Red-light Cameras in Texas: A Status Report
July 31, 2006
AccidentscausedbyTexasdriverswhorunredlightsareextremelycostlyinhumanandeconomicterms.TheTexasDepartmentofPublicSafety(DPS)crashdatabaseshowsinjuriesandfatalitiesstemmingfromred-lightcrashesgrewfrom10,000annuallyin1975to24,000peryearin2001,andarecentFederalHighwayAdministrationstudyidentifiedTexasasoneoftheworststatesforred-lightrunning.ThefinancialcostsoftheseaccidentsinTexashavebeenestimatedatbetween$1.4billionand$3billionannuallyinmedical,insurance,andrelatedexpenses.Red-lightaccidentsoftenareamongtheworstbecausetheygenerallyinvolvevehiclescrashingdirectlyintothedriverorpassengersideofanothercarathighspeeds.
Theuseofphotographictrafficsignalenforcementsystems–or“red-lightcameras”–byTexasmunicipalitieshasexplodedsincethe78thLegislatureenactedSB1184byDeuell,whichincludedaprovisiongrantingcitiesadditionalpowerstoregulatetrafficontheirroadsandissuecivilcitationsforviolationsthatpreviouslyhadbeenpunishableonlyascriminaloffenses.Since2003,atleastadozenTexascitieshavecontractedwithvendorstocatchandfinered-lightrunners,andanumberofothersareconsideringestablishingprogramsoftheirown.
AlthoughseveralmunicipalitieshaveinterpretedthelanguageinSB1184tomeanthatTexaslawpermitstheuseofred-lightcameras,theLegislaturehas
notenactedlegislationthatspecificallyallowsorprohibitstheiruse.Arecentattorneygeneralopinionprovidesclearguidancefortheuse
ofcamerasonstateroads,allowingmunicipalitiestoinstallred-lightcamerasunderapartnershipwiththeTexasDepartmentofTransportation(TxDOT).ButTexashasnotexplicitlyaddressedtheuseofcamerasonnon-stateroads.
Red-lightcamerashavebeencontroversialsincetheyfirstwereinstalledinNewYorkCityin1993,andtheirusehassparkeddebate
formanyyearsinTexasandaroundthecountry.Somestateshavebannedthecamerasoutrightwhileothershavegrantedcompleteapprovalfortheuseofcameras.Stillothersallowthecamerasbutlimittheiruse,andafewstates
This report reviews current law, examines state and
national data, and explores some of the legal and ethical questions raised
by the use of red-light cameras.
Number 79-15
3
7
5
2
910
6
Red-light camera legislation in Texas
National programs & data
Box: Programs in other states
Legal and ethical debates
Box: How a red-light camera program work
Box: Programs in Texas cities
Other options
Page � House Research Organization
–includingTexas–havenotcodifiedtheuseofred-lightcamerasevenascitiescreateandoperatetheirownprograms. Thefactthatdifferentstateshaveadopteddiversered-lightcamerapoliciesisareflectiononthemixedfindingsthathaveemergedfromresearchintotheeffectivenessofthesecameras.Arecentfederalstudyfoundeconomicbenefitsassociatedwithred-lightcamerause,andmanycitiesinTexasandnationallythatusecamerashaveseenreductionsincrashesandviolations.Butanumberofstudiessuggestthattheuseofred-lightcamerasmayactuallyincreasethenumberofcaraccidents. Thisreportsummarizescurrentlawandreviewsthelegislativehistoryconcerningtheuseofred-lightcamerasinTexas.Itexaminesstateandnationaldataonred-lightcameraefficacy,describeshowthecameraswork,andreportswhichTexascitiesareoperatingorplanningred-lightprograms.Finally,thereportexploressomeofthelegalandethicalquestionsraisedbytheuseofred-lightcameras.
Red-light camera legislation in Texas
Current law.Texashasnolawthatexplicitlyaddressestheuseofred-lightcameras,butseveralTexascitieshavetakentheircuesfromrecentlegislativeactionandguidancefromtheAttorneyGeneral’sOffice. InFebruary2002,then-Atty.Gen.JohnCornynissuedanopiniononred-lightcamerasattherequestofthecityofRichardsonandRep.TonyGoolsbyofDallas.Richardsonhadinquiredaboutwhetherstatelawwouldallowthecitytousethecamerasandissuecivilviolationsinlieuofcriminalcitationsforred-lightrunnerscaughtonfilm.InOpinionNo.JC-0460,theattorneygeneraldeterminedthatcitieswereallowedtousethecamerasbutcouldnotissuecivilcitationsforred-lightviolations.
Citieshavehome-ruleauthoritytoenacttrafficregulationsunlesstheyconflictwithstatelaw.Atty.Gen.Cornynfoundthatanordinancecreatingacivilpenaltyagainsttheownerofavehiclerunningaredlight,asevidencedbyaphototakenbyared-lightcamera,conflictedwithstatelawimposingacriminalpenaltyforrunningaredlightinthreeways:
1) thepenaltywouldbeimposedontheownerofthe vehicleratherthanthedriver;
2) itwouldbeacivilratherthanacriminaloffense;and3) thepenaltywouldbe$75ratherthanacriminalfine
rangingfrom$1to$200. Atty.Gen.Cornyndidleavethedooropenforfutureuseofthecamerastoissuecivilcitationsbypointingoutthatan“ordinancecouldbeadoptedbythecityifthelegislatureamendedstatelawsoastoexpresslypermititorotherwiseeliminatetheconflict”betweencivilandcriminalpunishmentforthesameviolation. Red-lightcameraadvocatesbelievetheenactmentofSB1184byDeuellin2003eliminatedthisconflict.AHouseamendmenttoSB1184addedthefollowinglanguagetoTransportationCode,sec.542.202,whichcoversthepowersoflocalauthoritiesoverroadsintheirjurisdictions: “‘Regulating’meanscriminal,civil,andadministrativeenforcementagainstaperson,includingtheowneroroperatorofamotorvehicle,inaccordancewithastatelaworamunicipalordinance.” Abillthatwouldhaverepealedthatlanguageandanotherthatwouldhavebannedthecamerasoutrightbothfailedduringtheregularsessionofthe79thLegislature.SupportersofthecameraspointtothosedevelopmentsasatacitendorsementbytheLegislatureofred-lightcamerause. OnJune23,2006,followingarequestfromTxDOTforlegalguidance,Atty.Gen.GregAbbottissuedanopinionthatuseofred-lightcamerasisallowedonstateroads.InOpinionNo.GA-0440,notingTxDOT’sbroadauthorityoverthestatehighwaysystemanditscurrentuseofcamerasfortrafficandemergencypurposes,theattorneygeneralaffirmedthatthedepartmentcaninstallthecamerasandallowmunicipalitiestodothesame“forthepurposeofenforcingtrafficlawsonstatehighways”andforthepromotionofpublicsafety.Atty.Gen.AbbottalsocitedTransportationCode,sec.221.002,toshowthatmunicipalitiesandtheTexasTransportationCommissioncurrentlyareauthorizedtoreachagreementsthatsharetheresponsibilityandliabilityassociatedwithperformingvariousdutiesonstateroads.Theopiniondidnotaddresswhetherlocalgovernmentshavetheauthoritytousered-lightcamerasonnon-stateroadsbecausethissubjectfelloutsidethescopeofTxDOT’srequest.
Todate,TxDOThasreceivedrequestsfrom14citiesregardingtheinstallationofred-lightcamerasonstateroads.ByAugust,theagencyexpectstohavedraftedanagreement
House Research Organization Page �
thatwillallowTxDOTtoauthorizemunicipalitiestoplacecamerasonstatehighwaysandrightsofway.Theagencydoesnotplantoturndownrequeststoinstallcamerasbutwillreviewallapplicationstoensurethatmunicipalitiesfirsthaveexploredengineeringoptionstoreducered-lightrunningaccidents.TxDOTwillnotchargemunicipalitiestoinstallthecamerasandwillnotseekanyrevenueraisedthroughtheiruse.Inaddition,theagencywillturnoverallresponsibilityregardingthefundingandoperationofthecamerastothemunicipalities.
Legislative history.TheTexasLegislaturehasconsideredlegislationaddressingred-lightcamerasinallbutoneofthelastsixregularsessions.
In1995,SB876byCain,whichwouldhaveauthorizedmunicipalitiestousered-lightcameras,passedtheSenatebutfailedintheHouseonsecondreadingduringthe74thLegislature.
The76thLegislaturein1999didnotenactHB1152byDriver,whichwouldhaveallowedamunicipalityinacountywithapopulationofatleast150,000ornexttoacountywithapopulationofatleast150,000toissuecivilcitationstotrafficoffenderscaughtbyred-lightcameras.TheHousetabledthebillafterpassinganumberofflooramendments,includingonethatwouldhaverequiredanoticeaccompanyingthecamerastoread:“BigBrotheriswatchingyou!”
In2001,HB1115byDriverdiedaftertwoseparatevotesintheHouseendedinatie.Thebillwouldhaveallowedmunicipalitiestoimposecivilpenaltiesundertheuseofa“photographictrafficsignalenforcementsystem.”
Twobillsthatwouldhaveauthorizedred-lightcamerasfailedtopassinthe78thLegislatureduringthe2003regularsession.HB200byBermandiedinHousecommittee,andHB901byP.KingwasdefeatedinthefullHouseaftertwoamendmentsrestrictedcamerausetomunicipalitiesincountieswithpopulationsof50,000orlessandthentocountieswithpopulationsof50orless.
InenactingSB1184byDeuell,whichdealswithenforcingcommercialmotorvehiclestandards,the78thLegislaturein2003approvedanamendmentbyRep.Harper-BrownofIrvingthatgrantslocalauthoritiesthepowertoregulateroadsusing“criminal,civil,andadministrativeenforcement”(TransportationCode,sec.542.202(b)(3)).Red-lightcameraadvocatespointtoSB
1184asthelegaljustificationforthemunicipaloperationofred-lightcameraprogramsthatissuecivilcitationstooffenders.Opponents,however,believethatSB1184doesnotauthorizecitiestousered-lightcamerasandarguethatTexaslacksalawspecificallyadressingthissubject.
Duringits2005regularsession,the79thLegislatureconsideredHB259byElkins,whichwouldhaverepealedTransportationCode,sec.542.202(b)(3).ItpassedtheHousebutdiedintheSenateafterfailingtogetthetwo-thirdssupportneededtobringthebilltothefloor.HB1347byIsettalsopassedtheHousebutdiedinSenatecommittee.Inadditiontorepealingsec.542.202(b)(3),itwouldhaveprohibitedlocalauthoritiesfromoperatingred-lightcamerasontheirroads.
