Red light cameras in St. Mary's County?

[Editor]

The following is being posted as a courtesy to the undersigned, and it does not necessarily reflect the opinion of somd.com.

-----

Honorable Members of the County Commission:

Staff at the City of San Francisco MTA recently published a report (copy attached) in which they reviewed the effect the City's nineteen-year-old red light camera program had upon the incidence of broadside crashes with injury. While their report leads off with a graph (Fig. 1) showing a dramatic decrease in crashes citywide, the intersection-by-intersection charts for just the intersections having red light cameras (Figs. 2 thru 26) tell a very different story: At the vast majority of those intersections, the red light camera(s) had no beneficial effect.

Regards,

Jim Lissner

cc: Media

 

[tommyjo]

The following is being posted as a courtesy to the undersigned, and it does not necessarily reflect the opinion of somd.com.

-----

Honorable Members of the County Commission:

Staff at the City of San Francisco MTA recently published a report (copy attached) in which they reviewed the effect the City's nineteen-year-old red light camera program had upon the incidence of broadside crashes with injury. While their report leads off with a graph (Fig. 1) showing a dramatic decrease in crashes citywide, the intersection-by-intersection charts for just the intersections having red light cameras (Figs. 2 thru 26) tell a very different story: At the vast majority of those intersections, the red light camera(s) had no beneficial effect.

Regards,

Jim Lissner

cc: Media

Without doubt, Mr. Lissner's conclusion is categorically false.

Here is the summary of findings from the provided document:

San Francisco Red Light Running Collision Trends
Figure 1 illustrates the trend in red light running injury collisions using California Vehicle Code Section 21453(A), failure by a motorist to obey traffic signals. Red light running collisions have shown a general decrease since the early 1990’s, with 2011 recording the second lowest annual total in ten years. Signal hardware improvements funded by the City’s transportation sales tax have helped reduce these types of collisions, most notably in the South of Market area. This drop coincides with the city’s deployment of red light photo enforcement starting in the late 1990’s. Other global factors such as education, motor vehicle design, or demographic changes could also be contributing to these trends.

In fact, if one looks at the actual intersection by intersection report figs 2-26, it is quite clearly visible that in only 2 of the 24 cited intersections did the number of accidents in the years after the installation of the RCLs ever met or exceeded the number of accidents in the year of or the high accident year prior to the installation of the RCL.

It is obvious that the author of the letter read the report in a manner to fit a preconceived conclusion.

 

[glhs837]

One of the often neglected things in this conversation is that crash rates and fatality rates across the nation have been on a decades long decline. With or without automated enforcement, this fact remains. Separating the cameras effects from that overall crop isn't in the industries best interests, of course. Another item to note about that there is no reporting of rear end collisions. Odd, that omission.

 

[TPD]

One of the often neglected things in this conversation is that crash rates and fatality rates across the nation have been on a decades long decline. With or without automated enforcement, this fact remains. Separating the cameras effects from that overall crop isn't in the industries best interests, of course. Another item to note about that there is no reporting of rear end collisions. Odd, that omission.

Something that needs to be considered is the rear end collision increase. Rt 235 is bad enough at 5:00pm without accidents. If the studies are correct and rear end collisions increase with red light cameras, has anyone considered how this will affect traffic and the strain on our volunteer fire fighters and ambulance crews? Our emergency responders love to close the entire road in both directions for a broken thumbnail and the police force doesn't mind shutting down the county for an accident reconstruction when a single vehicle runs off the road into a ditch, so what will additional rear end collisions do to productivity in this county? Additional fees for being late to the babysitter, little Johnny sitting all alone after soccer practice waiting for his ride, hubby upset because wifey does not have dinner on the table at 6pm. As a dump truck driver who needs additional stopping distance, I don't want granny slamming on the brakes at the first sign of a yellow light because she doesn't want a red light ticket. I can assure you, if I rear end her with my dump truck, she will have more than a broken thumbnail.

We've already seen what closing gate 3 does to traffic and how that affects EVERYONE, not just base employees. Throw in a rear end collision every week on 235 at 5pm and then come back and tell me how you like red light cameras!

 

[glhs837]

No, that discussion isn't taking place because the industry doesn't talk about that.

http://time.com/3643077/red-light-cams-rear-end-collisions-chicago/

"The study’s findings, published by the Chicago Tribune Friday, found that while traffic cameras appeared to reduce injuries by 15% for collisions at right angles, where one car crashes head-on into the side of another car, those improvements were overshadowed by a 22% increase in injuries from rear-end accidents. Taken together, the study shows a statistically insignificant increase of injuries by 5%"


http://www.caranddriver.com/columns/rear-end-crashes-go-up-after-red-light-cameras-go-in


"Skeptics will notice that crashes went down rather randomly all over town, and some ordinary intersections outperformed those with the gotcha equipment. The cameras look remarkably ineffectual until, just in time, spillover effect arrives to snatch victory from the jaws of ho-hum.

Skeptics will also notice that these IIHS studies, which pretend to be about red-light running, never bother to isolate those crashes specifically caused by running red lights. Why? It says, "The crash data did not contain sufficient detail to identify crashes that were specifically red-light-running events.""

 

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

Still waiting for the independent study to be conducted in St. Mary's (and Calvert) County to determine the (safety effectiveness) need for these cameras.

 

[glhs837]

Independent? Could be the Sheriff hired an independent group to perform the study he's using to justify his request for them. More likely is that the vendor offered to perform the study for free.

 

[BernieP]

Independent? Could be the Sheriff hired an independent group to perform the study he's using to justify his request for them. More likely is that the vendor offered to perform the study for free.

I was going to say, Good Luck. The county isn't going to pay for something they can get for free. Chances are the study will be paid for by the vendor but will come from an "independent" third party (for the sake of appearance).

 

[glhs837]

It's already done. The Sheriff has referenced it once or twice. But he has not mentioned what it contains or where it came from. I assume it will be part of his presentation on the 5th.


Think it was this article here, but since it wants me to sign up, I can't see the whole thing and while I read it in paper format, I cannot recall exactly.

 

[3CATSAILOR]

Look at the Enterprise for the 31st of December. Namely the "County Commissioner agenda". You will see something on the County Commissioner agenda you may be interested in attending pertaining to red light cameras.

 

[glhs837]

Yep, should be on the agenda for the meeting on the 5th. Wonder if there will be any debate or if it's a forgeone conclusion. Not sure if I can get loose from work at 0930 on Teusday though. Coming back after the holidays theres' a bunch to get caught up on.

 

[3CATSAILOR]

It is interesting that they have it timed immediately after the holiday. I have no absolutely no doubt the Commissioners will push it through. After all, this is the "primary" reason why they want Code Home Rule. Code Home Rule will allow them to make the "infraction" fine anything they want. It is interesting that according to the Washington Times article this past week that DC wants to change their infraction fine for their radar cameras for over 25 mph offense and increase it to $1000.00!! That right. $1000.00. Even the Washington Times took notice as it would be a massive increase! Once St. Mary's has their foot in the door with this camera stuff, sky is the limit for them.

Although the are a Republican group, all of them act much more like Democrats. Obviously, the people will clean house in the next election and start over. They will become one term Commissioners. But, not until they lock in the camera contract on us. READ how the law states the revenue is supposed to be divided up. It says to the PRIMARY law enforcement agency. The Commissioners believe since they control the purse strings of the Sheriff's Office it goes to them. If it went directly to them, it is in fact a violation of the intent of the law. It goes to the primary law enforcement agency unless our legislators recently changed it. They could have. But, I doubt it.

 

[3CATSAILOR]

Sheriff's Office has a budget presentation coming up. I am not sure when it is. You could present your disagreement with money spent toward this effort during this presentation. I don't blame the Sheriff for trying to get as much revenue as possible for his employees. If I was Sheriff, I would do the same. In my opinion, he is a good Sheriff doing a great job with a limited budget. The only problem is that he doesn't realize that the increase in rear end accidents the red light cameras will cause can be "lasting" injuries and nothing to sneeze at. I know several people that have received these type of injuries. They have it for life. And in some cases, it is a severe injury from a "rear end collision. The very type of collision that our Sheriff is trying downplay is the type of accident that increases as a direct result of red light cameras.

 

[glhs837]

I'm still not convinced that Code Home Rule allow them to bypass state law as far as fines for these systems. DC can do whatever they want. I would think that if it were that easy, some other municipality or county would have done so.

Charles has had CHR since 2003, and RLCS for a while, yet they use the same fines as the State requires.

See, we dont know yet if any money will be spent on this, beyond whatever the deputy who reviews the citations costs. And that's one question outstanding. Last I looked, there was only a Station Clerk added to the budget, but by law, that position, who is NOT a sworn officer, doesn't meet the state requirement that a sworn officer review the citations.

 

[BernieP]

Instead of red light cameras, can we get a red light district? I think if they structure it right the revenue would be greater.

 

[3CATSAILOR]

By the time you are convinced, it will be too late.

 

[glhs837]

Well, you would think that if it was allowed, Charles or some other county that had it would have increased the rates already, yet none have. It's not a carte blanche to do as they wish, there are restrictions on what they can do fine wise.