Click It or Ticket Insanity

[Steve Cassani]

Ron,

The company that supplied the cameras may have an open-ended contract with the city or county, calling for a percentage of the revenue generated through use of the camera. A proposal to introduce cameras at intersections in the city of Billings included a 'fee' of twenty percent. The city was ready to accept the proposal - the company picks up the costs for intallation and maintenance - until the state legislature voted against their use anywhere in Montana. Proponents saw a way to increase effectiveness (and revenue) with no change in staffing; opponents argued law enforcement could not be responsible when enacted at a distance.

[HI Cobra]

Hawaii is a big click it or ticket state for quite a while. I use my seat belts
so it doesn't impact me. I don't think anyone would want to have an accident
without a seat belt that had an air bag fire on them. Glad I had mine on
when a bimbo on a cel phone decided to make a u-turn and drilled me.

[lovehamr]

Originally Posted by Steve Cassani

Ron,

The company that supplied the cameras may have an open-ended contract with the city or county, calling for a percentage of the revenue generated through use of the camera. A proposal to introduce cameras at intersections in the city of Billings included a 'fee' of twenty percent. The city was ready to accept the proposal - the company picks up the costs for intallation and maintenance - until the state legislature voted against their use anywhere in Montana. Proponents saw a way to increase effectiveness (and revenue) with no change in staffing; opponents argued law enforcement could not be responsible when enacted at a distance.

Yup. THAT is revenue generation. BTW, to all the guys who believe that the cops are out there to support themselves with ticket revenue; the only program that I personally know of that directly supports LE in the enforcement role are drug seizures and that's only support not saleries. All the other monies go into the municipality's general fund. In other words into a pot where the polititions control of it. Again, if you want different laws or laws enforced in a different way then get involved, communicate in your community and above all be involved in the political process and VOTE for the leader whom you want to have the purse strings. You might be surprised at how many cops are with you.

Steve

[Got the Bug]

Originally Posted by Steve Cassani

Ron,

The company that supplied the cameras may have an open-ended contract with the city or county, calling for a percentage of the revenue generated through use of the camera. A proposal to introduce cameras at intersections in the city of Billings included a 'fee' of twenty percent. The city was ready to accept the proposal - the company picks up the costs for intallation and maintenance - until the state legislature voted against their use anywhere in Montana. Proponents saw a way to increase effectiveness (and revenue) with no change in staffing; opponents argued law enforcement could not be responsible when enacted at a distance.

In nearly all cases, red light cameras are a revenue sharing deal between a city or county and the camera vendor. I read an article a while back that said that it's becoming common place for cities to pull the plug on the red light cameras because they've done their job...people have become conditioned and they stop running red lights. I guess they just need to keep the little strobe /flash up to keep people on their toes.

Click or ticket. There's no argument...it takes two seconds to put your seat belt on. Do you drive your Cobra without a seat belt on??

[Ron61]

Steve,

Sharing the revenue would be far to much intelligence for this area. When they signed the contract they had it worded so the camera supplier got all of it until it went above a set level each month which was as much as they would normally get in ticket revenue in about 8 months. Real brilliance on the part of the city council. Their solution was to either try to re-negotiate the contract so they got a percentage of it or have the fines raised so high that it wouldn't take so many to reach the set level. Right now both the difference in fines if a patrolman issues the ticket or a camera catches it and the contract are in a state of law suites. The city threatened to have them taken out but they still have to pay the amount that would have been collected up to the agreed total. And since there is such a huge difference in a ticket written by a policeman and the camera tickets that is another big fight. This city council can't do anything that doesn't wind up in court it seems. Doesn't really bother me as driving here is worse than in San Francisco and I have always worn seat belts and stopped at lights and signs.

Ron

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Got the Bug

Click or ticket. There's no argument...it takes two seconds to put your seat belt on. Do you drive your Cobra without a seat belt on??

+1. Seat belts save lives. Also, as parents, we set examples for our kids as well. Our kids copy virtually everything we do. If we don't care to put on our seat belt, then our kids won't bother either.

Or you can be a celebrity and drive with them on your lap in the front seat unrestrained.

Further, I was never much a red light runner, but the cameras are doing their job.

People are complaining about too many police officers out there? How about Oakland, CA where they can't hire enough? Law enforcement have a very difficult job, and I for one admire them for the job I wouldn't want to do.

"Don't do the crime , if you can't do the time." Who loves ya baby?