DPSRedflex Contract Available Online

The contract outlining the state’s photo scam cams has been obtained by CameraFRAUD.com and is now available for you to download and review for yourself.

DOWNLOAD .pdf, 26.5MB (Right click, choose “Save File/Target As”)

The 406 page document contains information about the current system and potential planned upgrades, including “point to point” enforcement, where all vehicles are documented to calculate speed over distance.

Download, read, and come back here to comment.

33 Responses to DPSRedflex Contract Available Online

  1. jgunn says:

    Great. It would be nice if someone could compile a summary of key points. I checked it out, it’s like “war and peace”. 🙂

  2. camerafraud says:

    It’s coming, jgunn… Look for more on Monday

  3. AA says:

    Sweet! Glad you guys got it up so quickly.

  4. AZ ATTORNEY says:


    LOL… pulling a Drudge by running names together to show they’re one in the same?

    I like it!

  5. George says:

    So when are you guys going to let the public know that if you have out of state plates, Mexican plates, or your vehicle is registered to a business that you can speed with impunity?

  6. RPr says:

    at the bottom of the home page is a previous entries link

    Lots of great articles there covering many of these topics

  7. azmojo says:

    George, add to your list:
    Temporary plates (assuming camera can’t see them as well), plate covers, dirty plates, plates with out-of-date registration mailing address, vehicles towing trailers (can’t assume the trailer owner is the same as the car owner).

  8. Sick of Government says:

    Anyone else notice the mention of wireless? Wonder what the feasibility of jamming is…

  9. Bill Conley says:

    Jamming the system, if it were even possible, would be a crime.
    Fight this the right way, get involved.

  10. Mike says:

    That is some seriously scary stuff! Documenting EVERY vehicle that goes past the cameras and then calculating the average speed between cameras?!

  11. Bill Conley says:

    The contract mandates that Redflex, or any other, staff pass a background check. I think we know of at least one individual that has a suspect background.

    So either DPS doesn’t care that there are criminals manning these vehicles, they aren’t checking or Redflex is not releasing the info…either way, it’s not good.

    The other problem is; what kind of personal information is being released to Redflex to issues these “civil” citations.

  12. Scott says:

    I wonder how Sheriff Joe, and other Local law enforcement officers personally feel about these photo-cameras?? Anyone know?

  13. Bill Conley says:

    I’m a Police Officer, I’m against it. If it’s that big of a safety issues then we need to out in uniform issuing citations, enforcing laws and arresting people if needed. Photo Radar isn’t going to save a life from a drunken speeder; it’s simply going to take a picture of a drunk driver.

    I believe strongly in enforcing the laws, but I’m a bigger fan of the U.S. constitution. Photo Radar leaves an individual proving he/she is innocent, that’s not how our system works. Photo Radar is nothing more that a Tax and is not reliable, if it were you wouldn’t have a 66% failure rate.

    Read my Blog: http://www.pinalcountygov.blogspot.com/

  14. Bill Conley says:


    I believe Sheriff Joe and the newly elected Paul Babeu are both against it.
    They both understand law enforcements role in all this and it’s not Photo Radar, it’s more patrol.

  15. azmojo says:

    Interesting notes:
    Page 79 – They bag on other company’s systems so much here. Non-redflex tickets can argue that other company’s camera systems are vulnerable to system failures, erratic behavior and innacurate data capture based on this report.

    Page 185: “Associates are trained to modify the immages: Zoom & crop, lighten & darn, mask the face, and perhaps modify the data.” — Really? And perhaps modify the speeds or times while they are at it?

    Page 191: Website only caters to English and Spanish speakers. What about other languages? Guess you’re screwed.

    Other applications advertised in this report (p. 85):
    Lic Plate monitoring (ALPR)
    HOV Lane compliance
    Homeland securtity

    –If these really were about safety, I would think that they would implement the tailgating detection immediately. Why only speeding?

    Page 112: SMARTscene Live Realtime Streaming Video stores video for up to 90 days. — Of ALL TRAFFIC! Those planning to post-it note or do other things to cameras, be sure to cover up!

    Throughout the report: Repeat of the line “capturing great images which increase the capture rate resulting in enhanced public safety.” — Ah yes, more/clearer pictures = safer streets. Got it.

    Page 257: “Our success rates have allowed cities to collect more fines and make their programs profitable.” — Profit? Why would cities want to make profit? I thought they just wanted safer streets.

    Page 263: Less than 1% of all citations result in court proceedings –This means that MORE PEOPLE NEED TO CONTEST THEIR TICKETS!

    Page 336: The standard data elements are encrypted at the point of capture on each image and this information cannot be manipulated by Redflex or the system. — Oh really? Photoshop can change **ANY** image.

    Page 367: These checks have lead to quick response times in dealing with the enclosure glass being marked or smeared by things such as eggs.” — This is not an uncommon ocurrence!

  16. azmojo says:

    A few more:
    Page 403: “DPS may… require the contractor to enforce civil violations on its behalf by authorizeing specific contractor employees to sign citations.”

    So wait a second… there’s a possibility DPS won’t be signing all citations?

  17. RPr says:

    looks like Jay Heiler violated the contract when he gave those interviews

  18. […] of Government Affairs for Redflex. Take a look for yourself from page 406 of Redflex’s contract with DPS. More on this story to […]

  19. RPr says:

    redflex employees can type your name and pull up every video of you crossing any of their cameras

    they can pull up every video of you or anyone in your vehicle

    How many scameras have you driven by?

    No search warrent required

  20. ScameraActivist says:

    I’m up researching his involvement with one of the construction companies which has a contract to install the equipment. Watch out now ! Those two construction companies are B&F Contacting. That Registrar of Contractors number would be 089744. Qualifying Party is Bruce Wayne Balls and Thomas Foley. Names sound familiar. Wheres our buddy Jay Heiler in the mix of this ? Corporation Commision site down, so I can’t get info on other officers for B&F. Also, T.A.T. Technologies is an Israeli company. No wonder we always side with Israel, lots of business with them. Then again, that was no secret.

  21. ScameraActivist says:

    Maybe Heiler is an investor in B&F, or an officer or something. I got this word from an unnamed source. Trying to verify something here.

    May not be illegal if he is involved, just very interesting since he is the director / president / head jicky jack for governmental affairs with Redflex. If he happened to be involved with investing / operating the company that installs the equipment that would be very interesting.

  22. No One says:

    Interesting to hear a police officer speaking out against it.

    I was thinking the other day about the whole police officer issue, and one of the arguments is of course that police “have better things to do” with their time…

    but then I was thinking about the following scenario:

    For the purpose of this scenario, assume the new system did everything it was supposed to, 100% perfect. The roads were safe, and everything was perfect. Policemen would no longer be required to do any traffic stops. Also assume a city/state/county/other governmental unit has say 100 officers, 30 of which were dedicated to traffic. Do you think the city would continue to employ 30 more people than they need to? “Why, that’s wasting money!” the bean counters would say, and there’d be layoffs or a hiring freeze and the level of officers would stabilize to the 70 that are needed every day. And the bean counters would celebrate, because the system is not only saving 30 salaries but is generating more revenue (ie writing more tickets) than those 30 police officers ever could! And they pat themselves on the back for being so clever and crafty and they’re all happy.

    Fast forward a year or two, when something comes along- be it a natural disaster, a terrorist attack, or some other unforeseen event- and every last officer is required. Only now, instead of having 100 officers, there’s 70. The reserve has been removed, because they are no longer “needed.” The cameras certainly can’t redeploy to other, more important tasks. Nope, they’ll just take nice pictures of the remaining police cars speeding by on their way to the disaster. The city has effectively shot itself in the foot by removing the reserve force of officers, and guess who would suffer! Us!

    Obviously, the system is not perfect, and it is well-known that it cannot replace officers wholesale. BUT, in this era of budget shortfalls, with nearly every city running a deficit and several cities (like Mesa) already considering or implementing a cut to the emergency services, do you really think that it’s not in the back of some bureaucrat’s mind?

  23. J.W. says:

    Did you notice on page 404 that the state actually gets a price break according to the number of Paid Citations. Seems if the state really cared about our safety they would be willing to pay more to keep us safer. But instead their motivation is to have more of us pay them so they can get a better price break on the fees they pay to Fraudflex. They even state that they only expect a 60% paid citation rate.

  24. James says:

    The service contract will have very little to do with the vendors having private investigator licenses. The question will be if the state has taken proper legal steps to empower private vendors to manage this kind of system. Much in the way that a Sheriff “deputizes” someone who is not currently a sworn officer.

    Don’t waste time on this contract, waste time on the actual laws of the state that address (or fail to address) such out-sourcing.

  25. Darin says:

    I agree that our constitution does not allow this out-sourcing of unreasonable search.

  26. No One says:

    On the privacy issue– if you read the contract, it is clear that DPS will provide Redflex with access to their database. Presumably, since Redflex is responsible for the mailing of any notification, this includes your name, address, photograph…and probably your driver’s license number. And in the showlow post, note that it is specifically going to be used to track felony suspects. Suspects, not felons. This means they will also have access to your criminal record, if any, and anything you’re suspected of. Going back to the contract, in one spot (section 12) it specifies that any information “processing” must occur in the US, but then says shortly thereafter that redundant or backup systems are not included in that restriction. Elsewhere it specifies that the information will be retained for three years.

    So, if you pass by one of these cameras, all this information– name, address, driver’s license number, any criminal record (including items you might be “suspected” of, whether true or not), past traffic citations is recorded and passed off to some backup database that’s not controlled by any government agency, may not even be located in this country and is out there for a minimum of three years. And, on pg 266, it specifies that all this is available for download on their website in a convenient Excel or MS Access format. How convenient.

    Can you say “identity theft?” It has happened with much less information.

    And other than a quick glossing over about how the offeror (Redflex) should use “best demonstrated practices” to protect the data, I saw next to nothing about any safeguards to be put in place. You would think that the governor’s office would have some specific mandates to protect our non-public information, but I haven’t seen any evidence of it!

  27. RPr says:

    what does that make redflex guilty off? Hmmmm

  28. sunfiresarah says:

    I just tried to DL the file and I got an error that said it was damaged and couldn’t be repaired, anybody else have this problem recently?

  29. Joe says:

    “They even state that they only expect a 60% paid citation rate.”

    Try 16% ha ha ha ha

  30. […] unclear what part of the DPSRedflex contract authorizes Redflex to expand their capabilities into non-traffic related surveillance, but then […]

  31. […] Arizona Department of Public Safety and Redflex. Composed of fixed and mobile units, Redflex has made it clear within the contract with the state that license plate tracking is available at the flip of a switch (assuming like they aren’t […]

  32. Gary says:

    I keep hearing the Scameras are comming down. What is happening to speed this process up and tell us how to help.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: