PHOENIX — As Peoria becomes the fourth Valley city to get rid of traffic cameras, a group fighting the cameras is trying to convince Mesa to join the ban.
Shawn Dow with camerafraud.com said Thursday he will stop at nothing to get Mesa to end its traffic camera contract with American Traffic Solutions.
"We will file recalls for those people who are eligible for recall and, if they're running for re-election, we will run people against them," Dow said. "There is no need for this council to renew this contract."
Peoria's red-light cameras will stop snapping photos of violators on Oct. 3.
The city won't renew its contract with Redflex Traffic Systems after learning from police that crashes at monitored intersections actually increased during the three-year pilot program.
Peoria police said in a Tuesday presentation to City Council that collisions at the four intersections with red-light cameras saw an average increase of 29 percent.
Red-light violations did drop during the pilot period from 2008 to 2010, an average of 64 percent.
The pilot program began in January 2008. Its goal was to decrease crashes and violations.
The Arizona Republic says Peoria is the fourth Phoenix-area city not to renew its photo-enforcement contract in the past year — joining Tempe, Avondale and Glendale.
http://ktar.com/6/1452312/Mesa-next-to-ban-traffic-cams
Friday, September 16, 2011
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Photo radar on the way out in Sherwood Park
Edmonton City Hall stands behind local speed-camera program
Sherwood Park will halt photo radar by next fall, but don't expect Edmonton to hit the brakes any time soon.
Strathcona County council voted 5-4 on Tuesday to replace its mobile photo radar cameras with five new enforcement officers by next September. The decision won't affect speed cameras at intersections.
Coun. Brian Botterill, who introduced the motion, said photo radar isn't an effective deterrent.
"Drivers will get a $200 fine and it's not like they're not feeding their family. It's almost more of a nuisance," said Botterill. "If you get a demerit, you can possibly lose your licence or your insurance will go up."
Botterill has seen photo radar placed in "arbitrary" speed transition zones, or even in areas accident-free for more than a year. Additional enforcement officers, who work for the county, will nab distracted and impaired drivers and hand out demerits for speeders, he said.
Retired Mountie Coun. Peter Wlodarczak was among the councillors who voted against the measure. Wlodarczak, head of the Strathcona RCMP detachment between 1998 and 2001, just after the technology was brought in, said photo radar is an essential component in traffic enforcement. "Knowing it's there, you slow down," said Wlodarczak. "There will be a void in enforcement without it."
The city will extend its contract for photo radar for the next eight months, then on a month-to-month basis until the new officers are trained. The county expects to lose more than $500,000 a year in ticket revenue, plus incur about $900,000 in first-year costs to expand and train the force.
Strathcona RCMP have also talked about eventually adding an additional six officers in subsequent years, Botterill said.
Botterill said any revenue losses should be made up through property taxes, since traffic enforcement is about safety, not revenue.
Bob Boutilier, transportation general manager at the City of Edmonton, said the city has no plans to follow suit. Edmonton's high-speed thoroughfares make traffic enforcement a safety challenge, and manned photo-radar vans are a cost-effective tool, Boutilier said. Edmonton police are left to target problem areas, and don't use the technology as a "cash cow."
"The deployment strategy is based on complaints," Boutilier said. "It's directed specifically where we see a problem, not at areas where we want to make money."
Edmonton's photo-enforcement program - which includes 14 vans and about 40 intersection cameras - brings in $20 million a year. The province collects the revenue and keeps more than 20 per cent, then returns the rest to the city. The city allocates the remaining funds back to traffic and policing programs.
Boutilier said $10 million goes into the traffic-enforcement unit, while the rest funds general policing, camera systems, a University of Alberta chair in urban traffic safety, and an annual traffic safety conference.
"This is not about generating revenue," he said.
There are differing opinions about photo radar on Edmonton city council, with a consensus on the superiority of manned enforcement.
Coun. Kerry Diotte called Strathcona County's decision "a bold move and a smart move," and said photo radar doesn't catch outstanding warrants, stolen property, or expired licences. "It's a real benefit to have real police officers as opposed to camera enforcement, I think, and it's worth looking at for Edmonton," Diotte said.
Mayor Stephen Mandel said he supports photo radar and is awaiting a proposal from police Chief Rod Knecht about expanding manned enforcement.
"You catch a different group of people. Conventional radar opens up new and different doors," he said.
bwittmeier@edmontonjournal.com twitter.com/wittmeier
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Photo+radar+Sherwood+Park/5406080/story.html
Sherwood Park will halt photo radar by next fall, but don't expect Edmonton to hit the brakes any time soon.
Strathcona County council voted 5-4 on Tuesday to replace its mobile photo radar cameras with five new enforcement officers by next September. The decision won't affect speed cameras at intersections.
Coun. Brian Botterill, who introduced the motion, said photo radar isn't an effective deterrent.
"Drivers will get a $200 fine and it's not like they're not feeding their family. It's almost more of a nuisance," said Botterill. "If you get a demerit, you can possibly lose your licence or your insurance will go up."
Botterill has seen photo radar placed in "arbitrary" speed transition zones, or even in areas accident-free for more than a year. Additional enforcement officers, who work for the county, will nab distracted and impaired drivers and hand out demerits for speeders, he said.
Retired Mountie Coun. Peter Wlodarczak was among the councillors who voted against the measure. Wlodarczak, head of the Strathcona RCMP detachment between 1998 and 2001, just after the technology was brought in, said photo radar is an essential component in traffic enforcement. "Knowing it's there, you slow down," said Wlodarczak. "There will be a void in enforcement without it."
The city will extend its contract for photo radar for the next eight months, then on a month-to-month basis until the new officers are trained. The county expects to lose more than $500,000 a year in ticket revenue, plus incur about $900,000 in first-year costs to expand and train the force.
Strathcona RCMP have also talked about eventually adding an additional six officers in subsequent years, Botterill said.
Botterill said any revenue losses should be made up through property taxes, since traffic enforcement is about safety, not revenue.
Bob Boutilier, transportation general manager at the City of Edmonton, said the city has no plans to follow suit. Edmonton's high-speed thoroughfares make traffic enforcement a safety challenge, and manned photo-radar vans are a cost-effective tool, Boutilier said. Edmonton police are left to target problem areas, and don't use the technology as a "cash cow."
"The deployment strategy is based on complaints," Boutilier said. "It's directed specifically where we see a problem, not at areas where we want to make money."
Edmonton's photo-enforcement program - which includes 14 vans and about 40 intersection cameras - brings in $20 million a year. The province collects the revenue and keeps more than 20 per cent, then returns the rest to the city. The city allocates the remaining funds back to traffic and policing programs.
Boutilier said $10 million goes into the traffic-enforcement unit, while the rest funds general policing, camera systems, a University of Alberta chair in urban traffic safety, and an annual traffic safety conference.
"This is not about generating revenue," he said.
There are differing opinions about photo radar on Edmonton city council, with a consensus on the superiority of manned enforcement.
Coun. Kerry Diotte called Strathcona County's decision "a bold move and a smart move," and said photo radar doesn't catch outstanding warrants, stolen property, or expired licences. "It's a real benefit to have real police officers as opposed to camera enforcement, I think, and it's worth looking at for Edmonton," Diotte said.
Mayor Stephen Mandel said he supports photo radar and is awaiting a proposal from police Chief Rod Knecht about expanding manned enforcement.
"You catch a different group of people. Conventional radar opens up new and different doors," he said.
bwittmeier@edmontonjournal.com twitter.com/wittmeier
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Photo+radar+Sherwood+Park/5406080/story.html
Red light camera debate moves to Redmond
REDMOND, Wash. -- Tim Eyman is taking on red light cameras in Redmond now. This afternoon he presented signatures on a petition and asked that it go to a vote. He's doing this in other communities too with mixed success.
It's not just here in Redmond as you mention. Bellingham, Monroe, Mukilteo and Wenatchee are just a few cities where the political initiative business is booming to either take the cameras down or stop them from being installed.
A flash light after going through a red light is a bad sign for a driver. It means a $124 ticket will be showing up in the mail in about four weeks.
A traffic light at the intersection of Redmond Way and 148th, for example, has seen traffic violations drop dramatically from nearly 1,200 warning tickets issued in February after the camera was installed to less than 200 violations in May.
"The majority of violations are right turn on red, but I would point out that those were the most hazardous and pedestrians," said Redmond Police Chief Ron Gibson.
But a drop in citations is less clear at another busy intersection where Redmond has installed cameras. The location at NE 40th and 156th near Microsoft is down one month and up the next.
"95 percent of the infractions at intersections are for California Stops, that's an incredible expensive driver's ed program," said Redmond resident Scott Harlan.
Harlan is filing the initiative to put the cameras to a vote. For the record: a California stop is not making a full stop while making a right turn on red.
With the help of frequent Initiative sponsor Eyman filing of signatures with clerk's office. A group of Redmond residents filed more than 6,000 signatures to make a vote happen.
And this is just the latest battle over the cameras.
But if voters can put the cameras out of business, could they block other forms of law enforcement.
"The system is already set up to weed out any frivolous ideas, but when it comes to these cameras, as Harlan says there's no doubt that these cameras are admittedly controversial and we think the voters should have the final say," said Eyman.
But in Bellingham, Monroe and Longview it's been a legal issue complete with court action.
