Florida City Agrees to Refund Illegal Red Light Camera Tickets

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper

Some Florida are beginning to regret jumping on the red light camera bandwagon without bothering to wait for state legislative approval. On Wednesday, the Pembroke Pines city commission voted to approve a settlement with attorney Jason D. Weisser who filed a lawsuit against a number of towns that began automated ticketing before state law was changed last July to allow automated ticketing.

Pembroke Pines collected a total of $450,854 from the program prior to July. By settling the case without going to trial, Pembroke Pines and American Traffic Solutions (ATS) will each contribute a third of their profit to the settlement fund — $106,589 from the city and $28,667 from the vendor, plus about $10,000 in administrative costs. Ticket recipients would then receive a partial refund within six months from this fund. ATS has cut the same deal in all the other cities that Weisser sued.

“The city attorney’s office and special counsel have reviewed the proposal, as well as the status of the litigation both in the city’s specific case and in other cases,” City Attorney Samuel S. Goren wrote in a memo to the commission. “Given the rulings to date, it cannot be said with any degree of certainty that the city would ultimately prevail.”

Commission members on Wednesday also deferred the decision on a long-term renewal of its photo enforcement contract with ATS over concern that the program was not making money.

“We can’t implement the program that’s not economically sustainable for the city,” Commissioner Carl Shechter said. “The cost of safety would become too high for the city.”

ATS salesman Greg Parks explained that “the cameras were not producing the desired revenue” because the commission decided to drop right-turn-on-red ticketing. Parks insisted the fees his company charges are based on the number of tickets issued so that the city will never lose money.

“You can’t pay us more than you take in,” Parks said.

ATS offered a rebate and lowered costs for the program to entice the city to renew their contract. The company also agreed to move cameras out of non-profitable locations.

“There are places where these cameras are not working, not producing any income — not for ATS, not for us,” Shechter said. “And this is about revenue… in addition to safety. If there’s no revenue, we are paying the bill for safety.”

[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]

The Newspaper
The Newspaper

More by The Newspaper

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 3 comments
  • Halftruth Halftruth on Jun 17, 2011

    “And this is about revenue… in addition to safety. If there’s no revenue, we are paying the bill for safety.” "...about revenue.." Just stop right there. Nuff said.

  • CarPerson CarPerson on Jun 17, 2011

    The Cities and ATS will kick in a maximum of one-third of their PROFITS for running an illegal citation-generating scheme??? WOW! The fix is in at every conceivable angle with the cameras. Even Elliott Ness would shake his head and decline to try to bring these people to justice...

  • FreedMike I guess there's no Rivian love for Mitsubishi Mirage owners. Darn.
  • MaintenanceCosts I already have one EV but lower prices might make me a bit more likely to replace our other car with another one.
  • FreedMike I'd take one of these with fewer miles, or the last-gen V90 (NO Cross Country frippery, thanks), which was a lovely car.
  • 3-On-The-Tree I had a 69 Thunderbird with a 429 and it did the same thing.
  • Lou_BC No. An EV would have to replace my primary vehicle. That means it has to be able to do everything my current vehicle does.
Next