National red-light camera programs and data
Avarietyofstateactionshavemirroredthedisparityinstudiesfocusedonred-lightcameras.Somestatesandmunicipalitieshavebannedtheiruseoutrightorcanceledprogramsbasedonevidencethatthecamerasareineffectiveinenhancingsafety.Otherstatesandcitieshaveciteddifferentstudiesshowingimprovementinsafetyatintersectionsusingred-lightcameras. Proponentsofred-lightcamerasoftenpointtotheincreasedpopularityofthedevicesasevidenceoftheirsuccess–citieswouldnotusethemunlesstheyworked.TwelvestatesandtheDistrictofColumbiahaveenactedlegislationallowingtheuseofred-lightcameras.Manyapplyconditionstotheiruse,suchaspostingsignstoalertdriversthattheycouldbephotographedandcitediftheyrunaredlight.NewYorkallowscamerastobeusedonlyincitieswithpopulationsofatleast1millionandcapsat100thenumberofintersectionsatwhichanyjurisdictioncanemploythecameras.CertaincitiesinNorthCarolinaandthosewithpopulationsgreaterthan30,000inOregoncanoperatered-lightcameras.California,Colorado,Delaware,Georgia,Illinois,Maryland,Pennsylvania,RhodeIsland,andWashingtonalsohavelawsallowingforphotoenforcementatintersections(seeTable 1: Red-light camera programs in other states,page5). Innineotherstates,includingTexas,camerasareinuseintheabsenceofanyspecificstatestatuteauthorizingorprohibitingthem.Arizona,Iowa,Missouri,NewMexico,Ohio,RhodeIsland,SouthDakota,andTennesseearesilent
Page � House Research Organization
onthelegalityofcameras,butred-lightcameraprogramsareoperatingincitiessuchasPhoenix,Toledo,andKnoxville.Intotal,morethan110citiesacrossthecountryemployred-lightcameras.
Success stories and studies. Supportersofred-lightcamerasciteanumberofgovernmentandprivatestudiesasdemonstratingthebenefitsofemployingthecameras.ThefederalTransportationResearchBoardfoundinits“ImpactofRedLightCameraEnforcementonCrashExperience”surveyconductedin2003thatamajorityofred-lightcamerajurisdictionsreporteddecreasesinaccidentsandviolationsasaresultofthecrashes,including:
Charlotte,NC,whereallcrashtypesdroppedby19percentandcrashseverityfellby16percentduringathree-yearperiod;Sacramento,CA,wherered-lightcrashesdecreased39percentduringaone-yearperiod;andBaltimoreCounty,MD,wherered-lightcrashesfell30percentduringaone-yearperiod.
TheFederalHighwayAdministrationinApril2005reported“amodesttomoderateeconomicbenefit”tojurisdictionsthatinstalledthecameras,whichyieldedanaverageof$39,000to$50,000annuallyateachintersectionwheretheywereinuse.Usingdatacollectedaroundthecountryat132intersections,thestudyfoundthecamerascausedareductioninright-anglecrashesbutanincreaseinrear-endcollisions.Althoughthedataforintersectionswithandwithoutthecameraswerenearlyidenticalintermsofthetotalnumberofcrashes,thestudyconcludedthatcamerascanreducecostsbecausebroadsidecrashesaremoredangerousandcausegreaterdamagethanrear-endcollisions.
TheInsuranceInstituteforHighwaySafetyhasconductedseveralstudiesacrossthenation,findingthatcamerashavereducedred-lightrunningandcrashesatintersections.Its2002study,whichcomparedcrashdatafromOxnard,CA,withdatafromthreesimilarcitieswherered-lightcamerasarenotemployed,showedanoverallcrashrate7percentlowerinOxnardandarateofinjuryaccidents29percentlowertherethanintheothercities.ThestudyexaminedallintersectionsinOxnardandconcludedthatthepresenceofcamerasatsomeintersectionscreatesa“haloeffect”thatpromptsdriverstobemorecautiousateveryintersection.
•
•
•
Rejected programs and opposing data.Whilestudiesandstatisticshavetoutedthesuccessofred-lightcameras,severalstatesandmunicipalitieshavereacheddifferentconclusions. In2005,theVirginiaLegislatureoptednottocontinuethatstate’sred-lightprogramaftertheconclusionofa10-yearpilotprojectinseveralcommunitiesaroundWashington,D.C.,andinVirginiaBeach.Alongwithgeneralconcernsaboutcivilliberties,legislatorsreachedthedecisionaftercommissioningastudyconductedbytheVirginiaTransportationResearchCouncil–agroupjointlysponsoredbytheVirginiaDepartmentofTransportationandtheUniversityofVirginia.BasedondatafromtheNorthernVirginiacameras,itconcludedthatthenumberofinjury-causingcrashesactuallyhadincreasedwhiletheintersectionswereundersurveillance.Althoughthecamerasreducedthenumberofaccidentsinwhichoneormoreofthedriverswaschargedwithfailingtoobeythestoplight,theanalysisfoundanincreaseinrear-endcrasheswhilerevealingapossibledecreaseincrashesatanangle.Whileallowingthattheseverityofinjuriesincurredintheseangledcrashescouldbegreaterthanthoseresultingfromrear-endcollisions,researchersdidnothavedatadetailedenoughtoprovethathypothesis. In2002,Hawaiilawmakerscanceledatrafficcameraenforcementprogramthatusedcamerasmountedinvansandradartotargetspeedersandred-lightrunners.Criticsclaimedthattheprograminvadedtheprivacyofdriversand
Data from Garland
OfalltheTexascitiesusingred-lightcameras,onlyGarlandhasbeenoperatingasystemlongenoughtohavecollectedannualdataonviolationsandcitations.Sinceinstallingthecamerasattheendof2003,Garlandhasseenviolationsandcitationsdropineachsuccessivecalendaryear.
Thecitylauncheditsprogramwiththreecameras,addedoneafewmonthslater,andinstalledafifthcamerain2005.(Thefifthcamerahasbeenexcludedfromtheanalysisbecauseitmalfunctionedduringthefinalthreemonthsof2005.)Programdatashowthataveragemonthlyviolationspercameradecreased27percentfrom2004to2005,andaveragemonthlycitiationsfell14percentoverthesameperiod.
House Research Organization Page �
Source: National Conference on State Legislatures and HRO research
State Legal status of red-light cameras
Table 1: Red-light camera programs in other states
Arizona Nostatelaw;cityprogramsincludePhoenixandScottsdale
Arkansas Camerasbannedunlesslawenforcementofficerispresenttoissuecitation
California Cameraslegalstatewide;programsinatleast55citiesandtwocounties
Colorado Cameraslegalstatewide;programsinatleastsixcities
Delaware Cameraslegalstatewide;programsinatleastfivecities
DistrictofColumbia Cameraslegalcitywide
Florida Nostatelaw;attorneygeneralruledcameraevidencecannotbeusedtocitemotorists
Georgia Cameraslegalstatewide;programsinatleast15citiesandtwocounties
Hawaii Programterminatedin2003
Illinois Cameraslegalineightcounties
Iowa Nostatelaw;cityprogramsincludeCouncilBluffsandDavenport
Maryland Cameraslegalstatewide;programsinatleast17citiesand6counties
Missouri Nostatelaw;cityprogramsincludeArnoldandFlorissant
Minnesota Nostatelaw;soleprograminMinneapolisoverturnedbycourt
NewMexico Nostatelaw;cityprograminAlbuquerque
Nevada Camerasbannedunlessoperatedbylawenforcementagency
NewYork Cameraslegalincitieswithatleast1millionresidents;programinNewYorkCity
NorthCarolina Cameraslegalinselectcities;manycityprogramssuspendedduetolegalchallenges
Ohio Nostatelaw;cityprogramsincludeColumbus,Dayton,andToledo
Oregon Cameraslegalincitieswithatleast30,000residents;programsinatleastthreecities
Pennsylvania StatelawauthorizesPhiladelphiaprogram
RhodeIsland Cameraslegalstatewide;programinProvidence
SouthDakota Nostatelaw;programinSiouxFalls
Tennessee Nostatelaw;cityprogramsincludeGermantownandKnoxville
Utah Restrictscamerastolow-speedroadswhereapoliceofficeralsohaswitnessedtheviolation
Virginia Legislaturedidnotrenewprogramafter10-yearpilotexpiredinJuly2005
Washington Cameraslegalstatewide;programsinatleastthreecities
WestVirginia Camerasbannedstatewide
Wisconsin Camerasbannedstatewide
Page � House Research Organization
wasunconstitutionalbecauseitassumedthatthevehicle’sownerwasdrivingthecarwhentheviolationoccurred.Thegovernororderedanendtotheprogramduringthefirstyearofitsthree-yearpilotphase,andsubsequenteffortstorevivetheprogramhavestalled. Fourotherstatelegislatures,inArkansas,Nevada,WestVirginia,andWisconsin,havebannedautomatedred-lightenforcementsystems.Florida’sattorneygeneralruledthatevidencegleanedfromred-lightcamerascouldnotbeusedtoissuetickets,butthreecitieshaveengagedinalegalbattlewiththestatebymovingforwardwithred-lightcameraprogramsnonetheless.
Inresponsetootherstudiesthathadbeencriticizedfortheirsimplicityorsmallsamplesizes,theUrbanTransitInstituteatNorthCarolinaA&TStateUniversityanalyzedreportedaccidentsatornear303intersectionsovera57-monthperiodthatbeganmorethantwoyearsbeforetheintroductionofred-lightcameras.TheOctober2003study,updatedthefollowingJuly,foundthatred-lightcamerasdidnotreducecrashesandthattheymayhaveledtoincreasesinrear-endandothertypesofcrashes.Accidentsinvolvingcarstravelingindifferentdirectionsdidnotchangewiththeintroductionofthecameras,accordingtothestudy.“Inmanyways,”theauthorsconcluded,“theevidencepointstowardtheinstallationof[red-lightcameras]asadetrimenttosafety.” BasedondatafromaDistrictofColumbiaintersectionaccidentdatabaseoveraseven-yearperiod,theWashington PostinOctober2005determinedthatthenumberofcrashesatintersectionswithcamerasdoubledfrom1998to2005andincreasedby64percentatintersectionswithout24-hourmonitoring.Evenfatal-and-severe-injurycrashesandbroadsidecrashesappeartohaveincreasedsignificantlyatallintersections,whichcriticssaycontradictsthebeliefamongred-lightcameraadvocatesthatcamerasareeffectiveinpreventingthedeadliestaccidents.
Problems with cameras.Technicalandlegalproblemsalsohavemitigatedagainsttheuseofred-lightcamerasinseveraljurisdictionsaroundthecountry. InMinnesota,wherenolawspecificallyallowsorprohibitsred-lightcameras,acountyjudgehaltedtheMinneapolisred-lightprogram,theonlyoneinthestate.Becausestatelawmakesdriversresponsibleforred-lightviolationsandthecitydoesnothavetheauthoritytoestablishanordinancedirectedattheactualdrivers,a
HennepinCountyDistrictJudgeinMarch2006struckdownthecity’sordinancebecauseitconflictswithstatelawbyshiftingtheburdenofprooftovehicleownersinsteadofrequiringticketingauthoritiestoproveviolations. NorthCarolina’scourtsalsohaveeffectivelyundercutred-lightprogramsthere.InMay2006,theNorthCarolinaCourtofAppealsfoundtheprogramunconstitutionalbecauseitdoesnotgive90percentofthemoneycollectedfromeverytrafficcitationtolocalschoolsystemsasmandatedbythestateconstitution.Morethantwodozencitiesandtownsoperatecamerasthere,andsomehavesuspendedtheirprogramsduringtheappealsprocess.Becausethecostofpayingred-lightcameravendorsismuchhigherthanthe10percentportionoftheticketthatjurisdictionscankeepforthemselves,citieswillhavetodecidewhethertopayfortheirprogramsthroughothermeansorkillthementirely. LosAngelesalsohaddifficultywithitsprogramafter20percentofitsphotographedviolationsweredismissedduetolackofclearevidence.Thecitybrieflystoppeditsprogram,terminateditsvendor,andcontractedwithanewcompanytoinstallthecamerasatasmanyas32intersectionsbytheendof2006.
