Santa Ana's top news & views blog

Santa Ana's top news & views blog

Tag Archives: red light cameras

The City Council cancels the red light cameras but they’ll stay until 6/2015

Posted on by Posted in Civic Affairs, Santa Ana 2 Comments

no on red light camears

The Santa Ana City Council Tuesday voted unanimously to terminate the city’s contract with a red-light camera vendor that is the subject of a federal bribery investigation, with council members saying the nearly $500 fines associated with red light tickets are an excessive burden on residents, according to the Voice of OC.

However, the contract with Phoenix-based RedFlex Traffic Systems doesn’t expire until June, 2015 and city officials said the cameras must stay up until then because they can’t terminate the contract early.

You know that some of these Council Members must have voted for these cameras originally.  Voters should certainly hold that against them in November. Continue reading→

Should the City of Santa Ana install more red light cameras, or get rid of them all?

Posted on by Posted in Civic Affairs, Civil Rights, Public Safety, Santa Ana, Transportation 4 Comments

 


(polls)

“Despite a steady stream of court challenges, Santa Ana is poised to double the number of automatic cameras it has watching over intersections for red-light runners,” according to the O.C. Register.

This despite recent evidence that we posted here, indicating that the City of Santa Ana is losing money on this program.  And despite the fact that the courts just don’t like these cameras.

I think that the Santa Ana City Council looks at this as a way to help increase law enforcement, but I think if that is the case, they are off-base.

Red light runners aren’t killing our young people.  Other young people are.  The drug runners are using our teenagers and even younger kids to sell drugs.  The gang violence we are seeing is mostly fighting over turf – because they are all making a mint selling a ton of drugs in our city.

Folks, we need to contact the City Council and our Mayor and let them know we don’t want any more of these red light cameras and we want them all removed!

Click here to contact Mayor Miguel Pulido.  Click here to contact the Santa Ana City Council.  You can contact City Manager Dave Ream’s assistant, Mark Lawrence, at MLawrence@santa-ana.org. 

Are Santa Ana’s red light cameras wasting thousands of taxpayer dollars?

Posted on by Posted in Civic Affairs, Public Safety, Santa Ana, Taxes, Transportation 2 Comments

A Santa Ana resident is asking the Santa Ana City Council to stop wasting money on red light cameras.  Here are his thoughts, which are well-researched and quite compelling:

Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers:

I wrote to you earlier this month about the proposed contract (a copy of that email is pasted below). I have just read the staff report prepared for Monday night’s meeting, and have the following comments.

1. Cost neutrality has not been removed from the contract – the amendment is unchanged from that submitted to you for the meeting of the 7th, and it does not deal with the cost-neutral language contained in Section 26(a) of the 2002 contract. The staff report submitted for tonight’s meeting does not even discuss the issue, or the effect of current legislation in Sacramento. I hope you will ask your staff for a detailed, written explanation as to why they think cost neutrality should be retained.

2. The contract is also unchanged with regard to the monthly rent for existing cameras. In my June 6 email I said the City could save $1.6 million by negotiating a rent comparable to that in Escondido and Garden Grove. Per the article here, another city is doing just such a negotiation. It should also be noted that if Santa Ana’s losses continue, the City will lose $9.7 million over the course of the new contract. Click here to see the Loss Analysis dated June 19.  And click here to see my financial analysis.

3. In the June 6 email I wrote about the many cities which have closed their camera program. Now there is one more, as Union City has announced it will allow its contract to expire without renewal.

Regards,

Jim
jim@vivahermosa.com

Previously sent:

6-6-10

Honorable Councilmembers:

Tonight, please consider:

1. As cost-neutrality is illegal (a violation of CVC 21455.5(g) – see P. v. Franco), the City will need to remove the cost-neutral
compensation from the contract. This is something that has been done recently by the cities of Culver City, Davis, Escondido, Gardena, Laguna Woods, Millbrae, Newark, San Bernardino, San Juan Capistrano, San Mateo, South Gate and Whittier. If you have any doubt about the legal environment surrounding cost-neutral contracts, ask your staff to report back to you. (The cost-neutral language appears in Section 26(a) of the City’s 2002 contract, click here to see it. Also attached in that same pdf is the similar cost-neutral clause from the Culver City contract of 2007, which in December 2009 they removed via a mid-term amendment which
had as its sole purpose the removal of cost-neutrality. A copy of that amendment is at the end of the pdf.

2. Without cost-neutrality, the City will be obligated to pay the full monthly rent, even if the fine revenue is less than the rent – as it has been. For example, in the four months November 2009 to February 2010, the City paid 52% more in rent than it received in revenue – an out-of-pocket expenditure of $145,000 in four months. The source documents and analysis sheet are attached. (It should also be noted that when the raw figures were adjusted to more-closely reflect the true cost and revenue, the program cost the City 130% more than it received in revenue. See the analysis sheet.) Thus, if the City elects to continue the program, it should try to get the lowest monthly rent possible, in order to minimize the loss. The City does not need to pay the $3900 (per-camera) rent indicated in today’s staff report. Today is a “buyer’s market” – RedFlex has not won a new contract in California since San Rafael signed on in March of 2009, and is eager to retain those it has. Many other cities are paying significantly less than $3900. For example, Escondido is paying $2833 for 15 cameras, and Garden Grove is paying $2900 for 14 cameras. I suggest that you order
that this multi-million dollar project be put out to competitive bid. If you can shave $1000 off the monthly rent, you will see a savings of $1.6 million over the seven years of the contract.

3. You would be in good company if you decide NOT to continue the program. The Hemet and San Bruno councils made that same decision last month (May). Also in May, the City of Burlingame announced it would be closing down its year-old program, and paying an early termination fee in order to do so. In April, the Loma Linda and San Carlos city councils voted to let their contracts expire without renewal; they had hoped to terminate the contracts immediately, but would have had to pay Redflex a big penalty for the privilege. Compton, Cupertino, El Monte, Fairfield, Fresno, Fullerton, Indian Wells, Irvine, Maywood, Montclair, Moreno Valley, Paramount, Redlands, Roseville, Santa Fe Springs, Santa Maria and Upland all have already shut down their camera systems.

Regards,

Jim

jim@vivahermosa.com

Click here an analysis of the Santa Ana red light invoices.

Click here to see the Santa Ana red light invoices.