New York State has granted Suffolk County in Long Island NY to double its Red Light camera locations from 50 to 100. Adjoining Nassau county was also approved in March to double its cameras from 50 to 100.
These two counties will have 200 cameras which is far more than many other states combined totals.
What disturbs me is the following statement:
"Under a contract for Suffolk's first 50 cameras, revenue is evenly split with Affiliated Computer Services, Inc., in exchange for the firm installing and maintaining the systems, and handling some clerical work, Schneider said.
"There's no way we'd extend an additional 50 intersections under existing contract terms," he said. "We want more."Another issue is how the new intersections will be engineered. Several residents have lobbied for uniformity among yellow-light durations at camera locations, saying some of them provide less time to stop than the state recommends."
So if safety was the primary objective, then receiving no revenue at all would be acceptable.
Here is the statement from County Executive:
"While Suffolk County Executive Steve Bellone has said cameras improve safety, he acknowledged they will also help cut a $530-million deficit projection. Budget analysts expect about $6 million in revenue, depending on terms of a vendor contract."
Here is a link to the article, I'm not sure you will be able to view since it's a subscription to Newsday.
The problem with this is that Suffolk is given the go ahead on 50 intersections.. Then they put 4 cameras at each location. Viola! 200 cameras not 50.. Albany should limit the number of cameras not the location.. The N/E corner of 1st and Elm st is different from the S/E corner of 1st and Elm st.. Two different locations in my book..
The Red Light Safety Program was authorized by Local Law 20-2009 and New York State Vehicle & Traffic Law § 1111-b, which permit the installation of red light cameras at up to 50 intersections in Suffolk County..
Currently Suffolk has 103 cameras at 43 locations according to Newsday.. there may be more by now..
Seems that the word intersection was chosen as the restricting factor.
Why should Albany have limited the number of cameras rather than the number of intersections?
According to previous reports on Nassau and Suffolk, these new cameras will not see the light of day until next year. I do wish the law required that the locations be published online by the government agency responsible for them. Nassau used to do it until the change in leadership two years ago and they pulled the page. All information I have seen, including this site, is based on driver observations. Nothing official.
safety camera or Taxing Camera. City tax coffers are what are being effected not so much safety. I believe these taxing cameras make most of their money on right turn on red which is almost never a safety issue.
They made it very clear this time that the cameras are being put up for revenue.
Folks can argue the efficacy of these cameras but here the government goes again- rather than reducing costs and wastes it is generating an additional way of collecting and generating income.
If these cameras were 100% effective at reducing anyone from crossing the line, the County would no doubt be very upset.
I guess that they expect the citizens to be more sympathetic given the financial mess that Suffolk County is in.
In New York City the 150 cameras they have installed only 100 can be active at a time.. Not locations, camera count.. This data was from a few years ago, they might have 200 authorized cameras by now, but it is the quantity of cameras, not the intersections.. If the intersection number was the limiting factor, Bloomberg would have 6 cameras at each intersection.. $$$$$$$
terms | privacy | contactCopyright © 2006 - 2014