to be one of the worst places for people running traffic lights. I don't live there but everytime go there, I see at least a half dozen cars blowing through lights. It's just not safe to leap of the white line when the light gives you the go ahead. You might just killed. If there is someone next to me I usually let them start into the intersection first. I sometime cannot see but I like to make sure the cars that have the red light are surely stopped. If your in Jacksonville Florida beware.

--
Garmin GPSmap76CS / Nuvi 200W

100% agreed....

windwalker wrote:

Why do we put up with it?

VOTE THE BUMS OUT!

+1 on that one! It's time to put career politicians on the endangered species list!

--
"Everything in excess! To enjoy the flavor of life, take big bites. Moderation is for monks" ~ Excerpt from the notebooks of Lazarus Long, from Robert Heinlein's "Time Enough for Love"