Legal and ethical debates
Red-lightcamerasbringwiththemthepotentialofincreasedsafetyandrevenue,buttheyalsohavegeneratedanumberofethicalandlegaldilemmas.Opponentsofthecamerasexpressconcernsaboutprivacyandtheriseofasurveillancestate,alongwithothercomplaintsabouttheunfairnessofpunishmentsissuedbyfor-profitcompaniesinlieuoflawenforcementagencies.Advocatessaythatmanyimprovementshavebeenmadetothesystemssincetheybeganoperatingindozensofcitiesaroundthecountry,nullifyingmanyoftheseconcerns.
Equality of punishment. Avehiclerunningaredlightinacommunitywithred-lightcamerascanbesubjecttounequalpunishments,criticssay,dependingonwhocatchestheviolator.Adrivercaughtbyared-lightcamerafacesacivilcitationandafinethatinmostTexascommunitiesusingthecamerasislowerthantheoneissuedbyauniformedofficer.Also,becauseanofficer-issuedticketisacriminalcitation,itcanaddpointstoadriver’srecordandpotentiallyraisethatperson’sinsurancerates.
House Research Organization Page �
Severalcompaniesoperatered-lightcamerasundercontractwithmunicipalities.Mostcompaniesusedigitalcamerasmountedabovethecornersofanintersectionpointinginallfourdirectionsoftraffic.Thecamerasareconnectedbycomputertoboththetrafficsignalandtoundergroundelectricalwiresthatactivatethecameraswhenadriverrunsaredlight.Thesystemsutilizea“passivesensor”thatswitchesonthecamerasonlywhenavehicleenterstheintersectionafterthelighthasturnedred;avehiclealreadyintheintersection,suchasonewaitingtoturnleftjustasthelightturnsred,wouldnottriggerthered-lightcamera.
Whenavehiclerunsaredlight,thecomputertriggersthecameratotaketwooverheadpicturestodocumenttheviolation–ashotofthevehicleenteringtheintersectionafterthelightturnsredandanotherpictureofthevehiclemovingthroughtheintersectionwhilethelightisred.Aseparatecameratakesaphotographofthevehicle’slicenseplate.Aftertakingthepictures,thecomputersuperimposesdataontheimagetoincludethetimeanddateoftheinfraction,thelocationoftheintersection,thespeedofthecar(calculatedbythedistanceandtimedocumentedinthephotos),andtheelapsedtimebetweenwhenthelightturnedredandwhenthecarenteredtheintersection.Somesystemsalsoemployavideocameratoshowa12-secondblocoftimesurroundingtheinfraction.Thevendorthenweedsoutanyblurredorotherwiseunusablephotosbeforeforwardingthecompletedimagestothecontractingmunicipality.
The Garland model.MostTexascitiesemploythefollowingmodel,pioneeredbythecityofGarland,toissueandadjudicatethecitations.Uponreceivingtheimagesfromthevendor,thecityremovesanythatitbelieveswouldnotstanduptoachallengebasedonincompleteorinconclusivedata.Imagesthatdocumentavalidreasonforacartorunaredlight,suchasafuneralprocessionorapoliceofficermanuallydirectingtrafficattheintersection,alsoarediscarded.Thepolicedepartmentthenissuesacivilviolation–ratherthanacriminalviolationthatmustbewitnessedbyapoliceofficer–tothevehicle’sregisteredowner.Asacivilviolation,theoffenseisnotincludedontheowner’sdrivingrecord.InGarlandandmanyTexascities,thefinefortheoffenseis$75butcanincreaseto$200foradriverwhohasreceivedatleasttwored-lightcameracitationsintheprevious12months.
How a red-light camera program works
Uponreceivingacitation,theownerofthevehiclehasthreeoptions:paythefine,requestanadministrativehearing,orprovideevidencetoshowthatsomeoneelsewasdrivingthevehicleatthetimeoftheinfraction.Suchevidencemayinclude,forexample,apolicereportshowingthatthevehiclehadbeenstolenpriortothered-lightoffenseorabillofsaledemonstratingthatthecarhadbeensoldpriortotheinfractionbuthadnotyetbeenregisteredbythenewowner.Insuchcases,thepolicedepartmentdismissestheoriginalticketand,whenpossible,reissuesitinthenameoftheactualdriver.
Apersonchallengingtheticketbeforeanadministrativehearingofficeralsomayintroducemitigatingevidencethatanofficeronthescenemighthavetakenintoaccount,suchasweatherconditionsthatwouldhavemadeasuddenstopunsafe.Inaddition,ifadriverreceivedforthesameoffenseacivilcitationinthemailandaticketfromanofficeronthescene,thecitywoulddismissthecivilcitation.
Whenmotoristsfailtorespondtocivilcitationsbythedeadlineprintedonthebackoftheticket,somecitieshavebegunturningoverdelinquentpaymentstocollectionsagencies.Indefinitefailuretopaythefinecouldresultintheinclusionofoutstandingdebtonthedriver’screditreport,asopposedtofailuretorespondtoacriminalcitationforwhichpenaltiesincludedenialofadriver’slicenserenewal,denialofavehicleregistrationrenewal,and/oranadditionalcriminalchargeoffailuretoappearaccompaniedbyawarrantforthedriver’sarrest.
Mostcompaniessignmulti-yearagreementstorunred-lightcamerasatselectedintersections.Thecompaniesmaintainandownthecamerasthemselvesandgenerallychargeamonthlyfeepercamerainservice.Somecompaniesstillreceiveacertainpercentageofeachticketassessedbutthispracticehasdeclinedduetotheperceptionthatcompaniesandcitieshaveanincentivetoissueasmanyticketsaspossible.Althoughtermsvary,eachcontractallowsthecitytoterminatetheprogramiftheLegislatureorthecourtsdeemtheuseofred-lightcamerasillegal.Mostcontractsallowmunicipalitiestooptoutiftheydonotmakeenoughmoneytorecouptheircosts,althoughtheregenerallyareexpensesassociatedwithdismantlingared-lightcameraoperation.
Page � House Research Organization
Supportersofred-lightcameraspointoutthatrepeatoffenderswouldeventuallyfacemoreseverepunishmentundertheprogramthatGarlandandmostTexascitieshaveestablishedbecausethosereceivingmorethantwoticketsina12-monthperiodfacelargerfines.Thecamerasarenotinstalledateveryintersection,andpoliceofficersmonitoringthosestoplightslikelywouldcatchdriverswhoconsistentlyrunafoulofthelaw.Moreover,supporterssay,thefeeforacivilpenaltyisequivalenttothatpaidbypeoplewhotakedefensivedrivingordeferredadjudicationtodisposeofcriminalcitations.
Equality of enforcement. Opponentsofthecamerasbelievetheyviolateacitizen’sSixthAmendmentrighttoconfronthisorheraccuser.Unlikeanofficeronthescene,acameracannottestifyastowhathappened,andanaccusedmotoristcannotofferadefenseagainstamachinethatmayhavemalfunctionedandsnappedapicturewhenthelightwasnotred.Further,opponentssay,camerascannotexercisethediscretionanofficeronthescenemightuseinchoosingnottociteamotoristrunningaredlightduetobadweatherorparticipationinafuneralprocession,forexample. Supportersarguethattheuseofred-lightcamerasdoesnotviolatetheConstitutionbecausethemunicipalityitselfbecomestheaccuser.Apersonwhoreceivesaticketviacameraalsohastheopportunitytoexplainthecasetoanadministrativehearingofficer,whocanexercisethesamediscretiontodismissaticketthatapoliceofficermight.
Safety. ManypolicedepartmentsinTexasarestrongsupportersofred-lightcamerasbecausetheysaythetechnologyallowsthemtoallocatemanpowermoreefficiently.Assumingapoliceofficertakesabout15minutestopulloverandticketamotorist,theofficercouldcitenomorethanfouroffendersperhour.Inaddition,thesesupporterssay,aloneofficermonitoringred-lightrunnersatagivenintersectioncanonlywatchtrafficmovinginonedirectionandwouldmissamajorityofthattrafficwhilecitingoffenders.Red-lightcamerashavenosuchlimitations,supporterssay.Infact,somecamerascanphotographuptofourviolatorsmovinginonedirectionatthesametime. Opponents,however,pointtowhatcamerascannotdo–removerecklessordrunkdriversfromtheroad.Theyalsofearthatthecamerassimplywillevolveintoareplacementforuniformedtrafficofficerswhowilleitherbereallocatedorreducedinforceasaresultofdownsizing.
Red-lightcameraadvocatesareskepticalofsuchclaims,citingseveralexamplesofcitieswithcamerasthatareusingproceedstohireadditionalofficers.Althoughdrunkandrecklessdriversareasafetyconcern,soisapoliceofficerwhoplacesotherdriversindangerbyrunningaredlighttoapprehendacarthatranaredlight.Besides,supporterssay,thecameraswouldactuallyfreemoreofficerstoremovehabituallydangerousdriversfromtheroad. Camerasupportersalsoarguethatdriversinareaswithoutcamerasknowthereareonlysomanyofficersontheroadandwoulddrivemorecarefullyiftheyknewintersectionsweremonitoredaroundtheclock.Further,theysay,camerasarevaluableinhelpingpolicedepartmentsdocumentthecausesofaccidents,especiallythosethatoccurwithoutwitnesses,andpreventingtrafficproblemssuchasgridlockcausedbycarsthatblockintersections.
Revenue. Someopponentsofred-lightcamerasworrythatcitieswithred-lightcameraprogramsmaybemoreinterestedinraisingrevenuethaninpromotingpublicsaftety.TheypointtoSanDiegoas“exhibitA”ofasystemrunamok.ThecitycontractedwithLockheedMartinCo.tooperateared-lightcameraprogram,givingthecompany$70foreach$271citationitissued.ButaccordingtotheRedLightCameraDefenseTeam,agroupofareaattorneys,thecityandLockheedchosetomonitornotthemostdangerousintersectionsbutthosewithshortyellow-lighttimesandheavytrafficvolumes.ThreemonthsafterthecitysuspendedtheprograminJune2001,aCaliforniajudgedismissedalmost300citationsbecausehefoundLockheedhadtoomuchdiscretionovertheprogram’simplementation.
