RED LIGHT CAMERAS
w w w . h i g h w a y r o b b e r y . n e t
Email Address
Site Index

If you haven't already done so, please read the left-turn section of Defect # 9 on the Home page

City of Mesa, Arizona, Documents
(and Other Arizona Information)

Mesa, pop. 450,000, is east of Phoenix.
Mesa has both red light cameras and speed camera vans.

For a book on how to fight speed camera tickets, see the Speeding Ticket section on the Links page.

 
  Mesa Docs Set # 1
Mesa Data Shows Longer Yellows Cut Violations by 2/3 - Permanently

New 8-3-04, updated 7-18-13

In Nov. 2000 the City of Mesa, due to complaints from its citizens, increased its left-turn yellows from three seconds to four.  The table below shows that by the following month the number of violations had dropped to 1/3 (or less) of what it had been, and also that for years after the change, there was no "rebound" - violations remained down.  (Flipping the numbers over, we would expect that if Mesa re-set those yellows back to three seconds, there would be a threefold increase in violations.)

See the footnotes [  ], and an Arizona Tribune article, for details.

Table:  First 18 columns are red light camera data.  Red type is total violations photographed (most months are not posted, due to time limitations).  Black type is citations issued.  The 19th (last) column is speed camera citations issued.  The averages were calculated by highwayrobbery.net. [5]

CITY
OF
MESA,
ARIZONA
CC
Sou-
th-
ern

SBD
Sou-
thern
CC

Left
Mesa
Sou-
th-
ern

NBD
Mesa
Bro-
ad-
way
Sta-
pley
Sou-
th-
ern
EBD
Sta-
pley
Bro-
ad-
way
NBD
Sta-
pley
Main


