During their meeting of Dec. 5, 2005 the Huntington Park City Council voted against installing red light cameras.  The following police memo was submitted to them for their consideration, and as a result is a public record.  (The memo was received at highwayrobbery.net as a .doc file but has been posted here in .txt (plain text) format, to prevent virus transmission.) 

Memorandum

To:	Chief R. Narramore
CC:	Assistant Chief S. Peeler
From:	Lt. Mike Leinen
Date:	12/06/05
Re:	Red Light Camera Enforcement programs.

Background: 

The following summarizes a recommendation that the City of Huntington Park not commit to any Red Light camera enforcement system presently available. A detailed analysis has revealed the following areas of concern that may expose the City to both excessive cost and potential litigation.

Lack of justification: 

The primary reason for the implementation of a Red Light Camera System is to reduce injury accidents that occur because of motorists that fail to stop for red lights.  A careful review of traffic accident statistics revealed that there was no discernable trend toward traffic accidents caused by running a red light; to the contrary there were comparatively  few accidents caused by running red lights.  A review of statistics from 2002 thru the first 9 months of 2005 revealed a total of 37 accidents over a 4 year period. A break down is as follows:

	2002              12 accidents                              505 total
	2003                9 accidents                              437 total
	2004                9 accidents                              462 total
	2005                7 accidents (thru September) 447 thru September

The statistics reveal that only a few of the total were caused by red light runners. The numbers also tend to suggest an overall downward trend in red light accidents.   

Cost of implementation:

Contracts:

All red light camera enforcement systems are provided under contract by private firms without government connection. The various companies require a 5 year contract with an escape clause only during the first year.  The provider will enter an agreement with the municipality to provide red light camera services including placement, maintenance and violation review and citation preparation as part of the contractual services.  A typical contract between a red light camera company and a city includes a stipulation that beyond the first year of the contract that all costs not recovered thru citation revenue are paid from the cities general fund. In other words; if the motorists don't pay, then the city is contractually obligated to make up the difference.
  
Further Obligations:

Each approach to a red light camera intersection covered by the cameras is billed according to a cost formula derived by the system provider.  Each approach (direction) can cost the city from $2,000.00 to $20,000.00 per month of operation.  In the event that citation revenue does not meet the minimum operating cost then the city makes up the difference resulting in a negative cash flow situation for the duration of the contract (City of Paramount).  

The initial review of films are conducted by the service provider then forwarded to the Police Department for violation review and approval by a sworn officer. The approved violations are then processed by the service provider. In the event that the violator cannot be identified, or lacks a Drivers License, or does not own the vehicle, then the violation is sent back to the police department for further follow up.  The costs associated with the officer's time to review the violations or conduct a follow up are borne exclusively by the Police Department and the city. 

It is also incumbent on the police department to conduct periodic reviews of signal operation and ensure that signal timing is correct and that both the yellow and red phases are of the correct duration throughout the city. Again, an additional requirement not covered by the service provider and paid for out of the department budget. 

Any legal challenge or appeals thru the courts must be borne by the city. The service providers specify in the contract that legal challenges, class action suites and court costs be defended at the expense of the city. 

Legal Issues:

There have been some significant legal challenges to red light camera systems in the last few years. Within the last 2 years there were 2 class action law suites in both San Diego and East Los Angeles concerning red light camera systems resulting in vast payouts to the concerned motorists, plus legal costs none of which were borne by the service providers.  
There are currently several pending law suits against municipalities which have not been resolved.   Red light camera enforcement programs are a constant target for litigation and claims, the costs for which are borne by the City. (Sample attached)

Revenue Issues:

The City of Huntington Park is a relatively small city of some 3 square miles with an ethnically diverse population of predominantly low income families. Red light camera enforcement is only effective (profitable) in communities where the majority of drivers are licensed and own their vehicles. Cities in Orange County that use red light cameras do so primarily for revenue generation with public safety as a secondary concern.  These areas are composed of upper income residents where the camera systems are placed around high end shopping areas or business parks. In L.A. County the City of Inglewood placed red light cameras around their Home Depot and other shopping areas in order to target motorists who were presumed to have adequate disposable income and pre disposed to just pay the ticket rather then fight the citation in court. 

The Huntington Park Factor:

The entire concept of Red Light Camera enforcement is based on a positive cash flow resulting from the successful collection of fines from motorists. This premise proceeds from the false assumption that most drivers will comply with the citation process and send in their money rather then contest the citation. The problems associated with this notion are many and varied as follows: 

Traffic enforcement statistics for the period from 10-01-04 thru 9-30-05 reveals that of the total 7,375 citations issued by police personnel 1,765 of those drivers were unlicensed.  Almost 1/4 of the drivers were unlicensed and would be untraceable for the purpose of identification and issuance of a red light ticket. (The registered owner of the vehicle is under no obligation to identify the driver.)

A large portion of the revenue for red light citations is derived from court imposed fines. The red light camera companies base their revenue predictions on the maximum prevailing fines and usually include these numbers as the basis for their service billing. Unfortunately, the Huntington Park Traffic Courts seldom impose the maximum fine and usually suspend most of the fine, or allow cited motorists to attend traffic school or arrange for alternative sentencing in lieu of payment. 

Technology Issues:
 
A review of contracts and sample materials provided by the Red Light Camera companies revealed that once the equipment is installed any and all upgrades resulting from improved technology is at the cities expense.  Repairs and maintenance are taken care of by the service provider.  Once the contract period has elapsed the city is responsible for maintenance or removal of the equipment. The City of Long Beach currently has 3 different generations of equipment in place ranging from the unobtrusive to extremely complex installations around their city. 

The current state of technology does not allow capture of license plates with plastic covers, or non reflector coating, or foreign plates.

Summary and recommendation:

Based on the forgoing information, I recommend that the City of Huntington Park forego any implementation of a red light camera system at this time. Future developments on both the legal and technical fronts may make the issue more attractive and practical.

******