Red Light Camera: One Month, One Camera, $709,900 in Fines
January 13th, 2009 | by Brian Costin Published in Blog, Features, Public Safety, Transportation | 28 Comments
A concerned Schaumburg citizen who attended the Public Safety Committee meeting on January 8th, reported that the Village of Schaumburg has found a gold mine in red light traffic camera citations.
Bob Garrett wrote to us at SchaumburgFreedom.com. He explained “Red Speed Illinois sent 7,403 violations to the Village of Schaumburg, of which 7,099 were approved. Collecting $133,231.98 in new revenue from Nov 16th to Dec 23rd.”
In actuality, the price of a red light traffic camera ticket is $100. Therefore, the 7,099 tickets actually cost Schaumburg motorists $709,900.
Keep in mind that this red light camera is only at one intersection, Meacham Road & Woodfield Road, and Schaumburg is considering up to 10 total sites for red light cameras in the future.
According to Schaumburg’s contract with Red Speed, which is the private company behind this program, they stand to make a pretty penny on this deal. Red Speed collects a $1,499.00 monthly fee from the Village and $35.94 per ticket. With 7,099 tickets written that comes to an astounding total of $256,637.06 in potential revenue for Red Speed in the first 38 days of operation of the camera.
A previous SchaumburgFreedom.com investigation found that at least 9 comprehensive studies on red light cameras found that the cameras actually made intersections less safe.
The Schaumburg Freedom Coalition’s solution to this problem is to remove all red light cameras and increase the duration of yellow lights at problem intersections. Unlike dangerous red light cameras, extending the yellow light duration is a proven method in reducing accidents at intersections.
This story was featured in the Pioneer Press on January 15, 2008 & The Daily Herald on January 21, 2008. There is quite a lively discussion on this in the comments section of the Daily Herald.
Update: February 26, 2009: Per Schaumburg Police Officer Paul Bultinck “The data is as follows, November 01, 2007 until January 31, 2008 there were a total of 10 crashes at the intersection with 5 being right turn on red related. From November 01, 2008 until January 31, 2009 there were a total of 7 crashes with 2 being right turn on red related. This was also reported again last night at the Village Board Meeting (February 24, 2009).”
Things of note:
- News reports showed that in 2008 traffic was down nationally.
- Woodfield Mall reported a very difficult holiday season, suggesting even less traffic in the area of the red light camera. The Village of Schaumburg has reported lower Sales Tax receipts from Woodfield and other area merchants.
- Restaurants have been particularly hit hard in the economic downturn.
- Combine that with the second highest sales tax in the nation in Schaumburg (10%).
- Both this winter and last were particularly hard. Weather conditions may have played a factor during these time periods and should be studied further to see if conditions affected accident rates.
It would be a pretty safe bet to say that the intersection probably experienced a significant drop in car & truck traffic. Still there was no reduction in main intersection crashes (5 in 2007 and 5 in 2008). The reduction of right turn on red related accidents (5 down to 2) is something to watch in the future.
The Schaumburg Freedom Coalition will be filing a FOIA request to see if there is any data on traffic volume for said intersection.
At this point of the red light camera experiment, the only public safety conclusion that can be made is that more data is needed. This should be lead by the Village Trustees and the Mayor to place a higher reliance on the existing comprehensive studies of red light camera intersections which include studies on thousands of intersections for multiple years. As I have already stated, these studies show that red light cameras make intersections less safe.
No related posts.
January 13th, 2009 at 12:58 PM (#)
I received an email this morning in response to this issue from a concerned Schaumburg citizen.
“Brian,
Way to call the village out on the red light cameras. They are mere revenue generators and do not promote safety whatsoever. I agree with your idea on extending the duration of yellow lights at problem intersections.
Good luck to you,”
Thanks!
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 7:54 AM (#)
Your suggestion makes no sense what so ever as that will not solve the right turn on red violations that do not stop & also doesn’t help but rather encourages drivers to run the red light. Bottom line stop & do not run the red lights.
