RED LIGHT CAMERAS
www.highwayrobbery.net

Email Address
Site Index

If you haven't already done so, please read the Walnut section on the Camera Towns page

City of Walnut Documents


It may be possible to completely ignore a Walnut ticket.
1.  If your "ticket" does not have the Superior Court's name and address on it, it is a fake ticket, which I call a "Snitch Ticket."  For more details about Snitch Tickets, see the Snitch Ticket section at the top of the Your Ticket page
.
2.  The LA County Superior Court does not report ignored red light camera tickets to the DMV.  More info is in "Countywide Information," which is Docs Set # 2 on the LA County Documents page.
 

Walnut Docs Set # 1
Ticket Counts

Total Violations, Notices Printed [4]

New 7-31-09, updated 2-28-13

Cam #
AMGR-01
GRAM-01









Amar/Temple
Ebd @
Grand

Grand
&
Amar/Temple
[6]
Monthly Average
of Notices Printed
[5]


[3]

Total
Citations
Issued
as %
of Events
Re-
corded
Total
Violations
Recorded/
Notices
Printed
[1] [4]

Dec06
0
0








2006










Jan07
728
510
138
59






866
569

Feb07
856
546
189
77






1045
623

Mar07
921
528
145
56






1066
584

Apr07
650
289
169
36






819
325

May07
567
182
144
29






711
211

Jun07
516
176
249
43






765
219

Jul07
733
333
300
63






1033
396

Aug07
594
261
261
99






855
360

Sep07
713
336
279
109






992
445

Oct07
563
256
235
108






798
364

Nov07
413
196
243
79






656
275

Dec07
379
137
183
41






562
178

2007










Jan08
305
135
190
66
174





495
201

Feb08
236
112
182
81
174




418
193

Mar08
261
112
174
72
174




435
184

Apr08
147
34
198
52
174




345
86

May08
374
141
157
54
174




531
195

Jun08
337
112
165
49
174




502
161

Jul08
341
81
253
57
174




594
138

Aug08
425
175
250
75
174




675
250

Sep08
344
167
170
62
174




514
229

Oct08
108
63
88
41
174




196
104

Nov08
0
0






0

Dec08
0
0






0

2008










Jan09
0
0






0

Feb09
0
0






0

Mar09
0
0






0

Apr09
0
0






0

May09
0
15
0






15
0

Jun09
442
148
267
90
245





709
238

Jul09


245




1006
337

Aug09


245






Sep09


245






Oct09


245




826
335

Nov09


245






Dec09


245






2009










Jan10


245




581
325

Feb10


245






Mar10


245






Apr10


245




509
275

May10


245






Jun10


245






Jul10


245




663
206

Aug10


245






Sep10


245






Oct10


245




448
280

Nov10


245






Dec10


245






2010










Jan11
222
138
250
148
245




472
286

Feb11


245






Mar11


245






Apr11
174
94
221
95
245




395
189

May11


245






Jun11
223
94
268
138
245




461
232

Jul11
[8]
245 166






Aug11
[8]
245 166






Sep11
[8]
245 166






Oct11
[8]
245 166






Nov11
[8]
245 166






Dec11
[8]
245 166






2011










Jun09-
Jan12
(32
mos.)
[5]
9855
4109
7353
3738
245




17208
7847
[5]

Jan12
[8]









Feb12
[8]








Mar12
[8]








Apr12
[8]








May12
[8]








Jun12
[8]








Jul12
[8]








Aug12
[8]








Sep12
[8]








Oct12
[8]








Nov12
[8]








Dec12










2011










Cam #
AMGR-01
GRAM-01









Amar/Temple
Ebd @
Grand

Grand
&
Amar/Temple
[6]
Monthly Average
of Notices Printed
[5]
Monthly Average
of Notices Printed
[5]

[3]

Total
Citations
Issued
as %
of Events
Re-
corded
Total
Violations
Recorded/
Notices
Printed
[1] [4]


This table made by highwayrobbery.net, using official reports provided by the City under the California Public Records Act.

Official reports, 2006 - 2009
Official reports, 2009 - 2010, recd Jan. 2013
Official report, Jun. 2009 - Jan. 2012 (32 months)
Official reports, 2011

[  ] indicates a footnote.
[1]  Totals are as provided by the City.
[2]  YTD = Year-to-date total.
[3]  Un-used columns are to allow for later expansion of City's system.
[4]  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, 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 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).
[5]  Month-by-month data was requested on 1-30-12 but the City provided a 32-month grand total and a 6-month grand total.  In the table above, highwayrobbery.net averaged those grand total over those 32 and 6 months.  For comparison, highwayrobbery.net also averaged the Notices Printed in the ten months of 2008 for which information has been made available.  The 245 average for the 2009 - 2012 period represents a 44% increase over the 174 average for 2008. 
[6]  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.
[7]  Includes enforcement of posted "no turn on red" signs.
[8]  Month-by-month data was requested on 1-30-12 and on 11-29-12.



Walnut Docs Set # 2
"Late Time" Graphs

The City provided bar graphs of Late Times, etcetera, for both cameras.
These graphs track violations recorded, not tickets issued.
 Where there is a large number of long Late Time violations in a curb lane, it is believed to indicate heavy ticketing on right turns.
(The curb lane will be the lane with the highest lane number.)

Grand Terrace late times bar chart
The picture above is an example from another city.

Bar Graphs 2008 - 2009
Bar Graphs Oct. 2011

Bar graphs are available for more than fifty other cities - see the list in the expanded version of Defect # 9.



Walnut Docs Set # 3
The Contracts


The city council heard a
staff report in late 2005 and approved Walnut's first contract with RedFlex in Aug. 2006.  
Then, in Feb. 2009 - two years before the expiration of the first contract - the council approved a
new five-year contract.
The new contract provided for a slightly lower rent for the cameras - $5750 per camera per month vs. the former $6000.

Both contracts included, in Exhibit D, an illegal "cost neutrality" clause, whereby the city will not have to pay RedFlex the full rent if there aren't enough fines to cover the cost.  See Subsection B of Defect # 10.

Section 11.14 of the 2009 contract penalizes the City if:
"...the City or Police waives more than 10 percent of valid violations forwarded to the Police for acceptance...."
(See Subsection A of Defect # 9, about quotas.)

Section 11.14 also penalizes the City if:
"...the City elects not to enforce illegal right turn on red violations...."

The rent reduction in the 2009 contract will save the City $30,000 over the 60 month term of the contract.

  But had the council negotiated a $2225 rent like that in the
2009 contract of the City of Solana Beach, it could have saved an additional $423,000.

Or, had the council negotiated a $2500 rent like that in the 2009 contract of the City of Davis, it could have saved $390,000.


This list of contracts and amendments may not be up-to-date - there could be a contract or amendment later than the ones linked above.



Walnut Docs Set # 4
More Coming


There may be some more Walnut 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