You have to give full credit to Mark Spear, John Kromko and their crew for their win on Election Day: They have terminated RoboCop before he could turn on us.

From Tucson spokeswoman Lane Mandel:

The City of Tucson is no longer processing citations through the Traffic Safety Camera Program in response to the apparent passage of Proposition 201. Current election results show that 65 percent of voters
approved the referendum to end the red light cameras and photo enforcement vans. The change became effective on Wednesday, Nov. 4.

“The voters have spoken clearly on this issue,” said City Manager
Michael Ortega. “While the election results will not be certified
until later this month, the City of Tucson wishes to honor the spirit
and intent of the voters by ending the citations immediately following
the election.”

Proposition 201 is a public initiative that amends Tucson Code Section
20-2 to provide that no violation of Chapter 20 occurs if evidence is
gathered through the use of automatic photo red light or speed cameras,
and prohibiting City use or contracting for traffic control technology
that does not produce a human, on-site eyewitness to testify in court.

Traffic laws will continue to be enforced by motor and patrol officers.

Let’s still be careful out there, OK?

This article appears in Nov 5-11, 2015.

Getting hassled by The Man Mild-mannered reporter

11 replies on “Kromko Terminates Robocop: Red Light Cameras Deactived”

  2. Who will benefit from the outcome of the rejection of the red-light cameras?
    Auto body shops – from the increase in wrecked vehicles once the collision rate returns to the pre-camera era; douchebag drivers – who will resume running red lights, mostly with impunity; and, uh…well, that’s about it.
    Emergency rooms will also see an increase in patients from the likely increase in traffic collisions, but I doubt they would consider that a benefit.

  3. I have no problem with the red light cameras. I have a problem with drivers being afraid they’ll get their picture taken, and so they slow down to a crawl at those intersections, thereby delaying the rest of us that don’t drive around town in constant fear. As a result, I’m glad they’re gone. If you want safer streets, eliminate all mobile phone usage in moving automobiles, with the exception of hands-free devices.

  4. Ending the predatory money grab red light scameras immediately was a very honorable decision by Tucson authorities. Now, with the financial incentives gone, the city can re-calculate the yellow intervals for safety. It is safest when the yellow intervals are set for the ACTUAL perception/reaction times of about 85% of the drivers (typically 0.4 seconds longer than now set) and the ACTUAL approach speeds of 85% of the drivers under good conditions. These re-calculations will typically mean adding 0.7 to 1.0 seconds to the yellows to reduce violation rates by 60% to 80+%.

    Tucson was the 44th loss in 47 votes for red light or speed cameras. Unfortunately, ATS and Redflex can “buy” enough votes in the legislature to block bills that would make red light and speed scameras illegal in the state of Arizona. $$$$$$ are all that count for the predatory for-profit ticket scamera companies – safety and morality are meaningless.

    James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association

  6. Now that the profit motive is gone, perhaps the idiots at the city can work on the signal timing, which elimintates 90% of crashes.

    Or does the public need to do that for you mouth-breathers too?

  7. @ Goldwater: The mouth breathers that run red lights SHOULD funds city activities.
    @ JC Walker: Why don’t we do something to promote drunk driving?

  8. Look at all these Red Light Camera Shills.

    Information and perception wars, from red light cameras to immigration.

    There are people who are paid to comment on every comments section like a lobbyist. These people are known as shills.

    If 90 or even 80 % of the profit from these red light cameras actually went back into the city, was completely overseen by the police and city – without any adjustments to generate more red-light tickets, I might be OK with them.

    It’s simply a bad deal for everyone but the company who owns and operates these cameras.

  9. Good riddance to the deceptive, rip off cameras. The city even moved the sensor lines that trip the cameras out into the intersections in some places to increase revenue. Anyone can get a ticket in this case, even if you crossed the limit line on full yellow. Only fools that don’t understand the facts support these big-brother freedom sucking devices.

  10. We at Tucson Traffic Justice are just as concerned with safety as many citizens of Tucson. There are a number of no-enforcement methods that can be used to improve safety, and we will be suggesting and supporting them. Traffic enforcement cameras that are predatory, represent the worst method of attempting to achieve any safety benefit. Any analysis of the data shows that camera system proponents are far more concerned with revenue than for safety. Finally, Tucson Traffic Justice presented an option to the citizens of Tucson to decide their own future; and unlike the Tucson City Council, we did not “enforce” anything on them.

  11. Through the years I must admit that I have received tickets that required the traffic school about every 6 to 10 years. I remember going to sessions many years ago and the people attending were mostly younger people, many obviously not very experienced drivers. Then, after the cameras, it was apparent that: the participants were in the majority far older, they were definitely experienced drivers who had not caused an accident, they seemed quite inexperienced with traffic school, they obviously had money, and they were immediately willing to go to school and pay the rate. The cameras created this drastic change, and one result was entrapment for profit no matter what camera defenders want to believe.

Comments are closed.