Chandler Photo Enforcement Error Rate 52%

According to the East Valley Tribune, Chandler’s red light cameras result in enforceable tickets only 48% of the time. For fiscal year 2008-2009, the cameras flashed 29,000 times; however, 8000 of those tickets failed to capture critical information according to Detective Dave Ramer. Of the remaining tickets, 7000 (24%) were of commercial vehicles belonging to companies that refused to divulge the identity of the driver. According to the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety, an average of 28% of drivers are NOT the registered owner the car, which further adds to the difficulty of issuing tickets. Then we know that of the 48% of “successful” tickets, only a fraction ever get paid.

The Chandler City Council is now contemplating an expansion of the system. But would the Chandler City Council have voted for the cameras had the sales pitch to Chandler been more honest to begin with?

Redflex: “We have this system that photographs drivers who run red lights… except we can only target a fraction of the people driving by, and it only works 48% of the time.  But did I mention we, (*cough*) I mean you can still make lots of money?”

The article goes on to imply that Chandler is disappointed that it couldn’t cash in on all of those missed opportunities, and had to settle for a paltry $300,000 while sending millions of dollars (drained from the local economy) to Redflex.

If the same statistics hold true for freeway traffic, 1 in 4 cars passing by a freeway camera are immune from photo tickets because of commercial plate registration. Again we ask, how is this constitutional? As a reminder, 

Arizona constitution, Article 2, Section 13 states:

No law shall be enacted granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens or corporations.

It would seem to us that over 25% of the drivers on the road have inherent “immunities which, upon the same terms, (do) not equally belong to all citizens.” Compare this to human officers who can pull anyone over at any time for any reason.

Call To Action: The Chandler City Council is voting on whether to expand the red light contract on Thursday, Mar 11. Click here to find out how you can help influence their decision.

10 Responses to Chandler Photo Enforcement Error Rate 52%

  1. photoradarscam says:

    Before someone comments about the math…
    29000-8000-7000 = 14000. 14000/29000 = 48%.

  2. SD Anderson says:

    “However, the city must pay $19 to Redflex for each actionable ticket, regardless of whether the violator ultimately pays up, he said. That means the city paid about $133,000 to Redflex for those 7,000 unsuccessful tickets yet received no revenue in return”

    Must be nice that Redflex gets the secure end of the bargain.

    They shouldn’t renew the contracts until after November when it’ll be decided by the voters whether or not the cameras shall remain. Even then, they should perform a thorough engineering study before signing any contract.

  3. Anon. E. Mous. says:

    Think you forgot the obvious US constitutional argument…

    It could be construed as an equal protection problem as well. Particularly when non-resident violators will never be served.

  4. It was mentioned at the meeting last night that we are probably looking at a 4-3 vote in Chandler City Council in favor of EXPANSION of the scameras.

    Our voices and threats of “voting them out” can really make a difference on Thursday. We may not be able to change one of their minds, but then again…. we might!

    A good point was made also that long speeches are not needed, just a few words will do the trick. Have fun with it, but make your point. Okay, down off the soapbox now.

  5. libertydefenderaz says:

    Show up and voice your opinion if you care Chandler residents!

    Red light cameras don’t stop red light runners or DUI’s. This is just constant video surveillance and revenue generation for an international corporation. Get them out!

  6. B says:

    Whenever anyone asks you, “How are cameras unconstitutional exactly?”, then this article’s response is the answer.

    Thanks for clarifying that point. Sometimes people take the “due process” argument, which gets argued into the ground.

  7. Nate Forrest says:

    Well, Chandler voted overwhelmingly to keep the program. Maybe, despite all of the lies from this website they noticed that it was saving lives. Who would have guessed.

  8. Dr Jett says:

    Gee Nate, Did you ever hear of the term, REVENUE?

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: