How can this be legal? TxDOT speed cameras using FEDERAL money

Status
Not open for further replies.
If anyone is interested...

http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html


the article linked said:
The objectives of this research was to determine the effects of raising and lowering posted speed limits on driver behavior and accidents for non-limited access rural and urban highways. Speed and accident data were collected in 22 States at 100 sites before and after speed limits were altered. Before and after data were also collected simultaneously at comparison sites where speed limits were not changed to control for the time trends. Repeated measurements were made at 14 sites to examine short - and long-term effects of speed limit changes.

The results of the study indicated that lowering posted speed limits by as much as 20 mi/h (32 km/h), or raising speed limits by as much as 15 mi/h (24 km/h) had little effect on motorist' speed. The majority of motorist did not drive 5 mi/h (8 km/h) above the posted speed limits when speed limits were raised, nor did they reduce their speed by 5 or 10 mi/h (8 or 16 km/h) when speed limits are lowered. Data collected at the study sites indicated that the majority of speed limits are posed below the average speed of traffic. Lowering speed limits below the 50th percentile does not reduce accidents, but does significantly increase driver violations of the speed limit. Conversely, raising the posted speed limits did not increase speeds or accidents.
 
jfruser,

Interesting that Plano is using a city ordinance to prosecute a crime covered under the universal state traffic codes. I suppose the only other avenue would be to see if local jurisdictions are prohibited from doing such things - as in the case of the regulation of firearms in the state of Texas.
 
Like someone else said, they give you a civil infraction. It's just starting up here in Fla. The cameras are against the law. So to gather revenue, they take a pic of your car in an intersection at an unlawful time. Zoning department mails you a fine ($75) and you can take it to court. Minimum is $100 just to request a hearing. Add the cost of defense and you get the picture. Joe
 
I am not sure what the consequences for giving the City of Plano the finger and not paying their fines.

Here is the PPD's story on why red light cameras are wonderful:
http://pdf.plano.gov/police/docs/redlightcamera.pdf

Here is a story telling the actual results:
http://www.kcbd.com/Global/story.asp?S=5806989
After 6 months, Plano, Texas showed a 50% increase in rear-end collisions at intersections with cameras, but a similar decrease in side angle collisions.

Here is the Plano city code. Note the bolded portions, which double the fines/fees assessed if one dares to contest and loses. Also note that if one is to appeal, one has to post a bind with the city equal to the amount of the fine. Nice system if you can rig it to your advantage.
http://library4.municode.com/mcc/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=setHitDoc&doc_hit=1 said:
ARTICLE X. AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SIGNAL ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 12-260. Definitions.
In this article:
(1) Department shall mean the Police Department of the City of Plano, Texas.
(2) Intersection shall mean the place or area where two (2) or more streets intersect.
(3) Owner shall mean the owner of a motor vehicle as shown on the motor vehicle registration records of the Texas Department of Transportation or the analogous department or agency of another state or country.
(4) Photographic traffic signal enforcement system shall mean a system that:
a. Consists of a camera system installed to work in conjunction with an electrically operated traffic-control signal; and
b. Is capable of producing at least two (2) recorded images that depicts the license plate attached to the rear of a motor vehicle that is not operated in compliance with the instructions of the traffic-control signal.
(5) Recorded image means an image recorded by a photographic traffic monitoring system that depicts the rear of a motor vehicle and is automatically recorded on a photograph or digital image.
(6) System location means the approach to an intersection toward which a photographic traffic monitoring system is directed and in operation.
(7) Traffic control signal shall mean a traffic control device that displays alternating red, amber and green lights that directs traffic when to stop at or proceed through an intersection.
(Ord. No. 2004-8-32, § I, 8-17-04)

Sec. 12-261. Imposition of civil penalty for violations.
(a) The city council finds and determines that a vehicle that proceeds into an intersection when the traffic control signal for that vehicle's direction of travel is emitting a steady red signal damages the public by endangering motor vehicle operators and pedestrians alike, by decreasing the efficiency of traffic control and traffic flow efforts, and by increasing the number of serious accidents to which public safety agencies must respond at the expense of the taxpayers.
(b) Except as provided in (c) and (d) below, the owner of a motor vehicle is liable for a civil penalty of seventy-five dollars ($75.00) if the motor vehicle proceeds into an intersection at a system location when the traffic control signal for that motor vehicle's direction of travel is emitting a steady red signal.
(c) For a third or subsequent violation committed by the owner of the same motor vehicle during any twelve-month period, the amount of the civil penalty shall be one hundred fifty dollars ($150.00).
(d) A owner who fails to timely pay the civil penalty shall be subject to a late payment penalty of twenty-five dollars ($25.00).
(Ord. No. 2004-8-32, § I, 8-17-04)

