Although most of the people interviewed by ATS in the US this year actually support implementation of photo enforcement, they perceive themselves to be in the minority.
RSS
However, we were also able to measure the impact of the vocal minority. Across the country, in every locale where we studied public opinion, we learned that while a significant majority strongly supports photo enforcement, they think they are in the minority. When we asked people how they thought their fellow citizens felt about photo enforcement, they consistently indicated that they believed the support wasn't there.
In Arizona, where the industry got its start some 20 years ago and where the country's first statewide photo speed enforcement program was started in 2008, only 35 per cent said they thought "most Arizonans" support the use of photo enforcement technology to enforce traffic safety laws, while 55 per cent thought the bulk of the state's population was opposed to it. In fact, 82 per cent of Arizonans support red light cameras, 67 per cent support the use of speed cameras on city streets and 61 per cent support using speed cameras on urban freeways.
In April this year Neil Newhouse, one of the founding partners of public affairs research firm Public Opinion Strategies, interviewed 800 likely voters across the United States. He found that 69 per cent of Americans support the use of red light cameras at the most dangerous intersections in their states, while just 29 per cent oppose them. He noted that, "Support for these red light cameras is not only very strong nationally but cuts across all demographic and attitudinal groups, including men and women, young and old, Republicans and Democrats, and conservatives and liberals. But by a 47 per cent to 41 per cent margin, voters believe that most residents in their state oppose red light cameras." This opinion trend can have a devastating impact on municipal and state officials who are tasked with making a determination on red light and speed camera programmes.
It has become crystal clear to ATS, and the other vendors in the industry, that we must be diligent in communicating not only the level of public support for photo enforcement but the results achieved in terms of reductions in violations and collisions after the technology has been adopted by a state or community.
Legislation both supporting and opposing photo traffic enforcement was debated in several states in 2009. The recession, with the attendant decline in state revenues, sparked vigorous debates in several legislatures, most of which did not adopt significant legislation impacting the automated enforcement industry this year. The majority of legislators in Florida support red light cameras but legislation failed to pass in the regular session when they couldn't agree on how revenues from the cameras should be shared between the state and local communities. A similar debate in Texas a couple of years ago resulted in a compromise that allocates a significant portion of all citation payments to trauma centres throughout the state. Houston hospitals alone received $8.5 million.
In Arizona, opponents of photo enforcement are gathering signatures to put an initiative on the state ballot in November 2010 that would ban the use of traffic cameras in Arizona. The Mississippi legislature has adopted a new law that bans the use of cameras in that state. While the news may not have been bright in those states, many others are moving ahead vigorously. In New York, the legislature approved expansion of photo enforcement outside the New York City boroughs for the first time. Cameras are now deployed in Nassau County and are expected to be adopted by Buffalo, Syracuse, Yonkers, Rochester, Albany and Suffolk County. Red light cameras are being deployed in 10 New Jersey communities. And despite the lack of enabling state legislation, photo traffic enforcement programmes expanded significantly across Florida, where citizens fed up with red light runners wrote letters to their local newspapers urging their elected officials to embrace the technology to save lives. Approximately 40 Florida communities are now using photo traffic enforcement technology.
Specifically, the Seventh Circuit held that issuing citations to vehicle owners (or lessees) without any evidence of who was actually driving the vehicle at the time of the traffic violation is constitutionally permissible. The Court rejected the violators' argument that Chicago's red light camera system offended their due process rights and acclaimed the prudence of the city's system.
The Court also addressed the issue of revenues derived from photo traffic enforcement systems. According to the Court, "That the City's system raises revenues does not condemn it. Taxes, whether on liquor or on running red lights, are valid municipal endeavours. Like any other exaction, a fine does more than raise revenue: it also discourages the taxed activity. A system that simultaneously raises money and improves compliance with traffic laws has much to recommend it and cannot be called unconstitutionally whimsical." Class action attorneys in Florida and other states apparently haven't read the ruling from the Seventh Circuit, as they are busy soliciting red light runners for a gaggle of class action suits. We are confident these frivolous lawsuits will be dismissed, as many others have been, when they reach the courts.
On 23 July, the US District Court, Eastern District of Missouri dismissed all remaining claims in a lawsuit against the City of Arnold, Missouri and ATS, confirming the legality and constitutionality of Missouri's red-light camera programmes. This comprehensive ruling further validates other cases across the United States in stating that photo enforcement programmes are constitutional public safety programmes.
