California: City Fined $250,000 Over Botched Red Light Camera Program

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper

Red light camera program troubles continue to grow in South San Francisco, California. On Wednesday, the city council will meet to discuss how to pay the $250,000 bill submitted by the San Mateo County Superior Court to cover the administrative costs of processing $3 million worth of red light camera citation refunds. Because the city failed to properly ratify its contract with American Traffic Solutions, the company in charge of automated ticketing, the 6800 tickets issued between August 14 2009 and February 28, 2010 were declared invalid by the court.

“The city will also return to the court the portion of the fines that it has previously received related to the dismissed citations,” City Attorney Steven T. Mattas explained in a memo to the council. “Staff will make these payments to the court within five days of approval of this agreement…. The city is also responsible for any ‘actual and necessary’ administrative costs connected with the issuance of the refunds.”

The quarter-million figure represents only an estimate of the costs involved, and the final amount could be greater. Refunds include the $446 cost of the ticket, plus interest calculated at a 7-percent annual rate, and the full cost of traffic school that any driver may have taken to avoid points on his license. Those who did not attend a school will have the license points manually removed from their driving record. In California, the superior court system is responsible for dividing up the profit from each citation among a number of city, state and county agencies. Because the court does not hold the cash for more than a month, it has asked the city to supply $1.5 million to begin the refunds. Court administrators will negotiate with the state for the return of its portion of the citation revenue. If the state fails to send a check, the court will withhold the correct amount from future traffic ticket payments.

“In addition, issuance of the unauthorized citations caused the court unnecessary expense, in the amount of a $4.81 per-citation financial charge, which it paid the vendor that ordinarily processes its traffic citations,” the agreement with the San Mateo court explained.

Despite the hassle already experienced, the city council narrowly voted to continue the red light camera program. A copy of the proposed agreement between the city and the superior court is available in a 1.1mb PDF file at the source link below.

Agreement Between South San Francisco and Superior Court (City of South San Francisco, California, 4/21/2010)

The Newspaper
The Newspaper

More by The Newspaper

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 7 comments
  • Daanii2 Daanii2 on Apr 26, 2010

    I live near South San Francisco. Not the greatest place to visit in the past. And certainly not a place I am going to go in the future. These red light cameras are a scam, pure and simple. Cities that have them should be ashamed of themselves.

  • Grifonik Grifonik on Apr 26, 2010

    "Despite the hassle already experienced, the city council narrowly voted to continue the red light camera program." They double down with tax payer dollars for tax payer dollars. The drunken gambler is out of control.

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next