Primaries Offer Some Voters a Choice on Speed Cameras

Some incumbent lawmakers who voted for statewide speed cameras face challenges not only in the November 2nd election but also in Maryland's September 14th primaries.

One challenger in the District 16 House of Delegates race in Montgomery County, Craig Herskowitz has built his campaign around the issue of speed cameras and believes he can unseat one of the three incumbent delegates, all of whom voted for statewide speed cameras, in the Democratic primary.  One of the incumbents, William Bronrott, was one of the sponsors of the House version of last year’s statewide speed camera bill.

Craig Herskowitz, Democratic Candidate for District 16 Delegate

Craig notes on his campaign website that "The speed camera program piloted in Montgomery County has been implemented in a way that denies due process, presumes guilt instead of innocence, and fails to provide immediate and proper notice of the offense. The program infringes on people's civil rights and liberties by automatically placing guilt on the owner of the vehicle and requiring that person to betray a family member or a friend in order to prove his or her innocence. "  His website displays a quote from the president of the Fraternal Order of Police Union, Walter Bader, who said "You can be held more accountable for going 12 miles an hour over the speed limit in Montgomery County than for being a gang member in the country illegally".  Craig has pledged to "protect the rights of motorists" and has placed transportation issues such as traffic congestion among his top priorities.

Read Full Story>>

New License Plate Scanners Will Monitor Maryland Drivers

Governor O'Malley has approved the purchase of 105 new Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) systems.  These devices are used by state police to scan the tag number of every passing vehicle and search a database of license plate numbers for those with some outstanding violation, warrant, or red flag.  The O'Malley administration has stated that the purpose of the systems is to find stolen vehicles, wanted criminals, or vehicles flagged for 'amber alerts' etc.  However the "Security Integration Strategy" document released by the state lists one of the goals of the LPR program as "Identify vehicles linked to drivers with expired licenses, expired tags, or unpaid fines."  The document also note that  "In a single day, LPRs in use by the Maryland Transportation Authority Police were responsible for the recovery of almost $50,000 in scofflaw fees for toll tag violations."

Read Full Story>>

Mount Rainier, Brentwood Lowered Speed Limits at Camera Sites

The town of Mount Rainier recently began using a speed camera on the 3700 block of Rhode Island Avenue (US Route 1). StopBigBrotherMD has discovered that the speed limit at that camera site was recently lowered by 10mph, from 35mph to 25mph. Photos taken in the first week of August by a concerned citizen show the 25mph speed limit just north of 37th street. The speed limit north of the current camera site is 35mph, with the camera site located about 45 yards south of the 25mph sign (marked on the photo below, partially concealed by trees and other obstacles).   An image extracted from Google street view shows the same site taken before the camera deployment. Notice that the 25mph sign is not present in these legacy images.

Before

After

A 25mph zone did exist previously on Rhode Island Avenue southbound, but started south of 37th street, approximately 500 feet south of the point where it is at now. Before the new 25mph sign the speed the limit in the section around the camera was still posted as 35mph.

We also discovered that there was previously a 35mph speed limit sign just south of 37th street in the northbound lane, marking the (former) end of that 25mph zone. Now that sign was removed and has been replaced by a 25mph sign a short distance away.

Before

After

The next-door town of Brentwood has been using a camera at 38th street in the northbound lane, enforcing the 25mph speed limit in the area formerly marked as 35mph as the drivers are exiting the newly created school zone.

Read Full Story>>

Montgomery County Scamera Contract Includes Massive PR Campaign

Montgomery County's Speed Camera contract with ACS State and Local Solutions includes a 15 page section describing the public relations campaign which ACS helps to coordinate (SEE DOCUMENT). The contract describes PR campaigns ACS has assisted elsewhere and approaches which it advises the county to take in selling the cameras to the public and deflating criticisms and opposition. The contract details how ACS would assist in creating public relations material, manipulate the media, influence state and local lawmakers, and even 'inform' judges on the company's version of the facts on the camera.

