This is an awesome broadcast where Dori Monson calls out Lynnwood city councilman, Ted Hikel, who tries to defend the use of scameras. (Fast Forward to about 2 min). Make sure you listen past the first few callers. Ted Hikel calls back to “set the record straight” and digs himself into an even bigger hole!
More audio at MyNorthwest.com
Remember that the traffic cameras at school crossings are not just spying on you and your car; they are also spyng on your CHILDREN.
Dori calls it right.
This is a scam!
As for Lynnwood trying to defend 3 secomd amber.
GIVE ME A BREAK!
When GA required 1 plus ambers, multiple towns dropped RLC
The guy tryiing to defend 3 seconds is either dillusional or works for ATS!
Wonder which one.
Tell ya Lynnwood, raise the Amber to 4 second from 3 seconds and see what happens????
(I am sure ATS will understand their loss of revenue from giving people a chance to stop or proceed through if they can't safely).
My email to Ted
Hi Ted, have you ever looked at the yellow light time algebraic equation? Have you ever talked to the engineers at ITE. The formula used is purely mythical, according the ITE it is up to local traffic engineer to set the time. The formula is ONLY a guideline and must be adjusted based on accidents rates at the intersections. Why do you force drivers to guess at the yellow light times? Can you do this equation in your head? The ITE engineers told me the formula does NOT include all variables.
A 3 second yellow at 40 MPH is attempted homicide. Based on the ITE formula the time at 40 MPH should be at least 4 seconds. Of course at 4 seconds revenue would decline and so would accidents. Whomever is responsible for setting that time that low should be arrested . You people are gambling with other peoples lives and property.
Here is the ITE yellow light interval formula https://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=205394&…
Jim Brown https://www.facebook.com/killtncams?ref=ts
How much of the $2.2 Million dollars that Lynnwood has hauled in revenue is actually going to the city and how much is going to American Traffic Solutions (ATS) of Arizona. Consider that ATS handles all of the processing of complaints, all of the revenue collection, all of the initial processing of the video, as well as maintaining and installing the cameras. Municipalities are initially sold by ATS that they will only have to pay for the initial installation and maintenance. However, after cities realize how much paperwork and time is involved they turn all of these duties over to ATS. I'll bet that ATS is getting 75%-80% of the gross revenue.
Mitigation by mail is a crock. Believe me, I tried. Even though ATS is required by law to notify a violator in 14 days, they mailed me a violation 18 days from the incident, and I received it 22 days after the incident. When I pointed this out by my mitigation by mail, since it was in Spokane and I live in Bothell, I was rejected. They stated that my postmarked envelope was insufficient evidence, and even though it may have been mailed outside of 14 days that there was nothing in the law that required dismissal of the ticket as a remedy. Ted Hikel is an idiot.
Actually, ATS gets zero dollars from the fines. See the bill passed by the state: section 1, paragraph h prohibits a contractor from being awarded compensation "based upon a portion of the fine or civil penalty imposed or the revenue generated by the equipment."
What does strike me, however, is the fact that the $124 fine that Lynnwood imposes is based on "parking" fines. The summary of the original bill passed by the state legislature, however, says "City treasurers are currently required to remit … 32 percent of … penalties, fines, bail forfeitures, fees and costs for violations of municipal or town ordinances [to the state coffers]." But, it goes on to say that "The 32 percent remittance does not include monies received for parking infractions." Are these fines considered "parking" fines? Because if they are, and this is really about "public safety," then that means the cities are sidestepping the intent of the state legislature here, just to make some extra money. That 32 percent is supposed to be going to the state's Public Safety and Education Account.
ATS is not the one required to notify the violator. Again, I must refer you to section 1, paragraph d which clearly dictates that a law enforcement officer is the one who issues the notice of infraction.
You are absolutely correct here.