iowa city ordinance no. 12-4466

7/27/2019 Iowa City ORDINANCE NO. 12-4466

1/15

M 4_tip

P r e p a r e d b y : K r is to p h e r A c k e r s o n , A ss t . T r a n s p o r ta t io n P l a n n e r, a n d E r i c G o e r s , A s s t . C i t y At to rney , 4 1 0 E .W a s h in g to n S tr e e t, I ow a Ci t y , IA 52240; 319 - 5 6 -5247, an d 3 1 9 - 5 6 -5 0 30 r e s p e c ti ve l y

ORDINANCE NO. 12 - 4466

ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9, " MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC ", CHAPTER 1 ,DEFINITIONS, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF TRAFFIC PROVISIONS ",

SECTION 1 , " DEFINITIONS "; AND AMENDING TITLE 9, " MOTOR VEHICLES ANDTRAFFIC ", TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 11 , AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT, TOALLOW FOR RED LIGHT AUTOMATED TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENTWHEREAS, the City o f Io wa C ity is ves ted with h o m e rule author i ty pu r s u an t t o Art ic le I I I ,Section 38A of the I o w a Constitution a n d Chapter 3 6 4 of th e C o d e of I o w a ; a n dWHEREAS; the C ity o f Io wa C ity is located in a h i g h - d e n s ity tr affic a r e a an d regular lyexperiences traffic i n c i d e n t s r e l a t e d to th e failure of m o t o r i s t s t o o be y d u ly e r e c t e d traffic c o n t r o ldev ices , exp os ing i t s ci t izens to th e da ng ers o f p e r s o n a l in ju ry an d p ro p e rt y d am a g e ; an dW H E R E A S , th e City is c o n c e r n e d w ith the v io la t ion o f S ta te s ta tu e s c o nc e rn in g tr affic s ig n als ,spec i f ica l ly th e fa ilu re o f m o to ris ts to s t o p at re d l ights an d o b e y ' n o t u rn o n re d s igns; ' andWHEREAS, appr e he n d in g m oto r i s t s w ho fail to o b e y t raff ic con t ro l dev ices t h r o u gh lawenforcement observance, chase, and citation is difficult, dangerous, and expensive and requiresth e C ity to c o m m i t addi t iona l p e r s o n n e l that w o u l d n o t b e n e c e s s a r y w ith th e u se o f a u t o m a t e dtraffic in f ra c tio n d e te c to r s w i th im a g e c ap tu r e technologies ( i. e ., re d -l igh t c a m e r a s ) ; a n dWHEREAS, l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t s in d i f f e r e n t p a r t s o f th e S ta te o f I o w a a n d n at io n h a v ed e m o n s t r a te d th at th e c o m b in a tio n o f t r a ff ic i n f r a c t i o n d e t e c t o r s w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l t ra f f i c la wenforcement methods enhances vehicular and pedestrian safety; andW H ER E A S , a u t o m a te d t r af f ic e n fo r ce m e n t l a w s a re a u t h o r i z e d bo th by I o w a h o m e ru le a n d th eI o w a S u pr e m e C o u r t , in C i t y of D a v e n p o r t v . Seymour, 7 5 5 N. W.2 d 5 3 3 ( I o w a 2 0 0 8 ) , all ofw h i c h recognize th e r i g h t s of m u n i c ip a l it ie s to u t i l i ze traffic i n f r a c t i o n detectors to r e g u l a t emunicipal traffic; andW H E R E A S , the C ity o f I owa C ity fin d s t ha t im p le m e n t atio n o f th e e n f o r c e m e n t pro gram s e t fo rthin th is o r d in a n c e wi l l p r o m o t e , p r o t e c t , a n d im p r o ve th e h e a l t h , s a f e t y , a n d w e lfa re o f it s c i t i z e n sc o n s i s t e n t with t he a u th o rit y o f an d l imi tat ions o n th e City p u r s u a n t to cas e la w, t he C o n s t it u tio nof the State of Iowa, and the Code of Iowa.N O W, T H E R E F O R E , B E IT O RD A I N E D B Y TH E C ITY C O UNC I L OF TH E C ITY OF I O W ACITY, IOWA:

SECTION I. AMENDMENTS

Title 9, " Motor Vehicles and Traffic ",Chapter 1 , " Definitions, Administration and Enforcement ofTraffic Provisions ",Section 1 , " D e f i n i t i o n s " is a m e n d e d by a d d in g t he fo llo w i n g d e f i n e d t e r m s :

AUTOMATED TRAFFIC CITATION: A notice of fine generated in connection with theautomated traffic enforcement system.


2/15

OdnanceNo. 12 -4466 --Page 2

2 . AUTOMATED TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT CONTRACTOR: Th e c o m pa n y or e n t i t y , ifa n y , with w h ic h th e C ity o f I o wa City c o n tr ac ts e q u ip m e n t and /o r serv ices in co n n e c t io nwith the Automated Traffic Enforcement System.3 . AUTOMATED TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM: An electronic system consisting of

a p h o t o g r a p h i c , v i d e o , o r e l e c t r o n i c c a m e r a an d a veh ic le s e n s o r i ns ta l l ed to w o r k inconjunction w i t h a n o f f i c ia l traffic controller o r p o lic e department employee toau to mat i c a l l y p r o d u c e p h o t og r a p h s , v i deo o r digi ta l im age s o f e ach veh ic le v io la t ing astandard traffic control device or speed restriction.4. VEHICLE OWNER: Th e p e r s o n o r e n t ity id e n tif ie d by th e Io w a De pa r tm e n t o fT r a n s p o r t a t i o n , o r re gis te re d w ith a n y o t h e r s ta te v e hic le r e gis tr at io n o f f i c e , as th e

registered owner of avehicle.