Red-lightcameraadvocatesobservethatSanDiego’sprogramisupandrunningagaininpartnershipwithAffiliatedComputerServices,whichhadacquiredLockheed’sred-lightcameradivisionintheinterim.Insteadofaper-ticketfee,thecompanychargesamonthlyrate,andeveryTexascityoperatingared-lightprogramhasimplementedasimilarsystem.Neitherred-lightvendorsnorpolicedepartmentscansequencethetrafficlights,whicharecontrolledbystateorlocaltrafficdepartmentsinaccordancewithstateandfederalregulations. Inaddition,supporterssay,manyTexascitieshavespecificallyearmarkedprofitsmadefromthecamerasforuseinenhancingpublicsafety.Garland,forexample,hasusedred-lightmoneytoreplaceallsignallightswithbigger
House Research Organization Page �
Figure 1: Red-light camera programs in Texas cities
1
�
�
��
�
�
�
�
10
11
1�
1�
1�
1�
1���1���
�� ��
��
�1
seeinset
11
��
citythatcurrentlyoperatesared-lightprogram
citythatplanstolaunchared-lightprogramwithin12months
citythatisconsideringestablishingared-lightprogram
�0
1.Denton–4cameras 2.Frisco–2cameras 3.Garland–5cameras(planstoadd7) 4.Plano–4cameras 5.Richardson–2cameras 6.Rowlett–3cameras
7.Arlington–10cameras 8.Dallas–15cameras 9.Duncanville–2cameras 10.ElPaso–10cameras 11.GrandPrairie–10cameras 12.Houston–10cameras (planstoadd40inincrementsof10)
13.AlamoHeights 14. Austin 15.Bedford 16.Conroe 17.CopperasCove 18.FarmersBranch 19.HighlandPark 20. Irving 21.Laredo 22.LeonValley 23.Marshall 24.NorthRichlandHills 25.Pasadena 26.SanAntonio 27.Terrell 28.UniversityPark
AlthoughRichardsonwasthefirstcityinTexastoestablishared-lightcamerapilotandseekstateapprovalfortheprogram,thecityofGarlandsincehastakentheleadinexploringandtestingitslegalauthoritytousered-lightcameras.InSeptember2003,Garlandbecamethefirstcitytoinstallandrunapermanentred-lightcameraprogramfollowingtheenactmentofSB1184.Sincethen,thelegalframeworkusedinGarlandhasbeenmirroredinatleastadozenTexascommunitiesthathavepassedordinancestoestablishprograms,imposecivilpenaltiesforred-lightrunning,andcreateenforcementandhearingprocesses.
1�
�
1���
��
Page 10 House Research Organization
andbrighterlight-emittingdiode(LED)lights,alongwithreplacingallschool-crossingsignswithhigh-visibilityfluorescentgreensignsandre-stripingallintersections.
Privacy. WithanodtothetotalitariangovernmentdepictedinGeorgeOrwell’sfuturisticnovelNineteen Eighty-Four,somecriticsbelievethemunicipaluseofred-lightcamerasisakintoBigBrotherspyingonthedriversofTexas.Already,theysay,theproliferationofsurveillanceequipmentinoursocietyisexcessive,withpublicandprivatecamerasinstalledonmanystreetsandbuildingstomonitortrafficandguardagainstbreak-ins.Red-lightcameraprograms,theyargue,violatetheFourthAmendment’sprotectionagainstunreasonablesearchandseizure.Citygovernmentsunreasonablydeploycamerasonpublicroadswithoutprobablecausetobelievethatanyparticularmotoristwillviolatethelaw.
Camerasupporterscontendthatprivacyclaimsbroughtbydriversonpublicroadshavebeenrejectedbycourtsaroundthecountry.ThefactthatcamerasalreadyareusedwidelyinTexas,includingattollbooths,withlittlepubliccomplaintprovestheyarenotonlyeffectivebutalsorelativelynoninvasive,supporterssay.Thisisespeciallytruegiventhatred-lightcamerasinTexasphotographonlythevehicleandlicenseplatebutnotthedriver.Inaddition,supporterssay,thecamerasarenotconstantlyrunning–theyaretriggeredtotakephotosonlyafteramotoristhasrunaredlight.
Other options
AdvocatesonbothsidesofthedebatepointtoseveralreasonswhyTexasneedsastatutethatexplicitlyallowsorprohibitstheuseofred-lightcamerasbycitiestoissuecivilcitations.
Authorizing red-light cameras. Supportersofred-lightcameraprogramsarguethattheLegislatureshouldenactlegislationexplicitlyauthorizingtheiruse.Basedonexperienceswithred-lightcamerasinotherstatesaswellasconcernsaboutproblemsthatcouldarisefromthepatchworkofprogramsthathasemergedinTexas,theyurgelawmakerstoconsiderthefollowingideasastheymoveforwardwithsuchlegislation:
Protection from litigation. InMinnesota,thelackofastatelawauthorizingred-lightcamerasenabledcourtstheretoinvalidateprogramsonconstitutionalgrounds.
Whilenolegalchallengetoared-lightcameraprograminTexasisunderwaytoday,litigationonthisfrontisalwaysapossibilityabsentastatelawexpresslyauthorizingsuchprograms.
Breadth of current authorizing language. ThelanguageintheTransportationCodethatmunicipalitieshaveusedaslegalauthoritytoinstallthecamerasonnon-stateroadsallowslocalauthoritiestousecriminal,civil,oradministrativepenaltiesagainstamotoristforviolatingastatelawormunicipalordinance.Whilemunicipalitiesthusfarhaveusedthislanguageonlytooperatered-lightcameraprograms,itcouldbeconstruedtogovernavarietyofotheractionsnotexplicitlycoveredbystatelaw,suchasprohibitingtheuseofacellphonewhiledriving.Bydirectlyauthorizingred-lightcameraprogramsinstatute,theLegislaturecouldstrikesec.542.202(b)(3)toensurethatcitiesdidnotusethislanguageinthefuturetoconductactivitiesthatlawmakershadnotintendedtoallow.
Regulation and oversight. AlthoughmostTexascitieswithred-lightcameraprogramshavefollowedtheGarlandmodel(seeHow a red-light camera program works,page7),theycurrentlyarenotboundbyanystateregulationswhenestablishingtheirsystems.Statelawmandatesthatcitiesmustsetcriminalfinesforred-lightrunningthatrangebetween$1and$200,butthereisnocorrespondingguidelineiftheviolationisdeemedaciviloffense.Writingred-lightcameraprogramsintolawwouldallowtheLegislaturetosetlimitsoneverythingfromthenumberofcamerasacitycouldinstalltotheamountitcouldfineviolators.