Lawsuits seem unlikely here as Redmond is still in a one year long pilot program and could abandon the initiative. These Redmond intersections don't see a lot of collisions but since the cameras went in, the number of accidents is actually up.
http://www.king5.com/news/Red-light-camera-debate-moves-to-Bellingham-129847008.html
It's not just here in Redmond as you mention. Bellingham, Monroe, Mukilteo and Wenatchee are just a few cities where the political initiative business is booming to either take the cameras down or stop them from being installed.
A flash light after going through a red light is a bad sign for a driver. It means a $124 ticket will be showing up in the mail in about four weeks.
A traffic light at the intersection of Redmond Way and 148th, for example, has seen traffic violations drop dramatically from nearly 1,200 warning tickets issued in February after the camera was installed to less than 200 violations in May.
"The majority of violations are right turn on red, but I would point out that those were the most hazardous and pedestrians," said Redmond Police Chief Ron Gibson.
But a drop in citations is less clear at another busy intersection where Redmond has installed cameras. The location at NE 40th and 156th near Microsoft is down one month and up the next.
"95 percent of the infractions at intersections are for California Stops, that's an incredible expensive driver's ed program," said Redmond resident Scott Harlan.
Harlan is filing the initiative to put the cameras to a vote. For the record: a California stop is not making a full stop while making a right turn on red.
With the help of frequent Initiative sponsor Eyman filing of signatures with clerk's office. A group of Redmond residents filed more than 6,000 signatures to make a vote happen.
And this is just the latest battle over the cameras.
But if voters can put the cameras out of business, could they block other forms of law enforcement.
"The system is already set up to weed out any frivolous ideas, but when it comes to these cameras, as Harlan says there's no doubt that these cameras are admittedly controversial and we think the voters should have the final say," said Eyman.
But in Bellingham, Monroe and Longview it's been a legal issue complete with court action.
Lawsuits seem unlikely here as Redmond is still in a one year long pilot program and could abandon the initiative. These Redmond intersections don't see a lot of collisions but since the cameras went in, the number of accidents is actually up.
http://www.king5.com/news/Red-light-camera-debate-moves-to-Bellingham-129847008.html
The Red Light Camera Circus
The city secretary adjusts her spectacles and looks down at her speakers list — number 17 is up next — and the crowd packed into the sweaty Houston City Hall chambers starts to shift to their feet. Suited Republicans, scraggly-haired hippies and sign-clutching members of the National Black United Front have been standing and sitting in unison for the past hour, as if they're playing Simon Says with someone who knows just two commands. Mayor Annise Parker has warned that cheering and clapping will result in a swift kick from chambers, so they silently stand to show their support instead.
Most of the crowd is here because of number 17 — "Mr. Paul Kubosh," the secretary reads aloud slowly. The name carries the power of a curse word to most of city council, but especially to Mayor Parker, who looks warily annoyed. This man, along with the two Kuboshes following him on the public speakers' list, have made her life extremely complicated.
Kubosh walks briskly to the podium. He signed up to speak for three minutes, but like the 38 other people listed to talk about red-light cameras, was only granted one. Kubosh plants his palms on the podium and leans forward toward city council , his gray suit stretched across his back. It's stained with sweat from the protest he led outside City Hall just before the meeting started.
"Let me make sure that you folks understand," Kubosh says in a low growl. "This will never go away." It's August 2, 2011, and Kubosh is talking about the red-light camera issue, one he and his brothers have been fighting since long before the cameras went up in 2006.
The Kuboshes thought the fight was over in November, when they led a petition drive that ended with 52 percent of the city voting down the cameras. Parker unilaterally turned the cameras off, only to be greeted by a $25 million threat from the camera vendor American Traffic Solutions for killing its contract years before its end. The scare tactic worked on the mayor, who used to be city controller. With her mind on revenue for her cash-strapped city, she flipped sides, and on came the hated cameras — until finally, she defected again and turned them off.
Now, the city is headed for a high-stakes court fight (it's already had its PR disaster) and nobody really knows where the mayor stands. About 186,000 Houstonians of all colors and political persuasions are livid that their vote didn't count. Just as many wonder: However did we get to this point ?_____________________
Walking through the periwinkle bail bonding office near downtown's municipal courts, you're bound to bump into a Kubosh. The three ample brothers, plus their diminutive, sunny mother, plus Paul's children, who range in age from 8 to 15, make a consistently full house.
But the social hub is the office of Michael Kubosh, the bail bondsman and jokester of the family. Michael has short, snowy hair and a choppy white beard. Suspenders loyally hold up his pants, and he speaks with a deep, buttery lilt, like he's at a never-ending audition for a role in a spaghetti Western. Today, he's being temporarily kicked out of his mahogany office with hanging moose heads by his brother Paul, whose office next door is apparently too disarrayed to host visitors.
Paul Kubosh, a gentle-mannered Texan until he gets riled up, has always loved public speaking. It's why he became a traffic attorney: Considering Houston drivers, he knew he'd always have an audience. Back in 1995, Kubosh heard that red-light camera companies were trying to bring the cameras to Texas. He and his brothers took a trip to San Diego three years later out to see how the program there was working. The Kuboshes were shocked.
"They just went out and cut the yellows down, all over the place," Kubosh said. Shorter yellow times mean more red-light running — which also means more tickets. A Texas Transportation Institute study that would come out in 2004 found that adding just one second to a yellow light decreased red-light camera violations by 53 percent. Shortening the yellow by the same amount resulted in a 110 percent increase in violations. "We started seeing what we believed was the sinister side of it," Kubosh said. "We started realizing it wasn't about safety."
Kubosh became obsessed with keeping the cameras out of Texas. He and his brothers testified against the cameras in Austin for years, claiming that simple engineering changes would make traffic safer. Members of the Legislature seemed to agree and voted automated traffic enforcement down each time. But in 2003, in an obscure part of a transportation bill, one word slipped past the Kuboshes' watchful eyes. A representative amended the bill to allow municipalities to regulate traffic civilly in addition to criminally. Just one word gave red-light cameras the green light.
Kubosh sued and tried to get a judge to declare the cameras unconstitutional, but to no avail. Then-mayor Bill White, who did not return Houston Press requests for comment, welcomed the cameras to Houston in 2006 when he signed a five-year contract with ATS.
Here's the deal, according to the 200-page monster of an agreement: Each camera costs the city at least $3,000 per month. The cameras record violations that are sent to ATS, whose workers review them to weed out the dismissible ones like legal right turns on red and police wave-throughs. ATS then sends them to the Houston Police Department, awaits its approval of the violations and mails out $75 tickets with photo evidence. No driver's license or insurance points are assessed: only a fine. To get constituents revved up for being ticketed, the contract also mandates up to $120,000 per year in public awareness campaign expenses. One of ATS's objectives, expressed in the contract: "to limit antagonism, opposition or concerns about the program."
Kubosh walks briskly to the podium. He signed up to speak for three minutes, but like the 38 other people listed to talk about red-light cameras, was only granted one. Kubosh plants his palms on the podium and leans forward toward city council , his gray suit stretched across his back. It's stained with sweat from the protest he led outside City Hall just before the meeting started.
"Let me make sure that you folks understand," Kubosh says in a low growl. "This will never go away." It's August 2, 2011, and Kubosh is talking about the red-light camera issue, one he and his brothers have been fighting since long before the cameras went up in 2006.
The Kuboshes thought the fight was over in November, when they led a petition drive that ended with 52 percent of the city voting down the cameras. Parker unilaterally turned the cameras off, only to be greeted by a $25 million threat from the camera vendor American Traffic Solutions for killing its contract years before its end. The scare tactic worked on the mayor, who used to be city controller. With her mind on revenue for her cash-strapped city, she flipped sides, and on came the hated cameras — until finally, she defected again and turned them off.
Now, the city is headed for a high-stakes court fight (it's already had its PR disaster) and nobody really knows where the mayor stands. About 186,000 Houstonians of all colors and political persuasions are livid that their vote didn't count. Just as many wonder: However did we get to this point ?_____________________
Walking through the periwinkle bail bonding office near downtown's municipal courts, you're bound to bump into a Kubosh. The three ample brothers, plus their diminutive, sunny mother, plus Paul's children, who range in age from 8 to 15, make a consistently full house.
But the social hub is the office of Michael Kubosh, the bail bondsman and jokester of the family. Michael has short, snowy hair and a choppy white beard. Suspenders loyally hold up his pants, and he speaks with a deep, buttery lilt, like he's at a never-ending audition for a role in a spaghetti Western. Today, he's being temporarily kicked out of his mahogany office with hanging moose heads by his brother Paul, whose office next door is apparently too disarrayed to host visitors.
Paul Kubosh, a gentle-mannered Texan until he gets riled up, has always loved public speaking. It's why he became a traffic attorney: Considering Houston drivers, he knew he'd always have an audience. Back in 1995, Kubosh heard that red-light camera companies were trying to bring the cameras to Texas. He and his brothers took a trip to San Diego three years later out to see how the program there was working. The Kuboshes were shocked.
"They just went out and cut the yellows down, all over the place," Kubosh said. Shorter yellow times mean more red-light running — which also means more tickets. A Texas Transportation Institute study that would come out in 2004 found that adding just one second to a yellow light decreased red-light camera violations by 53 percent. Shortening the yellow by the same amount resulted in a 110 percent increase in violations. "We started seeing what we believed was the sinister side of it," Kubosh said. "We started realizing it wasn't about safety."
Kubosh became obsessed with keeping the cameras out of Texas. He and his brothers testified against the cameras in Austin for years, claiming that simple engineering changes would make traffic safer. Members of the Legislature seemed to agree and voted automated traffic enforcement down each time. But in 2003, in an obscure part of a transportation bill, one word slipped past the Kuboshes' watchful eyes. A representative amended the bill to allow municipalities to regulate traffic civilly in addition to criminally. Just one word gave red-light cameras the green light.