Reply
Brian Costin Reply:
January 15th, 2009 at 8:51 AM
Captain-
I strongly encourage you to look at the studies that I have cited. It shows that red-light cameras increase accidents. These are not mom and pop studies they are from very reputable sources that have no financial interest in the cameras.
Virginia Department of Transportation, University of South Florida, The Washington Post, North Carolina A&T University, Ontario Ministry of Transportation, and the Australian Road Research Board have all found in their studies that red light cameras increase accidents.
Extending yellow light times does not encourage drivers to run red lights. Studies have show that extending yellow lights significantly reduces red-light running and accidents.
Not every infraction on the road is an unsafe action and deserves a ticket. Turning right on red can be completely safe without fully stopping.
This is about revenue for the Village and everyone knows it. If it wasn’t about revenue the Village would be donating the red-light revenue to M.A.D.D. or some other worthy non-profit.
Reply
January 18th, 2009 at 7:39 PM (#)
I just got my first ticket and after viewing the video for 30 or so minutes, the only conclusion I draw is that they got me doing a rolling stop (point is that the evidence is not so very crisp, even with the video). Since I cannot contest the ticket, here is my course of action: 1) Pay the $100. 2) Locate all redlight cameras in the area and tag them in my GPS. 3) Avoid shopping in Schaumburg (I cannot afford the $100 toll AND the 10% sales tax). and 4) Tell all my friends.
Reply
Brian Costin Reply:
January 18th, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Or you can help spread the word about the Schaumburg Freedom Coalition to your friends and elect a new set of elected officials in 2011 and get the red-light cameras removed.
Truth is you are right about the sales tax and the tickets, they will hurt the economy and the Schaumburg area will loose jobs. The Village board & Mayor Larson has increased taxes twice (1990 and 2004). How in the world can the Village and Mayor Larson stand up to the recent Cook County Tax hikes when they are tax raisers themselves? We need new elected officials in Schaumburg, starting with Mayor Larson.
Reply
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:42 AM (#)
Hi Brian,
Do you have any info on Illinois required minimum(s) for yellow light duration? From what I’ve been reading, some states have seen a trend of shortening yellow light length to increase revenue.
Reply
Brian Costin Reply:
January 23rd, 2009 at 8:37 AM
This information is very hard to find. In fact I did a reedom Of Information Act request for this very thing to see what the yellow light duration was previously at this intersection in Schaumburg. Schaumburg denied my request for the document saying that no such document exists.
I am looking for help concerning the overwhelming load of FOIA requests that can be done to make Schaumburg, and other municipalities, more transparent about such things.
What is surprising here is that only 2% of the tickets are for running a red-light in the traditional sense, 98% of the tickets are being written for turning right on red without coming to a complete stop.
Reply
January 27th, 2009 at 8:57 PM (#)
Most towns in the region already have or are soon getting redlight camera. Is Schaumburg’s lone camera uniquely unfair in some way?
Should the state law be changed to permit drivers to roll through a red light without stopping when making a right turn?
Why shouldn’t conservatives embrace the notion of having enforcement paid for by violators instead of by taxpayers?
Reply
Brian Costin Reply:
January 27th, 2009 at 9:59 PM
Schaumburg’s red light situation is not uniquely unfair, all red light cameras are inherently unfair.
Law enforcement should revolve around protecting the life, liberty, and property of its citizens. There is a significant difference between an right turn on red where someone is rolling slowly to see if it safe to turn without coming to a complete stop and a driver who puts others at risk by making an unsafe right turn that either causes and accident or nearly causes an accident. This calls for discretion by law enforcement.
The key difference is weather or not the police should fine and individual regarding a right hand turn is when an imminent threat to someone’s life, liberty, or property occurs. If no such threat or accident occurs then there is no reason to write a ticket.
This is not enforcement that results in a safer society. In fact the studies show that the red light cameras cause intersections to become more dangerous. Why should someone who is interested in safety propose policies that would cause our streets to become less safe?
Conservatives shouldn’t embrace policies that cause more loss of life and more property damage regardless of the fact that so-called “violators” are paying for them. This will have an economic impact of making government and the red-light cameras richer, and making the people poorer. This individuals who receive tickets will have less money to incite economic activity elsewhere.