Title 9, " Motor Vehicles and Traffic ", Chapter 11, " Automated Traffic Enforcement" is added asfolows:1 . G e n e r a l . Th e C ity o f I owa Ci ty , in a cc o rd an c e w ith it s pol ice p o w e r s , m ay d e p l o y , e r e c to r ca u se to h a ve e r e c t e d an a u t o m a t e d t r af fic e n f o r ce m e n t s y s t e m f o r m a k i n g v id e o im a g e s o fv e h ic le s t ha t fai l to o be y re d l ight t raf f ic s i gn a l s a t i n t e r s e c t i o n s d e s i g n a t e d by th e c ity m a n a g e r ,o r a d e s i g n e e . Th e s y s te m s m ay be m a n a g e d by th e p riv ate c o n tr ac to r th at o w n s a n d o p e r a t e sth e r e qu is ite e q u i p m e n t wi th s u p e r v i s o r y , c o n t r o l v e s t e d in th e city' s pol ice d e p a r t m e n t . V i d e oim a ge s s ha ll be p ro v i d e d to the po l ice d e p a r t m e n t by th e c o n t r a c t o r fo r r e vie w . Th e po l i cedepartment wi l l determine w h i c h vehicle owners a r e in v i o l a t i o n of th e c i t y ' s traffic c o n t r o lordinances and are to receive a notice of violation for the offense.2. Vehicle Owner's Cvil Liability for Certain Traffic Offenses.

A. The Vehicle Owner shall be liable for a fine if such a vehicle crosses a markedstop l i n e o r th e in te rs e ctio n p la ne a t a sys tem lo ca tio n w h e n t h e traff ic s ignal fo r thatvehicle's direction is e m i t t i n g a s t e a d y r e d lig h t o r arrow.B. Th e violat ion m ay be e x e m p t e d f r o m l iabi li ty as o u t lin e d be lo w in sec t i on 5 o f thisc h a p t e r , a n d o t h e r d e fe n se s m a y be c o n s i d e r e d in c o n n e c t i o n w ith th e a p p e a l p r o c e s s .C. In n o e v e n t w i l l a n A u t o m a t e d Tr af f ic C i t a t i o n be s e n t o r re p o r te d to th e I o w aD e pa rtm e n t o f Tr an s p o rta tio n o r s im ila r d e p a r t m e n t o f a n y o t h e r s t a t e for th e p u r p o s e o fbe in g a dd e d to th e V e h i c l e O w n e r 's d r iv in g r e co r d .

3. Notice ofViolation; Fine.A. Notice of th e violation wi l l be mailed to the Vehicle Owner for each violationr e c o rd e d by a n A u to m a te d Tr aff ic E n f o r c e m e n t S y s t e m o r t raf f ic c o n t r o l s igna lm o n i to r in g d e vic e . Th e A u t o m a t e d Traffic En fo r ce m e n t C o n t ra cto r shal l ma i l th e not icewi th in 30 d ay s a f t e r rece iv ing in fo rm a tio n a bo u t th e V eh ic le Ow n e r. Th e no t i ce shal li n c l u d e th e n a m e a n d a d d r e s s of th e V e h ic le O w n e r ; th e v e h ic le m a k e , if ava i lab le a n dr ead ily d iscernable , a n d regist rat ion n u m b e r ; th e vio la tio n ch arg ed ; t he tim e ; th e date;and the location of th e a l l e g e d violation; the applicable f i ne a n d monetary penalty whichshall be assessed for late payment; information as to the availability of an administrativehear ing in which th e n otice m ay b e con tes ted o n it s mer i ts ; a n d th at th e basis o f thenot ice is a p h o tog ra p h ic r eco r d obta ined by a n A u t o m a te d Tr affic En fo r ce m e n t S y s te m .


3/15

OdnanceNoPage 3

12 -4466

B. A n y v io la tio n o f sect ion 2 o f this chapter s h a l l r e s u l t in a c i v i l f ine i s s u e d t o t h eV e hic le Ow n e r in an a m o u n t s e t by C ity C o u n cil by reso lu t ion , payable to the City o fIowa City.

4. C on t es t i ng a n A u t o m a t e d Traff ic Ci ta t ion . A V e h ic le Ow n e r w ho h a s b e e n i s s u e d a nA u t o m a t e d Traff ic C ita tio n m a y c o n te s t th e c i ta t ion as f o l l o ws :A. B y submit t ing, in a fo rm s pe cifie d b y the C ity , a r e q u e s t fo r a n administ rat iveh ea r i ng to be held a t the I o w a Ci ty Pol ice D e p a r t m e n t before an a d m i n i s tr a ti ve a p p e a lsboard (the "Board ") co n s is tin g o f o n e o r m o r e im p artia l f ac t f in d e r s . Such a r e q u e s t m u s tbe f ile d within 30 d a y s o f th e date o n w hi c h Not ice o f the v io la t ion is s e n t to th e Veh i c l eOwner . A f t e r a hear ing, th e Bo ard m ay ei ther uphold o r d is m is s th e A u to m a te d TrafficC i t a t i o n a n d s h a l l m a i l it s w r it te n d e c is io n w i t h i n 1 0 d a y s a ft e r th e h e a r i n g to th e a d d r e s sprov ided o n the r eq u es t fo r hear ing . If t he c it at io n is upheld, th en th e B o ar d s ha ll in c lu d ei n it s wr i t ten dec is ion a date b y which th e fin e m u st be p aid , an d o n o r before that datethe Vehic le O w n e r shal l e i the r pay the fin e o r s ubm it a r e q u e s t fo r a ju d ic ia l h e ar in gpursuant to section 4( B ) of this chapter.B. B y s u b m i t t i n g , in a f o rm s p e c i f ie d b y t h e C i t y , a r e q u e s t t h a t in l i e u o f th eA u t o m a t e d Tra ff ic Ci t a t i o n , a m u n i c i p a l i n f rac t ion ci tat ion be i s s u e d an d file d w ith th eS m a ll C la im s D iv is io n o f th e Io w a D is t ric t C o u r t in Jo h n s o n C o u n ty . S u c h a r e q u e s t m u s tbe f i led wi thin 3 0 d a y s f ro m the date o n w h ich No tic e o f th e v io la tio n is s e n t to th eVeh i c l e O w n e r . S u c h a r e q u e s t wi l l r e s u l t in a c o u r t o r d e r r e q u ir in g th e V e h ic le O w n e r tofile an a n s w e r an d a p p ea ra nce w ith the C le rk o f C o u r t , as w e l l as se t t i ng th e m a t t e r fo rt r ia l before a j u d g e o r m a g i s t r a t e . If th e C o u rt f in d s th e V e hic le Ow n e r gui l ty o f th em u n ic ip al in fr ac tio n , s t ate m a n d a te d c o u rt cos t s wil l be a d d e d to the a m o u n t o f th e f ineimposed by th is chapter.