Kubosh sued and tried to get a judge to declare the cameras unconstitutional, but to no avail. Then-mayor Bill White, who did not return Houston Press requests for comment, welcomed the cameras to Houston in 2006 when he signed a five-year contract with ATS.
Here's the deal, according to the 200-page monster of an agreement: Each camera costs the city at least $3,000 per month. The cameras record violations that are sent to ATS, whose workers review them to weed out the dismissible ones like legal right turns on red and police wave-throughs. ATS then sends them to the Houston Police Department, awaits its approval of the violations and mails out $75 tickets with photo evidence. No driver's license or insurance points are assessed: only a fine. To get constituents revved up for being ticketed, the contract also mandates up to $120,000 per year in public awareness campaign expenses. One of ATS's objectives, expressed in the contract: "to limit antagonism, opposition or concerns about the program."
Bluff City camera shut down due to legality
One of Bluff City’s two speed cameras on U.S. Highway 11E has been temporarily shut down amid concerns it might have illegally been issuing tickets for the past 2½ months.
Interim City Manager Judy Dulaney said she disabled the camera monitoring traffic on the highway’s southbound lanes Wednesday after she learned it might be in violation of the state’s new traffic camera law because the device is too close to a drop in the speed limit.
“I’m not going to take a chance on that,” Dulaney said, explaining her decision. “The city wants to do what’s right.”
Responding to complaints concerning the amount of citations issued and the revenues the cameras generate, the state legislature this spring passed a comprehensive law regulating speed and red light camera systems. One of the new law’s restrictions, which went into effect July 1, bars localities from setting up a speed camera like Bluff City’s within one mile of where the speed limit drops by 10 mph or more.
This causes problems for the city’s camera system because the device is less than a third of a mile from where the speed limit on U.S. 11E’s southbound lanes drops from 55 mph to 45 mph on the way to Piney Flats.
Dulaney said Wednesday that city officials thought the new law did not apply in their case because the city’s contract with American Traffic Solutions to operate the cameras does not expire until Jan. 1, 2015.
City officials could extend the length of the 45 mph zone to meet the regulation, which a former city manager thought about doing, but there was no hurry because they thought they had been grandfathered in under the new state law.
However, Dulaney started to question that line of thinking Wednesday when she learned about comments State Rep. Matthew Hill, R-Jonesborough, made regarding the cameras earlier that afternoon. In an interview with a Johnson City newspaper, Hill said the camera system violates the law and he called on the city to shut it down or move the signs and refund any tickets issued since July 1.
He further called on Sullivan County Mayor Steve Godsey to extend the length of the 45 mph zone or shut down the camera system on his own if city officials did not immediately fix the problem.
“The way I read the law when we voted on it this spring, that restriction applies to the city,” Hill said when asked Wednesday whether Bluff City had been grandfathered in because of its contract with ATS.
But Hill conceded that if the city was grandfathered in, he didn’t have any problems with the camera’s location: “If they’re abiding by the law, then they’re abiding by the law,” he said.
Not wanting to take any chances, Dulaney said the city’s southbound camera will stay off until she can get a final answer from the state attorney general’s office on whether the city was grandfathered in.
“Until I can get something in writing, then it will stay down,” Dulaney said, adding that the city is prepared to issue refunds to anyone who received an improper citation because of this situation.
gmclean@bristolnews.com
(276) 645-2518
http://www2.tricities.com/news/2011/sep/15/one-bluff-citys-two-speed-cameras-shut-down-due-le-ar-1310612/
Interim City Manager Judy Dulaney said she disabled the camera monitoring traffic on the highway’s southbound lanes Wednesday after she learned it might be in violation of the state’s new traffic camera law because the device is too close to a drop in the speed limit.
“I’m not going to take a chance on that,” Dulaney said, explaining her decision. “The city wants to do what’s right.”
Responding to complaints concerning the amount of citations issued and the revenues the cameras generate, the state legislature this spring passed a comprehensive law regulating speed and red light camera systems. One of the new law’s restrictions, which went into effect July 1, bars localities from setting up a speed camera like Bluff City’s within one mile of where the speed limit drops by 10 mph or more.
This causes problems for the city’s camera system because the device is less than a third of a mile from where the speed limit on U.S. 11E’s southbound lanes drops from 55 mph to 45 mph on the way to Piney Flats.
Dulaney said Wednesday that city officials thought the new law did not apply in their case because the city’s contract with American Traffic Solutions to operate the cameras does not expire until Jan. 1, 2015.
City officials could extend the length of the 45 mph zone to meet the regulation, which a former city manager thought about doing, but there was no hurry because they thought they had been grandfathered in under the new state law.