WBD
CC
Univ



SBD
CC
Univ


Left
Alma
Sou-
th-
ern

EBD
Alma
Sou-
thern

Left
Dob-
son
Sou-
thern
Left
Sou-
thern
Dob-
son

EBD
Univ
Mesa



WBD
Dob-
son
Bro-
adway
Left
Power
Main


Left
Lind-
say
Univ


NBD
Total
RLC
[1]
Total
Speed
Cam-
era
Jan00
77

45
93
38
66
84






0



403
1282
Feb00
93

14
64
25
52
55
10





68



381
1318
Mar00
79

39
65
42
64
47
129
0
9
161
0
15
94
9
309
28
10
791
2109
Apr00
62
213
82
73
37
67
48
145
621
19
779
406
75
75
278
2457
368
37
3385
1890
May00
49
386
68
55
19
71
60
135
506
10
1025
674
40
72
315
2127
395
32
3912
1742
Jun00
67
231
54
63
23
34
73
84
376
6
589
515
46
74
275
1429
381
31
2922
1311
Jul00
57
294
52
54
24
50
57
96
429
3
481
788
67
66
272
1519
435
23
3248
1225
Aug00
[5]
50
1134
283
64
62
23
44
64
95
1177
553
10
1705
658
2304
865
51
73
1036
292
1563
388
19
3594
1257
Sep00
[5]
42
1184
386
73
49
24
41
59
92
1009
479
14
1178
448
2355
1014
37
43
953
241
1087
296
28
3366
1370
Oct00
[5]
36
996
287
55
30
14
32
41
93
1013
471
13
1595
480
2295
752
38
68
833
253
1561
402
23
3088
1356
Nov00
[2] [5]
38
674
180
81
45
20
28
63
71
477
185
15
1010
335
1194
449
34
58
399
92
1529
399
19
2112
1257
Dec00
[5]
40
445
103
44
39
32
65
69
89
153
55
15
497
188
654
262
53
80
116
38
326
70
26
1268
1502
Jan01
[5]
29
506
125
36
36
23
35
82
91
181
67
18
400
119
437
167
33
68
111
41
339
60
22
1052
1330
Feb01
[5]
28
613
137
37
59
23
41
60
99
200
83
13
373
120
538
188
38
64
114
38
434
82
26
1136
1139
Mar01
35
213
61
42
33
66
67
122
142
24
94
183
43
85
34
376
68
20
1332
1808
Apr01
94
221
93
113
50
106
141
195
118
28
182
270
84
128
71
333
68
26
1988
1390
May01
111
231
144
69
30
113
113
193
148
11
88
240
77
140
51
290
56
34
1849
1425
Jun01
[3]
75
177
155
74
48
88
135
133
145
9
254
186
74
108
41
265
68
28
1798
1709
Jul01
81
122
114
48
12
77
111
121
130
-
135
122
55
126
0
256
47
24
1325
1233
Aug01
111
139
127
51
0
97
86
143
164
0
157
316
0
119
0
260
36
0
1546
1191
Sep01
139
165
114
47
0
130
170
145
177
0
87
222
0
119
0
356
112
0
1627
969
Oct01
145
197
101
32
0
77
135
201
170
0
105
250
0
106
0
234
47
0
1566
1183
Nov01
123
86
100
23
0
75
138
215
156
0
133
64
0
183
0
302
67
0
1363
768
Dec01
73
105
89
37
0
109
164
131
118
0
82
232
0
126
0
732
163
0
1429
1299
Jan02
63
112
82
28
0
101
129
153
88
0
124
228
0
137
0
1068
219
0
1464
1063
Feb02
84
134
98
49
0
179
98
128
92
0
116
267
0
111
0
841
204
0
1560
1085
Mar02
82
146
72
22
0
94
150
133
73
0
96
125
0
71
0
791
188
0
1252
784
Apr02
75
101
87
28
0
91
142
83
75
0
48
130
0
71
0
424
65
0
996
949
May02
59
90
111
38
0
115
160
133
67
-
24
122
-
80
0
382
73
0
1072
1151
Jun02
75
112
97
42
0
125
125
86
44
0
104
160
0
93
0
331
47
0
1110
1018
Jul02
67
132
92
29
0
98
105
91
41
-
49
97
0
87
17
313
35
0
940
1044
Aug02
15
93
114
48
0
146
151
124
80
0
19
271
0
117
40
262
34
0
1252
1139
Sep02
36
51
115
54
0
138
157
104
106
0
25
387
0
97
39
318
97
0
1406
1667
Oct02
32
161
191
35
0
153
170
87
97
0
36
455
0
142
62
448
167
0
1788
1279
Nov02
25
148
116
44
-
164
144
127
60
-
37
255
-
85
58
555
188
-
1451
1422
Dec02
44
98
145
47
0
151
167
106
37
0
46
277
0
88
47
745
201
0
1454
1704
Jan03
32
109
131
45
0
102
156
120
90
0
38
273
0
108
57
790
220
0
1481
973
Feb03
31
152
106
50
0
138
131
80
68
0
32
280
0
78
49
739
200
0
1395
919
Mar03
31
112
87
44
0
126
103
88
92
0
39
248
0
77
35
912
280
0
1362
1092
Apr03
55
109
99
56
0
122
150
144
81
0
20
193
0
75
39
494
129
0
1272
1184
May03
18
40
86
10
-
103
84
122
40
-
40
156
-
53
32
337
68
-
852
894
Jun03
21
11
124
-
2
89
80
124
34
-
63
167
-
73
36
275
66
-
890

Jul03
24
59
88
0
5
155
107
15
63
0
26
11
0
53
23
89
2
0
631
832
Aug03
15
93
114
48
0
146
151
124
80
0
19
271
0
117
40
262
34
0
1252
908
Sep03
32
36
76
0
5
109
97
113
131
0
39
285
0
87
49
83
14
0
1073
1004
Oct03
45
17
112
-
16
153
106
126
148
-
37
258
-
96
58
153
45
-
1117

Nov03
44
34
102
0
9
136
92
130
115
-
49
201
-
74
39
190
47
-
1072
1335
Dec03
59
160
135
0
13
137
145
178
46
0
73
352
0
98
79
221
47
0
1522
1735
Jan04
65
105
142
12
0
130
150
142
71
0
50
286
0
88
51
272
56
0
1348
1051
Feb04
62
120
108
0
11
164
123
153
107
0
69
371
0
81
60
586
145
0
1574
****
Mar04
97
149
103
0
11
139
124
130
110
0
58
289
0
65
43
757
175
0
1493
1115
Apr04
69
123
118
0
6
139
129
105
47
0
49
218
0
71
60
704
171
0
1305
1114
May04
81
116
75
0
9
135
104
114
57
0
86
200
0
23
51
506
162
0
1213
1054
Jun04
47
446
118
110
0
15
210
145
74
131
60
0
218
64
431
178
0
78
181
56
582
176
0
1331
1135
Jul04
42
410
105
87
-
4
280
105
53
103
27
-
169
39
339
99
-
61
117
29
379
63
-
994

Aug04
63
652
77
124
-
18
122
86
101
212
80
-
213
55
730
190
-
43
196
57
506
133
-
1149





















  Monthly Avg.
  July 2000 -
Oct. 2000
[2]
46
313
61
49
21
42
55
94
483
10
517
855
48
63
265
380
23
3324

Nov. 14,
2000:
Left Turn
Yellows
Lengthened
[2]

+1
sec.






+1
sec.

+1
sec.
+1
sec.


+1
sec.
+1
sec.



Monthly Avg.
Dec. 2000 -
Mar. 2001
[2] 
33
145
45
44
28
52
70
100
87
18
130
200
42
74
38
70
24
1197

Monthly Avg.
Apr. 2001 -
Aug. 2004
[6]
62
114
109
46
20
128
128
124
91
?
71
224
?
94
47
108
?
1331

Monthly Avg.
Jan. 2006 -
Dec. 2009
[7] [8]
187
187
42
23
112
48
154
74
213
79
71
100
27
1316

Jan. 2010 -
[8]
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?


CC
Sou-
th-
ern

SBD
Sou-
thern
CC

Left
Mesa
Sou-
th-
ern

NBD
Mesa
Bro-
ad-
way
Sta-
pley
Sou-
th-
ern
EBD
Sta-
pley
Bro-
ad-
way
NBD
Sta-
pley
Main


WBD
CC
Univ



SBD
CC
Univ


Left
Alma
Sou-
th-
ern

EBD
Alma
Sou-
thern

Left
Dob-
son
Sou-
thern
Left
Sou-
thern
Dob-
son

EBD
Univ
Mesa



WBD
Dob-
son
Bro-
adway
Left
Power
Main


Left
Lind-
say
Univ


NBD
Total
RLC
[1]
Total
Speed
Cam-
era


Questions Raised by the Figures in this Table

A.  Why was there no significant decline in overall cites, when the 2001-2004 period (1331 cites per month) is compared to the 2006-2009 period (1316)?
B.  Why was there a big jump in citations at most intersections, but not all of them, in March and April 2001?
C.  Why did citations at Mesa/Southern quadruple - including a near-doubling sometime after Aug. 2004 - after being so low in early 2001?
D.  Why did citations at Dobson/Southern continue to be so high?
E.  Why did citations at Power/Main rise and fall so much during the 2001 - 2004 period?   


The table above was made by highwayrobbery.net, using the City's official monthly tabulations of citations actually issued.  Except for the rightmost column, all figures represent red light camera citations.

Official reports, 2000 - 2001
Official reports, 2002 - 2004
Official report, 2006 - 2009

Footnotes:

[1]  The monthly totals are as provided by the City, except for Jun03, Oct03, Jul04, and Aug04 which were calculated by highwayrobbery.net.
The averages were calculated by highwayrobbery.net.
[2]  On Nov. 14, 2000, the City increased the length of the yellows at the left turns above, from three seconds, to four.
[3]  Effective June 1, 2001, the number of available cameras was reduced from 17 to 12, with the cameras to be rotated among the 17 existing housings.
[4]  Data requested but not yet received.
[5]  Figures in red type (or, if you are looking at this table in black and white, the upper figure of the two in the cell) are "raw" violations recorded by the cameras.  They have been posted only for selected months, due to time limitations.  If there is sufficient public interest, additional months will be posted.  The figures in black type are citations issued.
[6]  Months with no activity, and months at the beginning or end of a short period of activity, have not been included in this average .
[7]  The official report for 2006 - 2009 (linked above) combined the ticket counts for four of the left turns with ticket counts for through movements. The overall average Total RLC shown here for Jan. 2006 - Dec. 2009 (1316) is for the camera locations named in the table above; it does not include locations constructed after Aug. 2004.
[8]  In 2011 highwayrobbery.net requested detailed data for 2010 onward but was told that the only information available was the one-page report for 2006 - 2009, linked above. 
For details about the 2011 records request, see Set # 8, below.

 

Mesa Docs Set # 2

Mesa's Contract with the Vendor

As of July 2004 the contract documents consisted of a 1999 contract and a July 2001 amendment.  Here are some major provisions.

Vendor, and term:  The vendor was Lockheed Martin IMS, now ACS.  The contract was signed in Nov. 1999  and runs until April 30, 2005. 
 Fees: 
Until June 1, 2001, the vendor received $48.50 each for the first 20,000 paid citations (combined red light camera and speed camera) per year (calendar year or contract year?), $39 for the next 20,000, and $21 for those above 40,000. 
Beginning June 1, 2001 the two types of cameras have separate compensation schedules.  The vendor receives $73 each for the first 900 red light camera tickets paid each month, $65 for the next 300, and $48.50 for those above 1200.  For speed camera tickets, the vendor receives $51 for each one paid.
Camera locations:  The June 1, 2001 contract amendment reduced the number of red light camera mechanisms from 17 to 12 [although it appears, from the table above, that they still have 13 cameras], with the cameras to be rotated among the 17 existing housings.




Mesa Docs Set # 3
The Signs



There's five or six signs in this photo.  Which one is illegal?



Mesa Docs Set # 4
Location of Limit Line

If you have a red light camera ticket from any Arizona city, look at the extended commentary below the three Aug. 17, 2006 Mesa crash photos on this page.





Mesa Docs Set # 5
  Arizona Fake Tickets You Can Ignore!

Arizona has two different kinds of camera tickets.
 

(1)  Tickets issued by the Department of Public Safety have a $100+ fine, and do not affect your insurance.  The DPS is ticketing only for speeding on State highways.

(2) Tickets issued by Arizona cities are handled through the same court system as are tickets issued by a "live" cop who has pulled you over.  These tickets carry a $200+ fine, and can affect your insurance.   These tickets can be either for running a red light, or for speeding.  If you have received a photo ticket issued by an Arizona city (not the DPS), you MAY be able to ignore it, if it says, "This is not a summons to appear."  These fake tickets may or may not give the name of the court - and there will no address for the court.  Arizona fake tickets are similar to the Snitch Tickets used in California.  Read about California Snitch Tickets in the top section on the Your Ticket page.

Be sure to read this excellent Phoenix New Times article from 2007 before you make any contact with Arizona authorities or their websites.  But keep in mind that the article is only about the city-issued tickets - it was written before the beginning of the DPS program.  From the article:

"Most cities don't send real citations to corporations. They send weakly worded notices that can be safely thrown in the trash. Unlike the grim tone of a citation, which orders the motorist to pay a fine or appear in court on a certain date, the violation notices let the company know up front: " 'This is not a Summons to Appear. There is no fine associated with this Notice.' "

 "The notices sent to businesses gently ask them to identify the driver and mail the form back so a new ticket can be reissued in the driver's name. No law forces anyone to do that, however."

 "Scottsdale's been mailing such notices for years; Mesa and Phoenix started sending them last year. Tempe sends businesses a letter instead of a citation."

 "Police do nothing when the notices are disregarded."

In 2011 a new law went into effect, limiting the ability of Arizona authorities to print false threats on notices sent out to motorists.  From a Jul. 19, 2011 Phoenix New Times article:

"Starting tomorrow [Jul. 20, 2011], photo-enforcement-violation notices must finally state the truth about what's going on -- namely, that you don't need to respond or identify the driver in the picture."



Mesa Docs Set # 6
Petitions Circulating

As of early 2009 there were at least two anti-camera organizations in Arizona, and they were starting to circulate statewide petitions.  You can find links to them, in Section 5 of the Links page.



Mesa Docs Set # 7
Mesa's Losses Continue to Grow

Mesa has been losing money on its camera program.

Per an Arizona Republic
article published Mar. 5, 2010, the losses have been:

2009:  $436,797
2008: $389,307
2007:  $281,000



Mesa Docs Set # 8
Information Blackout - For the Public and the City Council

In 2011 highwayrobbery.net requested detailed ticketing data for 2010 onward (to extend the table in Set # 1, above) but was told that the only information available was the one-page report for 2006 - 2009, linked above. 
  The 2011 correspondence with the City is in the box, below.



On 3-17-11 highwayrobbery.net wrote:

For MPD PIO Det. B---- -

Thank you for returning my call just now.

Here is my written public records request.

I would like to get a copy of the report(s) or other materials which were provided to the Republic for their photo enforcement article of the 16th. [link]

I would also like to get a copy of the most recent periodic (monthly, quarterly, annual) photo enforcement status report provided to the city council, the public safety committee, or other legislative body.

Finally, I would also like to get a copy of the most recent comprehensive or non-periodic photo enforcement report provided to the city council, the public safety committee, or other legislative body. The subject matter of interest would be any aspect of the program including but not limited to the contract, income, staffing, liability, litigation, accident rates, or efficacy.

Thanks,


On 3-22-11 Steven B---- wrote:

Hello,

We don't normally send out information through e-mail and normally there is a $5.00 fee associated with any request. However, since there is only the one page, my supervisor authorized me to send it via e-mail.

This is the only sheet available. This is the exact information that was provided to the Arizona Republic for their article.

Steve


On 3-23-11 highwayrobbery.net wrote:

For Det. B---- -

Thanks for the data sheet. Since, per your response, no report or status report, whether periodic or non-periodic, has been provided to any legislative body at any time (please advise if I have mid-interpreted your response), I would like to widen my request to cover any report or status report provided to anyone, not necessarily a legislative body, outside the program. This would include, but not be limited to, documents provided to police administration, a city oversight committee (or any other oversight committee), city administration, county administration or legislative body, state administration or legislative body, federal administration or legislative body, the camera vendor, the press, or the general public.

Thanks,


On 4-12-11 Steven B---- wrote:

Sorry for the delay in my response. The report that I previously sent you is all that is available. We do not put together any quarterly type report according to my supervisor. For the number of citations you could probably get that information from Mesa City Court.

Steve




Mesa Docs Set # 9
More Coming

There may be some more Mesa information posted in the next few weeks.  Mark your calendar to remind you to come back here and look!



---------------------------------
RED LIGHT CAMERAS
www.highwayrobbery.net
www.highwayrobbery.net