• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

buckeyefool

He's back and better than ever!
  • Motorists to see red as warning period ends
    $95 fines to follow those who run lights

    Thursday, April 06, 2006

    Jodi Andes
    THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

    <!--PHOTOS--><TABLE class=phototableright align=right border=0><!-- begin large ad code --><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE align=center><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle>
    20060406-Pc-A4-0800.jpg
    </IMG> </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle>
    20060406-Pc-A1-1200.jpg
    </IMG> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=credit width=200>CHRIS RUSSELL DISPATCH </TD></TR><TR><TD class=cutline width=200>Columbus Police Officer Roger Foor with a photo of a car caught in the act of going through a red light 12 seconds after it changed </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

    Cameras set up to catch red-light runners at two Columbus intersections have been something motorists didn’t have to worry much about.

    After all, they got only a warning.
    That’s going to change at one minute after midnight tonight.

    That’s when infractions caught by the cameras on N. 4 th Street at Mount Vernon Avenue and at E. 5 th Avenue will begin triggering $95 fines.

    And if the cameras’ first 24 days in operation are any indication, people will be turning over a lot of dollars. Columbus police issued 1,159 warnings to motorists who ran red lights between March 7 and 31.

    "In my wildest dream I never knew ho
    w many people were running red lights. It’s amaz- ing," said Police Officer Roger Foor, who is one of two officers who review images to see if an infraction occurred.

    The camera at 4 th Street and 5 th Avenue caught one motorist running a red light at 68 mph. The speed limit there is 35 mph.
    In another case, a motorist nearly struck a pedestrian, Foor said.

    Police counted 416 cases in which they didn’t issue warnings. They included 23 emergency vehicles, which are allowed to run red lights.

    Motorists who get notices can check out the details online. They will see still photographs and videos, as well as the date, time, location and speed they were driving.

    The infractions are civil offenses that do not add points to drivers’ licenses. The city did not provide detailed information on offenders, such as whether they were repeats, Columbus residents or out-of-towners.

    The next intersection to get cameras likely will be Cleveland Avenue and Spring Street, Foor said. They likely won’t be operating until May. Ten other intersections are in the planning stages of having cameras installed.
    Still up in the air is whether the Ohio legislature will limit how cities can use the cameras or ban them entirely.

    House Bill 56, which passed the House in May, remains in the Senate’s Highways and Transportation Committee. One senator quipped during a March hearing that the bill now has more versions than a Hollywood freeway.

    The legislature is on recess, and the bill likely won’t be discussed in hearings again until mid-May, an aide to the committee chairman, Sen. Jeffry Armbruster, R-North Ridgeville, has said.

    As the bill stands now, cities could use the cameras to catch red-light runners, speeders in school zones and motorists running gates at railroad crossings. The tickets could be sent to whomever the car is registered to and would carry only a fine, as is the case in Columbus.

    One of the areas under debate in the bill is whether police should be required to identify the driver. One version would require cities to prove identity if the owner objects to the ticket, a requirement that some say would mean putting up more cameras to take pictures of the vehicles’ interiors, rather than just the rear of the car.

    Columbus officials say that would restrict cities’ powers to enact their own laws. They are anticipating filing a lawsuit if the bill passes, Assistant Safety Director Barb Seckler said.
    [email protected]
     
    As I've gotten older I've noticed more and more poeple running red lights. It's gotten so bad in my area that I actually wait after the light turns green so that I can look both ways before pulling out with the green light. I hope they put these up everywhere. Tax dollars well spent IMO.
     
    Upvote 0
    Of course my problem with this is how do they prove I was behind the wheel?

    I lent the car to a friend, wife, brother.

    It was at the shop and they were test driving it.

    Prove to me I was the one behind the wheel.

    Edit: I guess I see that addressed in the article. I wouldn't pay it the way it stands now.
     