5. Except ions to Ow n er Liabi l i ty. There shal l b e n o liability pursuan t to this chapter i f :A. Th e o p e r a t o r o f the veh ic le in q u e s t i o n w a s is su ed a u n i f o rm t raf f ic c it at io n f o r thev io la t ion in q u e s t i o n p u r s u a n t to Title 9 o f th e I o w a C ity C o de o r I o w a C o d e C h a p t e r 3 2 12011) as amended; or

B. The violat ion o c c u r r e d at an y tim e afte r the ve hicle i n q u e s t i o n o r it s s ta ter e g i s t ra t i o n pla tes w e r e r e p o r t e d to a la w e n f o r c e m e n t a g e n c y as hav in g b e e n s t o l e n ,p r ov i ded , h owever , t h e vehic le o r it s pla tes had n o t be e n r e c o v e r e d by th e Vehic leOwner at the time of the alleged violation; orC. The vehicle in question was an authorized emergency vehicle; orD. The o ffic e r in s pe c tin g th e r e co r de d image d e t e r m i n e s that th e vehicle i n ques t i onw a s la w f u lly p a rt ic ip a tin g in a f u n e r a l p r o c e s s i o n ; o rE. Th e o f fic e r in s p e c t in g th e re c o rd e d i ma g e d e t e r m i n e s . t h a t th e vehic le in ques t i onreasonably e n t e r e d th e in te rsect ion in o rde r t o y i e l d t h e r ig h t -o f -w ay t o a n e m e r g e n c yvehce.


4/15

OdnanceNo 12 - 4466Page 4

6. Failure to Tim e l y P a y o r Appeal . I f t h e r e c ip ie n t o f a n Au t o m a t e d Traff ic C i t a t i o n d o e sn o t ei ther pay the f ine b y th e du e date stated in the citatio n o r app eal th e citation a s providedhe re in , late f e e s m ay be a s s e s s e d , as a p p roved by City C o u n c i l t h r o u gh r e so lu t io n , an d /o r amunic ipa l in f r a c t io n c it a t io n m a y b e f i l e d b y th e I o w a C i t y P o lic e Department a n d a f i n e m a y b es o u g h t in a cc o rd a n ce w i th Io w a C ity C od e Title 1 , Chap t e r 4 , Sect ion 2 ( B ) , Vio la t ions , Pena l t iesan d A l te rn a t i v e R el i e f , ra the r th a n s e c tio n 3 a bove . If th e C o u r t f in d s th e V e hic le Ow n e r gui l ty o fth e m u n i cip a l in f ra c tio n , Sta te m a n d a t e d co u rt co s ts will be ad d e d to the am o u nt o f the fin eimposed by this section.SECTION ll. REPEALER. A ll ordinances a n d p a r ts of ordinances in conflict with the p r o v i s i o nof this Ordinance are hereby repealed.SECTION I I I . SEVERABILITY. I f a n y s e ct io n , p ro v is io n o r part o f t he Or d in a n c e shal l b e adjudgedto be in valid o r uncons t i t u t i ona l , su c h adjudica t ion s ha ll n o t a ff e ct t he validity o f th e Ordinance asa who le o r a n y s e c tio n , p ro v is io n o r part t h e r e o f n o t a dju d ge d invalid o r uncons t i tu t iona l .S E C T I O N IV . E FF EC T IV E D A TE . T his O rd in a n c e s h a l l be e f f e c t i v e u p o n p u b l i c a t i o n .

2P a s s e d a n d a p p r o v e d this 21st d a y of February , 201A.

AAA 44-fl 4MAYOR ) JATTEST:C I T Y C L E R KApproved by

Ci ty A t t o r n e y 's Office


5/15

Ordinance No. 12 - 4466Page 5

It w a s m o v e d by Mims a nd s e co n d ed by Dobyns that theOrdinance a s read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:

AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:

x ChampionDickens

x Dobynsx Hayekx MimsPayne

x Throgmorton

First Consideration 1 / 10/ 2012Vote for passage: AYES: Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Dckens. NAYS: Payne, Champion,Throgmorton. ABSENT: None.

Second Consideration 1/ 24/ 2012Voteforpassage: AYES: Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Dckens. NAYS: Payne, Champion,Throgmoton. ABSENT: None.

Date published 5 / 1 / 2012


6/15

CityofIowaCityMEMORANDUM

Date: F e b r u a r y 8, 2 0 1 2To: Tom Markus, C i t y Manager

Geoff Fruin, Assistant to the Cty ManagerFrom: Sam Hargadine, Police ChiefJ o h n Y a p p , T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n e r 7Y! Y , "Re: Responses to questions regarding r e d light running camerasFo llo w in g a re re spo ns e s to q u e s t i o n s r e ga rd in g re d lig ht ru n nin g c a m e r a s su b mi t t e d byCouncilors Throgmorton and Payne. Information in this memorandum was compiled with inputfrom a variety of C i t y Staff.