In the case of Woodfield mall what if less people decide to shop there because of the increased cost or increased traffic? I know heard of a number of cases of people who fear getting tickets refusing to turn on red unless there is a green and unneccesarily tying up traffic. These are real economic costs of red-light cameras.
Also, conservatives shouldn’t embrace red-light cameras because of the questionable constitutionality such as the 5th Amendment right to due process, and the 6th amendment right to confront witnesses. Conservatives should be more supportive of individual rights within the framework of the Constitution.
Finally, conservatives shouldn’t embrace red-light because they degrade the respect for the rule of law and law enforcement. When police and government agencies are seen as only interested in extracting fines from people instead of working towards the mission of defending lives, liberty, and property people loose respect for law enforcement and government and general. Law enforcement is increasingly not being seen as defenders of our lives, liberty, and property but instead seen as agencies that deprive us of the same.
Reply
January 29th, 2009 at 11:02 PM (#)
Hoffman Estates just approved cameras at 5 intersections, which will be 500% more than Schaumburg has. According to Brian, that’s because they want to create less safety. I doubt that’s what the trustees and mayor have in mind. I’ll bet Hoffman will ticket RTOR violators too.
I don’t understand how strict enforcement of the law “degrades the respect for the rule of law.” It seems to that that letting people violate the law with impunity does that.
I don’t see the due process issue here since driving privileges are not in jeopardy, nor is one’s freedom. Unless parking tickets are a violation of due process, too.
It sounds as if Brian favors amending state law to permit drivers to not stop on red if the driver feels he can safely roll through. The same argument can be made about stop signs when there’s no traffic. Good luck in getting that enacted.
Reply
Brian Costin Reply:
January 30th, 2009 at 12:10 AM
I enjoy the debate even though you don’t agree with me on this one.
False, I do not pretend to assume to know what Hoffman trustees think about public safety in regards to red light cameras. It could be the case that they haven’t been presented with the same information that I presented to the Schaumburg board about at least 9 rigorous academic studies show how red-light cameras lead to more accidents at intersections and reduce public safety. They could be blissfully ignorant at this point, I don’t know.
The Schaumburg board has no excuse as they have been repeatedly exposed to the information at hand that should have led them to make a different conclusion about the safety of the intersection.
It’s understandable that some people don’t recognize how red-light camera enforcement and infraction policing degrades the rule of law. Many don’t recognize that extensive studies show that red-light camera make intersection less safe either. But once you are presented with the facts that this public policy puts lives and property at risk it becomes quite clear that fully-educated politicians are only interested in the revenue and not about the public safety.
According to the Constitution, due process is at issue any time someone is deprived of their property by government not just when there are criminal charges laid. In this case that means the $100 fine.
Law is not based on how one “feels” as you would suggest. What I am advocating is allowing drivers to make use of the road in a safe manner, including not ticketing everyone who rolls through a right hand turn on a red light. The key here is police officer discretion. If an officer observes someone who slowly rolls through a right hand turn on red when no one’s safety is threatened then what’s the big deal?
Have we really become that big of a nanny state where police officers or law enforcement cameras have to watch our every move to see if we are committing an infraction of the law or not. What’s next? Putting tracking devices on every car so they can monitor the speed we are traveling and ticket us when we go 1 MPH over the speed limit? Sadly, this is not fantasy it is actually being considered in Oregon.
If we take your argument to a deducible, but also absurd, conclusion by your logic it would be o.k. for the government to monitor us 24 hours a day everywhere from our homes to everything we do in public to make sure we are not committing any infractions of the law, even if our actions are of no harm to others or ourselves. Anything in the name of “public safety”, right?
Let’s not get ridiculous Paul! You can’t tell me that each and every one of those 7,000 people ticketed were threats to the safety of the public or themselves. Can you?