    Last edited:
    Upvote 0
    I've gotten bad over the past couple months. There are a few lights on my way to and from work that are retarded and I don't want to wait for them if I can make it. I hate lights that turn or waste time on direction arrows when there is nobody waiting. I would be more willing to stop at all lights if they had to be actuated in order to turn.
     
    Upvote 0
    Of course my problem with this is how do they prove I was behind the wheel?

    I lent the car to a friend, wife, brother.

    It was at the shop and they were test driving it.

    Prove to me I was the one behind the wheel.

    Edit: I guess I see that addressed in the article. I wouldn't pay it the way it stands now.

    I hear ya on the prove it was me driving, but it is a non-issue for me as it currently stands.

    Since all details can be viewed online, still photos, date, time, and location if friend, wife, or brother were using my car at that time, hence they are the guilty party, I would collect from them to pay the fine. If friend, wife, or brother says no, well I guess they won't borrow my car the next time they need to use it. If it were being test driven due to being at the shop, well if they refused to pay, I guess I'd take my business elsewhere and I'd be sure to inform the shop that I'd let my friends know as well. (Word of mouth is still a great form of advertising, positive or negative.)
     
    Upvote 0
    Those bastards! That series of traffic lights is a nightmare. It seems like there are three sets of lights within 100 feet of each other and I never know where to stop. I know I've run the second light at least twice.

    Guess I'm going to have to find a detour around that intersection. No more getting on 670 from 4th anymore.
     
    Upvote 0
    Wow! This is a great idea! Maybe next, they can put cameras in everyone's front yards. That way, IF something illegal happens, they've got it all on tape. Brilliant! [/sarcasm]


    Totall Bullshit.
     
    Upvote 0
    They've had them here in Middletown for at least a year. Something I've noticed is that the yellow light is not consistent. I've actually watched these while sitting at an intersection and there has been up to a 2 second difference on how long the yellow holds. There was also a lady here who had a fine sent to her while she was in a funeral procession. The little flag from the funeral home even showed up in the picture. She called about and they told her that she had to pay the fine first, then file a claim in order to get her money back. What kind of crap is that?
     
    Upvote 0
    I doubt this is true but someone told me that you can beat a ticket like this if you challenge it in court. He said you have the right to confront your accuser and a camera can't testify in court and therefor it would be thrown out. The guy had written a book on how to get out of traffic tickets.
     
    Upvote 0
    I go through the camera on 4th St. everyday and am glad it is there... I don't know how many people I have seen blow through those lights without thinking twice. The speed limit on 4th St. in that area is 35mph and I've noticed many drivers going 45 in that area... I park right next to the old fire station and sometimes it is a chore just to get onto 4th St.

    As for the cost of these cameras... the city paid $0 out of pocket... yes, there is a catch. The camera vendor receives 75% of each ticket. If the city would have paid what the vendor wanted the total cost would have been $4.5 million for 20 cameras. Here's a writeup in the Dispatch describing the monetary issues:

    Red-light fines benefit vendor
     
    Upvote 0
    As for the cost of these cameras... the city paid $0 out of pocket... yes, there is a catch. The camera vendor receives 75% of each ticket. If the city would have paid what the vendor wanted the total cost would have been $4.5 million for 20 cameras. Here's a writeup in the Dispatch describing the monetary issues:

    Red-light fines benefit vendor

    That shows that the vendor had a much better idea than the city did regarding how much the process was worth. It will be interesting to see now much gets collected.
     
    Upvote 0
    That shows that the vendor had a much better idea than the city did regarding how much the process was worth. It will be interesting to see now much gets collected.
    One other stat the article states that if the city was to purchase the cameras, in order to break even they would need to issue only 2 tickets per day per camera... the "trial" period caught 23 people per day per camera. Gratned, that number will drop as drivers know that now they will get a ticket and not a warning, but I'm sure that they would still collect more than 2 tickets per day. IMO, I think the model they chose was fine, especially if a law ever gets through the Ohio legislators to ban these cameras (Cleveland Plain Dealer) then the city isn't out a dime.
     
    Upvote 0
    Back
    Top