1: W h e r e is I o w a City G o v e r n m e n t currently using c a m e r a s to monitor activity inoutdoorpubicareas?Th e C ity c u r r e n t l y u s e s d oz e ns o f c a m e r a s fo r s u r v e i l l a n c e p u r p o s e s . Listed b e l o w is a s y n o p s i so n how our various departments utilize cameras for monitoring and /or investigative purposes.Poice Department camera per squad car

The Police Department utilizes in squad car cameras that are activated by officers when theyinitiate the vehicle's lights and sirens. The cameras record the officer's interaction with asuspect, v ic tim o r witness o n th e scene d u r i n g a n incident. The v i d e o is r e c o r d e d for p o t e n t i a luse as evidence or to aid in further investigations. The department also monitors closed circuitcameras in a number of other facilities, including Cty H a l l , the P o l i c e Substation, and P o l i c eEvidence Room. The Police Department further monitor cameras for some of the facilities listedbelow under th e h e a d i n g of separate departments.The Police Department also has access to State owned cameras on 1 - 80. These cameras canbe viewed by P o lic e Department personnel for the purposes of monitoring incidents o n th einterstate.

Transit Division 162 cameras

The Transit D i v i s i o n h a s 6 cameras in e a c h of it s twenty -seven b u s e s . These cameras i n c l u d eaudio recording a n d a r e u s e d to c o n tr o l a n d investigate behavioral r e l a t e d incidents o n th ebuses.

Parks and Recreation 28 camerasThe Parks a n d Recreation Department h a s 1 6 cameras at the Mercer facility a n d 1 2 a t theR o b e r t A . Le e fac i l i t y . Th e s e c am e r a s r e c o r d act iv i t y i n s i d e t he bu i ld in g a n d a r e u s e d to m o n i t o rac t iv i t y a n d u s e in i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f i n c i d e n t s in t he s e fa c ili t ie s . These cameras can bemonitored by th e P o l i c e Department.


7/15

Library 26 cameras

Th e Libr ar y has a secu r i t y s y s t e m wi th 26 c a m e r a s . Th e c am e r as c ap tu r e a ctiv ity within th ebui ld ing as w e l l as a t e n t ra n c e s an d in the back a l l e y w a y .Public Works 17 cameras

Th e W a t e r Division u s e s 17 s e c u rity c am e r as to m o n it o r a c tiv it y o n th e ir g ro u n d s i n c l u d i n g bothi n d o o r a n d outdoor s p a c e s . Th e c am e r as h a v e f u l l p a n /t i l t / z o o m abi l i ty a n d a re a l s o t i ed i n t o inan infrared motion detection system. The Streets division has 229 cameras installed at trafficsignals to detect vehicles and actuate the signals. These area low resolution cameras ( theye s s e n t ia lly f u n c t io n as m o t i o n d e t e c t o r s ) n o t su i t e d fo r c o n ve r s io n to u s e as r e d lig ht c a m e r a s .Fire Department - 1 cameraThe Fire Department h a s one surveillance camera that monitors activity at Station 1 inDowntown. It is monitored by the P o l i c e Department.Airport cameras pending

The Airport recently received a state ( Iowa Department of Transportation) grant for thei ns ta l la t i on o f s e c u rity c am e r as o n its g r o u n d s . S t a f f is w o r k i n g o n a plan t h a t w o u l d m o n i t o r th ec o d e d e n try g ate s a n d p o t en t i a l l y th e parking lo t an d a ir c ra f t a p ro n . T he A i r p o r t a ls o ho s ts awebcam that spans the aircraft apron.Parking Division cameras pendingTh e P a rkin g Div is io n is c u r r e n t l y w o r k i n g wi th ITS s t a f f an d th e P o l i ce D e p a r t m e n t to p lacecameras a t th e entrance a n d exit lanes of the parking decks a n d around th e automatedpayment equipment. The cameras will monitor incidents as well as allow staff to provide remotecustomer assistance for patrons having trouble with the payment equipment. Plans are alsob e i n g c o n s i d e r e d fo r th e u s e o f c am e r as in th e e l e v a t o r s a n d s t a i r t o w e r s in th e d ec k fac i l i t i es .Th e P a rk i n g Div i s i on is a ls o e v a lu a tin g th e u s e o f l i ce n s e plate r e co g n it io n s o f tw a r e fo r park ingenforcement purposes. This vehicle mounted technology is becoming increasingly common a s itallows for m o r e efficient enforcement of p a r k i n g regulations b o t h in decked facilities a n d o n th estreet.Pedestrian Mall 8 private cameras

There a re eight privately o w n e d cameras that r e c o r d activity in a n d a r o u n d the pedestrian m a l l .Th e s e c a m e ra s w e re in s ta lle d by in d iv id u a l bu s in e s s e s a n d th e Do w n to w n A s s o cia tio n . Th ePolice Department has access to the web server that stores the recordings and often utilizes thefootage for investigative purposes.

In a d d i t i o n to th e current u s e s o u tlin e d a bo ve , the C i t y is currently planning for upgrades a n dadditional uses of cameras for surveillance purposes. The ITS and Police Department arew o r k i n g j o i n t l y o n a c a m e r a s y s t e m u p g ra de th at wi l l i m p r o v e q u a l i t y a n d a l l ow fo r t he d ig ita lr e c o r d i n g o f im a g e s . Th is s y s t e m w o u ld e n ha n c e c a m e ra s n o t e d in th e a b o v e -m e n t i o n e d publ icfacilities and would expand surveillance to the Airport and parking deck structures.