"ACS believes that ongoing media relations are essential to sustaining successful photo speed enforcement public information and public education programs. As such, our team recommends that the County's public information program does not stop once the initial events and fanfare are over. Over the length of the program, ACS recommends that the County carry out an extended media relations program that uses the photo speed enforcement program to promote traffic safety.

This program, as currently envisioned by our team, would include:

* Writing and placing one or more articles in the local, daily newspaper of the County's choice.
* Identifying and contacting key local print journalists and editors in order to brief them on the project and solicit their interest and support. ACS experience shows that outreach to traffic reporters and commuter journalists such as Dr. Gridlock of the Washington Post increases support and understanding of the program.
* Identifying and contacting key radio and television outlets to encourage coverage
* Identifying and contacting key radio "drive time" traffic reporters to brief them on the project.
* Organizing a media fax network for the purpose of keeping media representatives aware of the status of Montgomery County's Photo Speed Enforcement Program.
* Composing, for distribution to the media, issue papers that address pertinent public policy issues raised by photo speed enforcement, as well as answer-specific anticipated criticisms of photo speed enforcement.
* Organizing additional news conferences on the occasion of significant project milestones.
* Regularly identifying and pitching photo speed enforcement's positive message to electronic and print media that support the program's public safety goals."

"We have been successful in providing the necessary information to high profile newspapers such as the Washington Post where positive stories about the enforcement programs have been published. The result is an enforcement program that is highly supported by the public."

Read Full Story>>

Montgomery County Traffic Fatalities Double as Cameras Increase

Montgomery County reported its 27th traffic fatality of 2010 on in June. Tragically this is more than double the 13 traffic deaths the county experienced in the same period of January 1,2009 through June 28, 2009. (Information from the Gazette )

In June 2009 Montgomery County touted a drop in traffic fatalities for the first few months of the year, claiming the county's speed camera program was largely responsible, and the head of the program Captain Damskey crediting the cameras with having a "long-lasting, profound effect on our roadways". The county downplayed certain facts however, including the fact that traffic fatalities had increased in the county from 2007 to 2008, and that there had been an unusually large nationwide decline in traffic fatalities occurring both from 2007 to 2008 and 2008 to 2009. In March 2010 the NHTSA released data showing that there had been a nationwide reduction in traffic fatalities of 8.9% from 2008 to 2009, following a similar drop the prior year, with an overall 22% reduction in nationwide fatalities from 2005 to 2009.

Read Full Story>>

Brentwood Offers Speed Camera Citation Refunds

The following was recently posted by police to a local police blog and one or more local listservs on Friday July 23rd:
"Due to an error we are offering to void speed camera citations that were issued between June 24th thru July 13th, 2010. Please email your citation number to chiefbrentwoodpd@juno.com with Citation Amnesty Program written in the subject line.

Any speed citations issued before or after the dates listed are not included in this amnesty program .

This program does not include or involve speed camera citations that were issued by the City of Mount Rainier. "

We advise anyone receiving one of these citations to take advantage of the city's offer to correct their error.

===================================

Update 7/29/2010: The Washington Examiner has followed up on this story. When asked Brentwood Mayor Xzavier Montgomery-Wright attributed the refund to an "internal error". "I want to end this [phone] call and not respond," she said, declining to identify the town's camera contractor. "The people calling the press and telling them about this are just trying to shut down the [camera] program."
The Examiner received conflicting responses from the town police Chief and the camera vendor, Optotraffic/Sigma Space.

8/16: The Gazette reported on August 5th that the town plans to refund all citations. 3500 citations were apparently improperly approved during the 3 week period. However we have been informed by another source that this may take a very long time since the Brentwood police are understaffed.

Charles County To Get Speed Cameras

On June 15 2010, with little fanfare or debate, the Charles County commissioners approved the use of speed cameras. A public hearing was held on June 15 to discuss the ordinance (Bill#2010-10), however no members of the public other than county officials were present to speak. The county website shows that the legislation was unanimously approved the same day. The 'press releases' section of the county website did not include a posting for the hearing or for the passage of the legislation.

The legislation goes into effect July 30th. Before deploying cameras the county will need to sign a contract with a speed camera vendor. The legislation states that the cameras will only be used in "school zones", however in most of the rest of the state local governments have simply created new school zones solely for the use of speed cameras regardless of whether those locations were ever considered school zones previously (despite published guidelines from the SHA stating that this should not be done).

Concerned citizens can contact the board of commissioners :
email: commissioner@charlescounty.org
mail: 200 Baltimore Street
P.O. Box 2150, La Plata, MD 20646
phone: 301-645-0550 . 301-870-3000

DC Adds New Cameras, Revenues Surge

DC is on track for another record year of speed camera revenues. Data released by the DC police show that DC speed cameras brought in $24,828 in the first 8 months of FY2010, compared with $20,228,725 for the same 8 months in FY09. Based on this the district is in an excellent position to exceed year $33million in revenue and 553,900 citations from the cameras last year. Much of this revenue has come from Maryland residents.

Dc claims the cameras are not for revenue (as they all say) and have reduced speeding., But AAA spokesman John Townsend had a different view on the cameras success, saying the cameras have not modified driver behavior: "It seems that the District has been paying lip service to traffic safety, but people realize it's all about the revenue and they're not changing their behavior." he quoted to the Washington Examiner.

To keep the cash flowing DC is adding 12 new speed camera locations, many of which are located near the border with Maryland. The following new camera locations were announced earlier in July. Pay particular mind to the addition of three camera sites on I-295.

New mobile radar locations
* 3500 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE (North)
* 3500 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE (South)
* 1400 Alabama Ave. SE (East)
* 1400 Alabama Ave. SE (West).
* 5200 Southern Ave. SE (South)
* 3100 North Capitol St. NE (North).
* Interstate-295 at Exit 1 SW (South)
* 4100 South Dakota Ave. NE (North).
* Suitland Pkwy SE (.9m south of Stanton Road eastbound)
* Suitland Pkwy SE (.2m south of Stanton Road westbound)

New "work zone: camera locations
* I-295 at Eastern Avenue NE (North)
* I-295 at Eastern Avenue NE (South)

With the new additions the District has 10 fixed location cameras plus 35 mobile locations patrolled by 12 camera units.

Arizona Shuts Down Freeway Scameras

As of midnight last night the State of Arizona shut down all of its freeway speed cameras. Governor Jan Brewer (R) decided to end the state's two year photo enforcement contract with Redflex which her predecessor, Janet Napolitano (D) signed. The state will remove a total of 76 fixed and mobile cameras from Arizona state highways by labor day.

The move was largely in response to a year long effort by the group CameraFraud.com whose slogan 'The Cameras Are Coming Down" is finally coming to pass. Additionally, the program began to lose profitability when many drivers learned that Arizona law required in person service of citations and refused to pay. Governor Napolitano (now serving as Secretary of Homeland Security) had previously predicted the cameras would bring in $90million in revenue, but in fact over half of the citations issued remain uncollected and unenforceable.

Several municipal programs still continue to operate in Arizona, and CameraFRAUD has pledged to bring the cameras down in those cities one by one, bypassing the legislature with local referendums.

Princess Anne Considering Speed Cams

WMDT47 News has reported that the town of Princess Anne(Somerset County) is considering creating a speed camera program. The County Commissioners will be discussing the matter in their July 26th work session. The town would need to pass an ordinance authorizing the use of speed monitoring systems prior to their use. It is unclear whether the date announced constitutes a 'public hearing' for such legislation. We could find no mention of speed cameras anywhere on the town's website and no agenda was listed on the town website for the meeting listed in the WMDT story.

Residents who wish to state their views should contact the town commissioners NOW and not wait until AFTER the cameras are deployed to do so.

New Forest Heights Speed Cameras Enrage Residents

The Gazette has reported that residents in the Prince George's County town of Forest Heights have taken issue with newly installed speed cameras on state highway 210.

The cameras are located on Indian Head Highway/ Route 210 just south of the intersection with Livingston Road in Forest Heights. The speed limit drops from 40-mph to 35mph immediately before the cameras. Some residents claim that "the town ignored recommendations — although not mandates — by the Maryland State Highway Administration not to install the cameras on a hill or near traffic signals, highway ramps or speed-transition zones, as the two cameras are."

