VIRGINIA BEACH
At 11 of the city's busiest intersections, cameras wait to snap photos of vehicles that run red lights.
For most drivers, the violation will cost $50, but because of a loophole in state law, city employees driving city vehicles get a free pass.
Virginia law states that localities may only use photos and videos collected by red-light cameras to fine a vehicle's owner, lessee or renter. The information cannot be made public, reported to insurance companies, used against someone's driving record or "disclosed to any other entity except as may be necessary for the enforcement of a traffic light violation," according to the 2007 law.
As a result, when a camera catches a city vehicle running a red light, police can't send the photos to the respective department for disciplinary action against the driver, said Officer Jimmy Barnes, a police spokesman. And the city isn't going to fine itself, he said, because then taxpayers would be paying for the violation.
Virginia Beach is the first city in the state to implement red-light cameras since the General Assembly re-approved their use in 2007. Between March 13 and June 30, the cameras recorded 16,888 violations, Barnes said. After eliminating emergency vehicles responding to calls for service, funeral processions and other exemptions, police issued 9,712 violation notices, he said.
The cameras have caught 18 city vehicles running red lights, Barnes said. That's 0.1 percent of the total violations captured.
Police Chief Jake Jacocks has proposed an amendment to state law that would allow localities to use the photos and videos captured to discipline city employees. The City Council received the proposal Tuesday for consideration in the Beach's 2010 legislative agenda.
Under current state law, police can't do anything about those infractions, Jacocks said.
"It was something that nobody envisioned when the code was originally written," he said. "It doesn't make sense, and I don't think the community thinks it makes sense."
Del. John Cosgrove, whose 78th District includes part of Chesapeake, sponsored the red-light cameras legislation in 2007. He said the exemption for city vehicles was unintentional.
"Obviously that's a loophole that needs to be fixed," he said.
Drivers in city vehicles should not be exempt from consequences if cameras catch them running red lights, several residents said Wednesday at a gas station at the intersection of Virginia Beach and Independence boulevards. Cameras enforce the traffic light there.
"It's not fair to the other drivers," Mike Krechel said. "The law should be equal for all."
Geraldine Eady agreed.
"Anyone who drives on the street should be held accountable," she said.
Of the 18 city vehicles caught on-camera, four were police cars, Barnes said. Two of those were cleared as taking place during official police duties, such as responding to a burglary call, which wouldn't necessarily require lights and sirens, Barnes said.
"There's kind of a double standard with the police cars," he said. But "it's still incumbent upon them to obey the law."
"We don't want anyone getting away with it," he added. "We found an error; we're trying to correct it."
Virginia Beach is one of many cities using cameras to enforce traffic laws. Redflex Traffic Systems Inc., the Phoenix-based company that provides Virginia Beach's cameras, has contracts with more than 240 cities nationwide, according to its Web site. The company offers systems to enforce speed limits, rail crossings, stop signs and red lights.
But the cameras often come with controversy, with residents concerned about privacy, due process and the possibility that they cause more rear -end collisions when drivers slam on their brakes to avoid fines.
Because of privacy concerns, the General Assembly allowed Virginia's pilot program to lapse in 2005. For nine months prior, Virginia Beach had eight red-light cameras that resulted in 17,315 tickets.
When legislators re-approved the program two years ago, they placed strict limits on how the photos can be used. They also prohibited private companies like Redflex from accessing vehicle records.
Jacocks has also proposed changing that. He said he'd like Redflex to be able to access Department of Motor Vehicle records directly.
Right now, after a red-light violation is captured on camera and verified by an officer, the Police Department matches the license plate with DMV records and provides the information to Redflex, which mails a citation to the vehicle's owner.
Jacocks said he'd like to cut out the extra step. Restrictions would be put in place to protect Virginians' privacy, and an officer still would verify each violation, he said.
"It's not like they would have unfettered access to DMV files," Jacocks said.
Kent Willis, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, said he opposes private companies gaining access to government databases, including DMV records.
If a private company like Redflex is allowed to access DMV records, strict limits and consequences have to apply, Willis said.
"The key would be to put in place additional protections to make sure that information is used by the company for this purpose and only for this purpose," he said.
Some local residents also said they are leery.
"I don't think records like that should be given to the public, even if it's an employee of the company," Eady said.
Cosgrove said he doesn't know whether he can support allowing a private company to access DMV records.
"I don't know that it's proper to have a non-law enforcement agency make those types of inquiries," he said. "I would wait to see what Virginia Beach asks for."
So far, 5.5 percent of citations have yielded revenue. As of June 30, the city had collected $26,950 in fines, Barnes said.
That money went to Redflex, which installs, maintains and monitors the city's red-light cameras. Once Redflex recoups the $4,500 monthly fee it charges per camera, any leftover money goes to the city's general fund, Barnes said. It takes three violations per camera a day to pay the fee.
So far, more than half of the recorded violations have been disqualified, either by Redflex or the Police Department. And it can take several months to collect payment once a citation is issued, said Officer Brian Walters, who coordinates the PhotoSafe Program.
"There are oodles of reasons why we disqualify them," said Sgt. Ryan Arnold, who supervises the program.
Sometimes the license plate number is unclear, he said, and once, a seagull blocked the camera.
The program aims to reduce the running of red lights, not make money, Arnold said.
"We don't care about the money," he said. "We care about the safety."
If the City Council approves Jacocks' proposals, the city manager's office will seek a patron to sponsor legislation during the next General Assembly session.
"We just want to make it as user-effective as possible so that people stop running red lights," Cosgrove said. "But at the same time, we have to balance that with privacy concerns and kind of big brother issues that a lot of people fear."
Kathy Adams, (757) 222-5155, kathy.adams@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
The registered owner gets the ticket
I co-signed a loan to help my nephew get a car and so I got the ticket when he recently rolled on right. Of course he paid the ticket but at first he claimed that the light and camera were out of sequence, then he discovered they had a video of the infraction.
I certainly was glad that the ticket was not used against my driving record or insurance.
I don't like the cameras and now that I find out how little help they are to the city's bottom line I like them even less. I fear that drivers may be looking for these camera when they should be looking for oncoming traffic.
I always come to a full stop before turning right on red because you're supposed to and because one time I didn't and I almost hit a car making a u-turn.
If the city leaders had any integrity
They would take the vehicle away from the person who was driving it and that person should never be allowed to drive a city vehicle again. If their job was dependent on that vehicle....oh well, should have obeyed the law.
Who calibrates these things?
My concern is that the lights and cameras will not be calibrated properly and/or they may be calibrated in such a way as to increase revenue for the city and the "Redflix" folks. Many of the lights are already improperly calibrated for the posted speed limit or set up on such short cycles that they restrict flow, increase tension and stress, and cause more rear-end collisions when people go "oh @#$% I gotta hit the breaks" cause the light only allowed movement of one or two vehicles. If you don't believe me try traveling east on Dam Neck Rd. through the Princess Anne Rd. intersection during heavy traffic times. Another one is turning left from London Bridge Rd. (east) to General Booth Blvd. (north),and last but not least (any time of day)turning left onto Oceana Blvd. from General Booth Blvd. It's enough to make you crazy!
Previlidged information
Chief Jacocks will probably be unsuccessful in his attempt to give access of DMV information to a private company. The police access DMV through a system used by law enforcement called VCIN. State law prohibits information from this system being accessed for any reason other than criminal justice use. The state is adamant in regards to adherence to this and it is a violation of state law to disclose information for any other purpose. Access to this system is restricted to law enforcement only. That's why this information cannot be used to discipline city employees as it cannot be released to their bosses. Remember the fine goes to the registered owner of the offending vehicle. That would be the city.
It's amazing ---------
How many brillant legal minds are discovered when something like this surfaces! The bottom line here is to drive like you are supposed to. It's an amazing concept to be sure --- but just try it. As for Mr. Wizard and his fourth amendment scenario, traffic violations and search and seizure issues aren't really comparable.
dept of criminal justice va
are all redflex traffic systems employees regulated by the dept of criminal justice of virginia , and have all redflex traffic systems employees been thru a state cerification , does anyone kno if this company has a dcjs cerification , who is the companies compliance officer ????? anyone have a clue ?
camera
Don't pay the fine?
get over it and pay the ___fine already!
What a bunch of whiners. Sounds like more playground accusations to me.
It is not always someone else's fault--be an adult and get on with your life
is redflex properly licensed thru the dcjs????????
according to va code sections 9.1-138 thru 9.1-50.4 also 6vac-20-171 I can find no licensing information on this company reflex traffic systems according to the dcjs all companies doing business in va are required to be licensed as such my question is is redflex traffic systems licensed by the dcjs to do video survielance and if so none of their websites of advertizements include such dcjs license numbers as required by va code , Is this company licensed in va to do business as a private security /investigations selling its product to a city that is using it to procecute its citizens if anyone has the anwser to this would you please respond , / refrence dcjsvirginia.gov
Not all Red Light Violations are the same
There are basically two kinds of Red Light infractions, the Straight Through running of the red light, which is the kind which results in serious, T-bone collisions and are a serious danger, and the Right-turn-on red rolling stop violation which rarely results in any kind of accident and almost never involves a serious injury.