Reply
February 7th, 2009 at 10:49 AM (#)
I had a lot to say about this issue but you have covered all the angles and present a sound and logical argument against the use of the cameras. I hope Schaumburg officials listen but I highly doubt they care since they stand to make millions off of this in short order. My concerns rest with the big brother aspect of this. Too many Americans have accepted these sorts of watchdog policies and blindly believe these sorts of efforts are improving safety. It’s funny how the studies repute the legitamacy of this program and folks still don’t care. I think they rush to make a judgment without looking at the evidence or they work for the city and stand to gain from the fines.
I don’t know the details and i will get back to you if i can but i believe in Colorado these have been fought on the basis that the tickets were not written by a police officer. That worked until they hired one to review the videos…
I admit I got one of these for rolling a right on red. Nobody was in danger as the traffic coming from the right had a left turn arrow so there was no cross traffic for me to interfere with. In other words, there should have been a right green arrow for me.
Lastly, and as an FYI to anyone reading, I was planning on buying my next vehicle in Schaumburg but will shop elsewhere now as that is the only recourse I really have.
Reply
February 7th, 2009 at 12:05 PM (#)
[...] sidles up to the money mill. Red Speed collects a $1,499.00 monthly fee from the Village and $35.94 per ticket. With 7,099 [...]
February 12th, 2009 at 1:45 PM (#)
gone2 has a good idea about a right green arrow while southbound Meacham traffic turns left onto Woodfield.
gone2 writes, He’ll be happy to know he’s wrong on this one. The Village no longer uses automated photo enforcement of the RTOR.
Reply
February 24th, 2009 at 12:26 AM (#)
[...] no one noticed they slipped this one in there? Trust me the people of Schaumburg will notice. Our last red-light camera story is the most read article on this [...]
March 29th, 2009 at 9:47 AM (#)
Where can one find out exactly who voted FOR and AGAINST these cameras? Then we can work AGGRESSIVELY to remove them from office at the next election.
I saw an argument above that seemed to focus on whether the cameras improved or worsened safety – and then focused on money. NEITHER of these things are the main issue!!!
The main issue is Big Brother watching us, and the implications for privacy and freedom if the initial step of cameras watching our speed is taken further to monitor even more of our activities by faceless automated cameras and other equipment.
I have a lot of friends in law enforcement, the few times I have been pulled over I have been polite to the officer and paid my fine without complaint. But the cameras are EVIL.
Reply
Brian Costin Reply:
March 30th, 2009 at 2:16 PM
All 6 of the Village Trustees in Schaumburg voted for the Red Light Camera’s. Also, Mayor Larson, who can veto any ordinance the Trustees pass, voiced support for the red light camera.
I know that Schaumburg Rep. Paul Froehlich supported the Red Light Cameras as well.
While there are many issues that are equally or more important than Red Light Cameras, I think that all voters should absolutely take this into account when voting.
Reply
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:49 PM (#)
More than one area state legislator voted for the red light camera bill, HB 4835, in 2006, which authorized suburbs to employ automated enforcement. Among those supporting this bill were Republicans John Millner, Dan Cronin and Peter Roskam in the Senate, and Republicans Suzie Bassi, Ruth Munson, Terry Parke and Paul Froehlich in the House.
Reply
May 8th, 2009 at 3:39 PM (#)
I stopped shopping in Woodfield Mall because of this idotic photo enforcement system in Schaumburg. Why bother to visit place and fill like in jail cell?
Reply
July 1st, 2009 at 11:16 AM (#)
[...] & Police Chief Brian Howerton have decided that red light cameras willpermanently shut off the most lucrative red light camera in the U.S. and cancel plans for 9 [...]
July 14th, 2009 at 9:16 PM (#)
In December of last year I was in Plainfield visiting my brother. My family and I drove up from DALLAS, TEXAS and on ONE day we visited Schaumburg, to take the kids to Legoland. This past Monday (July 13, and almost seven months later)we received a letter from a collection agency on behalf of the “Village of Schaumburg” for TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS for allegedly running a red light. So we NEVER in seven months get a single item of correspondence informing us of this alleged infraction, but all of a sudden we are hit with a two hundred dollar collection bill? What is wrong with these people? Do they not know how to use Google? If “the Village of Schaumburg” had really wanted, they could have contacted us promptly….when the fine was the $100 you refer to — I guess they figured that because we were TOURISTS they could milk this ‘cash cow’ a bit more than with the locals!!! And we thought scams like these only originated in third-world countries — but then again, we had never been to Schaumburg, Illinois!
