Avondale Police Chief: No Correlation Between Cameras and Accident Reduction, Program Canceled

The Arizona Republic reported today that Avondale is canceling its photo enforcement program. A year ago Avondale voted to expand the photo enforcement program. The project was to be completed in March, but it never got off the ground.

The city council cited budget concerns in canceling the program, as the alleged safety benefits are apparently too expensive.

More revealing was the police chief’s comments:

Police Chief Kevin Kotsur said there has been a drop in traffic accidents, but he believes the bad economy means fewer people driving. And the costs of the program are rising every year.
“Looking at the stats, there’s no significant correlation between the number of accidents and the impact photo enforcement has been having on those wrecks,” he said. “It’s down all over the city. It’s down all over the state.

The program cancellation marks another contract loss for ATS.

In other news, a federal judge scolded Redflex and ATS for their child-like behavior in their lawsuit over lying in bid proposals. This is of course, nothing new or surprising for those of us familiar with how these companies conduct their business.

48 Responses to Avondale Police Chief: No Correlation Between Cameras and Accident Reduction, Program Canceled

  1. Mark S says:

    Woo Hoo!!! Another one bites the dust!!!

  2. B says:

    Aside from this dinner, is there a way we can locate and talk with some potential big-time donors for this cause?

  3. Stacey says:

    Boy, the way that camera stopped that accident was amazing. Thanks, Redflex!

    • photoradarscam says:

      It’s funny how often they like to show their product NOT working.

    • Keith T says:

      Yes, but it sure would come in handy in prosecuting the guy who ran the red light. Would you want this evidence if it was your family Stacy? Thought so.

      • Once again Lieutenant, don’t you have anything else you could be doing tonight?

        I saw a comment from a while back where you were hoping that we “distracted some drivers and caused some accidents,” so your grandstanding is very hollow.

        Thanks and good night in Prescott Valley.

      • photoradarscam says:

        It would also be very handy in prosecuting criminals if we got rid of that pesky constitution also… Just think how many more crimes we could convict people on if we didn’t need warrants to search their cars or homes? Or listen to conversations?

  4. Well he’ll be sorry when he gets that ticket in the mail and never do THAT again.

    The logic used by pro-camera people is faulty at best.

  5. JOKN says:

    The “TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE” and send you back were you came from…………………………………

  6. Stacey says:

    Those losers over at Peoria City Council are the WORST of the bunch! They KNOW they are causng accidents and they don’t care. Slimebags.

    For sure we will be over at Spring Training in March.

  7. Stacey says:

    AZ Republic

    Arizona photo-enforcement cameras nab county staff speeding on the job


  8. Dan G says:

    “Avondale is canceling its photo enforcement program” = “The Cameras are Coming Down”

    I’m ready to vote the rest of these right-stealing cameras out of existence.

  9. Stacey says:

    Friends in High Places _ John Wintersteen:


    Phoenix, AZ
    1,121 Volunteers

    Welcome to CameraFRAUD. We are united in our effort to get rid of every speed camera, red light camera, and photo radar van here in Arizona and across the country. We were suc…

    Check out this Meetup Group →

  10. RPr says:

    Only 8 percent say incumbents should be reelected

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32893.html#ixzz0fN5PEz1q

  11. Jim says:

    Just saw a tally van in Avondale around 3:00 pm. Are they still continuing to use it?

  12. John says:

    What a bunch of idiot’s. If you don’t break the law you won’t get a ticket. Why don’t you guy’s focus your energy toward something that really matters, like the big oil companies gouging us everytime we fill up our cars or insurance companies reporting huge profits while decline more claims, or how about keeping the illegal immigrants out of the country. GROW UP, get a set of balls and go after the issues that really matter.

    • What issues do you fight for John?

    • Alucard says:

      When I read this — “Why don’t you guy’s focus your energy toward something that really matters, like. . . . insurance companies reporting huge profits while decline more claims” — ROFLMAO!

      The companies are reporting huge profits because the camera companies are giving them ammo to increase their profits — increasing the insurance cost for the consumer!

      Issues of privacy, corporations performing law enforcement functions they DON’T have the credentials or training to do, and violations of constitutional due process through kangaroo courts are just a few of the things that matter to us; the scameras facilitate this type of nonsense! The scameras are coming down!

      • John says:

        When Im got my ticket I payed the fine. my insurance rates didn’t go up because it’s a civil offense not a criminal offense therefore no points are issued on your license. My ticket came from the local law enforcement agency where I commited the violation, not from the camera company. As far as privacy, give me a break. do you go to banks, gas stations, use atm machines, own a cell phone, or how about use a computer. These are all examples of how the goverment keeps tabs on us, non of which are illegal. As far as constitutional due proces through kangaroo courts, that sounds like something your cult leader brain washed you into saying. Can you explain what that means. I don’t see anything on your website about a kangaroo court. If you or a family member where involed in an accident at one of the camera locations would you like to see the video to see who was at fault, I sure would ,you would be stupid not to. Do you think the cops decline to review footage from a bank robbery to help catch the person? Give me some facts. do you think insurance companies are taking huge profits because of a couple stupid camera’s? No. Do you really feel like your privacey has been violated when you drive past one of these cameras? If you answer yes, then you better wake up and look at the big picture becuase you are being monitored just about everywhere you go.

  13. John says:

    I fight for issues that will make a difference. What is your issue with these camera’s. from what i’m reading on your web site you guys don’t have a legitiment issue with them. I challange all of you to give me one legitiment reason why these camera’s need to be removed.

  14. John says:

    There’s nothing to read. Why do you think i challanged you guys to provide me with some hard facts ? As far as i’m concerned, you guys are the one running the biggest scam. I see you are collecting donations to help fight these camera’s. Do you guys have employees, if not where are the donations going. Give me some cold hard facts, or show me a law being broken.

  15. ladydelish says:

    So, if I have a current ticket issued from one of these Avondale red light cameras (3 weeks ago) – does this mean I still have to pay it?

  16. John says:

    Did you break the law, if so then pay it. I don’t see the issue here.

  17. John says:

    That makes no sense. I live in ohio, how do yo know if I broke a law or not

    • Alucard says:

      I seem to recall that jurisdictions in the Buckeye State recently voted to get rid of the scameras. When up for a public vote, without exception, people have voted to dump the scameras. I wonder why?

  18. John says:

    You are talking about 2 small towns with a very small population. They may have read your website and became brain washed with all the bogus claims you guys have listed, half of them are probably members of your cult. look back at some of my comments, why can’t anybody give me answers to my questions ? I’m neutral on the camera issue, I don’t care if they stay or go it doesn’t matter to me. Is what matters is you guys are collecting donations to fight a cause that that makes no sense. I have been ticketed by one of these cameras. I reveiwed the violation, it was clear that I ran the red light. I payed the fine, no big deal. If some one robs a bank is it illegal to use the camera footage to capture that person? no it’s not. It’s the same concept, some one broke the law, you have proof of the crime caught on camera, you go arrest the person,case closed. should we do away with those cameras to? You guys are a bunch of cry babies that broke the law and you are wasting more time and money trying to fight these things than if you would have just payed the fine like a normal person would do. Some one please look at my past comments and answer my question with proven facts.

    • LoneWolf says:

      The answers to all your questions are on this website. Read the articles. If nothing here convinces you why the scameras should go, then by all means vote for them to remain. You certainly have the attitude that indicates you’re pro-camera so most of us aren’t even going to waste our time responding to you. Here are 20 reasons why we oppose them:


      And you can’t compare surveilance cameras with traffic cams. Surveilance cams aid in the prosecution of criminals but they’re not used as sole evidence to prosecute them nor are they used to generate money off of peoples’ mistakes.

    • LoneWolf says:

      I didn’t realize you’re from Ohio until I read your earlier response.

      People have minds of their own. We don’t take any credit for the scameras coming down in the 2 small Ohio towns. The scamera companies allegedly spent $50k on a campaign to keep the cameras up in those towns. They sent people brochures explaining the benefits and safety of having the cameras. If we would’ve had a hand in bringing awareness to our side of the issue, such a campaign could’ve easily unraveled everything we did. Although a couple of our members may have posted on the news websites for those towns, it’s highly unlikely that the entire population of both towns frequent those news sites so our influences would’ve been very minimal.