The Straight-through violation is the kind used to sell localities on Photo-Red and is a legitimate public safety measure, however, the R-o-R rolling stop violations, while technically still an infraction, rarely causes an accident and almost never serious injury. The R-o-R violations account for more than 100 tickets for every Straight-Thru ticket and are really little more than revenue scams.
So, which type of violation are we talking about here? If it was the R-o-R type, I really don't care about those any more for city workers than anyone else.
RonR
Yes, and it is my understanding that the company that operates the cameras will NOT come into a city that does NOT want ROR tickets issued for exactly that reason. It is NOT about safety, it IS about revenue.
Ignore it!
I have a question...What happens if I just ignore the notice? After all, it is coming from a company, not the city, and is a civil matter. Will they have to take me to court and then prove I was the driver? I hope so!
IGNORE IT PLEASE
How about you run the light, have your car and maybe even your picture taken with you behind the wheel. Get sent the citation w/picture, don't pay it and see how it develops from there. I believe there is no substitute for OJT. Then maybe you can become our "Legal expert". Think of it as a community service.
Due Process?
Funny stuff. Correct me if I am wrong: If I receive a citation for a red light violation from one of these traffic cameras, who verifies that the picture is accurate? Who says with 100 percent accuracy that the light sequence is triggered correctly to snap the photo? Who pays for the Department of Weights and Measures to come out and tests its calibration?
Once I dispute this ticket and opt for a trial to prove my innocents, I have a legal right to face my accuser. Who is going to bring the camera into court so I may question it? If the camera does not show up for court, is the case then dismissed?
All sharp legal minds respond please.
A picture is worth a thousand words
They also have a video of the infraction.
Terminate employment after third violation
I agree with Mickey, except three reprimands and out.
First: written counseling
Second: written counseling and suspension without pay
(time off to be determined)
Third: termination of employment.
Sounds hard? What if the red light runner causes a collision, maiming or murdering the incident victims (running a red light does not result in “an accident”), .
In addition, the City is responsible for the negligent act of its employee.
Everyone has to obey the law
I have noticed a number of city vehicles and police cars not obeying traffice laws. For example, they exceed the posted speed limit, do not turn their lights on when it is raining, etc.
If someone goes through a red light, they are endangering others. It does not matter whose car it is or whether the vehicle belongs to a third party.
The laws are for all of us.
All of us must obey the laws, especially traffic laws. Otherwise, we are all endangered.
Bait and switch
Chief Jacocks isn't trying to hold anyone of his officers or city employees responsible for running red lights. He is trying to protect his police officers from the public prying eyes. At this point, anybody can fill out a FOIA request and find out which employees and what departments have been accused of running red lights but the Chief knows that once he makes it a discipline issue; that it becomes a HR matter. And the public has no right to know about HR issues. Its classic bait and switch. He comes across appearing tough and accountable while actually he is throwing up roadblocks so the public won't find out which of his officers are recklessly endangering your safety. Find out for yourselves. Once the city starts discipline proceedings against an employee; you're right to know goes away.
You are the public. Heres a way to "Play Cop" yourself
Once again lets blame the police. Try to understand this theory. It's not the majority of drivers breaking these laws no matter who's vehicle they are driving. It's just that 10-15% with the mindset of "the laws are for everyone else except me". Most every day, during my same time every AM drive to work, there are cars I can point out that I know will run the light or not stop before turning right. If one of these happened to be a city vehicle I would make the call myself. All city vehicles are equiped with license plates and vehicle #'s, and some even the phone number. And all city employees have an I.D.,ususlly displayed if you happen to be able to get it. So do your civic duty as the fine upstanding citizen you are and report it. But you will need to put some walk(or phone call) into your talk to accomplish that. Trust me enough complaints against that 10-15% of city employees would have results you will probably never hear about, but will definately have consequences for someone. So if you really think the city employees are all getting away with breaking laws file the Citizens complaint.
Red Light District
This is a joke, right?
Unconstitutional...?
...why should that matter? If you drive like your supposed to, you're not going to run the light anyway. It was a law that was passed period. If you run the light and the camera catches you, shame on you, be responsible and pay the fine. City workers included, no one should be excluded, especially a city worker.