Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Item VI (02/12/2008) INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois DATE: FEBRUARY 8, 2008 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUES RELATED TO AUTOMATED RED LIGHT ENFORCEMENT TO: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MAN FROM: CHIEF JOHN DAHLBERG Over the past 9 months I have completed an extensive amount of research regarding automated red light enforcement and the possibility of the Village using this technology. In May of 2006, Governor Blagojevich signed into law House Bill 4835 authorizing the use of photo red light enforcement technology in Illinois, outside of the city of Chicago. The new law (625 ILC5 5/11-208.6) has several requirements, including: . Must operate in warning mode for 30 days prior to sending tickets. . Tickets are issued to the registered owner of the vehicle, therefore the driver need not be identified (similar to a parking ticket). . Fine is set at $100 and if unpaid after 30 days - $200. . Municipalities must pass a local ordinance prior to installing cameras. . Technology companies entering contracts for systems cannot be paid on a "per ticket" basis - must be a flat fee. . If 5 or more unpaid violations - municipality can petition S.O.S. for suspension of drivers license. . Municipality must have a means to administratively adjudicate these violations - including opportunity for a hearing. . Municipality must determine final approval of citation prior to issuance. . Data required to be recorded and reported to the violator. . Exempts emergency vehicles and funeral processions. . Violation is a civil penalty and not recorded as a moving violation on the driver's record. . Appropriate warning signs must be posted advising motorists. Page - 1 - C:\Documents and Settings\djarosz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKB1\Automated REd Light Enforcement Feb OB.doc The Illinois Department of Transportation then published a policy memorandum (March, 2007) titled Automated Traffic Law Enforcement Systems: Red Light Running Camera Enforcement Systems. This memorandum set standards that municipalities must comply with if they wish to install red light cameras on state roadways in their jurisdictions. The state requires that municipalities: . Apply for permits from lOOT for intersections with state roadways . Document crash history at the locations. . Intersection lights must meet MUTCD standards. . Traffic signal heads must have LED optics. . Documented history of red light violations where other enforcement actions have been unsuccessful (or difficult). . Submit justification report including crash history, traffic volumes, approach angles and speeds, bike and pedestrian crossing conditions. . Submit report with construction/installation plans, signage plans, manufacturer wiring diagrams, description of camera operation and maintenance plans, and copy of local ordinance. . Technology shall utilize video or laser technology. Pavement loops may be considered on a case by case basis by lOOT (due to pavement cutting). . Agencies must have a well publicized public information and education campaign. All of the vendors evaluated will work with lOOT to obtain appropriate permits and meet other State requirements. Additionally, in October of 2007, Cook County passed an ordinance regulating red light camera systems installed on Cook County Roads. As part of the ordinance (Article IV, Section 82-101), it states: "The intersections chosen for the program shall be located throughout the County, upon highways in the County's maintenance jurisdiction. 11 "Upon application by a local municipality, the County may permit through intergovernmental agreement, the local municipality to install and maintain such a system and issue citations, with all costs paid by and all fines paid to the local municipality, at intersections which are under the maintenance and operation jurisdiction of the County, but within the police jurisdiction of such municipality. 11 Page - 2 - H:IADMN\DCJlAutomated REd Light Enforcement Feb OB.doc The U.S. Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration, published a document in January of 2005 titled Red Light Camera Systems - Operational Guidelines to assist agencies who are considering using this technology in their jurisdictions. During the past 9 months I have personally interviewed representatives from five different companies that offer this technology in Illinois. Some of these companies have been in existence for a number of years and some are new to the arena. The companies interviewed were: 1) Red Flex (headquartered in California and Arizona). 2) GATSO (headquartered in the Netherlands). 3) A TS [American Traffic Solutions](headquartered in Arizona). 4) Red Speed Illinois (headquartered in Naperville, IL - an affiliate of Red Speed USA and Red Speed International). 5) Laser Craft (headquartered in Norcross, GA.). Each of the five companies was asked the same series of questions and their answers were documented. Charts of the questions and answers are attached. Several questions were asked to assist in rating the companies in key areas, including 1) Years in operation in U.S. and Illinois; 2) Does company "outsource" any portion of the operation; 3) Ability/willingness to do PI&E at their cost; 4) Willingness to work with us on critical items (such as timing of violations); 5) Minimal impact to roadway/environment; 6) Cost of additional options, such as viewing cameras live from the P.D., monitors to approve violations, etc., 7) Number of contracts in Illinois and 8) Is there an "Opt-Out Clause. The companies were rated as follows: Red Speed Laser Craft Red Flex ATS GATSO Years in 1 year in Since 1994 Since 1986 Since 1994 Making Red Light U.S. equip for Operation years - on own this year Outsource None None None None Yes PI&E No Yes - they No - will Assist in No - our pay help us design but cost For PI&E develop not pay Issues minimal No Yes No No Impact Yes No Yes No * Yes Addl. Costs Yes No No No No IL 8 3 3 2 None Contracts Opt-Out Yes Yes No* Yes Yes Page - 3 - C:\Documents and Settings\djarosz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKB1\Automated REd Light Enforcement Feb 08.doc * In speaking with the representative from RedFlex, he stated that if we ended a contract with them prior to the end of the 3 years, they would move to recoup their expenses of labor and equipment, which