8/15

2 . Does the poss ib le u s e o f re d l ight c a m e ra s at i n t e r s e c t i o n s ra is e an y i m p o r t a n t legalquestions about which we should be aware? This question has twoparts:a. I am d i s t u rb ed by the tim e g ap be tw e e n the m o m e nt a vehic le p a s s e s t h r o u g h a re dl ight an d w he n the o w n er o f th e vehic le r e c e i v e s a n o t i c e o f v io l at io n an d f ine in th emai l . W h e n I i m a g i n e m y s e l f r e c e i v i n g a n o t i c e in th e m a i l 3 o r 4 w e e ks a fte r I p a s st h r o u g h a re d l ight , I s u s p e c t I w o u l d n o t be able to r e m e m b e r th e e v e n t an d h e n c ehave v i r tua l l y n o g ro u n ds to o bje ct o r appeal . Do e s th is ra ise legal q u e s t io n s ( e . g . ,d u e p r o c e s s ) that w e should be a w a r e of b e f o r e m a k i n g a decision? No. The IowaS up re m e C ou rt has a l rea dy held th e a u t o m a t i c traf f ic e n f o r c e m e n t s y s t e m o n whic h o u rproposed ordinance is based is legal. S e e ge n e r a l l y , City o f D a v e n p o r t v . S e y m o u r , 7 55

N. W.2d 533 ( Iowa 2008). Th e c i ta t ion in th e D a v e n p o r t c a s e w as is s u e d 1 9 d a y s a f t e r th ein c id e n t . Th e v a s t m a j o rit y o f le g al c as e s fea ture a delay o f g re a te r than 3 -4 w e e k s betweenincident and legal action. This is true both of civil and criminal matters. Of course, with thec r i m i na l s y s te m c o m e g r e a t e r p ro te c tio n s fo r th e c r i m i na l d e f e n d a n t , d u e to th e p o te n tia ll o s s o f l i b e r t y . S i m p l e m i s d e m e a n o r c h a r g e s c a n b e f i l e d a g a i n s t a c r i m i n a l d e f e n d a n t u p t oo n e y e ar a fte r th e cr im e , an d th e filin g o f th e cha rg e m ay b e th e f i rst not ice a d e f e n d a n t ha sthat h e is accused of doing anything i l l ega l . More serious charges can be filed two yearsaf ter the cr im e , w ith y et m o re s e r i o u s c rim e s c ar ry in g a s ta tu t e o f lim i ta tio n o f 1 0 y e ars o re v e n u p to th e life t im e o f th e d e f e n d a n t . In th e c i v i l arena, the statute of limitations ( thed e a d l i n e b y w h ic h le g a l a c t io n m u s t b e f i l e d ) r a n g e s , d e p e n d i n g o n t h e c a u s e o f a c t i o n , f r o mone year to fifteen years. Nearly a ll o f tho se civil act ions re late to mat te r s o f fa r g re ate rim p o r ta n ce th an th e c iv il p e n a lty c o n te m p la te d h e r e . In s u m m a r y , a 3 -4 w e e k d e la yb e t w e e n v io la t ion a n d c ita tio n w o u ld n o t v io la te the l ega l r ights o f a n y on e i n v o l v e d .

b. I am d i s t u rb ed by th e d i s c o n n e c t b e tw e e n the d r i v e r o f th e veh ic le ( w h o co m m i ts thetransgression) and the owner of the car (who receives the fine). It seems tome thatth e f i n e s should be c h a r g e d to th e driver, n o t th e o w n e r . D o e s this r a i s e d u e p r o c e s s ,equal protection, or other legal issues about which we should be aware? No. It is al o n g - s ta n d in g p r o p o s it io n t h a t t h e o w n e r o f p ro p e rt y c a n b e h e ld l i a b l e f o r w h a t o t h e r sbo r ro w in g th e proper ty d o with it . While there are n u m e r o u s co m m o n e xam p le s o f this ( sucha s parking tickets), th e most apt example is found in I o w a ' s Motor Vehicle statute. "[ I] n allcases w h e r e d a m a g e is d o n e by a ny m o to r ve hicle b y r eason o f negl igence o f th e dr iver ,an d d riv en w ith th e c o n s e n t o f the o w n e r , the o w n e r o f the m o to r ve hic le shal l be liable fo rsuch damage." Iowa Code Section 321. 493. More specific to automatic traffic enforcement,th e s u p r e m e c o u r t s o f s e v e r a l o t h e r s t a t e s an d f e d e r a l appe l l a t e c o u r t s ha v e u ph e ldautomatic enforcement systems in the face of the challenges you mention. See, e . g . , ldrisv. City o f Chic ago , 552 F . 3d 564 ( 7th Cir . 2009) ; Agomo v . Fenty, 9 1 6 A . 2 d 181 ( D. C . App.2007. Th e v e hic le ' s o w n e r w o uld h a ve th e le ga l r ight to r e c o v e r th e civil p e n a l t y f r o m th eactual driver.

3 : W h a t p r e c i s e l y is th e p r o b l e m t h a t re d l ight c a m e r a s a t i n t e r s e c t i o n s w o u l d s o l v e ?Have other alternative solutions been considered? Is there scholarly and professionliterature on the topic about which we should be aware?The pu rp os e o f c a m e r a e n f o r c e m e n t at i n te rsec t i ons is to i nc rea se co mp l ian ce o f t ra ff ic law s atintersections. O t h er c o m m u n i t i e s in I o w a t h a t h a ve e m p lo y ed ca m e ra e n f o r c e m e n t h a ve f o u n ddecreased collisions a n d associated damage a n d injuries. This has the effect of andd e c r e a s i n g th e a m o u n t o f t i m e a n d r e s o u r c e s n e c e s s a r y t o e n f o r c e a n d r e s p o n d t o c o l l i s i o n s a tintersections.


