Red Light Cameras: Reform Bill Passes Senate

A measure containing several reforms to the existing red-light camera law passed the Senate Thursday, disappointing some advocates who hoped to ban the cameras.

"This bill is designed to maintain the cash cow status quo Chicago realizes from gouging city motorists since 2003," Barnet Fagel, traffic safety researcher for the National Motorists Association, told The Expired Meter blog. Fagel has been one of the most outspoken critics of the cameras, appearing on "Chicago Tonight" and across the internet arguing to prohibit them.

The bill, advanced by Senate President John Cullerton, was an attempt to appease critics like Fagel and Sen. Dan Duffy (R-Lake Barrington), while still maintaining the nearly $50 million-per-year revenue stream generated by red-light camera tickets. It includes a number of new protections for drivers. For one, every ticket issued in Chicago must be reviewed either by a police officer, a technician or by a contractor not associated with the cameras or the city. The $100 fee for challenging an RLC ticket would be lifted by the bill; an image of every violation would be posted on the Internet for violators to see; and one type of violation, stopping over the line before turning right on red, would be banned completely.

(Read the full text of the bill here.)

It also contains language directed at one of the major criticisms raised by RLC opponents: the length of yellow lights. The bill re-states that intersections with cameras (like all other intersections) "must have a yellow change interval that conforms with the Illinois Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices."

Fagel and other critics have argued that red-light camera intersections have illegally short yellows, in an attempt to trap drivers. But an extensive Chicago Tribune investigation showed no evidence that any yellow lights were shorter than three seconds, the minimum according to federal law.

The bill has had an oddly personal dimension since it was first brought up: as it was debated in committee, Sen. Cullerton played footage of a few red-light camera violations to explain why the driver was being ticketed.

The driver in the footage, it turned out, was none other than Sen. Duffy, the cameras' main opponent.

Comments

[The Ticket Doctor]

06:00 PM on 03/29/2010

Fagel shot street video on 11/28/2010 capturing Chicago’s 13 short yellow traffic signals. Google “MrBFagel”. The timing sequences are displayed intact. Fagel’s video timing method is certified. Fagel approached the Tribune’s Bob Secter in January, 2010. Secter minimizes Fagel's video findings, questioning one camera’s very existence. Secter e-mailed Fagel back to advise him that he had driven to the intersection under discussion was there.
Fagel shot the video with GPS locations recorded by the camera. Fagel has offered the raw video to Secter for verification, no response. Secter then asked Fagel “What difference could a half of second of yellow time make”? Fagel responded; “At 30 mph, ½ second means a vehicle travels 22 feet it could be someone’s life.”
Secter interviewed Fagel via e-mail on 3/3/2010. The questions were strangely biased. Secter never called Fagel for a conventional interview. Secter asked Fagel to prove his timing process to which Fagel responded in writing 3 times. Secter claimed he didn’t understand the math. Each of Fagel’s successive responses was simplified to assist Sector.
Finally Secter sent an e-mail stating “As a matter of fairness we always reach out to people and organizations we intend to refer to in our stories. If you don’t want to respond to the direct questions, then I will simply write that you and the National Motorists Association leveled allegations which Chicago refutes and which you declined to substantiate.”
To Fagel this appeared to be editorial blackmail.

[Rayme]

02:39 PM on 03/28/2010

I stop shopping in areas that have red light cameras. I drive around those areas.

[LeaderofMen]

12:18 PM on 03/28/2010

EVIDENCE! I want evidence. That's how it's done in a court.

I want evidence that these violations have caused safety issues. I want to see the correlation between being ticketed by a camera and the rise in safety issues.

If a ticketed driver is not causing accidents, then this is clearly a scam of the first order.

[MDayne]

10:55 AM on 03/27/2010

The whole red light camera thing is just another way to tax. It has nothing to do with safety and are just another example of the arrogance that government has for it's citizens. I got a speeding ticket over a year ago. Of course I had to pay it my mail since going to court meant that the minimum fine tripled. How do they get away with penalizing people for going to court? I suppose it doesn't matter since when one goes to court they are assumed guilty and, of course, cops never lie.

[upbeatdem]

07:13 AM on 03/29/2010

Right. If it had to do with safety, a guilty finding would go on the driver's record. It doesn't. Everything is forgiven if you just pay up. Revenue is all they are after.

[MDayne]

11:48 AM on 03/29/2010

I strongly suggest that people organize and confront their village boards/trustees to have these Orwellian devices removed.

[shthar]

10:13 PM on 03/26/2010

This is why I don't drive through Illinois.

That and the price of gas and the horrible roads.

[jmsent]

08:08 AM on 03/27/2010

Getting from Missouri to Indiana, or Wisconsin to Michigan must be a fun ride for you.

[Boogs67]

09:27 PM on 03/26/2010

Did Flagel have any evidence that yellow lights were shortened togenerate more tickets and revenue? He should be ashamed of himself for trying to get people upset over this. Flagel was trying to stir up trouble where there was none to give credence to his arguement. RLCs keep people safe and they should remain in place. There is no place for dirty politics in such an important issue.

[StansDad]

08:01 PM on 03/26/2010

The problem here is th- *guy in front not going 15 over* HEYY!!! F*&#!! YOU BUDDY GET OFF THE ROAD I AM LATE FOR SOME BS MEETING GRRAAAA anyway, the problem is clearly that yellow lights aren't long enough

[mjb5406]

03:46 PM on 03/26/2010

Red light cameras are a joke... safety? Hardly. If they were for safety, the tickets issued would be held against a driver's record... they are not, at least in Illinois. In other countries, the use cameras for speed enforcement... THAT I can see as a reasonable way to promote safety. But camers at red lights where, statistically, few accidents happen, is nothing but a revenue grab.

John Cullerton probably has accepted quite a bit of money from the camera companies to promote the status quo. He should be ashamed.

[Randy Shepherd]

02:08 PM on 03/26/2010

the biggest problem i had in the city was trying to make left turn. there are no left turn green arrowns (very few), just the traditional solid green, yellow, red. this forces you sit in the intersection until the light turns red, so you can be the one car that gets to turn left. mean while the suburbs all have left turn lanes and left turn signals

[dreadylocks]

09:17 AM on 03/27/2010

wah wah wah. stay in the burbs then. your point is moot because they don't ticket for that.

[Billyguitar]

01:15 PM on 03/26/2010

The problem is the length of the yellow light. Make it 4 seconds and there would be far fewer tickets.

[cabinetmaniac]

10:34 AM on 03/29/2010

And far fewer crashes.

:-]

[single playa]

12:59 PM on 03/26/2010

it's a money grab for them. i picked up a good red light camera detector from www.gpsangel.com

[jayevans20]

12:45 PM on 03/26/2010

Those Red light cameras are a rip off. As long as there's not accidents, no one should get a ticket for anything. I believe in keeping camera at intersession but not to get a ticket. Again as long as there's no accidents. If there are accidents then the cameras can record what happen and the city or who ever can get there restitution from whoever at fault.