      It seems to me that you just came here to pick a fight with us rather than make any attempt to understand why we’re standing up against the photo enforcement industry.. Most of us have no probs whatsoever enguaging in a debate with our opponents and we don’t have a problem with educating pro-cam people about our position. We’re not going to change our minds about photo enforcement so if our opponents wish to remain and use this website to push their own agenda or if they resort to threats and such, they’ll be banned from here. If you could care less if the cameras stay or leave, then technically, you should care less about us. But there’s obviously something going on here that’s pissing you off. You object to the fact that we’re very outspoken over the scameras. That tells me that you really do care for the cameras and that you’re probably either very pro-camera or you work(ed) for one of the camera companies.

      • John says:

        My issue is you guys are collecting donations and spending money for a ridiculous cause. There are plenty of ways that this money could be put to good use. I do not care what happens to the cameras. If the cities use the revenue to buy new patrol cars or keep a couple extra officers on the force than so be it it makes for a safer world for me and you to live in. I just don’t see the logic behind collecting donations to fight this cause, look at the economy right now, money is getting wasted everyday on stupid stuff that we have no control over. So why waste money fighting this issue. There is no benefit from your actions. The only people benefiting from this is the people who have the same mind set as you guys. Its very simple, instead of wasting money fighting the cameras, just dont run a red light or speed and you won’t get a ticket.

        • SD Anderson says:

          Change issues much? First you were pissy because nobody answered your question which was answered a thousand times over throughout this website. Now your issue is donations? You say you don’t care what happens to the cameras but yet you bias every word you say toward keeping the cameras. There’s no doubt that you are pro-camera and because CF is tightening up on its defenses, it’s making you and the rest of your Redflex crew feel more insecure.

          And about those red light tickets, this just came in:


          The council, on the other hand, was extremely pleased with the results of lengthening yellow lights by one second in November. The number of left-turn violations dropped 80 to 85 percent from about 240 monthly violations to about 25 or 30 a month immediately after the change. Straight through violations were reduced 92 percent.

          Of course, if you read through this website like you said you did, you would’ve found a few other articles similar to this one.

      • photoradarscam says:

        Cameras INCREASE accidents and deaths. How is it ridiculous to fight this?

        Cameras DRAIN MONEY from local economies and families that cannot afford them. How is it ridiculous to fight this? How is it ridiculous to fight this?

        Cameras BURDEN THOUSANDS for violations they did not commit due to malfunctions and errors in the system. How is it ridiculous to fight this?

        Cameras are being used to track and surveil ALL who pass by one. How is it ridiculous to fight this?

      • LoneWolf says:

        John, the scamera companies are collecting money for a hopeless cause. The money Redflex gets partially goes to the Australian economy and if there’s any bit of American patriot left inside you, how do you feel about the Australians taking part in enforcing American laws? How do you feel about corporations helping to enforce the laws that officers were trained to enforce to begin with? If you’re okay with all that, then would your thoughts change quickly if it were communist China helping to enforce American laws? I know I’m pretty pissed about it. I keep saying it over and over… if we allow this system of photo enforcement to slide, it doesn’t stop at one camera, or two, or three… the UK has over 6,000 of these machines on that tiny island and that’s exactly what we’ll end up with if we don’t try to put a stop to this now. Everytime someone speeds, gets hurt, or killed, it justifies putting up a scamera in that spot. If you’re okay with that, then why don’t you go move there. There are other solutions to making the roads safer than installing money machines everywhere.

        If you don’t think our cause is a worthy one, then you’ve put in your 2 cents worth, move on. None of us are making any money protesting against these things. The photo enforcement industry, particularily the corporations, are making millions. They trample on the rights of US citizens because the money they rake in speaks loudly and clearly. I have a problem with that.

  19. Tips for Car Donation…

    […]Avondale Police Chief: No Correlation Between Cameras and Accident Reduction, Program Canceled « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down[…]…

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: