Red-light camera firm in talks with Jacksonville has been kicked out of other cities

The company Jacksonville is negotiating with to install at least 25 red light cameras at intersections around the city has been kicked out of several U.S. cities because revenues didn’t equal projections.

Jacksonville is negotiating with Redflex Traffic Systems, an Arizona-based subsidiary of Australian Redflex Holdings. The company’s contract with Albuquerque, N.M., was shot down late last year by voters and the City Council, and two West Coast cities canceled their deals.

Albuquerque Councilman Dan Lewis said he was neutral about the cameras at first but eventually came out against them when he learned more.

The city asked the University of New Mexico in December 2009 to study the effects of the cameras on crashes. It found the number of crashes at intersections with cameras increased 3.5 percent, mostly due to a jump in rear-end collisions.

Also, Lewis said, the city was running in red ink.

“The program began to lose about $100,000 a month,” he said. Although the company renegotiated, the City Council followed the non-binding vote of the people to end the contract.

Redflex billed the city $4.5 million shortly thereafter, claiming the city had to pony up its share of revenue from tickets that were still outstanding even after the program was canceled. The city is currently disputing the claim in court, the Albuquerque Journal newspaper reported.

Lewis also pointed out that the cameras create a perverse incentive for cities to make sure the number of violators remains high, noting that if driver behavior actually changed, the number of violations would decrease over time and the cameras would produce less revenue.

He argues that other, more inexpensive safety measures, such as extending yellow light lengths, would be more effective.

Andrea Aker, a spokeswoman for Redflex, disagreed.

“It isn’t true,” she said. “Data is indisputable that safety cameras change driver behavior.

“Cities that operate safety camera programs consistently show a reduction in red light running and violations.”

Albuquerque isn’t the only city that has kicked Redflex out of town: Burien, Wash., and Glendale, Calif., both abandoned their Redflex-operated camera systems this year.

The details of the agreement between Redflex and Jacksonville, including payment terms, have yet to be finalized, but Redflex’s bid submission proposes a fixed monthly cost to the city of $3,999 per approach at the 25 intersections.

The company says its pricing model is designed to require “zero out-of-pocket expense and zero financial commitment,” and that the city would be able to address its overhead expenses before addressing the Redflex invoices.

If Jacksonville’s ticket monthly totals exceed $3,999 per approach, the excess is split between the city and state. If it’s less, the city owes that amount to Redflex.

The only city in Northeast Florida with red light cameras is Green Cove Springs, which has a contract with American Traffic Solutions, one of Redflex’s competitors. ATS submitted a bid to install and manage Jacksonville’s proposed system but ultimately lost out to Redflex.

Like Redflex, ATS has had contracts ended in cities across the country, including Houston in 2010 and Los Angeles this year.

Academics and traffic safety experts remain divided on the cameras’ efficacy.

A 2004 study by North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University claimed that the cameras’ presence increased the total number crashes by more than 40 percent.

On the other hand, a 2005 study by the Federal Highway Administration showed a decrease in the number of right-angle crashes but found evidence for an increase in rear-end collisions — ostensibly because of more people stopping abruptly at traffic signals.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit group funded by auto insurance companies, is a staunch supporter of red light cameras.

Russ Rader, a spokesman for the group, noted that while some studies showed that cameras caused an increase in rear-end crashes, the Institute believes this is more than offset by reductions in side impact crashes, which it characterizes as more dangerous.

Source: The company Jacksonville is negotiating with to install at least 25 red light cameras at intersections around the city has been kicked out of several U.S. cities because revenues didn’t equal projections.

Jacksonville is negotiating with Redflex Traffic Systems, an Arizona-based subsidiary of Australian Redflex Holdings. The company’s contract with Albuquerque, N.M., was shot down late last year by voters and the City Council, and two West Coast cities canceled their deals.

Albuquerque Councilman Dan Lewis said he was neutral about the cameras at first but eventually came out against them when he learned more.

The city asked the University of New Mexico in December 2009 to study the effects of the cameras on crashes. It found the number of crashes at intersections with cameras increased 3.5 percent, mostly due to a jump in rear-end collisions.

Also, Lewis said, the city was running in red ink.

“The program began to lose about $100,000 a month,” he said. Although the company renegotiated, the City Council followed the non-binding vote of the people to end the contract.

Redflex billed the city $4.5 million shortly thereafter, claiming the city had to pony up its share of revenue from tickets that were still outstanding even after the program was canceled. The city is currently disputing the claim in court, the Albuquerque Journal newspaper reported.

Lewis also pointed out that the cameras create a perverse incentive for cities to make sure the number of violators remains high, noting that if driver behavior actually changed, the number of violations would decrease over time and the cameras would produce less revenue.

He argues that other, more inexpensive safety measures, such as extending yellow light lengths, would be more effective.

Andrea Aker, a spokeswoman for Redflex, disagreed.

“It isn’t true,” she said. “Data is indisputable that safety cameras change driver behavior.

“Cities that operate safety camera programs consistently show a reduction in red light running and violations.”

Albuquerque isn’t the only city that has kicked Redflex out of town: Burien, Wash., and Glendale, Calif., both abandoned their Redflex-operated camera systems this year.

The details of the agreement between Redflex and Jacksonville, including payment terms, have yet to be finalized, but Redflex’s bid submission proposes a fixed monthly cost to the city of $3,999 per approach at the 25 intersections.

The company says its pricing model is designed to require “zero out-of-pocket expense and zero financial commitment,” and that the city would be able to address its overhead expenses before addressing the Redflex invoices.

If Jacksonville’s ticket monthly totals exceed $3,999 per approach, the excess is split between the city and state. If it’s less, the city owes that amount to Redflex.

The only city in Northeast Florida with red light cameras is Green Cove Springs, which has a contract with American Traffic Solutions, one of Redflex’s competitors. ATS submitted a bid to install and manage Jacksonville’s proposed system but ultimately lost out to Redflex.

Like Redflex, ATS has had contracts ended in cities across the country, including Houston in 2010 and Los Angeles this year.

Academics and traffic safety experts remain divided on the cameras’ efficacy.

A 2004 study by North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University claimed that the cameras’ presence increased the total number crashes by more than 40 percent.

On the other hand, a 2005 study by the Federal Highway Administration showed a decrease in the number of right-angle crashes but found evidence for an increase in rear-end collisions — ostensibly because of more people stopping abruptly at traffic signals.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit group funded by auto insurance companies, is a staunch supporter of red light cameras.

Russ Rader, a spokesman for the group, noted that while some studies showed that cameras caused an increase in rear-end crashes, the Institute believes this is more than offset by reductions in side impact crashes, which it characterizes as more dangerous.