he estimated to be over $100,000.00. Additionally, the cost or pricing structure of each vendor was determined. As some companies charge a flat fee per intersection (or approach), some charge a "transaction fee" and some charge a combination of both, a comparison chart was determined. For the purposes of this chart, I assumed that a single intersection has 10 red light violations detected per 24 hour period, extrapolated over a one year period (3650 violations). Based on the pricing structure of each vendor, the "cost" to the Village and revenue to the Village would be as follows (understanding that the "cost" is paid by the violators - so this figure represents the profit by the vendor). This chart assumes that in all cases, all violations are paid at the $100 fee as set by state law. Red Speed Laser Craft Red Flex ATS GA TSO Fee Monthly fee Flat Fee Monthly fee Flat Fee Transaction Structure ($1495) and $4595/month ($4395) and $4750/month fees per transaction transaction ticket - $30 fee per fee of $4.80 max ticket - per ticket $35.94 max Profit to $149,169 $55,140 $70,260 $57,000 $109,500 Vendor Revenue $215,831 $309,860 $294,740 $308,000 $255,500 to Village As part of the law passed in Illinois, it states "The compensation paid for an automated traffic law enforcement system must be based on the value of the equipment or services provided and may not be based on the number of traffic citations issued or the revenue generated by the system." While some companies appear to be attempting to circumvent the law by charging "transaction fees," these fees are based on each ticket issued and therefore, the company makes more money if more citations are issued. Of the five vendors interviewed, only two companies (Laser Craft and A TS) charge a flat fee with no other related costs. With these two companies, if there are 3 violations a day or 30 a day, their fee is the same. The other three vendors charge transaction fees per ticket, and as such, the vendor makes a greater profit based on a greater number of tickets, which appears to be in direct conflict with the intent of the law. Senator John Cullerton, who authored the legislation for Illinois, sent a letter to the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police on September 5, 2006, clarifying what the legislative intent of the law was. He stated in his letter: Page - 4 - C:\Documents and Settings\djarosz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKB1\Automated REd Light Enforcement Feb OB.doc Uln moving HB4835 through the Legislature one of the pronounced concerns of the membership was that the statute would be manipulated to generate revenue rather than being applied to improve public safety. In particular, membership wanted to assure vendors would not claim bounty money through ufee per ticket" contracts or contracts based upon the amount of revenue generated by an automated traffic enforcement system. To assure this did not occur, specific language was incorporated into the bill. " UBoth the purpose and intent of the Legislature in adopting such language is abundantly clear, any contract wherein a vendor is compensated based on the number of citations issued or the amount of revenue generated - including so called urisk-free" contracts where the vendor fee is dependent upon the amount of revenue collected - are strictly prohibited. Nevertheless I have heard some vendors are actually marketing their systems within the prescribed eight counties on a ufee per ticket" or urisk- free basis." Should a city or county enter into such a contract legal action would result against both the vendor and the governmental entity, and would be counterproductive to the intent of HB4835. " As a side note, many of the agencies I spoke with suggested that when the ordinance is worded, they would suggest that a percentage of the funds be designated to go to the police department to help fund future traffic safety activities and training, over and above what the normal budget is. Many departments wish they would have thought of that before passing their local ordinance and deciding if the money goes to the city's general fund. Most recently, the community of Bollingbrook, Illinois removed its automated red light enforcement cameras from all intersections in the community after less than 60 days of operation. Their automated red light enforcement vendor was Red Speed Illinois. In speaking with officials from Bollingbrook, citizen complaints directed at elected and police department officials and the public relations issues that resulted as well as the percentage of violations that were issued to motorists who failed to make a complete stop before turning right on red - a staggering 90%, led the Mayor of Bollingbrook to terminate the program. Additional Considerations: . The implementation of an automated red light enforcement system by the Village of Mount Prospect would have an impact on the availability of the Traffic Unit supervisor and possibly traffic unit officers who would be trained to review each and every video clip of a violation submitted to the Village by our automated red light enforcement vendor. Page - 5 - C:\Documents and Settings\djarosz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKB1\Automated REd Light Enforcement Feb 08.doc . The departments. who have implemented the automated red light enforcement systems report overtime costs associated with the reviewing of red light violation videos was an issue. · Citizen Complaints . Pre-Implementation Public Education Efforts . Documented Increases in rear end collisions at intersections with Automated Enforcement . Public Right of Way aesthetics (Automated Enforcement Equipment Placement) · Intergovernmental issues I think it is important for Mount Prospect Village Board members to engage in a discussion concerning all of the issues related to the implementation of an automated red light enforcement system. It is my belief that this document will assist Village Board members with their discussion regarding the implementation of an automated red light enforcement system. Mr. Mike Liebert of Red Speed Illinois has graciously agreed to present a brief educational Powerpoint video to members of the Village Board to assist them with their discussion of the issues on Tuesday, 12 January 2008. JD Page - 6 - C:\Documents and Settings\djarosz\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKB1\Automated REd Light Enforcement Feb 08.doc