Speed camera sepcific point.

[glhs837]

So, the SOMDNEWS article mentions the Lexington Park/California for speed cameras

http://www.somdnews.com/article/201...ing-traffic-cameras&template=southernMaryland

So, here's the thing. You can only place speed cams in a marked and designated school zone. MD law says a school zone is that area within 1/2 mile of a school. So, there are two schools close enough for that zone to extend to 235, Green Holly and Esperanza. As far as I know, neither of those schools marked school zones extend to RT 235. SO, are you all okay with the county extending those school zones out to the main drag, in violation of the intent of the school zone law, just so they can place cameras? If it's been unsafe out there on 235 for the kids, why haven't there been marked zones before? Even been any speed related incidents involving students from either school on 235?

 

[dan0623_2000]

Camera

Take the camera's and shove them up the commisioner's ........

 

[glhs837]

Sorry, the cameras are owned by the vendor and I'm pretty sure that positioning is not authorized

 

[awpitt]

So, the SOMDNEWS article mentions the Lexington Park/California for speed cameras

http://www.somdnews.com/article/201...ing-traffic-cameras&template=southernMaryland

So, here's the thing. You can only place speed cams in a marked and designated school zone. MD law says a school zone is that area within 1/2 mile of a school. So, there are two schools close enough for that zone to extend to 235, Green Holly and Esperanza. As far as I know, neither of those schools marked school zones extend to RT 235. SO, are you all okay with the county extending those school zones out to the main drag, in violation of the intent of the school zone law, just so they can place cameras? If it's been unsafe out there on 235 for the kids, why haven't there been marked zones before? Even been any speed related incidents involving students from either school on 235?

Who said they can only place speed cams in a marked and designated school zone?

 

[glhs837]

The state law allowing such systems also restrict them to school zone enforcement only. Whereas the State can only deploy them in designated highway work zones. One county has a special dispensation to operate them outside of school zones, they were the test case. But everybody else can only place them in designated school zones. Which has led to shenanigans, of course. Baltimore was placing them in front of schools that had been closed for years. Lot of places expanded school zones to encompass much busier roads than the school was actually on. In one case, a county denied a cities request to place cameras because the county planned on placing their own there. Also been documented cases of local govts dropping a speed limit in a school zone only right before the cameras went in. But it's never about the money, is it?

http://www.sha.state.md.us/pages/release.aspx?newsId=45

http://roads.maryland.gov/OC/Comparison_between_State_and_Local_Programs_Jan82013.pdf

 

[BernieP]

Sorry, the cameras are owned by the vendor and I'm pretty sure that positioning is not authorized

You wanted them, you got them. If they signed a contract with a vendor, you better believe that vendor is going to look to bend the rules to put as many cameras up to aid in getting their base revenue goal met.
Look for a camera on St. Andrews Church Rd. I bet you find Evergreen Elementary is within a 1/2 mile of the road as some point.
Don't forget Green View Knolls and Town Creek, as well as Lexington Park and Caver Elementary schools.
Not that there are any students walking to those schools off the of major highways, but it will make for a great speed trap. Drop the limit to 35 or 30.

 

[glhs837]

You wanted them, you got them. If they signed a contract with a vendor, you better believe that vendor is going to look to bend the rules to put as many cameras up to aid in getting their base revenue goal met.
Look for a camera on St. Andrews Church Rd. I bet you find Evergreen Elementary is within a 1/2 mile of the road as some point.
Don't forget Green View Knolls and Town Creek, as well as Lexington Park and Caver Elementary schools.
Not that there are any students walking to those schools off the of major highways, but it will make for a great speed trap. Drop the limit to 35 or 30.

Well they usually get called out pretty fast when it's blatant. And they can only do what the county will let them get away with. One reason I make these posts so people know what to look for. Beyond the basic fact that they purport to solve a problem that doesn't exist, the fact that there are all these shenanigans and secrecy, those things tell you something

 

[tblwdc]

So, the SOMDNEWS article mentions the Lexington Park/California for speed cameras

http://www.somdnews.com/article/201...ing-traffic-cameras&template=southernMaryland

So, here's the thing. You can only place speed cams in a marked and designated school zone. MD law says a school zone is that area within 1/2 mile of a school. So, there are two schools close enough for that zone to extend to 235, Green Holly and Esperanza. As far as I know, neither of those schools marked school zones extend to RT 235. SO, are you all okay with the county extending those school zones out to the main drag, in violation of the intent of the school zone law, just so they can place cameras? If it's been unsafe out there on 235 for the kids, why haven't there been marked zones before? Even been any speed related incidents involving students from either school on 235?

To answer your question, yes, I'd be okay with it. Also, you forgot Spring Ridge Middles School. I also think Evergreen and Hollywood elementary might qualify.

 

[glhs837]

I was thinking of the schools in the max traffic area. If the point is to increase safety for students, and larger zones would help that, why are they not designated school zones now? Is there any data to say that speed has caused crashes in those areas? Especially any involving the safety of students? Or do you mean you are okay with it just to raise revenue? This strictly addresses those two schools, although stretching Evergreen to Route 4 might be a bit much for anyone to believe. And the article said California and Lexington Park, so we'll leave Hollywood out.

 

[vince77]

I'm fine with extending them too. People need to slow down.

 

[MADPEBS1]

my radar/laser detector should give me fair warning !!!!!!!!!!!! I'm fine with all my sacrificial lambs getting the tickets.

 

[glhs837]

I'm fine with extending them too. People need to slow down.

Why, do you feel the kids that are in the school a quarter mile away are in danger from the speeders? Why do you feel they need to slow down? How many crashes on the stretch of 235 are caused by speeding? You think we should violate both the letter and the spirit of the state law regarding the layout of school zones just so they can issue tickets that make nobody any safer? Because state law says quite clearly that it's illegal to expand school zones soley to install speed cameras....... wonder if our commissioners know that.... see, this is where it starts, this "Meh, it's okay to break the law to catch lawbreakers. it's for the kids after all", except, of course, when it's not.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1e...S00NDAxLThmNmYtNzhkMDQ0ZTAwYWRi/edit?hl=en_US

""What’s a School Zone?
Maryland law allows ASE systems in designated school zones. A clear definition of “school zone” must be established in order to implement an effective ASE program.
The Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) defines a “School Area” as the area surrounding, and within one‐half mile of, a school building or property and within which motor vehicle, pedestrian or bicycle traffic is substantially generated or influenced by the school.
Within this “School Area”, “School Zones” may be designated.
SHA defines a “School Zone” as a segment of highway located within a School Area that is:
(1) Routinely used by pupils for access to or egress from school buildings or grounds,
(2) Established by official action, and
(3) Designated by appropriate signs.
The Maryland Annotated Code (TR § 21‐803.1) allows School Zones to be established within a one‐half mile radius of any school. However, this does not mean that all roads within a one‐half mile radius of a school are considered School Zones. The SHA, or the local authority having jurisdiction over the road, must officially establish a School Zone and designate it with the appropriate signs before it becomes a School Zone. School zones should not be established solely for the purpose of installing speed cameras. Similarly, all school zones do not automatically qualify for speed cameras. Speed camera deployments should be based on a traffic safety study.
** Not all roadways within a ½ mile radius of schools are considered School Zones **""

 

[glhs837]

my radar/laser detector should give me fair warning !!!!!!!!!!!! I'm fine with all my sacrificial lambs getting the tickets.

I dont expect I'll get any either, as it's exceedingly rare for me to do 12 or greater above the limit, and certainly not around here.Maybe on some stretches of 95.

 

[Beta]

So I take it they're going to add signs that those areas are school zones where speed is photo enforced? The camera companies can't put them in without the appropriate signage! If you take a look at how they do that in Charles county, even though it's not a typical "photo enforced" sign, there is indeed a sign at every school zone indicating speed can be photo enforced. They'd have to do the same thing here. No "photo enforced" warning, no validity to the tickets.


BTW glhs, you did a GREAT job of reading vince's statement and going overboard (and then way, way deep into the ocean). He said people drive too fast. That's about it.

 

[awpitt]

The state law allowing such systems also restrict them to school zone enforcement only. Whereas the State can only deploy them in designated highway work zones. One county has a special dispensation to operate them outside of school zones, they were the test case. But everybody else can only place them in designated school zones. Which has led to shenanigans, of course. Baltimore was placing them in front of schools that had been closed for years. Lot of places expanded school zones to encompass much busier roads than the school was actually on. In one case, a county denied a cities request to place cameras because the county planned on placing their own there. Also been documented cases of local govts dropping a speed limit in a school zone only right before the cameras went in. But it's never about the money, is it?

http://www.sha.state.md.us/pages/release.aspx?newsId=45

http://roads.maryland.gov/OC/Comparison_between_State_and_Local_Programs_Jan82013.pdf

Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware. Will be interesting to see, if this does move forward, how they'll position the speed cameras.

 

[awpitt]

my radar/laser detector should give me fair warning !!!!!!!!!!!! I'm fine with all my sacrificial lambs getting the tickets.

Radar/laser detectors are basically useless when it come to cameras.

 

[glhs837]

Yes, the county would have to get permission from the state to both add the school zones signs and have the vendor install the cameras, but only because 235 is a state road. You might think the State would then say "No way Jose, you are violating the law by expanding that school zone". But you would be wrong. I think three times counties have been shown in court to violate some aspect of the law, and each time, the courts have said "Yep, they sure did, but since you have no standing to sue about that, it doesn't matter."

And yes, they have to be clearly marked that they are photo enforced. As for going overboard, it wasn't the "They should slow down part I was really responding to, but rather the "I'm okay with expanding the school zones" part. That's the kind of attitude that the profiteering automated enforcement vendors count on when crafting the laws. That's why the state law restricts these things to school zones, and why the fine is low, and why there are no MVA repercussions. Every single aspect of the law that was ghost written by the vendors (They spent 600K lobbying the year that law was passed) had one purpose. To give the legislators a fig leaf of moral outrage to hide behind and to beat down opponents with.

School zones = If you don't support it, you are in favor of kids getting run down by evil speeders DeathRace 2000 style. Never mind that that doesn't really happen, I'm open to examples if anyone has any.
$40 fine = We are not hurting people too much, that's less than a parking ticket
No MVA reporting = We cant be challenged on a Constitutional basis

 

[Goldenhawk]

Waze smartphone app for the win....

 

[glhs837]

Well, the win would be to not deploy these systems in the first place. And really you don't need Waze to avoid them, especially in a county this small. Every place that deploys them says where they are going to be in advance. My real objection is the hypocrisy of them. They don't make kids safer, they don't make citizens safer, so there is no point to them. Enforcing the law solely for profit, which is all that's left after you remove the safety reasoning, is a very bad idea. One thing to note is that results reports are always expressed in terms of "changing drivers behavior". Why not express the results in terms of fewer crashes? Simply because they can't. Every time you see a "Fewer crashes due to cameras" article, look at crash rates in other areas without cameras. Those reductions are mirrored there also.

 

[awpitt]

I guess it comes down to this being a voluntary tax. Watch your speed and don't run a stop light and this becomes a non-issue.