Newspaper At Fault For Downturn in Red Light Camera Ticket Proceeds

The SN-L has a story on the red lght cameras.

When intentions to install the cameras were announced, planners said revenues from tickets would likely cover the cost of the devices.
"I think because it was covered (by the media) so heavily, people know where that one camera's at," Springfield engineer Jason Haynesh said. "We kind of feel that as we start getting more of these in, people might forget which locations they're at. They may go back to running the reds."
An average of 1.5 tickets a day for each camera is needed for the devices to pay for themselves.
In addition to limiting a bit of red-light dishonesty, the cameras are intended to cut down dangerous accidents in Springfield, Haynes said.
Curiously, Haynes said that accidents often initially increase at intersections where cameras are placed.

The media is responsible for the lack of tickets? See Tony, people ARE reading the paper,your job is safe! (Or at least the criminal element who would run red lights is reading the paper.) The city is banking on putting up more cameras and people forgetting where they are at? You can see the dang things. There are cameras up at Kearney and Kansas Expressway (isn't that an oxymoron, Kansas Expressway).

Somebody thought this was a good idea to reduce red light violations and increase revenue. Then it was scaled back that the company that owned the cameras would get the revenue from the tickets to pay for the cameras. Now, the city is having to fund the cameras. When will somebody realize this isn't good stewardship of the people's money.

So the spy cameras:
1) Lose money for the city.
2) Cause more crashes.

Oh.
Posted by: Crawdad on Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:41 am