By on April 1, 2010

Jefferson Parish, Louisiana has until 4pm today to meet the demands of Redflex Traffic Systems, the company that until January operated red light cameras and speed cameras for the local government. The Australian firm is absolutely furious that parish officials have withheld payment while the program faced lawsuits from citizens and corruption probes from federal investigators. Redflex insisted that the “millions of dollars” owed must be deposited in the Redflex accounts before the close of business today.

“Remit to the company all outstanding proceeds of the program due,” attorney Douglas R. Holmes demanded on behalf of Redflex. “This remittance should include any and all costs, penalties and interest. Additionally, Redflex demands that the parish reactivate the red light camera program, which we contend was clearly suspended without cause or justification under the terms of the agreement… In the event the parish fails to comply with these demands, Redflex will have no choice but to seek legal action to protect its financial and reputational interest.”

Although Jefferson Parish officials signed up for automated ticketing in 2007, those leaders have since resigned in disgrace in the wake of a widening scandal involving bribery and fraud. Interim Parish President Stephen Theriot suspended the red light camera program after documents revealed that Redflex paid 3.2 percent of its revenue from ticket proceeds to lobbyist Bryan Wagner, a former New Orleans city councilman, who shared the funds with the wife of District Judge Robert Murphy. Wagner was set to earn an estimated $90,000 a year from his cut of the photo tickets. Jay Morris Specter, the lobbyist who hired Wagner on behalf of Redflex, is currently serving time for fraud at Edgefield Federal Correctional Institution in South Carolina with an expected release date of September 21. Redflex insists the company has not been tainted its association with Specter and others.

“Jefferson Parish and local and out-of-town media have insinuated that Redflex has done something wrong, perhaps illegal, relative to our local operations, yet to date there has been absolutely no formal allegation that Redflex has done anything illegal or improper,” Holmes wrote. “Opponents of red light cameras in general, as well as Redflex competitors who utilized their own consultants to pursue the parish contract, have used this cloud of suspicion created by the parish and the media to discourage other jurisdictions from using Redflex services and technologies.”

The Redflex demand followed a March 24 letter from the parish announcing that an outside firm would audit the red light camera contract to investigate any irregularities. A study by the Journal of Trauma published last month found no evidence that photo enforcement produced any significant safety benefit in Jefferson Parish.

A copy of the letter is available in a 130k PDF file at the source link below.

Source: PDF File Jefferson Parish Red Light Camera Safety Program (Chaffe McCall LLP for Redflex, 3/26/2010)


Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

3 Comments on “Traffic Camera Firm Issues Threatening Letter To Jefferson Parish, Louisiana...”

  • avatar

    Corruption in Louisiana? In Jefferson Parish?

    Nice to see Redflex get ripped off, but sadly, they will eventually get paid.

  • avatar

    Ha ha. So not only are motorists suing the cities for the red camera lights, but the red camera light companies are also suing.

    These will end up costing the city big time, even if only in legal fees and time.

    Not to mention making incremental cities think twice before signing on for these things.

  • avatar

    While fraud and theft are as old as humanity, it’s hard to be seriously corrupt without the participation of government.

    I wonder how the cops and cop defenders feel about traffic cameras. My guess it they they’re ambivalent. On one hand, it’s revenue for their department, on the other hand, if a robot gives a ticket, some cop is missing out on overtime for a court appearance.

    It’s all about money, not traffic safety and any cop or politician that tries to make us believe otherwise is just plain lying.

    In Michigan, if you have two convictions for DUI you can still get a restricted driver’s license so you can get to your job. If you owe the state money for the Driver Responsibility Fees that Lansing tacks on to generate revenue for the state, you absolutely can’t get a driver’s license. So the bureaucrats, kleptocrats and politicians in Lansing have less of a problem with documented drunks on the road than with folks who have DRFs to pay.

    Go ahead and try to tell me any of this is about traffic safety.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • BSttac: The days of insurance companies giving drivers discounts for having a GPS unit in there car are over. Now...
  • BSttac: Definitely more excited for the new Z. Hell it might even cost less than the new Type R with the way Honda is...
  • MRF 95 T-Bird: When I would ride in my fathers 54 Bel Aire and 62 Impala the tube radio would take a few minutes or...
  • MitchConner: Chrysler really steered Imperial into the toilet during this time. To me that’s just a rebadged Fury....
  • EBFlex: ” It’s not just random chance that our formerly idyllic summers are now hellscapes of 108-degree...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber