St. Peters traffic
cameras could face own red light By Tim Bryant ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCHMonday, Jan. 23 2006
ST. PETERS
St. Peters
has a new ordinance allowing installation of cameras to catch red light runners. But pending state legislation could alter
the plan before an electronic cop-in-a-box can nab its first violator.
Sen. Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau, is
sponsoring legislation to bar cities from using "photo radar," or automated traffic control systems, to enforce traffic
laws. Crowell said last week that he may relent if certain restrictions are put in place.
"I believe, in the end,
there is merit to using (red light) cameras, and I've always thought that," he said. "But there need to be some protections.
There needs to be a statewide standard, much like there is a statewide standard for radar guns."
Arnold is the only city in the metro area to use cameras to catch red
light violators. Less than two weeks ago, St. Peters approved
setting up a system.
Crowell said he prefers red light camera videos to photos. Video evidence would excuse motorists
who make legal right turns on red or who run lights to make way for emergency vehicles, he said.
Fines become profits
What especially alarms some municipal officials is Crowell's opposition to what
he calls "contingency" deals, in which camera companies install and operate the systems in exchange for part of the
money motorists pay in fines.
Such deals, which are common, satisfy cities because they spend no money to build
or operate the systems, which can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars for just a few intersections.
Typically,
the cameras are set atop poles at an intersection. Cars entering the intersection against a red light trigger a computer
to take two pictures. The first one shows the car entering the intersection. The next one shows the car in the middle
of it.
Crowell differs with municipal leaders who say the electronic devices are a cost-effective alternative to
a police officer in a patrol car.
St. Peters Alderman Jerry Hollingsworth, who this month pushed through his city's
red light camera ordinance, said he cannot understand why Crowell cares if the camera company gets a share of the ticket
money.
"It makes no sense to me," said Hollingsworth, adding that the private company would be unable to alter
traffic signal operations and that police officials would review the photos before issuing tickets.
Alderman Randy
Crisler of Arnold, where red light cameras went on duty last
year, said the public has had "a mixed reaction" to the system but that he believes it will reduce the number of traffic
accidents. He defended the city's agreement to pay American Traffic Solutions $31.50 from each $94.50 fine collected
for traffic signal violations.
Crisler said getting caught by a camera in Arnold
is better than getting stopped by a cop because photo-generated tickets are treated by the city as nonmoving violations
and produce no drivers license points - and no insurance premium hikes - for motorists.
"They're like parking tickets,"
Crisler said.
Unlike the St. Peters system, which will include photos of drivers' faces,
the Arnold system relies on license plate photos only.
Crisler said Arnold officials are unwilling "to infringe
on civil liberties" by photographing drivers.
He said that, privately, Attorney General Jay Nixon has softened
on his position that red light camera photos cannot be the only evidence to cite drivers for violating state traffic
law. A spokesman for Nixon said the attorney general's position remains unchanged. The spokesman added that Nixon had
yet to take a position on Crowell's bill.
Sheldon Lineback, executive director of the Missouri Police Chiefs Association,
said his group supports use of red light cameras. People who run lights have no greater privacy claims than robbers
who are shown in store surveillance videotapes, he said.
Crowell has discussed his bill with the association, but
Lineback said the group is staying out of the dispute over contingency payments.
"Our focus is not on the financial
aspects," he said. "Our focus is on reducing the number of accidents and injuries."
As the number of camera systems
rises nationwide, so do sales of a product meant to foil the cameras, the seller claims.
A way around?
In the last three years, PhotoBlocker.com of Harrisburg, Pa., has sold more than 500,000 cans of a spray it says makes a license plate so shiny
a red light camera's flash makes the resulting photo unreadable.
Joe Scott,
PhotoBlocker.com's marketing director, said the product - at $29.99 per can
- "is good for life" and is banned for sale only in Illinois and New York.
"We're not encouraging anybody to run red lights or encouraging anyone
to speed," Scott said. "The reason we're in this business is that we found
these cameras make mistakes and that they can be rigged. If you have private interests coming in and setting these
up, they're always motivated by the bottom line." St. Peters officials have met
with representatives of two camera companies and plan to select one soon. Hollingsworth said a small system, which will
show drivers but not passengers, could be operating this spring.
He said an "intangible benefit" of the system
will be reduction of road stress. Rush hour drivers seethe as they often must wait at a green light as three or more
cars speed through on red, he said.
"Guess what?" he said of the waiting drivers. "It's 7 in the morning and I'm hacked
already."