RED LIGHT CAMERAS
you haven't already done so, please read the
Cathedral City section on the Camera Towns page
Some of Cathedral City's tickets can
possibly be ignored. If your "ticket" does not
have the Superior Court's name and address on it, it is
what I call a "Snitch Ticket." For more details,
see the Snitch Ticket section on the Your Ticket page.
In 2018, Vote No on Sheila Kuehl
Do you live in LA County? Was Zev
Yaroslavsky your County Supervisor? (He
represented the Third District, which includes the
central and western San Fernando Valley, Malibu, Santa
Monica, Venice, Beverly Hills, the City of West
Hollywood, and part of Hollywood.)
Zev "termed out," and in the Nov. 2014 election Sheila Kuehl won the race to succeed him, by a narrow margin.
Sheila "Kuehl Kams" Kuehl, in 2007
During her career in the California
Legislature, Kuehl made three attempts to pass bills to allow
the use of automated speed enforcement (photo radar) in
We need to watch Kuehl carefully, because as a Supervisor she will have a seat on the MTA/Metro board and she will be a vote to continue and expand their huge (101 cameras, so far) red light camera system. In 2016 she voted to put Measure M, a new countywide sales tax, on the Nov. 2016 ballot - and it passed. Most of the money will go to Metro.
Kuehl will be up for re-election in Nov. 2018 and Nov. 2022.
New 4-14-09, updated 8-30-17
Total Violation Events,
Citations Issued 
This table made by highwayrobbery.net, using official documents obtained under the California Public Records Act.
[ ] indicates a footnote.
Official reports, 2008 - 2009
Official reports, 2009 - 2012
Official reports, 2012 - 2013
Official reports, 2013 - 2014
Official reports, 2014 early
Official reports, 2013 & 2014 annual
Official reports, 2014 - 2015
Official reports, 2010 - 2015
Official reports, 2015 - 2016
Official reports, 2016 mid
Official reports, 2016 late
Official reports, 2016 - 2017
 These totals were provided by the City.
 These totals, annual totals, and annual projections, are by highwayrobbery.net
 Un-used columns are to allow for later expansion of City's system.
 Any figures in red type (or, if you are looking at this table in black and white, the upper figure when there are two or more figures in a cell) are what ATS calls Violation Events, or all incidents recorded by the cameras, and due to time limitations may have been posted here only for selected months or locations. If there is sufficient public interest, the remaining months will be posted. The figures in black type are what ATS calls Citations Issued, and may represent the sum of genuine citations issued (those filed with the court) plus any Nominations mailed (not filed with the court, a.k.a. Snitch Tickets).
 Data has not yet been requested.
 The camera enforcement is believed to be on traffic on the first-named street, but the direction of enforcement (north, south, east, west, thru, left, right) is not yet available.
 New camera as of this month.
 The official report for this month was generated a few days before the end of the month, or just a few days after the end of the month, so it is likely that not all tickets (for violations which occurred during the month) had been approved and counted by that time. (The report for the month of --- shows --- violations "still in workflow," so the number of tickets eventually issued could rise as high as ---+---=---.)
Ticketing doubled between Dec. 2013 and Jan. 2014, and jumped again in Feb. 2016. Also see Set # 4, below.
In 2015, 76% of Cathedral City's camera tickets were for right turns. (For most cities we obtain the percentages by movement - straight, right, left - from the annual reports they file as required by CVC 21455.5(i), but Cathedral City and its camera supplier ATS have been filing annual reports that do not include the breakout by movement. So, we have made our own estimate.)
Cathedral City Docs Set # 2
(From the CCPD Website)
Cathedral City Docs Set # 3
The Contracts and Amendments
Addenda 1 - 3
Early 2013 invoices show the City was paying $4990 per camera, each month.
Late 2013 invoices show the City still was paying $4990 per camera.
On May 14, 2014 the city council voted 4 - 1 (Toles: nay) to extend the program for three more years.
The new contract reduced the rent to $3500 per camera - still too high, see FAQ # 17 - and allows cancellation so long as the City gives 60 days notice.
June 2015 Council Discussion
A discussion of the cameras was on the agenda for a June 10, 2015 study session.
The staff report revealed that 69% of the tickets go to visitors.
No action was taken.
2017: Extended to 2018
On May 16, 2017 the chief of police approved a one year extension of the contract, to June 2, 2018.
This list of contracts and amendments was up-to-date as of July 2017.
Cathedral City Docs Set # 4
Guidelines and Business Rules
CVC 21455.5(c)(1) and CVC 21455.5(c)(2)(f) require a City to have controls and guidelines for the issuance of tickets, and most cities have put theirs in writing. In Feb. 2015 highwayrobbery.net sent Cathedral City a Public Records Act request asking for the items in blue, below, and in May got the answers in red, indicating that the City has no written procedures - it's all in their heads! Perhaps that is why the City experiences sudden changes in ticketing, like the New Years doubling between Dec. 2013 and Jan. 2014.
latest version or revision of the City's and/or
sheriff's written controls or guidelines, as
required by CVC 21455.5(c)(2)(F).
"There is no requirement for “written” controls under this section. The controls are that Sworn Police Officers are the only personnel who can access the system and issue citations based on their training and experience. Those citations approved by the officers are then processed by ATS and sent to the violators in the legally prescribed manner."
Q. The latest version or revision of the City's manual, guidelines, business rules, orders, memos or documents describing the action(s) to be taken by a City or sheriff employee or agent whose job it is to review violations and approve or disapprove the issuance of a ticket, when he or she observes a clear gender and/or age mismatch between the red light camera photo of the violating driver and the DMV file photo of the registered owner of the vehicle and is not able to identify the violating driver with a sufficient degree of certainty."There is nothing written down to address the issue raised above. If there are discrepancies with identifying a driver or a vehicle that is not to the satisfaction of the reviewing police officer, the citation is rejected. Officers are not going to waste their time and reputation with the Court by approving citations that are clearly not conclusive and could be successfully argued in Court."
Cathedral City Docs Set # 5
Length of Yellow: Signal Timing and Speed Surveys
Signal Timing and Speed Surveys
Cathedral City Docs Set # 6
There may be some more Cathedral City information posted in the next few weeks. Mark your calendar to remind you to come back here and look!
RED LIGHT CAMERAS