A California grand jury is asking tough questions about red-light cameras,
like the ones that are still operational in Bakersfield, and local officials
are hard-pressed to provide answers.
A Sacramento grand jury concluded that one town “chronically and
systematically ignores its own policies for oversight, testing, monitoring,
maintenance and record keeping.” Much of the report focused on yellow-light
timing. Under state law, the yellow light must last at least 3.9 seconds
in intersections with red-light cameras, but Citrus City routinely set
the time at 3.5 seconds, or even lower. Furthermore, the city produced
fake audit records in response to a request. Finally, the city was unable to produce any
evidence to support its claim of fewer accidents. After several inquiries,
officials finally admitted that “accurate documentation of accident
reduction [does] not exist” and “they do not routinely analyze
the data they collect.”
Citrus City has until October 1 to file a formal response with a Sacramento judge.
Although more than 60 cities in The Golden State have turned off their
red light cameras in recent months and years, some just do not want to
turn loose of the extra money they generate. But in an era of driverless
cars, drones, and similar technology, it is probably only a matter of
time before the cameras come back. The next wave may involve speeding
enforcement cameras. San Francisco may ask the state to
reconsider VC 40802(a)(1), the provision which defines speeding cameras as speed traps.
Privacy activists and economic conservatives are consistently opposed to
these type of measures. Camera cases seem more focused on raising revenue
at the expense of privacy than they do in increasing traffic safety.
Getting Legal Help
The aggressive lawyers at Bigger & Harman, APC, are committed to giving
individuals a voice when dealing with speeding and traffic tickets. Call
today at 661-859-1177 or email
email@example.com to receive the personal professional attention you deserve. En español,
llame al 661-376-0214.