California City Proposes to Evade California Red Light Camera Law

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper

Since May, the red light cameras in the city of Corona, California have issued a total of 6511 citations worth $2,903,906. This money has been split between Corona, Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia, the state and Riverside County. On Wednesday, the Corona City Council discussed the possibility of cutting the state and county out of the program entirely. This would allow Corona to keep more money while giving the city a chance to claim it is lowering the pricey $446 automated ticket. “I voted for the program, but I made a mistake,” Mayor Steve Nolan said. “I didn’t ask the cost… We are killing people with the fines.”


The city’s proposal would ignore the California statute authorizing red light camera ticketing, setting procedures and establishing the fines. In its place, the city would substitute its own administrative ticketing arrangement. Currently Corona only collects $133.80 out of each $446 ticket. Under the new plan, the first ticket would be lower but the city stands to collect a much greater amount from repeat violations.

“Administrative citations are processed outside of the court system and the driver is not held responsible,” Police Chief Richard Madory explained. “Vehicle Code Section 21101(d) provides the city with the authority to implement a local ordinance that would require a motorist to stop at red lights or any other traffic control device; however, there are no cities, to our knowledge, in California that are issuing administrative citations for red light violations. The fees received for administrative citations are set by California Government Code 36900 at $100 for a first violation. Subsequent violations can be increased up to $500 within a twelve-month period of time.”

Taking the unprecedented step of abandoning the structure set out by the legislature would certainly draw a lawsuit. Opponents of the red light camera program made forceful statements at the council hearing.

“I think we need to call this what it is: a tax increase for the city,” resident Mark Hainan said. “We’re taxed enough. Obama’s killing us, our state’s killing us, and now our own city’s killing us. We’re talking about California stops — ninety percent of the people in this room do California stops. I think the whole abomination should be abolished, not just reduce the fines.”

According to the city, 55 percent of tickets are issued to Corona residents. Redflex sends the vast majority of these tickets to drivers who make a right-hand turn on red after slowing. Studies show that these “California stops” are not a significant cause of accidents. Only one resident spoke in favor of the cameras, and those speaking against them received applause from the audience until Nolan insisted that they stop.

Nolan ended the meeting by stating that he would schedule a public city council study session to further consider the administrative ticket proposal.

[courtesy The Newpaper]

The Newspaper
The Newspaper

More by The Newspaper

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 17 comments
  • Marquinhocb Marquinhocb on Sep 25, 2009

    I'm all for red light cameras - for safety, not for profit! If Brazil can figure it out, why the hell can't an advanced country like the US? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8p-9t7E-Zs

  • Anonymous Anonymous on Sep 28, 2009

    [...] tickets as an administrative violation rather than a moving violation so it can keep more of the revenue for itself. “The problem here is that Corona is shredding the Sixth Amendment of the US [...]

  • Brandon I would vote for my 23 Escape ST-Line with the 2.0L turbo and a normal 8 speed transmission instead of CVT. 250 HP, I average 28 MPG and get much higher on trips and get a nice 13" sync4 touchscreen. It leaves these 2 in my dust literally
  • JLGOLDEN When this and Hornet were revealed, I expected BOTH to quickly become best-sellers for their brands. They look great, and seem like interesting and fun alternatives in a crowded market. Alas, ambitious pricing is a bridge too far...
  • Zerofoo Modifications are funny things. I like the smoked side marker look - however having seen too many cars with butchered wire harnesses, I don't buy cars with ANY modifications. Pro-tip - put the car back to stock before you try and sell it.
  • JLGOLDEN I disagree with the author's comment on the current Murano's "annoying CVT". Murano's CVT does not fake shifts like some CVTs attempt, therefore does not cause shift shock or driveline harshness while fumbling between set ratios. Murano's CVT feels genuinely smooth and lets the (great-sounding V6) engine sing and zing along pleasantly.
  • JLGOLDEN Our family bought a 2012 Murano AWD new, and enjoyed it for 280K before we sold it last month. CVT began slipping at 230K but it was worth fixing a clean, well-cared for car. As soon as we sold the 2012, I grabbed a new 2024 Murano before the body style and powertrain changes for 2025, and (as rumored) goes to 4-cyl turbo. Sure, the current Murano feels old-school, with interior switchgear and finishes akin to a 2010 Infiniti. That's not a bad thing! Feels solid, V6 sounds awesome, and the whole platform has been around long enough that future parts & service wont be an issue.
Next