However, Dulaney started to question that line of thinking Wednesday when she learned about comments State Rep. Matthew Hill, R-Jonesborough, made regarding the cameras earlier that afternoon. In an interview with a Johnson City newspaper, Hill said the camera system violates the law and he called on the city to shut it down or move the signs and refund any tickets issued since July 1.
He further called on Sullivan County Mayor Steve Godsey to extend the length of the 45 mph zone or shut down the camera system on his own if city officials did not immediately fix the problem.
“The way I read the law when we voted on it this spring, that restriction applies to the city,” Hill said when asked Wednesday whether Bluff City had been grandfathered in because of its contract with ATS.
But Hill conceded that if the city was grandfathered in, he didn’t have any problems with the camera’s location: “If they’re abiding by the law, then they’re abiding by the law,” he said.
Not wanting to take any chances, Dulaney said the city’s southbound camera will stay off until she can get a final answer from the state attorney general’s office on whether the city was grandfathered in.
“Until I can get something in writing, then it will stay down,” Dulaney said, adding that the city is prepared to issue refunds to anyone who received an improper citation because of this situation.
gmclean@bristolnews.com
(276) 645-2518
http://www2.tricities.com/news/2011/sep/15/one-bluff-citys-two-speed-cameras-shut-down-due-le-ar-1310612/
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Council eyes camera contract
A Lafayette City-Parish councilman is questioning the validity of the contract with the company responsible for speed and red-light traffic cameras here after learning the city-parish administration renewed the contract this summer — without telling either the Council or the public — and without renegotiating the contract's terms.
District 9 Councilman William Theriot brought up the contract during a wrap-up budget hearing Tuesday.
Theriot said he was researching the budget proposed by City-Parish President Joey Durel when he began examining the Lafayette Consolidated Government's contract with Redflex Traffic Systems.
He said LCG's initial contract with Reflex stated the agreement would last for four years, starting in June 2007. He said he wasn't aware of any decision to renew or renegotiate the contract this past June.
"I am under the assumption we no longer have a contract with Redflex?" Theriot asked during the hearing.
Dee Stanley, who is LCG's chief administrative officer, told Theriot that Durel extended that contract this summer. He said Durel was able to do so as city-parish president without needing council approval.
Theriot asked Stanley and Durel if the contract was renegotiated in any way, to which Stanley replied he did not believe there were any changes.
Stanley noted that Theriot was not on the council when it approved the initial contract, and he said it was no secret that the contract had a renewal option.
"With a hot-button issue like this, I'm just very surprised that this did not come before the council," Theriot said.
Theriot said he interpreted the contract as saying it needs to be renewed by Lafayette Consolidate Government. He questioned how "LCG" is defined and if that definition includes only the city-parish president or if it also includes the council.
City-Parish Attorney Mike Hebert could not say definitively during the hearing if the city-parish president is able to renew that contract without the council's approval.
He said he would need to read the full contract before rendering an opinion and said he would define "LCG" in this context in response to Theriot's request.
"It's very typical that a contract that has a renewal option in it does not come back before the Council," Hebert said during the hearing. "We have numerous contracts of that type throughout the government, but I'm not prepared to give a definitive opinion now."
When The Daily Advertiser asked Hebert on Tuesday evening to notify the newspaper of his official opinion on the matter, he said LCG's "legal opinions are subject to attorney-client privilege and we typically cannot release them under our rules of ethics."
The Redflex issue arose during a discussion about amendments to Durel's proposed budget for the 2011-12 fiscal year. Durel's budget uses a significant amount of money collected from speed and red light cameras in order to cover operating costs and recurring expenses despite past thinking that those funds should be given to only traffic safety improvement projects.
Councilman Jay Castille, District 2, previously proposed an amendment to remove a bulk of the funds collected by traffic cameras from the Traffic and Transportation Department and give those funds to the Lafayette Police Department's traffic enforcers.
Castille wants to then refund, at the same amount, all of Durel's proposed funding for the Traffic and Transportation Department but instead use dollars from the general fund to cover those personnel and operation costs.
Theriot objected to that amendment both when Castille first proposed it in late August and again during Tuesday's hearing.
Durel repeatedly asked Theriot during Tuesday's hearing what his questions about the Reflex contract had to do with the tasks at hand that day.
"I think this is a good discussion to have, but it may be for another time," Durel said. "I don't see what this discussion has to do with the budget itself."
Theriot said the Council needs to know about the Redflex contract before deciding how to vote on Castille's amendment concerning Redflex fines being used to cover operating and personnel costs within the Traffic and Transportation Department.
"In my opinion, it does make a difference," Theriot told Durel.
Theriot, who appeared flabbergasted by Durel's renewal of the contract without alerting the Council, continued his back-and-forth with a visibly frustrated Durel.
"What would make you say 'yes,' [to the proposed amendment]" Durel asked Theriot.
"There is no answer that would cause me to support that," Theriot replied.
"That's what I thought," Durel concluded.
No other Council members joined the discussion between Theriot, Durel, Stanley and Hebert as they examined the contract's validity.
Several LCG officials were unable to provide The Daily Advertiser with copies of the RedFlex contracts by press time after the newspaper made the request Tuesday afternoon.
Theriot, however, didn't stop rocking the administration's boat there.
Durel proposed giving nearly a half million dollars to the Cajundome in his 2011-12 budget, but Theriot previously backed an amendment to eliminate all of that funding.
He said giving the Cajundome LCG dollars forces local taxpayers to "subsidize something the people of Lafayette do not own." The state of Louisiana, through the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, owns that facility, according to the Cajundome's website.
Theriot also questioned the initial agreement between LCG and the Cajundome, saying he "felt as though that agreement was no longer active."
Stanley said the issue has been thoroughly discussed in the past, and previous administrations have taken the stance that the agreement doesn't expire until 2012. He said giving the Cajundome such subsidies shouldn't cause a legal problem.
"We need to make sure we're not doing anything we shouldn't be doing," Theriot said.
Theriot then moved his focus to the Lafayette Utilities System and LUS Fiber. "A lot of people are very concerned" about LUS Fiber he said as he questioned LUS Director Terry Huval about the project.
Huval told Theriot that LUS Fiber does not currently have plans to take an additional authorized loan from the LUS side of the utilities budget but wouldn't rule out that option in the future.
Huval said LUS Fiber repaid LUS nearly $445,000 during the current fiscal year, but will not have to make any such loan payments during the 2011-2012 fiscal year because of a loan restructuring.
Huval said the internal loan from LUS to LUS Fiber steams from assets built by LUS "both for its own purposes and to provide wholesale broadband services between 1997 and 2007."
The Local Government Fair Competition act prohibits LUS from simply transferring those assets to LUS Fiber and requires LUS Fiber to repay the LUS side for that infrastructure, Huval said.
"The internal loans council member Theriot was describing are loans that must, and will, be paid over the life of the fiber system," Huval said in an email. "Over half of the internal loans were due to the transfer of LUS's fiber assets."
Earlier in the hearing, Councilman Don Bertrand, District 7, proposed moving back to the general fund money set aside in the current budget for a roundabout at the intersection of Bendel Road and Coolidge Boulevard.
In early August, both Durel and Bertrand faced a group of Bendel Gardens residents who were angered by the plan and its lack of transparency. After that public outcry, Durel said the plan was "a dead issue to be dealt with by others in the future."
An enabling ordinance, however, remains in place and would allow future politicians to spend $150,000 on a feasibility study and to perform design work for such a roundabout.
Bertrand said he is backing an ordinance to overturn that initial enabling ordinance, which would ensure the roundabout is truly a dead issue.
That ordinance is scheduled for consideration later this month and for final adoption in early October.
The City-Parish Council will consider all of the proposed amendments to Durel's budget and ultimately approve funding for all LCG departments during a final hearing at 5:30 p.m. Sept.27 in the Council Auditorium at 705 West University Ave.
http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/20110914/NEWS01/109140351/Council-eyes-camera-contract
District 9 Councilman William Theriot brought up the contract during a wrap-up budget hearing Tuesday.
Theriot said he was researching the budget proposed by City-Parish President Joey Durel when he began examining the Lafayette Consolidated Government's contract with Redflex Traffic Systems.
He said LCG's initial contract with Reflex stated the agreement would last for four years, starting in June 2007. He said he wasn't aware of any decision to renew or renegotiate the contract this past June.
"I am under the assumption we no longer have a contract with Redflex?" Theriot asked during the hearing.
Dee Stanley, who is LCG's chief administrative officer, told Theriot that Durel extended that contract this summer. He said Durel was able to do so as city-parish president without needing council approval.
Theriot asked Stanley and Durel if the contract was renegotiated in any way, to which Stanley replied he did not believe there were any changes.
Stanley noted that Theriot was not on the council when it approved the initial contract, and he said it was no secret that the contract had a renewal option.
"With a hot-button issue like this, I'm just very surprised that this did not come before the council," Theriot said.
Theriot said he interpreted the contract as saying it needs to be renewed by Lafayette Consolidate Government. He questioned how "LCG" is defined and if that definition includes only the city-parish president or if it also includes the council.
City-Parish Attorney Mike Hebert could not say definitively during the hearing if the city-parish president is able to renew that contract without the council's approval.
He said he would need to read the full contract before rendering an opinion and said he would define "LCG" in this context in response to Theriot's request.
"It's very typical that a contract that has a renewal option in it does not come back before the Council," Hebert said during the hearing. "We have numerous contracts of that type throughout the government, but I'm not prepared to give a definitive opinion now."
