RED LIGHT CAMERAS
If you haven't
already done so, please read the Santa Ana
section on the Camera Towns page
City of Santa Ana
Be sure to read the "Countywide
Information," which is Docs Set # 6, below.
See Set # 4, below.
Some of Santa Ana's "tickets" can be
ignored! If your ticket does not have the
Superior Court's name and address on it, it is a fake
ticket, what I call a "Snitch Ticket." For more
details, see the Snitch Ticket section on the Your
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. 4, 2014 election Sheila Kuehl won the race to succeed him, by a narrow margin.
Sheila "Kuehl Cams" 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 California.
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.
Kuehl will be up for re-election in Nov. 2018 and Nov. 2022.
Do you live in Orange County, in or
near Tustin, Orange, Lake Forest, Placentia or Yorba
Linda? Is Donald Wagner your State
Wagner, who probably will be running for a Senate seat in 2016, was the sponsor of AB 2487, a 2014 bill which would have taken away your right to a Trial de Novo.
Asm. Donald Wagner
Please don't reward him with your
Recorded (some months) and Citations Issued
New 10-21-04, updated 7-15-15
Ticketing during 2013 (projection based upon the 11 months of 2013 data in the table above) was 63% higher than during 2011.
Ticketing during the last two months of the program, May and June 2015, was three times higher than it was earlier in 2015.
This table made by highwayrobbery.net, using official monthly tabulations of citations actually issued.
Official reports, 2005 - 2012
Official reports, 2011 - 2012
Official reports, 2009 - 2013
Official reports, Mar & Apr 2013
Official report, May - Aug 2013
Official reports, late 2013
Official reports, May - Sep. 2013 & Jan - Mar 2014
Official reports, 2007, 2009, 2011 (annual)
Official report, Mar - Aug 2014
Official reports, 2005 - Jan 2015
Official reports, Feb. 2014 - Apr. 2015
Official reports, Spring 2015
[ ] indicates a footnote.
 Totals are as provided by the City.
 Data was requested on:
 Un-used columns are to allow for later expansion of City's system.
 Except where noted otherwise, the figures given in the table are for the single calendar month indicated. 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 RedFlex calls Total Violations, or all incidents recorded by the cameras. The figures in black type are what RedFlex calls Notices Printed, and 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). Due to time limitations data may have been posted to the table only for selected months or locations. If there is sufficient public interest, the remaining months or locations will be posted. Full official data has been received and is available at one of the links given above.
 Figures in this row cover June 1, 2003 to Oct. 1, 2004.
 Each column represents one camera.
 Figures in this row cover Jan. 1, 2007 to Sept. 25, 2007.
 Intersection-by-intersection data for this month has been received, is available at the links above, but has not yet been fully posted, due to time limitations.
 The official report for this month was produced a few days before the end of the month, so the number of Notices Printed indicated in the report is an estimated 20% lower than the number that eventually will be printed for the complete month.
 Monthly report has not yet been requested.
 Annual totals, or annual projections (2013) based upon monthly data shown in table above, are by highwayrobbery.net.
 The City provided a report covering a four month and eight day period. That report was produced on the day following the last day of the period, so for purposes of making a projection of the number of Notices Printed in 2013, the period was taken as 4.0 months.
 The annual totals shown in the table above are as provided by the City. For 2011, when the twelve monthly totals are added up, the annual total is 15990.
 The totals for some of these months were calculated by highwayrobbery.net.
In 2014 the City provided a report covering Jan. - Mar. 2014, and later provided calendar-month reports for Feb. and Mar. 2014. The figures shown above for Jan. 2014 are the three-month total minus the two individual months.
Also in 2014 the City provided a report covering Mar. - Aug. 2014 and later provided calendar-month reports for four of the months included. The figures shown above for the months of May and July are the six-month total minus the four months, divided by two. The camera-by-camera figures shown on the line for the six-month report are the figures from that report, divided by six, and add up to 1580.
To adjust for the closing of the program on June 18, the figures shown above for June 2015 are the figures from the City-provided report times 1.67.
 Part of the 17th/Tustin intersection is unincorporated land, not part of the City of Santa Ana. On Oct. 7, 2014 the Orange County Board of Supervisors voted to ban all
cameras in unincorporated areas, so one or both of the 17th/Tustin cameras will be removed some time in late 2014 or early 2015.
 See Set # 4, below.
Docs Set # 2
2008 - Two Appellate Cases Won!
2009 - Significant Trial Decision
2010 - Four More Appellate Cases Won!
The first appellant fought her ticket based upon a number of foundational objections, among
them that Vehicle Code Section 21455.5 says, in part: "Prior to issuing citations under this section,
a local jurisdiction utilizing an automated traffic enforcement system shall commence
a program to issue only warning notices for 30 days."
For more details, and case documents, see People v. Anna V.
The second appellant also fought his ticket on the warning ticket issue, and won at appeal.
See People v. Fischetti (2008).
In 2009 there was a trial decision on both the contract issue (Defect # 10-B) and the issue
of the required public announcement (30 days before the commencement of the program).
See People v. Lori A. & Murray
And four more in 2010! (Mustapha, Romero, Khaled, Park)
Docs Set # 3
Santa Ana, Nov. 24, 2004 Trial Session: No Traffic School After Trial
On Nov. 24 I attended the weekly Wednesday afternoon trial session in Div. C-46.
In the hallway before the trial session, the SAPD officers were willing to discuss
their ticket with any defendant who wished to do so. Among the things they told
the defendants was that the judge didn't give traffic school to those who argued
their cases and lost.
The session was presided over by Commissioner Duane Thomas Neary. One defendant,
before trying his case, asked Comm. Neary if he could still get traffic school
if he tried his case. The commissioner replied, "Not very likely. Unless you show me
some wonderful evidence during the trial, you're not going to be able to go to traffic school."
Needless to say, that defendant and all but one of the others grabbed
traffic school and did not try their cases.
(For highwayrobbery.net's opinion about traffic school, see the editorial on the Links page.)
Docs Set # 4
2002 Contract, Renewals, and June 2015 Termination
In 2008 the city council extended their 2002
contract one year, to June 2009, at the same rent
Had the Santa Ana council negotiated a $2900 rent
like that in Garden
In the 2010 Amendment the City agreed
to pay $3900 per month for up to twenty existing
cameras, for five more years.
The contract contains no escape clause should a future city council wish to terminate the contract, or if the voters terminate the contract via initiative. A complete contract will include a formula by which the cost of such a Termination for Convenience is to be calculated. For an example of such a formula, see Section 6.2 in Victorville's original contract (available on the Victorville Documents page).
In the 2010 Amendment there is the prominent use of
the term "Fixed Fee"(twice in the first two paragraphs
of the Compensation section), so a reader could be
left with the impression that cost neutrality has been
eliminated and the Contract is now in full conformity
with Subsection 21455.5(g) (as of 2013, Section
21455.5(h)). However, such conformity is not the
case at all. Rather, a more careful reading of
the Contract and amendments reveals that in spite of
the clear meaning and intent of Subsection
21455.5(g)(1) (as of 2013, Subsection 21455.5 (h)(1)),
the City and RedFlex have entered into an arrangement
where RedFlex' income is dependent upon, and can
fluctuate with, the amount of City's revenue from
tickets. The methodology of that arrangement is
expressed in Paragraph 26(a) of the 2002 Contract,
"Miscellaneous Provisions," which states:
"… based on a bi-annual review process to ensure
received revenue provides for sufficient cost
recovery, the City shall have the option to
renegotiate the Compensation... if the City determines
it is unable to recover its costs..."
A 2013 public records request, which asked for
copies of any bi-annual reviews done between 2001 and
2013, got this written answer:
"No documents responsive to your request."
Although the City did not provide documents about
bi-annual reviews, March
2013 invoices show a $20,672 credit
described as "Concession for Performance,"
mid-2013 and late
2013 show more such credits. In
Apr. 2014 highwayrobbery.net asked the City for:
"All correspondence, both internal and external, dated Jan. 1, 2010 to the present, regarding the justification for, the negotiation of, or the negotiation of the amount of the Concessions for Performance and other similar credits shown on Redflex invoices for services rendered after 2009 but otherwise without regard to their date or to how they are entitled. Examples of such credits being those shown on the Redflex invoices dated 4-30-10, 4-30-11, 4-30-12, 4-30-13, 5-31-13, 6-30-13, 7-31-13, 10-31-13, 11-30-13, 12-31-13."
The City's reply was:
"There are no documents responsive to your request."
At the Mar. 18, 2014 council meeting the
council voted, unanimously, to let the program close
on June 21, 2015, the expiration date of the
And, at the Feb. 17, 2015 council meeting the
council voted to receive and file (take no action on)
a police memo
pointing out the financial effect of ending the
Per a letter highwayrobbery.net received from police
department staff in July 2015, the actual closing date
was June 18.
Docs Set # 5
Dec. 2009: City Blinks, Suspends Ticketing for 1-Month Warning Period
On Dec. 1, 2009 the OC Register published an article indicating that the City was suspending ticketing
for a month, to bring itself into compliance with the requirement for a 1-month warning period.
The article did not reveal whether tickets issued prior to the new warning period would be dismissed.
If you have a Santa Ana ticket, please be sure to contact the editor of this site.
Docs Set # 6
The info in Set # 6 is applicable throughout Orange County. But only in Orange County.
Why was revenue down? It could be that OC motorists thought they were in LA County, where in June 2011 it was revealed that paying is optional (because the LA County Superior Court does not report delinquent tickets to the DMV).
Grand Jury Report
The 2004 - 2005 OC Grand Jury did a report on red
light cameras. That report, and the cities'
(required) responses, are on the Grand Jury's reports
If you wish to read grand jury reports from other
counties, about their red light cameras, go to the
Grand Jury entry on the Site Index.
Docs Set # 7
The City has been asked for bar
graphs of Late Times, etcetera.
"The City does not have access to
"Your request seeks information that is not maintained by the City."
Bar graphs have been received from
more than fifty other cities - see the list
in the expanded version of Defect # 9.
Docs Set # 8
There may be some more information posted in the next few weeks. Mark your calendar to remind you
to come back here and look!
RED LIGHT CAMERAS