Revenue direction. ManyTexascitiesthatoperatered-lightcamerashavededicatedtheuseofrevenuegeneratedfromtheprogramforpublicsafetyorotherpolicefunctions.Butcitiesarenotrequiredtousered-lightviolationdollarsforanyparticularpurpose,andthereisevidencethatcertaincities,suchasSanDiego,haveimplementedred-lightcameraprogramsthatemphasizerevenuegenerationoverpublicsafety.Alawthatspecificallyauthorizestheuseofred-lightcamerascouldrequirecitiestousetherevenuegeneratedforthepublicgood.
Eliminating unequal punishment. ATexasdriverissubjecttodifferentpunishmentbasedonwhetherheorsheiscitedbyanofficeroracamera.IssueswithunequalpunishmentdonotexistinstatessuchasArizonaandCaliforniawhereallred-lightrunningoffensesarecriminalviolations.Inadditiontophotographingcarsandlicense
House Research Organization Page 11
plates,theircamerasystemsalsotakepicturesofactualdrivers,supplyingtheevidenceneededtocitethedriverforacriminaloffense.
Open records status.Nostatewidestandardexistsfortheuseandsharingofimagesbymunicipalitiesthatoperatered-lightcameraprograms.Imagescapturedbyred-lightcamerasareconsideredopenrecordssubjecttodiscoveryundertheTexasOpenRecordsActandcanbesubpoenaedbycourtsandinsurancecompaniesintrafficdisputes.However,apartyrequestingtheinformationmusthavekeyinformationsuchasthetime,date,andlocationoftheoffensebecausecitiesthatusered-lightcamerasdonotnecessarilyfiletheimagesundertheviolators’names.
HB901byP.King,whichthe78thLegislaturedidnotenactin2003,wouldhaveaddressedtheopen-recordsstatusofred-lightcameraimages.Exceptforarequestbythecitedmotorist,thebillwouldhaveexemptedtheimagesfromdiscoveryundertheOpenRecordsAct.Italsowouldhaverequiredmunicipalitiestodestroyallphotoscapturedbyred-lightcameraswithin30daysofpaymentofthecivilpenalty.
Double jeopardy.TheGarlandordinance,whichmanyTexascitieswithred-lightprogramsuseasamodel,includesaprovisiondesignedtopreventplacingred-lightviolatorsindoublejeopardy;i.e.,imposingbothacriminalandcivilpenaltyforthesameinfraction.Underthisprovision,thecitycannotimposeacivilpenaltyonamotoristwhohasbeencitedorarrestedforthesameoffensebyapoliceofficer.
Inpractice,Garland’spoliceofficersflageachcriminalcitationwrittenforred-lightrunningatintersectionsunderphotoenforcement,whichnotifiesthedepartmentthatmotoristsshouldnotreceivecivilcitationsforthoseoffenses.Butmanylegalexpertsbelievethatadriverwhoreceivedtwocitationsforasingleoffensecouldpaythecivilfineimmediatelyandthensuccessfullycontestthecriminalviolationonthebasisthatthedriveralreadyhadbeenpunishedfortheoffense.
Thepotentialforplacingoffendersindoublejeopardylikelywillincreaseasmoreandlargercitiesbeginoperatingred-lightprograms,andnostatewidestandardcurrentlyexiststoensurethatcityordinancesguardagainstdoublejeopardy.
Banning red-light cameras.Opponentsofred-lightcameraprogramsbelievethatcitiesshouldusemeasuresotherthanautomatedenforcementtoimprovetrafficsafety.TheyarguethattheLegislatureshouldexplicitlyprohibitred-lightcamerasandgrantTxDOTandDPStheresourcesandauthoritytotakethefollowingsteps: Lengthen warning time prior to red lights. AMarch2005TexasTransportationInstitutestudyof181Texasintersectionsduringathree-yearperiodfoundthatincreasingthelengthofyellow-lighttimebyonesecondreducedviolationsby53percentandcrashesby40percent.Inaddition,trafficsignalsinsomeEuropeancountriesemployacountdownclockthatshowshowmanysecondsremainuntilthelightwillturnred.Supportersofthisapproachcontendthatdriversoftenrunredlightssimplybecausetheymisjudgehowmuchtimetheyhavebeforealightturnsred,althoughopponentsarguethatdriverswhomisjudgeyellowlightstodaystillwilllikelyrunredlightsaftertheclockhasrundown.
Make lights more visible. Avarietyoftechnologicalsolutionsareavailabletoimprovethevisibilityoftrafficlightsfromafar,includingtheuseoflargersignalsandbrighterlights.
Explore engineering alternatives. Theuseofcamerasreducesincentivestodeterminethetruecausesofred-lightrunningaccidents,suchaspoorlydesignedintersections.Examplesofimprovementsincludeinstallingdedicatedturnarrows,trimminghedgesandreducingotherpotentialvisionimpairments,andinstallingtrafficcirclesinadditiontoorinsteadofstoplights.
Improve lane markings. Intersectionsthatarepoorlymarkedcanleadtoaccidents,particularlyamongdriverswhoareunfamiliarwiththearea.Restripingthelanemarkingshelpstodefineclearlytheboundariesofintersections,ensurethatcarshaveampleroomtoexecuteturns,andreduceconfusionamongdrivers.
– by Joel Eskovitz
House Research Organization Page 1�
HOUSE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION
Steering Committee:
BobHunter,Chairman DavidFarabee,Vice Chairman BillCallegari DianneWhiteDelisi HaroldDutton CarlIsett MikeKrusee JimMcReynolds GeanieMorrison ElliottNaishtat JoePickett RobertPuente ElviraReyna JimSolis G.E.“Buddy”West
JohnH.ReaganBuildingRoom420P.O.Box2910Austin,Texas78768-2910
(512)463-0752
www.capitol.state.tx.us/hrofr/hrofr.htm
Staff:TomWhatley,Director;BenDavis,Editor;RitaBarr,Office Manager/Analyst;BetsyBlair,KellieDworaczyk,JoelEskovitz,TeddHolladay,Research Analysts