On 26 March, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas dismissed a lawsuit claiming that red light camera vendors were required to obtain a private investigator's license to operate in the State of Texas. Subsequently, on 19 June, the US District Court of the Northern District of Texas dismissed a lawsuit against ATS with the same claim.
The trend in the courts across the United States is clearly supportive of the use of cameras to improve public safety by reducing collisions and injuries.
112 Redflex van operative. All ATS and Redflex vans were pulled from Arizona's streets and highways while the industry and its clients reassessed security and safety procedures.
These threats to the safety of our photo enforcement employees have inspired the industry to collaborate. For the first time that I can remember, fierce competitors are working together on issues that threaten our industry and the public safety of the communities we serve.
ATS and Redflex, for instance, collaborated on public opinion polling in New Jersey this year. We're also working together on the legislative front in various states. The CEOs of all the major photo enforcement vendors met this summer and endorsed strategies that will improve communications, increase the monitoring and reporting of the public safety benefits and results of photo enforcement, and develop successful strategies to address the attacks by the vocal minority.
RSS
In the US, affirmation of the photo traffic enforcement sector's legal status and rising public support were significant aspects of 2009. James Tuton, President and CEO of
The issue of public support
ATS has documented an interesting trend in public opinion this year: voters strongly support red light and speed camera enforcement but think they are in the minority. We conducted extensive public opinion polls in Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Tennessee and Texas. Overall, we found support strongest for red light cameras (in the high 70-80 per cent range). Speed cameras deployed on state highways and city streets are also supported by the majority of citizens (in the 60-70 per cent range). More than 80 per cent of the respondents in our polls expressed strong support for the use of speed cameras in school and construction zones. Support is solid across gender, age, geographic, political and racial demographics.However, we were also able to measure the impact of the vocal minority. Across the country, in every locale where we studied public opinion, we learned that while a significant majority strongly supports photo enforcement, they think they are in the minority. When we asked people how they thought their fellow citizens felt about photo enforcement, they consistently indicated that they believed the support wasn't there.
In Arizona, where the industry got its start some 20 years ago and where the country's first statewide photo speed enforcement program was started in 2008, only 35 per cent said they thought "most Arizonans" support the use of photo enforcement technology to enforce traffic safety laws, while 55 per cent thought the bulk of the state's population was opposed to it. In fact, 82 per cent of Arizonans support red light cameras, 67 per cent support the use of speed cameras on city streets and 61 per cent support using speed cameras on urban freeways.
In April this year Neil Newhouse, one of the founding partners of public affairs research firm Public Opinion Strategies, interviewed 800 likely voters across the United States. He found that 69 per cent of Americans support the use of red light cameras at the most dangerous intersections in their states, while just 29 per cent oppose them. He noted that, "Support for these red light cameras is not only very strong nationally but cuts across all demographic and attitudinal groups, including men and women, young and old, Republicans and Democrats, and conservatives and liberals. But by a 47 per cent to 41 per cent margin, voters believe that most residents in their state oppose red light cameras." This opinion trend can have a devastating impact on municipal and state officials who are tasked with making a determination on red light and speed camera programmes.
It has become crystal clear to ATS, and the other vendors in the industry, that we must be diligent in communicating not only the level of public support for photo enforcement but the results achieved in terms of reductions in violations and collisions after the technology has been adopted by a state or community.
Increasing official support
The continued growth of the photo traffic enforcement industry in North America is an indicator that elected officials understand the desire of their constituents for improved public safety. The technology is being used in approximately 500 communities in 26 states and provinces, with an estimated 3,500 cameras now installed. ATS's own growth in 2009 is expected to top 100 per cent. Some of that growth is attributable to its acquisition in September of Nestor Traffic Systems, Inc., the fourth-largest photo enforcement vendor in North America.Legislation both supporting and opposing photo traffic enforcement was debated in several states in 2009. The recession, with the attendant decline in state revenues, sparked vigorous debates in several legislatures, most of which did not adopt significant legislation impacting the automated enforcement industry this year. The majority of legislators in Florida support red light cameras but legislation failed to pass in the regular session when they couldn't agree on how revenues from the cameras should be shared between the state and local communities. A similar debate in Texas a couple of years ago resulted in a compromise that allocates a significant portion of all citation payments to trauma centres throughout the state. Houston hospitals alone received $8.5 million.
In Arizona, opponents of photo enforcement are gathering signatures to put an initiative on the state ballot in November 2010 that would ban the use of traffic cameras in Arizona. The Mississippi legislature has adopted a new law that bans the use of cameras in that state. While the news may not have been bright in those states, many others are moving ahead vigorously. In New York, the legislature approved expansion of photo enforcement outside the New York City boroughs for the first time. Cameras are now deployed in Nassau County and are expected to be adopted by Buffalo, Syracuse, Yonkers, Rochester, Albany and Suffolk County. Red light cameras are being deployed in 10 New Jersey communities. And despite the lack of enabling state legislation, photo traffic enforcement programmes expanded significantly across Florida, where citizens fed up with red light runners wrote letters to their local newspapers urging their elected officials to embrace the technology to save lives. Approximately 40 Florida communities are now using photo traffic enforcement technology.
Legal affirmation - and class-action lawsuits
In a landmark ruling, the Seventh Circuit, US Court of Appeals affirmed the constitutionality of red light photo enforcement programmes on 5 January 2009. This decision effectively settles the constitutionality issue and confirms that photo enforcement is a legal, successfully proven tool that assists communities in improving public safety on local roadways. We anticipate that opponents will endeavour to appeal against this ruling in the US Supreme Court but as of this writing, there is no indication that the Supreme Court would accept an appeal.Specifically, the Seventh Circuit held that issuing citations to vehicle owners (or lessees) without any evidence of who was actually driving the vehicle at the time of the traffic violation is constitutionally permissible. The Court rejected the violators' argument that Chicago's red light camera system offended their due process rights and acclaimed the prudence of the city's system.
The Court also addressed the issue of revenues derived from photo traffic enforcement systems. According to the Court, "That the City's system raises revenues does not condemn it. Taxes, whether on liquor or on running red lights, are valid municipal endeavours. Like any other exaction, a fine does more than raise revenue: it also discourages the taxed activity. A system that simultaneously raises money and improves compliance with traffic laws has much to recommend it and cannot be called unconstitutionally whimsical." Class action attorneys in Florida and other states apparently haven't read the ruling from the Seventh Circuit, as they are busy soliciting red light runners for a gaggle of class action suits. We are confident these frivolous lawsuits will be dismissed, as many others have been, when they reach the courts.
On 23 July, the US District Court, Eastern District of Missouri dismissed all remaining claims in a lawsuit against the City of Arnold, Missouri and ATS, confirming the legality and constitutionality of Missouri's red-light camera programmes. This comprehensive ruling further validates other cases across the United States in stating that photo enforcement programmes are constitutional public safety programmes.
On 26 March, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas dismissed a lawsuit claiming that red light camera vendors were required to obtain a private investigator's license to operate in the State of Texas. Subsequently, on 19 June, the US District Court of the Northern District of Texas dismissed a lawsuit against ATS with the same claim.
The trend in the courts across the United States is clearly supportive of the use of cameras to improve public safety by reducing collisions and injuries.
Opponents continue to attack
The vocal minority increased their acts of vandalism and intimidation in the United States this year. Cameras were attacked by opponents wielding everything from silly string to guns and even a pick-axe. Van drivers were stalked and video-taped, with the tapes being posted on various Internet sites. As the opposition's rhetoric ratcheted up in viciousness, vans were vandalised. An Arizona, a man is awaiting trial for the murder of aThese threats to the safety of our photo enforcement employees have inspired the industry to collaborate. For the first time that I can remember, fierce competitors are working together on issues that threaten our industry and the public safety of the communities we serve.
ATS and Redflex, for instance, collaborated on public opinion polling in New Jersey this year. We're also working together on the legislative front in various states. The CEOs of all the major photo enforcement vendors met this summer and endorsed strategies that will improve communications, increase the monitoring and reporting of the public safety benefits and results of photo enforcement, and develop successful strategies to address the attacks by the vocal minority.
Looking forward to 2010
I anticipate that the photo enforcement industry in North America will continue to grow. We will persist in carefully monitoring public opinion, as we've learned it's critical to have scientific data upon which decision-makers and politicians can rely. We will continue to be challenged in the courts but the trend is clear. The courts recognise the constitutionality of what we do and I believe continued legal attacks will simply result in more affirmations of the legality of photo enforcement. The vocal minority will continue to attack us but I believe the majority of the public who support public safety will start to speak out more forcefully against the tone of the rhetoric and the tactics favoured by opponents. We are likely to be challenged by more ballot issues. But I'm also confident that the spirit of cooperation that has evolved among industry leaders this year will continue in 2010, making us all more effective guardians of the public's safety.RSS
