THIS SHOULD BE INTERESTING

3

3CATSAILOR

Well-Known Member
Well,

I am glad to see that we finally have the Speed Cameras going in. I have been waiting for it for years now. Of course the red light cameras will follow afterward. But, one thing at a time. People are driving way too fast. And with the $40.00 fine that will be going up 500% according to the Governor's request to our Legislators, there should not be a need to raise taxes anymore in St. Mary's County. It is a relief that the cameras are essentially a done deal. The Commissioners are sure to approve it, regardless of what the folks say that do not want it at the meeting. Just a matter of time now. Again, I am sure this is already a done deal. Who turns down free money from those that speed? I guess the meeting is a requirement. I am just surprised we don't have them up already. It is about time though.


The Commissioners of St. Mary’s County (CSMC) will host a Public Hearing on Tuesday, November 14, 2023, at 6:30 p.m. in the CSMC meeting room in the Chesapeake Building, located at 41770 Baldridge Street in Leonardtown.

This Public Hearing will allow residents to speak directly to the Commissioners on the topic of the proposed Ordinance to Establish the School Zone Speed Camera Safety Program. Residents may offer appreciation, questions, or suggestions in a mutually respectful format.

Those wishing to speak at the hearing will receive up to three minutes to address the Commissioners. Public hearing information and related documents can be viewed online at www.stmaryscountymd.gov/publichearings.

Anyone wishing to provide more detailed feedback to the CSMC can do so at any time via:

  • Email to: csmc@stmarysmd.com
  • Mail to: Commissioners of St. Mary’s County, P.O. Box 653, Leonardtown, MD, 20650
Submissions will be considered by the CSMC at the Public Hearing and up to seven (7) days following the public hearing. All submissions must be received no later than 5 p.m. on Tuesday, November 21, 2023. Public Hearing guidelines are subject to change.

Note that because of the evidence and comments made at the public hearing, amendments may be made to the proposed Ordinance to Establish the School Zone Speed Camera Safety Program.

Appropriate accommodation for individuals with special needs will be provided upon request. To meet these requirements, we respectfully request one (1) week’s prior notice. Please contact the CSMC Office at 301-475-4200, ext. 1340. Proceedings are televised live and recorded for later broadcast.

All content of these proceedings is subject to disclosure under the Maryland Public Information Act. Photographic, electronic audio-visual broadcasting and recording devices are used during CSMC meetings. These are public meetings and attendance at these meetings automatically grants SMCG permission to broadcast your audio and visual image

CSMC County Public Hearings are televised live on St. Mary’s County Government (SMCG) TV Channel 95 and streamed live on the St. Mary’s County YouTube Channel
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Of course, I will be in Jacksonville that week. Points to ponder, Cat, and I did try pulling up the link to read the proposal, but its not working right now. And yes, I plan to write to them.

1. That fine increase was for the highway cams only.

2. This only allows for cameras within 1/2 mile of a school, inside an established school zone.

3. Yep, speeding is a problem. Can you point me to one injury or death in a school zone involving children or even staff that was caused by speeding? Think we had a right of way crash recently at Spring Ridge, no injuries. No speeding involved though. So how will this fix any problems.

4. What do the financial sides of the proposal look like? Will they commit to making this revenue neutral and locking in a fixed price contract, not a percentage of all money taken in? Will they lock in that all govt revenue received be used for non govt charitable purposes? Say a fund to assist needy seniors with tax bills stave off foreclosure or similar. Th point is to remove the revenue motive

5. Will a sworn officer review every citation? Will that officers identification be clearly marked on every citation?

6. Will the photographs provided as evidence include two pictures and timestamps with three decimals? The radar and camera systems involved can provide this information, but it generally is not displayed on citation so citizens cannot perform TSD checks on the system.

7. What is the required calibration standard and periodicity for the radars or lasers involved? Will the inspection and calibration logs be available for public review without the need for a PIA request?

8. Since this is being done for the children, will the systems only be active during school hours on school days?

9. Will the county commit to ensuring the required ombudsman position not be filled with someone involved with the program?

All of these I've listed have been problem's in Maryland systems. Oh, and thankfully, last time RLCs were proposed, the SHA said not on thier roadways.

One last unrelated thing. If anyone attends, would they ask the Sheriff for stats on how many hours they devote to enforcing the ban on handheld cell phone use?
 
LightRoasted

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

glhs837 said:
7. What is the required calibration standard and periodicity for the radars or lasers involved? Will the inspection and calibration logs be available for public review without the need for a PIA request?
Click to expand...

The real question: Will calibrations be in line with NIST standards under their standards and measurements for calibrated devices?
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
LightRoasted said:
For your consideration ...



The real question: Will calibrations be in line with NIST standards under their standards and measurements for calibrated devices?
Click to expand...

If history is anything to go by, they will cite that the equipment meets applicable certifications, but when pinned down, it turns out they tested one system back when and none since.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Tech said:
Oops, speed cameras and big brother.:buttkick:
Click to expand...
stargate sg1 scifi GIF
 
gemma_rae

gemma_rae

Well-Known Member
Last year I got a camera ticket in the mail from Baltimore city for blocking a cross walk. The irony is, I've never been to Baltimore city.

Even though they had a picture of the vehicle, which was not mine and did not have my tag on it, some dyslexic retard still entered the wrong tag number.

Took six months to clear it up. Which is probably better then StShlttyCity could do.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
StmarysCity79 said:
Why not? Would you rather they come arrest you once they review the footage?

Fines are a deterrent not set up for profit.

It costs money to enforce the law and pay salaries.
Click to expand...
I think you need to go back and look at some links I've posted. Governments and municipality use these things as a slush fund. And I agree finds issued by officers are not to make profit. If you'll go back and look at what I've been saying about these things for years, you will see this.

People think officers writing citations is a profit making venture and it never is they can't right citations fast enough to pay for their salary in the cost of the equipment they use.

But automated enforcement is a different animal entirely. It's entirely predicated on making money. It's handled private contractors usually get a 20 to 30% cut of all citations so they are motivated to ensure there are more citations. Municipalities and counties they get the rest to spend as they wish. And if you look at the links I posted on the other thread about this topic, you'll see they use it as a slush fund.

My preference isn't for no enforcement. It's for enforcement by officers that has real teeth with insurance reporting and real fines not piddly 40 and 75 dollars
 
S

StmarysCity79

Well-Known Member
glhs837 said:
I think you need to go back and look at some links I've posted. Governments and municipality use these things as a slush fund. And I agree finds issued by officers are not to make profit. If you'll go back and look at what I've been saying about these things for years, you will see this.

People think officers writing citations is a profit making venture and it never is they can't right citations fast enough to pay for their salary in the cost of the equipment they use.

But automated enforcement is a different animal entirely. It's entirely predicated on making money. It's handled private contractors usually get a 20 to 30% cut of all citations so they are motivated to ensure there are more citations. Municipalities and counties they get the rest to spend as they wish. And if you look at the links I posted on the other thread about this topic, you'll see they use it as a slush fund.

My preference isn't for no enforcement. It's for enforcement by officers that has real teeth with insurance reporting and real fines not piddly 40 and 75 dollars
Click to expand...


While i agree about enforcement being more severe inculding insurance reporting and real penalties i don't think the way the fines are used indicates what their intention is.

They are getting alot in revenues and using those as slush funds. However the intended use is as a detterent but there are not enough actual officers to be out doing the enforcing.

I personally i think officers have better things to do than write tickets and that this and red light cameras are the perfect use of this technolgy.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
StmarysCity79 said:
While i agree about enforcement being more severe inculding insurance reporting and real penalties i don't think the way the fines are used indicates what their intention is.

They are getting alot in revenues and using those as slush funds. However the intended use is as a detterent but there are not enough actual officers to be out doing the enforcing.

I personally i think officers have better things to do than write tickets and that this and red light cameras are the perfect use of this technolgy.
Click to expand...
If it were really a deterrent defines wouldn't be so low. As we've already seen once they stop bringing in money, politicians response isn't "yay We've succeeded how great for us". The response is let's crank up the fine so we get more money".

Remember the statewide legislation to allow this was ghost written by automated enforcement companies and they're drawing it very fine. Line to remain a symbiote not a parasite parasites. Get scraped off symbiotes get to stick around
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
If you need more money for your officers and their equipment, be honest about it and raise the damn taxes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top