Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.
Scott Elliott is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He writes about education, city and suburban issues, politics, business, workforce and consumer issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2010 > March > 18 > Entry
Editorial: Cameras can catch speeders, increase safety
Cameras mounted on street corners might not be the ideal way to enforce traffic laws, but it’s hard to argue with Dayton’s statistics.
The cameras are working.
They capture images of cars that ignore red lights and record their license plate numbers. The word has gotten out. That has made some dangerous streets safer. Problems with the system need to be addressed, the most pressing of which is that many drivers nabbed by the cameras ignore the citations they receive; consequences have been rare.
Even so, the city has a strong case to expand its use of cameras to issue citations also for speeding.
An outside company, contracting with the city, installed the cameras at its own cost between 2003 and 2005 at 10 intersections notorious for accidents.
While traffic accidents were trending down citywide before the cameras were put up, the decline at the camera sites are significantly deeper. In the past 18 months, accidents at the camera intersections were down 40 percent.
In addition, red-light violations recorded by the cameras have dropped by 72 percent. Even rear-end accidents are down 16 percent. In other cities, those crashes spiked at camera locations as drivers slammed on their brakes to avoid being caught by the camera.
Collections haven’t gone so well, primarily because the fines do not have the power of the courts behind them. Because there is no law officer or eyewitness involved, a city ordinance makes the fine a civil rather than criminal matter.
The Ohio Supreme Court in 2008 upheld a city’s right to treat camera-enforced offenses more like parking tickets than moving violations, which typically result in higher fines and points against the driver’s license. The debt owed by the driver to the city is legally binding and collected by the camera company, but criminal courts can’t enforce payment. If individuals think they’ve been cited erroneously — that someone else was driving their car, for instance — there is a formal appeal process.
Thousands of fines have gone unpaid. If drivers know they won’t be forced to pay, what incentive is there to pay attention to the cameras?
The company is now moving delinquent drivers more quickly to a collection agency, and the city is exploring changing its ordinances to allow for license and registration renewals to be blocked for unpaid camera fines.
Police Chief Richard Biehl wants to add more cameras on streets with the most speeders. The numbers support his case. Consider one example — the intersection of Third Street and Edwin C. Moses Boulevard.
For the 18-month study period, data from the cameras there showed 1,578 red-light violators were also driving at least 11 mph over the speed limit. A third of those cars were traveling at least 15 mph above the limit.
If the threat of a fine works to deter speeders the way it has for red-light violators, the added public safety alone makes trying it worthwhile.
Chief Biehl says he has no plans to completely replace traffic enforcement with cameras, but the reality is that there will be fewer police assigned to traffic duty as the police force shrinks due to budget cuts.
Using cameras to supplement officers’ eyes is making the most of technology.
Permalink | Comments (19) | Post your comment | Categories: City of Dayton, Editorials, Law Enforcement and Public Safety, Scott Elliott
Tweet
Comments
By Squirrellygirl
March 18, 2010 10:54 AM | Link to this
I’m pretty sure that we are entitled to question our accuser, but since the camera isn’t human, it wouldn’t be possible. Therefore, they can’t legally do anything to our licenses based on a red light camera. This camera only identifies the vehicle, not the driver. And unless our govt wants to change the law to fit the end they want to meet, it’s still unconstitutional. Red light cameras are an intrusion of our right to privacy. Hopefully, Sarge will get on here and again reiterate why this isn’t Constitutional.
By Joe
March 18, 2010 2:18 PM | Link to this
I have an idea, maybe Sheriff Plummer could get behind this type of effort for Harrison and Washington Twps. This would help improve his image as only being a complainer.
By Quentin
March 18, 2010 8:14 PM | Link to this
Except that the studies all show the cameras INCREASE accidents and city after city has been busted faking the statistics to show a decreas. Also many have been caught shortening the yellow lights to increase tickets for the money. How about enforcing the limits, getting idiots to stop hogging the left lanes and stop the idiots weaving all over trying to text or talk on their phone instead of driving?
By CalvinJ
March 18, 2010 10:16 PM | Link to this
This editorial is so far from reality that it’s a joke, again. The alleged statistics only show a reduction in red light running accidents at the intersections where the cameras are located. Note also, Dayton only has cameras on the money making direction—they don’t have cameras on the cross street; that would hit more of the locals for a ticket bill.++++++++++++++++++++Same for speeding data. Are they going to put up the cameras at every light in the city? Of course not. The RedFlex Australian company wouldn’t make money that way.++++++++++++++If you live in the suburbs, read the police and fire reports in the local weekly papers. When the police make stops for speeding, redlight running, weaaving, they often find someone intoxicated, under drug influence, warrants, no license, etc., etc. Which would make Dayton safer? More policemen actually stopping cars doing unusual things, or letting a camera take a picture. Duh.——————Another mindless editorial.
By RICHARD FLORIDA
March 19, 2010 7:43 AM | Link to this
Member of the Creative Class don’t need to obey traffic laws - they’ve got ideas and concepts that will speedily brings jobs to Dayton just as soon as they can ditch their day job waiting tables or working at the bookstore. You know, I’m available to consult….I can tell you anything you want to hear, make it sound convincing and well-researched, then charge a big fee.