The article states that the town created a 1/2 mile long new school zone on highway 210 (just as many other towns and cities have been doing), since the town is only authorized under state law to use the cameras in school zones. Residents noted that the highway is not close to crosswalks, has limited egress, no schools in the immediate area, and leads to a ramp for the Capital Beltway. There are two elementary schools in Forest Heights, but neither one is along highway 210. The town also spent $10,000 (of taxpayer money) on a 'feasibility study' that determined the highway 210 location was adequate "because of high traffic volume".

Mayor Andrea McCutcheon claims that the speed cameras are justified in that location because "the majority of drivers are exceeding the speed limit", even though by definition that means the speed limit is NOT set at the 85th percentile speed which is the recommended speed limit by many standard traffic engineering practices.

Read Full Story>>

Prince George's County Stonewalls Public Information Act Request

Officials in the Prince George's County Government have ignored a Maryland Public Information Act(MPIA) request sent by StopBigBrotherMD.org for now over 3 months.

We sent a request to the Prince George's DPWT and county executive's office for the following information on March 11, 2009:
"1) Whether Prince George’s County has received requests by any municipalities in Prince George’s County to create new school zones or to expand existing school zones on county maintained roads since April 1, 2009. If so, I wish to receive copies of those requests.
2) Whether Prince George’s County has received requests by any municipalities in Prince George’s County for permission to use speed cameras on county maintained roads since April 1, 2009. If so, I wish to receive copies of those requests.
3) If any of those requests were accepted or rejected, I wish to receive copies of the letters or documents making the acceptances or rejections.
4) Whether since April 10, 2009 Prince George’s County has stated that there would be any exactions, fees, or that there would be additional requirements beyond those stipulated in state law article 21-803 and 21-809, either for the creation of new school zones or for the municipality to receive permission to use speed cameras on any roads. If so, I wish to receive copies of the letters or documents which stated this."

In the request we mentioned that we believed the records were relevant to new legislation being discussed before the state legislature at that time, and that the public had a right to see them before that legislation was voted on. It was our interpretation that this legislation was intended to facilitate the creation of new school zones by Prince George's Municipalities solely for the purpose of using speed cameras, as had already been occurring in a significant number of locations. This interpretation is supported by the fiscal policy note which read "To the extent the bill results in the placement of additional speed monitoring systems in Prince George’s County, Transportation Trust Fund (TTF), special fund, and general fund revenues increase from penalties and court costs paid following a contested case under the bill, and TTF revenues increase from the collection of additional fees by the Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA) associated with the nonpayment of speed monitoring system citations." and "Revenues may increase significantly for Prince George’s County and any municipal corporation in the county that establishes a speed monitoring system as a result of the prepayment of fines in uncontested cases." However our emails and phone calls to some of the sponsors asking for clarification of the legislation's purpose went unanswered.

Read Full Story>>

Citizens Arrested for Filming Police

ANOTHER person has been arrested for trying to record police in Maryland. Yvonne Nicole Shaw was arrested by St. Mary's sheriff's deputies responding to a noise complaint last weekend at a Lexington Park neighborhood. Sheriff's Cpl. Patrick Handy wrote in a report saw her holding her cell phone "in a manner suggesting she was recording our activity" seized the phone, reviewed the camcorder contents, and "could hear my voice and the voices of the other subjects I was talking to". "She did admit to recording our encounter on her cell phone," the corporal wrote, "for the purpose of trying to show the police are harassing people." Yvonne was arrested, charged under Maryland Wiretapping Laws, and taken to a St Mary's county jail.

"I honestly did not know that I was not able to do that," Shaw said. "He just snatched my phone from me and locked me up."

Read Full Story>>

Baltimore Continues Ignoring Speed Camera Sign Requirements

We previously cited examples where Baltimore City deployed 'school zone' speed cameras without school zone signs, and in one case even configured a camera to issue tickets at the wrong speed limit for weeks. Now we've been sent another example where the city is failing to meet signage requirements for speed cameras, and where they may be enforcing a speed limit which is confusing to drivers.

The Maryland state law authorizing speed cameras states that before activating an unmanned stationary speed monitoring system, the local jurisdiction shall... "Ensure that each sign that designates a school zone indicates that speed monitoring systems are in use in school zones."

The following image is of a school zone sign for a camera at 2700 block of Orleans Street in Baltimore City. Well, here's a school zone sign, and there's a speed camera in it, so where's the photo enforcement sign? The citizen who sent this image confirmed that they found no signs indicating speed cameras in use anywhere leading up to the camera site.

We have received similar reports about the lack of signs indicating speed cameras in use elsewhere in the city.

In addition, according to a citation received by the car's owner (who was not the driver of the vehicle in this case) the camera is apparently issuing tickets based on this 25mph speed limit, and is doing so from 6am-8pm. Preceding this sign the speed limit is posted at 30mph. But look at the sign, it reads "7:00 a.m. to 4:00pm". A driver who read this sign might reasonably believe they were still in a 30mph zone and that the school zone was not in effect after 4pm when school is out of session.

Of course it is unlikely Baltimore will ever bring all of its speed camera zones into compliance with the law. Unless drivers in Maryland voice their objections in the November elections and vote against the lawmakers who approved the cameras you won't need signs to know where the cameras are: they will be everywhere.

Speed Camera Lobbyist charged with Ethics Violations

The Washington Post has reported that an ethics complaint has been filed against Sean Malone, a longtime O'Malley aide who is now an Annapolis lobbyist. Until September 2008, Malone was employed by O'Malley to lobby the General Assembly on behalf of his agenda, which included speed cameras and slots. Malone held a number of previous positions under O'Malley when he was Governor and when O'Malley was Mayor of Baltimore. The complaint, filed by former state's public defender Nancy Forester, alleges that by representing clients with interests in speed cameras and slots (specifically ACS State and Local Solutions), Malone violated a provision that bars private-sector lobbyists from engaging in matters in which they were directly involved as government employees.

Malone responds that the accusation is baseless and that enough time had passed between his public and private employment the he was free to represent private clients.

Reports filed with the Maryland State Ethics commission show that Malone was retained by ACS State and Local solutions between February 2009 and April 2008 to lobby in favor of speed camera legislation. The report lists a large number of campaign contributions made by Malone to state elected officials. ACS spent heavily on lobbying efforts prior to the passage of statewide speed cameras including buying steak dinners for state lawmakers.

ACS State and Local Solutions is the contractor for speed camera programs in Montgomery County, Baltimore City, and Bowie. ACS was recently awarded a contract to run the state freeway 'work zone' speed camera program (made possible by last year's statewide speed camera legislation), with an initial estimated value of $20.9million.

Judge Dismisses Camera Lawsuit

The Washington Examiner has reported that a Circuit Court judge dismissed the lawsuit against Montgomery County's contingent fee contract. The case had been in the courts for two years and was scheduled for a jury trial in July. The court refused previous requests by the county to dismiss the case. However this week Judge David Boyton made the decision that the county's contract, which pays ACS State and Local Solutions a 40% cut out of each ticket does not violate state law which reads "If a contractor operates a speed monitoring system on behalf of a local jurisdiction, the contractor’s fee may not be contingent on the number of citations issued or paid."

According the ACS's own press release : "Under the contract, ACS processes violations; generates and mails notices; schedules adjudication and appeals appointments; provides document imaging and correspondence management; provides walk-in customer service; maintains camera equipment; and provides pay-by-web, pay-by-phone, and integrated voice response systems."

It is unknown at this time whether the plaintiffs in the lawsuit will appeal the decision.

StopBigBrotherMD.org has previously documented statements by state lawmakers who include the ban on contingent fee contracts as part of their justification for supporting speed cameras. This website has also documented the fact that the county government has publicly promised to eliminate their contingent fee arrangement on several occasions to remove 'even the appearance of impropriety' but instead has renewed and expanded the arrangement. Nothing in this decision alters the hypocrisy and deception the government has engaged in, nor does it alter any of the many other abuses we have documented.

What this shows is how easily all of the advertised restrictions on speed cameras can and will be circumvented by local governments, enabled by teams of lawyers and PR campaigns paid for with our tax dollars. Those governments will view this as a green light to increase the extent to which they bend, fold, spindle and mutilate those restrictions. This website will continue to expose the corruption surrounding speed camera programs in Maryland.

================================================

Update 8/04/2010: We have been informed that the plaintiffs have filed an appeal. Briefs will be submitted to the special court of appeals within a few months. The People have a right to see this issue put before a jury; this matter is NOT closed.

Hagerstown Resident Issued DC Red Light Ticket In Error

The Herald-Mail recently reported on a case of a Hagerstown resident who received a red light camera ticket from DC dated March 17, 2010. There were just two problem: she'd never been in DC in her life, and the car in the picture wasn't hers. The grainy image of the license plate looked similar to hers, but some of the characters were not readable.

Easy enough to fix right? She called the DC police who told her to send a picture of her car and a copy of her registration. She did so and received a response on April 5 saying they would investigate.... “It can take up to 6 months for a decision to be rendered” the response from DC stated. After getting nowhere for over a month the Herald-Mail contacted DC police on her behalf. Faced with the media getting involved, DC finally concluded that it 'might' not have been her car and stated that they would void the citation.

Local Governments Write Speed Camera Revenues Into Budgets

Cities and Counties in Maryland are currently writing up their FY2011 budgets. Included in many of these are their estimates for speed camera revenues, with widely varying expectations... as well as varying degrees of creativity in addressing the constraints on that revenue.

Under current state law, local governments in Maryland are permitted to collect no more than 10% of their total budgets from speed camera fines "after expenses" -- in other words, if a city has a total budget of $10million they can collect $1million after expenses after all expenses for the program are paid -- with the remainder going to the state treasury. This money is required to be spent only on "public safety". However neither the term "public safety" nor the term "expense" is clearly spelled out, leaving a lot of wiggle room for any town or city which wish to get around those rules and maximize their revenue from this source.

New Carrollton wrote $750,000 of speed camera revenues into their budget, just under 10% of their total budget as coming from speed camera revenues, with the city's total budget increasing by 7.55%. Most of the speed camera money appears to be used to fund police department items, $237,917 for "employee services", 47,320 for "health and life insurance", 24,748 for "retirement pension". $60,550 of speed camera money is budgeted for general police budget items zeroed out of the general fund budget including telephones, uniforms, office supplies & printing, 'Dues & Subscriptions", "Travel & Meetings" "Public Official Liability & Bonding", and "small weapons".

Cheverly appears to be FAR more ambitious. The town wrote $2.8million worth of "fines and forfeitures" into their budget overview, compared to just $258,200 in last year's budget. The difference between the two ($2.55million) comprises about 36% of the town's total FY11 budget. No details were included in this budget overview, but the category "public safety" increased by $334,096, "Public Works" by $483,660, and "General Government" by $1,408,467. The town's budgeted total revenues increased by 58% from FY10 to FY11. Cheverly recently lowered the default speed limit in the town from 25mph to 20mph shortly after they approved the use of speed cameras. One council member's comments about speed camera revenues were recorded in the May 14, 2009 council meeting minutes as "CM Schachter will have questions about how creatively and expansive the Town could be in interpreting the law regarding the expenditure of these funds. Noted that it doesn't bother him one bit to make money to be used for additional public good. Can we lower speed limits around the schools? ". The town's first speed camera location was recently reported to be on the 2800 block of Cheverly Avenue.

Read Full Story>>

Sykesville Residents Overturn Speed Cameras

On Tuesday May 4 2010 the town of Sykesville became the first municipality in Maryland to overturn speed cameras by a popular vote. The town council voted 5-1 for an ordinance authorizing speed cameras with the support of the town mayor. The measure was forced to a referendum when town resident Chris Martin and supporters collected signatures from over 15% of the town's residents in less than 20 days. Out of 529 votes cast, 321(60.6%) voted to repeal the ordinance.

The town government of Sykesville had approved 2 mass mailings to 'dispel disinformation' about the cameras and argue the council majority's position paid for with public funds. Petition supporters countered by deploying signs and hand distributing their own flier, paid for by Sykesville residents with private funds.

Photo Enforcement programs have consistently lost at the ballot box whenever voters have had the opportunity to decide on them directly. This result is contrary to polls typically publicized by governments supporting the cameras; for example the insurance industry back IIHS report in 2008 on Montgomery County's program claimed that 62% of residents support speed cameras. The Mayor of Sykesville had previously stated he believed town residents either supported the cameras or were evenly split. So far referendums have taken place for speed cameras and/or red light cameras in Sulphur Louisaiana, Chillicothe Ohio, Steubenville Ohio, Peoria Arizona, Batavia Illinois, Anchorage Alaska, Heath Ohio, College Station Texas, and Arlington Texas. In every case voters have decided against the cameras.

Montgomery County Safe Speed Also Missing Camera Logs

Earlier we reported that the City Of Gaithersburg did not have daily self test logs recorded every day for some of its cameras. It turns out that this is the case for some county-run cameras as well.

We have discovered that several cameras managed by Montgomery County (not just Gaithersburg) have similar gaps in the daily setup logs. Logs for 3 randomly selected cameras were requested via a public information act request, along with the number of citations issued on each day. The results showed that for each of the 12 camera/days the test was NOT performed on that day, in each case at least 2 days went by with no daily self test log. 9 of the 12 camera/days had citations being issued, with 1 report of 0 citations and 2 camera days where no response was provided (the reason for those 3 days is not know at this time)

27000 Ridge Road SB
Date Requested _ Date Set Up _ Date Shut Down _ #Citations Issued on Requested Day
11-28-2009 _____ 11/27/09 ____ 11/30/09 _______ 60
12-27-2009 _____ 12/23/09 ____ 12/28/09 _______ 63
01-03-2010 _____ 12/31/09 ____ 01/05/10 _______ 37
01-31-2010 _____ 01/28/09 ____ 02/01/10 _______ 21

19600 Georgia Ave NB
Date Requested _ Date Set Up _ Date Shut Down _ #Citations Issued on Requested Day
11-28-2009 _____ 11/27/09 ____ 11/30/09 _______ 64
12-27-2009 _____ 12/24/09 ____ 12/28/09 _______ 74
01-03-2010 _____ 12/31/09 ____ 01/04/10 _______ 53
01-31-2010 _____ 01/29/09 ____ 02/01/10 _______ 49

13600Darnestown Rd Wb
Date Requested _ Date Set Up _ Date Shut Down _ #Citations Issued on Requested Day
11-28-2009 _____ 11/27/09 ____ 11/30/09 _______ 52
12-27-2009 _____ 12/24/09 ____ 12/28/09 _______ unknown
01-03-2010 _____ 12/31/09 ____ 01/05/10 _______ unknown
01-31-2010 _____ 01/29/09 ____ 02/01/10 _______ 0

Read Full Story>>

Baltimore City Speed Camera Issues Hundreds of Tickets In Error

A speed camera located at 2200 West Cold Spring Lane in Baltimore issued at least 932 citations after being calibrated with the wrong speed limit. A report by WBFF TV revealed that the camera had been configured for a speed limit of 30mph when the posted speed limit was in fact 35mph. Over 200 of the citations had already been paid by the time the city Department of Transportation admitted the error. The city has stated that the tickets would be voided and the paid citations refunded, however at the time of the report this had not yet occurred.

WBFF also reported that the location apparently was not marked as a school zone. Under state law speed cameras in Baltimore can only be used in School zones or work zones, and according to state transportation article 21-803 a road is only considered school zone if it is marked by appropriate signage. Baltimore City circumvented this by creating large number of new school zones solely for the purpose of using speed cameras -- even though doing so conflicts with State Highway Administration guidelines -- and in some cases the city has added the speed cameras before putting up the legally required signs.

Read Full Story>>