Red Light Cameras - Are They About Safety Or Revenue?

Cincinnati City Council is proposing to place 10 cameras at intersections around the city to catch people running red lights. The program is designed to reduce accidents by reducing the number of people running red lights and to generate revenue through the tickets issued to those who disobey the traffic signals.

While the Council proposal does not include a specific amount that will be generated by the tickets, the budget approved last year by City Council includes $1,000,000 in anticipated revenue from those tickets.

While I am sure that the proponents of these cameras are sincere in their attempt to reduce accidents, it is odd that the first action they have taken is to count the revenue from these cameras, even before approving their use.

More Safety or More Accidents?

Studies conducted by the University of South Florida, the Virginia Department of Transportation, North Carolina A&T University, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, the Australian Road Research Board, Monash University (Australia) and a Winnipeg, Canada city audit all found significant increases in the traffic collisions associated with red light cameras. For example, the study by the Virginia DOT found that: "The cameras are correlated with an increase in total crashes of 8% to 17%." In most cases, the increase came in the form of rear-end collisions, when drivers noticed the "Red Light Camera Enforced" sign at the last minute and slammed on their brakes to avoid going through the intersection.

More Revenue or Higher Deficits?

Based on the city budget, proponents of red light cameras are assuming that $1,000,000 in revenue will be generated by the cameras. However, a study conducted by the Los Angeles Times found that the expected revenue does not always materialize:

Some cities, including Walnut, Santa Clarita and Montebello, have netted tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars above camera operating costs, officials say. Culver City could clear even more this year, based on budget documents and recent revenue estimates.

Yet Paramount shut down its camera program in 2006 after running a projected $178,000 deficit in two years. 'It just really wasn't what we thought it would be,' said Assistant City Manager John Moreno.

Compton also canceled its program because of concerns over costs.

Pasadena's 6-year-old camera program has produced safety benefits, including reductions in red light running, but it is struggling to cover contractor costs, said Norman Baculinao, the city's senior traffic engineer. "You have less violations, you have less revenue," he said. "We're at that point now: Our violations are barely making the monthly fees."

Potential For Abuse

Despite studies by the Texas Transportation Institute and the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives that show that increasing the length of yellow lights reduces accidents, six cities were caught shortening yellow light times for profit. The six cities were found to have "an amber light that lasted less than the minimum timing at an intersection, and millions of dollars in fines have been collected when drivers went through the premature red and got caught on camera. Chattanooga, Tennessee; Dallas, Texas; Springfield, Missouri; Lubbock, Texas; Nashville, Tennessee; and Union City, California all cut the timing on their lights."

How You Can Stop This Dangerous, Money-Grubbing Scheme

The issue of red light cameras has brought together a broad coalition of groups, including the local branch of the NAACP, the Hamilton County Republican Party, the Green Party of Ohio, the Libertarian Party of Southwest Ohio, Blue Chip Young Republicans, COAST (Citizens Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes), the Hamilton County Business Owners, Property Rights Freedom Fighters and Americans for Prosperity, all of whom demand that the people - not the government - have the final word on whether or not we want to live in a city under 24-hour surveillance.

We Demand a Vote, the same group that help defeat the new jail sales tax by putting the tax on the ballot, is circulating petitions in order to give the citizens of Cincinnati a voice in this decision. Please visit the We Demand A Vote Web site for information on how you can help get this issue on the ballot.