Red Speed’s Criticism of Schaumburg’s Anti-Red Light Camera Movement Without Merit

November 2nd, 2009 | by Brian Costin Published in Blog, Features, Public Safety, Schaumburg Politics | 3 Comments

Schaumburg's Infamous Red Light Cameras

On the heels of being one of the first communities in Illinois to remove existing red-light cameras Schaumburg’s vendor, Red Speed of Illinois, has been circulating a memo that bashes the Village and the work that we have done at the Schaumburg Freedom Coalition to remove unsafe red-light cameras. Apparently, Red Speed is not happy with the fact that we pointed out that red light cameras actually increase accidents at intersections and are nothing more than a money making tool for municipalities and vendors alike. Could Red Speed’s criticism have something to do with the fact that their livelihood is dependent on the proliferation of red light cameras and speed cameras?

Surely sensing that public opinion is turning against red light cameras after a series of articles in the Chicago Tribune and Daily Herald Red Speed’s lobbyists are very busy trying to defame a successful citizen-led advocacy model for removing red light cameras. The Daily Herald recently found that Red Speed is sending memos to prospective red light camera municipalities bashing our success locally.

“Make no mistake that the mayor and village board’s decision is purely political in nature and has absolutely nothing to do with RedSpeed Illinois or the integrity of the program,” the e-mail stated. (Referring to Schaumburg)

Installed for a few months in late 2008 at an intersection by the Woodfield Shopping Center, red-light cameras generated about $1 million, nearly all for right-turn violations.

That made the village one of its most productive clients but that cut no ice with RedSpeed.

“Schaumburg had a vocal core of red light enforcement critics and apparently the village officials will succumb to their unfounded arguments regarding the safety effectiveness of these programs,” the memo said.

Full Daily Herald Story

Really?

The so-called “unfounded arguments” are actually nine comprehensive studies we presented to the Schaumburg Village Board showing how red-light cameras actually increase accidents and reduces the safety of intersections.

These studies come from respected organizations such as the University of South Florida, The Washington Post, North Carolina A&T University, Ontario Ministry of Transportation, Australian Road Research Board, and the Virginia Department of Transportation whose research found the cameras were associated with an increase in total crashes of 29%, and an increase in the frequency of injury crashes of 18%.

We provided two studies showing that extending the duration of yellow lights was highly effective in reducing accidents at intersections. The Texas Transportation Institute found “an increase in yellow duration of 1.0 seconds is associated with a [crash frequency] of about 0.6, which corresponds to a 40 percent reduction in crashes.”

Despite approximately 98% of tickets in Schaumburg being written for illegal right turns on red, we found U.S. Department of Transportation statistics showing the average motorist could drive a billion miles — the distance from Earth to Jupiter and back — before being involved in an accident that resulted from a motorist making a rolling stop on a right-hand turn.

All of the studies and articles referenced above can be found online at: www.schaumburgfreedom.com/red-light-cameras

I encourage all citizens and elected officials who are considering red-light cameras to examine all of the research available and judge for themselves whose argument is backed by numerous comprehensive studies from many reputable organizations and whose argument is “unfounded”.

Share and Enjoy:

Responses

Feed Trackback Address

Different View says:

November 3rd, 2009 at 3:52 PM (#)

While I don’t condon any kind of client-bashing (from either side) I think it is wrong to point out a bunch of studies that highlight certain points when there are actually more official studies that support the safety aspects of red light enforcement. Maybe your readers would like to see this too. Something has to be done about this situation and there aren’t a lot of other plausible ideas floating around (including extending the yellow time – that will just become the new norm).

http://www.vancnews.com/articles/2009/10/24/emporia/news/news9174.txt

Reply
Brian Costin Reply:
November 3rd, 2009 at 4:00 PM
Different View-

Certainly, there are some studies (typically funded by the insurance companies) that show some moderate increases in safety due to red light cameras. But what I have found out is that many of those studies are a very small statistical representations of the populations of red light camera intersections, and they have serious problems in the methodology.

Regardless, there is much easier ways to improve intersection safety (extending duration of yellow lights and increasing the timing in the delay in a red light appearing and the intersecting traffic control light turning green).

Note: The link you attached is not a study rather a single occurrence. Given that there are accidents at both red-light camera intersections and non red-light camera intersections your evidence is anecdotal and not comparable to the comprehensive studies that appear at http://www.schaumburgfreedom.com/public-safety/what-are-red-light-cameras-really-used-for/.

You are encouraged to post the studies you refer to in a response to this comment.

Reply
Paul Froehlich says:

February 15th, 2010 at 2:38 PM (#)

I see there are competing RLC bills introduced this year in the state senate, and two come up in committee on Feb. 16th.

Sen. Duffy’s bill (SB 2466) would ban RLCs, while Sen. Millner’s bill (SB 3140) would require some changes in how they’re used. The Duffy bill (SB 2466) has 16 co-sponsors as of Feb. 15th. The Millner bill (SB 3140) has one co-sponsor.

SB 2477 by Sen. Hendon would prohibit automated tickets for stopping one foot or less beyond the line.

The Duffy and Hendon bills are scheduled for hearing before the Senate Transportation Committee on Feb. 16 at 4 p.m. The Millner bill remains in the Assignments Committee as of Feb. 15.

Reply