By Doug Sidney
March 19, 2010 7:53 AM | Link to this
This sheriff is a moron. Why doesn’t he just tell everyone that it is not really about safety (it’s not), reduce accidents (it’s not), IT IS REVENUE GENERATION only. One way to defend against this is send the ticket and your payment to the city, they can’t deposit it but you’ve paid the fine, everyone wins. Time to boot these fools out.
By fortressdayton
March 19, 2010 8:07 AM | Link to this
Shortening yellow phases is enough to show that the intent is not safety. Intent is everything…ask a cop. Hypocrites.
By Original Bill
March 19, 2010 8:10 AM | Link to this
current “radar” units are proven inaccurate every day in court if they are not tested daily. exposed to weather, traffic, dirt, smoke etc.etc. and how often tested?? put a live cop at these intersections..provide jobs, increase money to city, catch more bad guys..lose less in court
By tommyv
March 19, 2010 8:17 AM | Link to this
Boy, the DDN just loves big government, don’t they. One thing you better understand is this - people begin to avoid streets that have these on them…and guess what? All of those restaurants, shops, and whatnot will be avoided as well. Oh, Martin and Ellen, I just love you guys as you save us from our own idiocy. Do you think the thieves and thugs driving around this city are going to pay those fines? Forget it.
By Dan Kennedy
March 19, 2010 9:06 AM | Link to this
Redflex also makes a portable system that is setup in a van with an officer to monitor it. This could allow speed ticketing to be used in more areas of the city than just the existing red-light intersections. Then an officer IS there to observe the infraction to make it a criminal ticket. More importantly, it has the flexibility to move the system to problem areas as they change through out the city. Used responsibly, red-light and speed camera systems can make our streets safer.
By CalvinJ
March 19, 2010 10:00 AM | Link to this
Dan, the officer does not get out of the van, run up and stop the offending driver and then note whether they have a drivers license, whether the plates are valid and are fot that vehicle, whether the drive has warrants, whether the driver is impaired? Those are all the reasons to put the money into real officers on the road. The cameras are City of Dayton; someone keepsing thinking they are the Sheriff Department’s cameras. NOPE. Not that dumb.
By davidss2
March 19, 2010 10:11 AM | Link to this
Let’s be clear. It’s not safe to travel into Dayton on most surface streets. At night it’s even worse. After being at a Dragons game I keep wishing the park had been allowed to be built at Hara rather than stolen by Dayton using public monies. I avoid the surface streets and even the interstate and US 35 aren’t safe because you seldom if ever see a police car patroling or watching for dangerous driving and speeding, maybe once a year. So I keep avoiding the city because of the lack of policing. So do other people. Even Spaghetti Warehouse is off our list now. Miller Lane and 725 offer must better restaurant choices.
By Henry
March 19, 2010 1:32 PM | Link to this
Davidss2 - I live and work downtown and I see a police car at least five times a day, as well as parking patrol and officers on bikes and on foot. If you don’t want to be downtown, so be it, but get your story straight. Putting the baseball stadium at Hara would have been a disaster.
By joe doggenhoff
March 19, 2010 4:10 PM | Link to this
I think the real reason that reason the traffic accidents in Dayton are trending downward is due more to population decline than to cameras scaring people into compliance. Dayton with it’s parking meters downtown, high taxes for businesses,and high crime give little incentive to travel through let alone travel to Dayton.
By Vestal Hartman
March 20, 2010 3:34 PM | Link to this
We pay city taxes that gives us a right to travel from point A to point B. Why should the city be able to put cameras out there to monitor our travels. Also, some of the red lights have too short a period of time on the yellow light. So if I travel the speed limit I should have the time to get through the intersection. I say get rid of the cameras. Don’t like them.
By LARRY FLYNT: A TRUE DAYTONIAN
March 20, 2010 9:18 PM | Link to this
I can show you better things to do with a camera
By davidss2
March 21, 2010 7:33 AM | Link to this
Henry doesn’t realize how much public money went into siting and buying a stadium for a private business to operate as their own downtown. The Hara site was going to be all private money. Even the RTA shared some of their “own” huge money reservoir to fund the stadium and state grants went to building the stadium there. Why didn’t the City of Dayton just pay for it all out of all the money they sucked up from the area through the previous decades? They’d already wasted it all on their own other social projects. Hee hee. It’s fun to play with other people’s money. Maybe those 5 police cars driving by on their way somewhere else downtown should be looking for red-light runners and checking for speeders to stop; that would take some dangerous drivers and drivers with warrants and violations off the street. Henry probably only drives in and out among the other commuters so he doesn’t see what’s really out there. Dayton has a safety and a reality problem. In another decade Dayton will be even lower in national rankings than it is. They’ll take the surrounding area down with them. So keep on being happy you see cars driving by: what HENRY didn’t say was that he sees FLASHING LIGHTS on the cars as they stopped cars to check for drugs, impaired drivers, no insurance, etc., as they stopped them for speeding, light-running, weaving, unsafe vehicles, etc.
By smoke-mirrors
October 28, 2010 6:49 AM | Link to this
Trotwood is installing 7 more cameras. They need them since the city is in jepordy and they can only run three cars a shift. This sounds dangerously low.
By smoke-mirrors
October 28, 2010 6:50 AM | Link to this
Trotwood is installing 7 more cameras. They need them since the city is in jepordy and they can only run three cars a shift. This sounds dangerously low.