Sec. 12-262. Enforcement; procedures.
(a) The department is responsible for the enforcement and administration of this article.
(b) In order to impose a civil penalty under this article, the department shall mail a notice of violation to the owner of the motor vehicle liable for the civil penalty not later than the 30th day after the date the violation is alleged to have occurred to:
(1) The owner's address as shown on the registration records of the Texas Department of Transportation; or
(2) If the vehicle is registered in another state or country, the owner's address as shown on the motor vehicle registration records of the department or agency of the other state or country analogous to the Texas Department of Transportation.
(c) A notice of violation issued under this article shall contain the following:
(1) A description of the violation alleged;
(2) The date, time, and location of the violation;
(3) A copy of a recorded image of the vehicle involved in the violation;
(4) The amount of the civil penalty to be imposed for the violation;
(5) The date by which the civil penalty must be paid;
(6) A statement that the person named in the notice of violation may pay the civil penalty in lieu of appearing at an administrative adjudication hearing;
(7) Information that informs the person named in the notice of violation:
a. Of the right to contest the imposition of the civil penalty in an administrative adjudication;
b. Of the manner and time in which to contest the imposition of the civil penalty; and
c. That failure to pay the civil penalty or to contest liability is an admission of liability.
(8) A statement that a recorded image is evidence in a proceeding for the imposition of a civil penalty;
(9) A statement that failure to pay the civil penalty within the time allowed shall result in the imposition of a late penalty of twenty-five dollars ($25.00); and
(10) Any other information deemed necessary by the department.
(d) A notice of violation under this article is presumed to have been received on the 10th day after the date the notice of violation is mailed.
(e) In lieu of issuing a notice of violation, the department may mail a warning notice to the owner.
(Ord. No. 2004-8-32, § I, 8-17-04)

Sec. 12-263. Administrative adjudication hearing.
(a) A person who receives a notice of violation may contest the imposition of the civil penalty by request in writing an administrative adjudication of the civil penalty within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of violation. Upon receipt of a timely request, the Department shall notify the person of the date and time of the hearing on the administrative adjudication. The administrative adjudication hearing shall be held before a hearing officer appointed by the city manager.
(b) Failure to pay a civil penalty or to contest liability in a timely manner is an admission of liability in the full amount of the civil penalty assessed in the notice of violation, and is a waiver of the right to appeal under section 12-263(i).
(c) The civil penalty shall not be assessed if after a hearing, the hearing officer enters a finding of no liability.
(d) In an administrative adjudication hearing, the issues must be proved at the hearing by a preponderance of the evidence. The reliability of the photographic traffic signal enforcement system used to produce the recorded image of the violation may be attested to in an administrative adjudication hearing by affidavit of an officer or employee of the city or the entity with which the city contracts to install or operate the system and who is responsible for inspecting and maintaining the system. An affidavit ofan officer or employee of the city that alleges a violation based on an inspection of the pertinent recorded image, is admissible in a proceeding under this article and is evidence of the facts contained in the affidavit.
(e) A person who is found liable after an administrative adjudication hearing or who requests an administrative adjudication hearing and thereafter fails to appear at the time and place of the hearing is liable for administrative hearing costs in the amount of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) in addition to the amount of the civil penalty assessed for the violation. A person who is found liable for a civil penalty after an administrative adjudication hearing shall pay the civil penalty and costs within thirty-one (31) days of the date on which the administrative adjudication hearing officer entered the finding of civil liability.
(f) It shall be an affirmative defense to the imposition of civil liability under this article, to be proven by a preponderance of the evidence, that:
(1) The traffic-control signal was not in proper position and sufficiently legible to an ordinarily observant person;
(2) The operator of the motor vehicle was acting in compliance with the lawful order or direction of a police officer;
(3) The operator of the motor vehicle violated the instructions of the traffic-control signal so as to yield the right-of-way to an immediately approaching authorized emergency vehicle;
(4) The motor vehicle was being operated as an authorized emergency vehicle under Chapter 546 of the Texas Transportation Code and that the operator was acting in compliance with that Chapter;
(5) The motor vehicle was a stolen vehicle and being operated by a person other than the owner of the vehicle without the effective consent of the owner;
(6) The license plate depicted in the recorded image of the violation was a stolen plate and being displayed on a motor vehicle other than the motor vehicle for which the plate had been issued;
(7) The presence of ice, snow, unusual amounts of rain or other unusually hazardous road conditions existed that would make compliance with this article more dangerous under the circumstances than non-compliance; or
(8) The person who received the notice of violation was not the owner of the motor-vehicle at the time of the violation.
(g) To demonstrate that at the time of the violation the motor vehicle was a stolen vehicle or the license plate displayed on the motor vehicle was a stolen plate, the owner must submit proof acceptable to the hearing officer that the theft of the vehicle or license plate had been timely reported to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
(h) Notwithstanding anything in this article to the contrary, a person who fails to pay the amount of a civil penalty or to contest liability in a timely manner is entitled to an administrative adjudication hearing on the violation if:
(1) The person files an affidavit with the hearing officer stating the date on which the person received the notice of violation that was mailed to the person; and
(2) Within the same period required by subsection 12-262(c)(7)b. for a hearing to be timely requested but measured from the date the mailed notice was received as stated in the affidavit filed under Subdivision (1), the person requests an administrative adjudication hearing.
(i) A person who is found liable after an administrative adjudication hearing may appeal that finding of civil liability to the municipal court by filing a notice of appeal with the clerk of the municipal court. The notice of appeal must be filed not later than the 31st day after the date on which the administrative adjudication hearing office entered the finding of civil liability. Unless the person, on or before the filing of the notice of appeal, posts a bond in the amount of the civil penalty and any fees,an appeal does not stay the enforcement of the civil penalty. An appeal shall be determined by the municipal court by non-jury trial de novo only. The affidavits submitted under section 12-263(d) shall be admitted by the municipal judge in the trial de novo, and the issues must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence. A person found liable by the municipal court shall pay an appellate filing fee of fifty dollars ($50.00) in addition to the civil penalty and any other fees due the city.
(Ord. No. 2004-8-32, § I, 8-17-04; Ord. No. 2006-8-9, § I, 8-14-06)

Sec. 12-264. Order.
(a) The hearing officer at any administrative adjudication hearing under this article shall issue an order stating:
(1) Whether the person charged with the violation is liable for the violation; and
(2) The amount of any civil penalty, late penalty, and administrative adjudication cost assessed against the person.
(b) The orders issued under subsection (a) may be filed with the office of the hearing examiner. The hearing examiner shall keep the orders in a separate index and file. The orders may be recorded using microfilm, microfiche, or data processing techniques.
(Ord. No. 2004-8-32, § I, 8-17-04)

Sec. 12-265. Effect of liability; exclusion of civil remedy.
(a) The imposition of a civil penalty under this article is not a criminal conviction for any purpose.
(b) A civil penalty may not be imposed under this article on the owner of a motor vehicle if the operator of the vehicle was arrested or was issued a citation and notice to appear by a peace officer for the same violation of Section 544.007(d) of the Texas Transportation Code recorded by the photographic traffic signal enforcement system.
(c) An owner who fails to pay the civil penalty or to timely contest liability for the penalty is considered to admit liability for the full amount of the civil penalty stated in the notice of violation mailed to the person.
(d) The city attorney is authorized to file suit to enforce collection of a civil penalty imposed under this article.
(Ord. No. 2004-8-32, § I, 8-17-04)

Sec. 12-266. Traffic safety fund.
The penalties and fees collected from the imposition of civil liability under this article shall be deposited in the traffic safety fund account established by the city council. Funds from the traffic safety fund may be expended only for the costs of automated signal enforcement under this article, public traffic or pedestrian safety programs, traffic enforcement and intersection improvements.
(Ord. No. 2004-8-32, § I, 8-17-04)
 
After taking a gander at the red light cameras in the Dallas area, I have come to the conclusion that CITY GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CARE ABOUT POOR AND MINORITY SAFETY!

What other conclusion can one come to when:
1. Red light cameras are for safety
2. None are located in poor/minority neighborhoods

Obviously, our city gov'ts are racist.
 
Actually, the crux of thematter is this opening sentence: "Despite the opposition of the state legislature, the Texas Department of Transportation proposes a federally funded speed camera test."

"Despite the opposition of the state legislature..." means that the DOT budget hearings in the next session will be "vewy intewestink". It's quite possible that some TXDOT bureaucrat will get transferred to the Division of Winds, Waves and Tides, or wind up in a west Texas survey crew in the Pecos residency. :D

It is not wise to upset legislators. They have long memories and they control the purse strings.

Art
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top