When The Daily Advertiser asked Hebert on Tuesday evening to notify the newspaper of his official opinion on the matter, he said LCG's "legal opinions are subject to attorney-client privilege and we typically cannot release them under our rules of ethics."
The Redflex issue arose during a discussion about amendments to Durel's proposed budget for the 2011-12 fiscal year. Durel's budget uses a significant amount of money collected from speed and red light cameras in order to cover operating costs and recurring expenses despite past thinking that those funds should be given to only traffic safety improvement projects.
Councilman Jay Castille, District 2, previously proposed an amendment to remove a bulk of the funds collected by traffic cameras from the Traffic and Transportation Department and give those funds to the Lafayette Police Department's traffic enforcers.
Castille wants to then refund, at the same amount, all of Durel's proposed funding for the Traffic and Transportation Department but instead use dollars from the general fund to cover those personnel and operation costs.
Theriot objected to that amendment both when Castille first proposed it in late August and again during Tuesday's hearing.
Durel repeatedly asked Theriot during Tuesday's hearing what his questions about the Reflex contract had to do with the tasks at hand that day.
"I think this is a good discussion to have, but it may be for another time," Durel said. "I don't see what this discussion has to do with the budget itself."
Theriot said the Council needs to know about the Redflex contract before deciding how to vote on Castille's amendment concerning Redflex fines being used to cover operating and personnel costs within the Traffic and Transportation Department.
"In my opinion, it does make a difference," Theriot told Durel.
Theriot, who appeared flabbergasted by Durel's renewal of the contract without alerting the Council, continued his back-and-forth with a visibly frustrated Durel.
"What would make you say 'yes,' [to the proposed amendment]" Durel asked Theriot.
"There is no answer that would cause me to support that," Theriot replied.
"That's what I thought," Durel concluded.
No other Council members joined the discussion between Theriot, Durel, Stanley and Hebert as they examined the contract's validity.
Several LCG officials were unable to provide The Daily Advertiser with copies of the RedFlex contracts by press time after the newspaper made the request Tuesday afternoon.
Theriot, however, didn't stop rocking the administration's boat there.
Durel proposed giving nearly a half million dollars to the Cajundome in his 2011-12 budget, but Theriot previously backed an amendment to eliminate all of that funding.
He said giving the Cajundome LCG dollars forces local taxpayers to "subsidize something the people of Lafayette do not own." The state of Louisiana, through the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, owns that facility, according to the Cajundome's website.
Theriot also questioned the initial agreement between LCG and the Cajundome, saying he "felt as though that agreement was no longer active."
Stanley said the issue has been thoroughly discussed in the past, and previous administrations have taken the stance that the agreement doesn't expire until 2012. He said giving the Cajundome such subsidies shouldn't cause a legal problem.
"We need to make sure we're not doing anything we shouldn't be doing," Theriot said.
Theriot then moved his focus to the Lafayette Utilities System and LUS Fiber. "A lot of people are very concerned" about LUS Fiber he said as he questioned LUS Director Terry Huval about the project.
Huval told Theriot that LUS Fiber does not currently have plans to take an additional authorized loan from the LUS side of the utilities budget but wouldn't rule out that option in the future.
Huval said LUS Fiber repaid LUS nearly $445,000 during the current fiscal year, but will not have to make any such loan payments during the 2011-2012 fiscal year because of a loan restructuring.
Huval said the internal loan from LUS to LUS Fiber steams from assets built by LUS "both for its own purposes and to provide wholesale broadband services between 1997 and 2007."
The Local Government Fair Competition act prohibits LUS from simply transferring those assets to LUS Fiber and requires LUS Fiber to repay the LUS side for that infrastructure, Huval said.
"The internal loans council member Theriot was describing are loans that must, and will, be paid over the life of the fiber system," Huval said in an email. "Over half of the internal loans were due to the transfer of LUS's fiber assets."
Earlier in the hearing, Councilman Don Bertrand, District 7, proposed moving back to the general fund money set aside in the current budget for a roundabout at the intersection of Bendel Road and Coolidge Boulevard.
In early August, both Durel and Bertrand faced a group of Bendel Gardens residents who were angered by the plan and its lack of transparency. After that public outcry, Durel said the plan was "a dead issue to be dealt with by others in the future."
An enabling ordinance, however, remains in place and would allow future politicians to spend $150,000 on a feasibility study and to perform design work for such a roundabout.
Bertrand said he is backing an ordinance to overturn that initial enabling ordinance, which would ensure the roundabout is truly a dead issue.
That ordinance is scheduled for consideration later this month and for final adoption in early October.
The City-Parish Council will consider all of the proposed amendments to Durel's budget and ultimately approve funding for all LCG departments during a final hearing at 5:30 p.m. Sept.27 in the Council Auditorium at 705 West University Ave.
http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/20110914/NEWS01/109140351/Council-eyes-camera-contract
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)