Reply
July 14th, 2009 at 9:40 PM (#)
Maria,
I am sorry to hear your unfortunate occurrence with red light cameras in Schaumburg.
While it may be a consolation prize at best, I am pleased to report to you that Schaumburg officially turned off and ripped out the red light cameras just today.
After a very aggressive political outreach campaign the Schaumburg Freedom Coalition has won.
Tonight, I asked the Village board if they would be refunding to the over 10,000 people who got tickets the $100 dollar fine. The Village Attorney advised the Village Board Members and Mayor Larson to not answer the question.
Typical.
Reply
August 21st, 2009 at 1:47 PM (#)
How these got up in the first place is a mystery to me. It is blatantly unconstitutional. You have the right to face your accuser. So unless they haul that camera into court im never paying.
Reply
August 23rd, 2009 at 3:21 PM (#)
I received a $100.00 ticket at the location of North & IL 59 S. I took a right turn on red after stopping for few second to make sure traffic was clear. Few days later I received a ticket saying that I disobeyed traffic control signal. There wasn’t any sign mentioning no right turn on red. So why did I recieve this ticket and still have to pay for it?
Reply
Ken Reply:
November 28th, 2009 at 3:52 PM
Tina – Did you fight this ticket, since there wasn’t any signage? I just received a $100 ticket for the same location of North and IL 59 and the photo does NOT show this sign. I’m fighting this.
Reply
September 21st, 2009 at 12:58 PM (#)
[...] cameras and sharing the story of how the Schaumburg Freedom Coalition was able to help defeat the most profitable safety program in [...]
July 23rd, 2010 at 2:47 PM (#)
I got one in Roselle, corner of Rodenburg & Central, not the busiest of intersection at 1PM. My issue is that I own a company with 6 vehicles and at any given time 1 of 6 people could be driving any one of those vehicles. Without visual evidence of the driver how can they stick my business with the fine. Any ideas how to fight this one?
Reply
March 21st, 2011 at 10:18 PM (#)
Think twice before sending your kids to college the Chicago area. Can you really afford to be liable for everything a driver of your car does? The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that the driver is responsible for going through red lights while in IL the owner is responsible. Greg, your workers want you to buy them pizza or you will have to pay $600 in fines this week! If you are a driver, rest assured, fools like Greg will pay so don’t worry about those cameras, after all, only the owner is liable under IL law. If you are a commercial driver think of this: When that pedestrian runs in front of you after you passed the “decision zone”, you will have a 100% chance of paying that fee when the red light camera gets you, but the kid running in the far crosswalk is guilty of running the red light and who knows? If you slam on the brakes just after crossing the white line, you just may not hit him. Rest assured, in Naperville, no car has ever been ticketed for hitting a pedestrian. That is in Naperville where parents care about their kids. Red light cameras have been affective at reducing the number of side collisions but has disproportionately increased the number of rear end collisions so much that the end result is much worse. Proponents of the red light cameras will be sure to quote only that first part. If it is a decision to slow down and make a head check to watch for a pedestrian don’t make that mistake at a red light intersection or you may not cross that white line in time. Think now of driving like a video game! Remember how you accelerated until that last second to make the finish line in “Pole Position”? That white line on the crosswalk is your goal. You MUST reach that no matter what or you pay $100. In Chicago the yellow lights are so short they don’t meet USDOT standards (3.2 seconds minimum for a yellow light in a 30 mile per hour zone) You will find that red light camera on Pulaski set to 3.0 seconds. Make sure you gun it when that light turns yellow or light up those tires and have grandma surprise you in your trunk when she can’t slow her Marquis fast enough. She probably has good insurance too! If you have a large family or have a commercial license, you just can’t afford to let your kids or workers drive your vehicles. You just may lose your license yourself because they have no liability!
Reply