Marty's marketing group after "studying" the city's scam-era program for a little over 2 months came up with a whopping 13 page report (read it here). (Ok... so the thing's really 81 pages, but the other 78 pages are attachments and the cover page.) In essence the report contains the following recommendations:
• Lowering fines for a first offense fines from $100 to $69, the cost of a ticket and fees issued by an officer for running a red light.You'll notice if you read the report, that there are a couple of objectives that the "Blue Ribbon Study Group on Automated Enforcement" failed to achieve; the most important of which was to determine whether or not scam-era "protected" intersections reduce accidents. Despite the fact that the system has been in operation in some parts of the city for over two years, the task force reports that "[w]hen the STOP program was implemented, a protocol was not in place to evaluate its effectiveness in preventing crashes and deterring violations at automated intersections."
• Creating an option for low-income violators to pay in installments.
• Keeping fines the same for repeat offenses.
• Conducting regular independent reviews of the program.
• Directing revenues from the program to traffic safety and to educating the public about the program. A reserve should be kept, as the task force anticipated lower revenues from the cameras as people change their driving behavior.
• Renegotiating the contract with Red Flex, the company that runs the cameras, so the company is not paid a percentage of fines. Under the current system, the company is paid through fixed fees, as well as a portion based on citations and fines issued.
• Conducting an immediate assessment of the hearing process for people who dispute the tickets, along with periodic reviews.
• Reviewing the placement of the cameras. Although most of the cameras were placed at the city's most dangerous intersections, some intersections have produced low numbers of violations.
The cameras at Montgomery and Carlisle boulevards Northeast produce about 25 percent of the program's total violations.
• Creating technical standards for where to place the cameras, which would determine all future decisions to install or remove cameras.
As a result, every time the city has made the claim that accidents have decreased at scam-era intersections you can't take them at their word because they simply DO NOT KNOW. Their numbers are simply more examples of Marty's greenhouse gas at Environmental Health, fuzzy math at Animal Control, or the number of officers at APD.
Another important omission is the overall legality of the program with respect to the authority of the city to implement a parallel legal system that supersedes both municipal and state law, and the question of due process with respect to the inherent conflict of interest of the program's hearing officers.
Both of these questions are raised in at least one of the class action lawsuits that are currently on file in District Court. The arguments against the city, the mayor, and Redflex are in our opinion compelling at the very least. (We have posted the most recent filing by attorney Paul Livingston here.)
Yet another un-addressed concern is the lack of verifiable calibration involved particularly in the case of the fixed scam-era speed detection units. Exhibit 11.1 attempts to convince readers that because the system has 4 sensors and two magnetic loops used to calculate speed they couldn't possibly malfunction. As you've seen right here on this website, the system does malfunction and there's almost no way for a defendant to prove a system malfunction.
Marty's Task Farce was as flawed as the system itself. It proceeded from the same assumption that the scam-era hearings do - namely that the scam-eras are infallible and therefore you are guilty until you prove otherwise. In this case, the program should continue because the numbers provided by the city and APD don't disprove that the system works.
(Sidebar)In the final analysis, The Mayor's Blue Ribbon Study Group on Automated Enforcement was created by the mayor and produced a result that was as predictable as it was flawed. It's the old GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) theory in action. Insert faulty data on one side and get faulty conclusions on the other.
We'd remind you here that a PRC analysis of the raw crash data provided by APD found that accidents didn't decrease and at some intersections actually increased (ABQ Journal - Subscription).
(End Sidebar)
But don't worry; we're all just probably suffering from a case of "misconception." We don't really understand how the system works. We just need a bunch of billboards, TV ads, websites, bumper stickers, and a spokesperson or two. (Where is Trish Hoffman when you need her?)
Our concerns of due process, legality, accuracy, fairness - aren't really concerns at all. We're all guilty and apparently stupid, so pay your fine and shut your mouth because Marty's going to keep all of us sheep safe.
11 comments:
Great article and OHHH so true!!!
Marty just wants the money from the red light system so he can continue to balance his budget and fund his special pet projects!
He does not care about public safety, as none of the profits from his camera's thus far have gone toward public safety!
I saw a profile on Lennin on the History channel recently. They said his attitude was it was better that 10,000 innocents be killed than one dissenter of his policies be spared. Official, state-sponsored Political Terror.
In England the burden of proof is to prove your own innocence, I believe. But here? Why are we in the position of taxation through photographic instumentation? Must we have a Boston Creme Pie Party in order to retain our rights?
I dunno, but it feels like the natives are ready to rebel at this revolting rape of our due process rights.
Erosion of rights is BAD.
tax payers REVOLT! And VOTE
Lets get this corupt, imbedded administration the hell out.
By the way does anyone know where the 1/4 cent public safety tax has been going? Me neither.
I listen to the lame supporters of this program go on and on about how they were T-boned at intersections. Fact # 1. We were ALL taught in Drivers Ed, to always slow down at intersections, look both ways and never assume you have the right of way. ( no matter what part of the country you live)
#2. They always fail to mention that they were plowed by a Drunk driver. Excuse me, but the Red Flex Camera system is not a 'silver bullet' and no matter how much photo enforcement you have they are not going to prevent you from being slammed into by a drunk driver. I suppose it would be too much to ask that the City & State focus as much attention on that as they do on catching law abiding citizens without the existance of an officers descretion in red light or speeding infractions. Afterall there's money to be gained by the latter.
#3. In of itself, it's good to curb red light runners, but at what cost? It would be nice if it were managed in an upstanding ethical manner.
The recent report fails to provide information as to how many accidents have been reduced since the inception of this program touting that they haven't been in place long enough to gather such info. STOP with that bullshit. The truth of the matter is that they just have not reduced accidents. If anything, they might just be on the increase due to rear end collisions.
Honestly, I can't believe anything this mayor tells us anymore, either directly or thru "blue ribbon committees." I don't care what end the hot air comes from, it all stinks.
You really can fool some of the people all of the time.
OR everyone could follow the law. Dont speed, dont run red lights, and let the program fail due to lack of funds. God forbid people follow the laws!
There is a simple solution that will never be implemented because there is no revenue to be earned from it; Extend the yellow and allow a .5 to 1 second overlay with the red lights, allowing 4 way red lights. An outside source for traffic engineering needs to be consulted for other solutions. I am baffled how mayor appointed personel can evaluate anything properly and without bias. City Labor Board, Red Light Camera Eval Committee, or the hearing officer for the red light cameras. Look at the Chief vs the Sheriff...appointed vs elected....it allows objectivity and the freedom to ake decisions without the fear of repercussions.
Chief Schultz is the mayor's puppet and sells his officers down the river at the request of the mayor.
Schultz, you should be ashamed of yourself for not protecting your people. Your a very poor example of a leader!!!!!!!!
No wonder why the morale on your dept is so bad!
Mayor Marty Liar Chavez
To "or everyone could follow the law"
Where do you think you live? In La La land?
Crime is bezerk here. You'd know that if you'd read the FBI crime reports. And that's only if those reports reflect the correct information. There have been several times I've been pressured to change my report to show a lesser crime. Not legitimate, but I have family and need to keep my job.
You need to hang out with Tinkie Winkie and the rest of the Teletubies.
Post a Comment