9/15

Th e col l is ion an d traffic v o l u m e data staf f p rov ided fo r te n i n t e r sec t i ons in I o wa City prov ided asnapshot of information t is to o s m all a s a m p l e s iz e to d ra w s ta tis t ic a l c o n clu s io n s fr o m . TheI o w a C e n t e r for T r a n s p o r t a t i o n R e s e a r c h a n d E d u c a t i o n , a s part of their study of thee ffe c tiv e n e s s o f r e d l i g h t r unn ing e n fo r ce m e n t p ro g ra m s in I o w a , fo u n d th at t h e " r a t io o f r e d l ig h tr u n n i n g to to ta l c r a s he s [ in Iowa] has s ta yed fair ly co n s t an t , around 21 %, over time.... the ratioof re d light running fatal- a n d m a jo r -n j u r y c r a s h e s to fa ta l - and major -njury crashes ats i g na l i zed i n t e r s e c t i o n s ha s a ls o r e m a i n e d c o ns ta n t o v e r t im e a t a b o u t 35 p e r c e n t " (CTRE, TheE f f e c t i v e n e s s o f I o w a ' s A u t o m a t e d R e d Lig ht R u n n in g E n f o r c e m e n t P r o g r a m s , 2007) .I n compar ing I o w a C i t y ' s percentage o f r e d l i g h t r unn ing col l is ions t o t he s ta te -w id e a ve r ag e ,city -w ide th e percen tage o f col l isions du e t o r e d light r unn i ng is 5 % of total colisions. Webe lie v e t his is d u e t o I o w a City al ready h a v i n g im p le m e nte d m a ny o f the ` b e s t practices' u s e d t omitigate collisions due to re d light running, including:

A d e q u a t e Y e llo w p ha se s for t ra f f i c s i g n a l s o f b e t w e e n 3 a n d 4. 5 s e c o n d s , perindustry best practicesA n all -re d c l e a r a n c e p h a s e a t i n t e r s e c t i o n s , u se d to a llo w c le a r in g o f th e i n t e r se c t i o nbefore the next Green phase of the signalI m p l e m e n t a t i o n of c o u n td o w n p e de s tr ia n s ig n als , im p le m e n t e d for th e be n e f it o fped es t r i ans , bu t also u s e d b y moto r i s t s t o know ho w long th e r e m a i n d e r o f th e G re e nphase is when approaching the intersectionC l e ar ly m a rke d s to p bars a n d c ro sswa lks a t in t e r s e c t io n s High -visibility crosswalksare marked at intersections with significant pedestrian usageH i g h - isibi l i ty LE D t ra f f i c s i g n a l l a m p sBlack backstops o n traffic signal heads to ensure the signal lamps a r e visible evenon bright, sunny daysTraffic signal heads placed o n poles a n d mast -arms above lanes of traffic

De s pite th es e e ffo r ts , m o t o r i s t s a re s till r u n n i n g re d l i gh ts , t yp ica l l y a t th e e n d o f th e y e l l o wphase and into the red phase. Some intersections continue to have a higher percentagecompared to the state average) of red light collisions for example, for the intersection ofMarket St / Dubuque St, 30% of all collisions ( 96 total collisions) were due to red light runningover the past ten years. From a sample of local intersections (as outlined in previous reports),staff observed an average of 0.6% o f v e h ic le s r u n n in g th e re d l igh t , o r s e ve ra l h u n dr e d v e h i c l e sp e r day p e r intersection.Studies and research

T h e r e h a v e b e e n n u m e r o u s s tu d ie s o f th e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f re d lig h t r u n n in g c a m e raenforcement, and numerous criticisms of those studies. To quote from the Federal HighwayAdministration: "A lit e ra tu re r e v ie w fo u n d th at e s tim a te s o f th e s a fe ty e ffe c t o f r e d - i gh t - r u n n i n gp r o g ra m s v a ry considerably . T h e b u lk o f t h e r e s u lt s appear t o suppor t a c o n c lu s io n t h a t r e d l i g h tc a m e r a s r e d u c e r ig h t -a n g l e c r a s h e s an d co u l d i n c r e a s e re ar e n d c ra s h e s ; h o w e v e r , m o s t o f th es tudies a r e tainted b y m e t h o do lo g ic al d iffic u lt ie s t ha t w o u ld r e nd e r u se le ss an y conclus ions f r o mthem. ( FHWA, Safety Evaluation of Red Light Cameras, 2005,www.fhwa.dot.gov/pubIications/research/safety/050 ). For this reason, staff has focused on


10/15

t h e I o w a -b a s e d statistics a s they a r e m o r e in d ic a tiv e o f expected r e s u l t s in I o w a C i t y , a sopposed to the experience in higher - opulation states a n d metropolitan areas.T h e s t u d y b y P r o f e s s o r H a l lm a rk , T h e E f f e c tiv e n e s s o f I o w a ' s A u t o m a t e d R e d L i g h t R u n n i n gEn fo r ce m e n t P r og ra m s , 2 0 0 7 , is t h e s tu d y s ta ff a s r e lie d o n in present ing d a t a to C o u n c i l inprevousrepots A su m m a r y / o v e r v ie w o f t h i s s t u d y ( f o c u s in g o n D a v e n p o r t a n d C o u n c il B l u ff s ,Iowa), publ ished by the C e n t e r fo r Tr an s p o rt atio n R e s e a rc h an d Educat ion ( CTRE), is attached.T h e C T R E S tu d y s u m m a r i z e s r e s u l ts o f o t h e r s im i la r s t u d i e s in o t h e r p a r t s o f th e c o u n t r y . A fe wsamples are below:

A s t u d y w a s c o n d u c t e d b y R e t t i n g a n d K y r y c h e n k o in 1 9 9 8 in O x n a r d , C A i n c l u d i n gth re e c o n tr o l c i t i e s : B a k e r s f i l e d , S a n B e r n a r d i n o a n d S an ta B a r b a r a . After a 29 monthd at a c o lle c tio n p ro c e s s, a lin e a r r e g re s s io n m o d e l w a s c re a te d to e va lu ate the d ata an dan analysis of variance was used to test statistical significance. It was concluded thatth e Ox n ard R LR c a m e r a s r ed u ce d th e n u m b e r o f c o llis io n s by 7% wth 95% confidenceintervals of 1 . 3 -12.5% ( M c G e e a n d E c c l e s , 2 0 0 3 ; R e t t i n g a n d K y r y c h e n k o , 2 0 0 2 )A s t u d y o f t h e S a n F r a n c i s c o r e d l ig h t r u n n in g c a m e r a p r o g r a m in 1 9 9 7 f o u n d t h e re w a sa 42% d e c r e a s e in re d l ight r u n n i n g a n d a 9% decrease in citywide collisions and injuriesFleck and Smith, 1999).A s o f 2003, the C ity o f Port land, OR h a d r e d lig ht r un n in g c am e r as a t f iv e i n t e rsec t i ons .D u r i n g a s tudy p e r i o d o f 2 0 0 1 - 2 0 0 2 , th e f iv e in t e r s e ct io n s repor ted a 6 0 -87% decline inred light running violations.A bo ve in fo rm a tio n fro m th e C TRE S t u d y The Effec t iveness o f I o w a ' s A u t o m a t e d R e dLi g h t R u n n i n g En f o rc e m e n t P r o g ra m s , 2 0 0 7 ]

A January 2012 s u m m a r y o f th e C e d a r Rapids exper i ence is attached. Cedar Rapids hasreported that since camera installation ( both r e d light and speed cameras), total crashed city-wide are down by 2 2 % , a nd p ers o n al in ju ry c ra sh e s c ity -w id e a re d o wn by 1 9 % .Th e F e d e r a l H i g h w a y A d m i n i s t r a t i o n h a s s u m m a r ie s o f n u m e ro u s, accepted studies ona u t o m a t e d t ra ff ic enforcement a t ht tp: / / s a f e t y . f h w a . d o t .g o v / i n t e r s e c t i o n / r e d l i g h t / c a m e r a sRear -End CollisionsW e have be en asked speci f ical ly if rear -e n d col l is ions will in c re a se w ith in s ta lla tio n o f r e d -lightrunning cameras. T h e r e a re e x a m p l e s n a t i o n -w i d e o f a n i n c r e a s e in r e a r -e n d co l l i s i o n s d u e tor e d -lig h t r u n n in g c a m e r a s in s o m e lo c at io n s . Th e FH W A s tu d y ( S a f e t y E v a l u a t i o n of R e d L igh tCameras, 2005) f o u n d that e ve n a t locations w i t h a n increase in rear -e n d collisions, " there is stilla modest to moderate economic benefit of b e tw e e n $ 39,000 and $50,000 per treated site year."T h e r e a r e m a n y o t h e r r e a s o n s f o r r e a r -e n d c o l l i s i o n s , i n c l u d i n g d r iv e r d is tr a c tio n ( a c c o u n t in g f o rmore than 60% of rear -end collisions nationwde), absence of turn lanes, crossing pedestrians,i m p r o p e r s p e e d p e rc e pt io n , u n c o n tr o lle d a cc e s s p o in ts /d r iv e w a y s , weather / l i p p e r y p a v e m e n t ,etc.Education/TransparencyFHWA recommends that for r e d light camera programs to be most successful, they becombi ned with a s t r ong educat ion /t ransparency ef for t . This wo u ld include brochu res , sgnageat


11/15

each treated intersection, a list of treated intersections on the city website, and onbrochures /lyers, a n d m e d ia n o tic e of where cameras a r e located. Part of the effort would alsobe to publ ish o n g oin g s ta tis tic s a bo u t th e n u m b e r o f re d lig ht r u n n in g v io la t i ons r e c o r d e d , an dthe effect on r e d light running rates and collision rates. An example of a brochure from the Ctyof Muscatine is attached.4: H o w m u c h r e v e n u e might be g e n e r a t e d through the u s e of R L c a m e r a s , andhow /should those revenues be used?

Th e a m o u n t o f re ve n u e g e n e r a t e d is d e t e r m i n e d by s e v e r a l f ac to r s , i n c l u d in g th e n u m b e r o fi n t e r s e c t i o n s w ith ca m e ra e n f o r c e m e n t , th e f i ne a m o u n t , th e c o n t r a c t t e r m s w ith th e c a m e r avendor, and the rates of red light running. We hope, and expect, that if r e d -light cameras arei n s ta l l e d , r a t e s o f r e d -l igh t r u n n i n g wi l l s i g n i f i ca n t l y d e c r e a s e . Until a contract is negotiated, andw e have lo cal e x p e r i e n c e in red -l ight r u n n i n g vio lat ion ra tes af t e r c a m e r a s a re in s t alle d , w e don o t h a ve a s o l i d answer for h o w m u c h revenue might be generated. We can however give theexperience of other Iowa cities:Muscatine Red Light Cameras

5 intersections507 citations January 2012Fine rate = $ 100Citations x fine = $50,700 for one month **

Cedar Rapids Red Light Cameras7 intersections224 citations October 2011Fine rate = $ 100Citations x fine = $22,400 for one month**

Des Moines Red Light Cameras5 intersections789 citations December 2011Fine rate = $ 65Citations x fine = $51, 285 for one month **

A c t u a l r e v e n u e to the city is l e s s than this a m o u n t d u e to n o n -p a y e r s , a n d d u e to thepercentage of th e c ita tio n w h ic h is forwarded to th e vendor, typically be tw e e n 40 % and 60%depending o n th e terms of th e contract

R e g a r d i n g h o w t h e r e v e n u e s m a y b e u s e d , t h i s is u l t im a t e l y a t t h e C o u n c i l ' s d i s c r e t i o n , o n c efunds are in -hand.Proponents of automated camera enforcement view this a s an example of a public -privatepartnership. Automated traffic enforcement would be installed a n d maintained by th e p riv atefirm at n o c o s t to the City; th e p riva te firm a n d th e City w o u ld s ha re in re ve n ue s fro m fin e s; a n drates of collisions and injuries are expected to decline.


