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.