|
CITY OF SCOTTSDALE,
ARIZONA Mayor Campana
Traffic Cameras: The Eyes
That Don’t Blink
"Photo Radar gets our officers back into the neighborhoods where they’re
really needed. Our streets are safer, and our community has the benefit of more police
protection. This type of program allows cities to be efficient with limited resources and
provide the best service possible."
-Mayor Campana
If your community is like
mine, traffic safety is on the minds of your citizens. Scottsdale, Arizona
is no different with collision numbers growing at a steady six percent
each year since 1991 (36 percent over 6 years). Our community could not
permit that trend to continue nor could it afford to pay for the number of
officers required to make a difference.
Transportation Secretary
Rodney Slater brought to our attention that over 8,100 people died in
intersection-related crashes in 1996. Citing a national public opinion
poll revealing widespread support (65 percent) for automated red light
enforcement, he called for states to adopt laws enabling cities to use
cameras for red light enforcement.
Traditional Approaches to the Problem
In 1994, Scottsdale
doubled the number of traffic enforcement officers by adding a second
squad of six traffic officers at an initial annual cost of $700,000. Those
officers conducted a number of traffic safety programs. DUI arrests
doubled in the first year, and speed citations rose by 42
percent.
Unfortunately, after a
full year of deployment and almost three quarters of a million dollars,
collisions rose another six percent. The city learned that adding officers
and throwing money at a problem is not necessarily the answer.
At the same time, photo
radar had been successfully operating in our neighboring community of
Paradise Valley since 1986. National City, California, and many other
cities have experienced up to a 40 percent reduction in collisions in the
first five years of deployment of the technology.
The Issues
Big Brother, privacy, and
arguments that the program is simply designed to produce revenue are
common themes from detractors and are without merit. However, perception
is reality, and some will be passionate about the issues. Our
responsibility is to manage the program with integrity while communicating
the real issue: safety. Photo radar is not about writing citations. When
passionate objections of "Big Brother" are voiced, softening the message
looks attractive.
Some communities place
warning signs immediately prior to enforcement vehicles, which diminishes
deterrent value. In contrast, Scottsdale has placed warning signs at every
point of entry into our city.
Some municipalities have
approached photo radar with a pilot program. However, the term "pilot"
implies that community leaders are not sure about the effectiveness of the
technology, and this will embolden detractors.
Regarding revenue,
Scottsdale completed its first year of using traffic cameras with a
surplus of $363,000 after expenses. However, apart from photo enforcement,
officers reported fewer violations and wrote fewer citations that year,
and court revenue fell by $330,000.
A halfhearted approach
will probably fail. It must be clear that there is no right to speed or
run red lights.
Focus on Safety
In December 1996 the
Scottsdale Police Department embarked on a Photo Radar and Red Light
Camera program called "Focus on Safety." The city entered into a contract
with a vendor to provide three speed cameras and three sets of red light
cameras to be rotated among nine intersections. The program had three
components:
- awareness;
- education; and
- enforcement.
Selecting a Program Manager
The program manager needs
skills in project management, contracts, and the media. The manager also
has to coordinate legal, legislative, and internal issues.
A mid-level manager with
the necessary experience, training, and public-speaking skills is
ideal.
Awareness and Education
Public awareness and
education are critical. An adequate budget to fund an education campaign
is essential to keep your safety message alive. Our efforts
included:
- over 6,000 warning
letters;
- utility billing fliers;
- radio public service
announcements;
- media
releases/appearances;
- public-speaking
engagements;
- theater slides;
- posters;
- radio talk shows; and
- cable television.
In spite of these efforts,
history tells us that two or three percent of drivers will continue to
drive in a manner that endangers others. Those drivers will help partially
fund the program. As the majority of drivers are more cautious, collisions
will be reduced and more people will support the program.
Although you can expect
the media to sensationalize the issues, they can also provide the most
effective means of communicating your safety message.
Results and Public Support
In 1997, the trend of
rising collisions in Scottsdale was neutralized and reversed. Collisions
had a 4 percent actual reduction citywide and a 20 percent actual
reduction in high collision areas (24 percent under the prediction). And,
this reduction has been sustained into 1998.
We began the program with
59 percent public support. At the end of the first year, support climbed
to 74 percent, rising to 79 percent when dissenters were told of the first
year collision reductions.
Available Technology
All speed cameras use a
form of Doppler radar to measure speed. Red light camera systems more
clearly define the vendors. All are interfaced with a computer and a pair
of cameras. One camera photographs the vehicle and red signal prior to
entering an intersection with all pertinent data for prosecution. The
second photo depicts the vehicle after it has entered against the red
signal.
One vendor utilizes a
sensor array imbedded in the roadway measuring speed within one mile per
hour through a time/distance calculation. The computer counts cars to take
a second photograph at a specific point, should that option be
required.
Another vendor utilizes
two loops imbedded in the roadway measuring speed within three miles per
hour. The first camera taking a photo causes the second camera to respond
as needed.
Another vendor with newly
available technology uses Doppler radar to monitor speed within one mile
per hour of vehicles approaching an intersection. If the vehicle is
traveling at a speed too great to stop for the signal, the cameras are
activated. The green light for opposing traffic is delayed as long as
necessary to permit the violator to safely clear the intersection. An
audible warning to pedestrians is an optional feature of the
system.
Conclusion
With a thoughtful approach
and growing public support, automated enforcement can be a powerful tool
to make urban roadways safer while being responsible with taxpayer
dollars. As municipal budgets are stretched, innovative approaches are
needed to meet the needs of our citizens. This technology is worthy of
serious consideration.
Contact: Lt. Mike Keeley,
Commander, Traffic Enforcement Division, Scottsdale Police Department,
602/994-2573.
Table of Contents
Return to Previous
Page.
|