12/15

5 : H a s an y t h o u g h t been given to s y n c h r o n i z i n g the l ights o n B ur l i ng ton St ( o r o the rs t re e t s ) s u c h t ha t if s o m e o n e d ro ve th e s p e e d l im i t , th e y c o u ld g e t to e a c h l i gh t w h e n itwasgreen?Burlington Street traffic signals, and other major corridors, are coordinated in that theyc o m m u n i c a t e ' w ith e ach o t h e r to a l l ow fo r e f f i c i e n c y in dis t r ibu t ing t raff ic t h r o u g h th e c o r r i d o rw h ile a llo w in g fo r m a x im u m ` g r e e n ' t im e o n th e a rt e ria l s t re e t . The best examples of this areM ar ke t S tr e e t a n d J e f f e r s o n S t, fo r w h i c h w e can t im e th e s i gn a l s fo r t raf f ic f l ow d u e to th e o n e -way street designation.Burl ington S t specifically is diff icult t o synchron ize fo r o n e d ir ec tio n o f traffic, du e t o th e h i g hp e r c e n t a g e o f s ide s t r e e t t raf f ic a t s o m e lo c at io n s ( Gi lber t S t, a nd to a l e s s e r e x t e n t Cl i n t on S ta n d M ad i so n S t) an d the n e e d to o p t im iz e t ra ff ic f l ow in all d i r e c t i o n s ; th e v o lu m es o f t raf f icm o v i n g in b o t h directions; the high percentage of pedestrian cross ing actuations acrossB ur l i ng t on S t w hi c h i n c r e a s e s th e s ign al pha s e fo r th e p e d e str ia n c ro s s in g ; an d th e n e e d topreserve the protected left turn signal phase for left- urning vehicles.6: H as t h e r e b e e n a n y t h o u g h t s to in s ta llin g fla s hin g y e llo w lig h ts p r io r to th e

intersection of HWY 6 and Sycamore St? Th e i d e a being that if the yellow light wasflashing, the light a t the intersection would be red when the vehicle reached theintersection. [ There are a few of these on H W Y 2 1 8 through Waterloo and it seemseffective.]A dva nce flas hin g y e llo w s ign als /beacons a r e typically u s e d w he n the re is a visibility i s s u ea p p r o a c h i n g a s i g n a l i z e d i n t e r s e c t i o n , particularly in h i gh speed corridors. We have notinvestigated if the Highway 6 / Sycamore St intersection meets the criteria for advance yellowsignals, but would be happy to.

7: At the intersections where the r e d lights a r e proposed, h o w many tickets h a ve be e nw r i t t e n by th e po l ice to d r i v e r s fo r r u n n i n g a re d l igh t in th e p as t 10 y e a r s ?Citations for" Disobey Red Light" at Select Intersections

2401 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2 0 0 7 ZM 2010 2011 TotalMarket St. and Dubuque St. 4 1 5 3 1 2 2 1 19Highway 6and Sycamore St. 5 7 4 4 2 3 3 1 1 30Jefferson St. and Glbert St. 2 2 6 1 4 1 5 1 1 22Highway 6 a n d Boyrum St 2 5 3 4 2 1 17Burlington St and S Riverside Dr. 1 12 10 7 7 1 5 1 2 46Highway 1 and Orchard S t. 1 3 1 1 1 7Burlington St. and Glbert St 7 16 11 11 11 6 1 6 2 1 72Jefferson St. and Dubuque St. 2 2 7 4 1 1 2 1 1 21Burlington St MadisonSt. 1 4 4 1 2 1 2 15Burlington St. and Clinton St. 1 7 11 7 2 7 5 1 1 1 43

8: H o w m a n y t i ckets have be e n w r i t t en by po l ice to d riv e rs fo r r u n n i n g re d l ightseverywhere in town in the past 1 0 years (by year)?3441 2443 M444 M445 2442 244$ 244.4 2414 2411 Isla!

Total Dsobey R e d Light Citations 99 279 249 214 152 193 137 92 98 68 34 1615


13/15

9 : Are there a r e studies to indicate how much traffic relocates from the traveled wayswth red -light cameras toalternate routes? How many people find alternative routes soas to avoid streets with red light cameras?Staf f cou ld n o t lo ca te an y an a lys is o r e v id e n ce o f t ra ffic d ive rs io n re su lt in g fro m pho toe n f o r c e m e n t in lite r at u re p u blis h e d by the Fe d e ral H i g h w a y Admi n i s t ra t i on o r In st itu te fo rTra nsp or ta t i on R e s e a r c h at Io w a State U n iv e rs it y. W e s u s p e ct this is the cas e b e c a u s e it ise a s i e r ( a n d m o r e e f f i c i e n t ) for m o t o r i s t s to o b e y th e traffic s i g n a l s th a n to a v o id p h o to e n f o r c e dintersections.

1 0 : A re there studies to determine impacts of installation of r e d light c a m e r a s o n th elocal economy (people avoiding the area)?Similar to # 9 above, w e c o u l d n o t lo ca te a n y a n a l y s i s o r s t u d i e s o f a u t o m a t e d t raf f ice n f o r c e m e n t c am e r as r e su lt in g in m o t o r is ts a vo id in g a re as w ith a u t o m a t e d t ra ff ic e n f o r c e m e n t .

1 1 : I f a po l i ce o f f i c e r is g o i n g to r e v ie w a ll o f th e p i c t u r e s b e f o r e a t i c k e t is s e n t o u t, isthere an estimate of how much time this would take? Wouldn' t this time be better spentactually writing tickets for running r e d lights ($195.00 fine versus a $100.00 fine)?Each v io la t ion is f l agge d by the s y s t e m an d r e v i e w e d by th e v e n d o r pr ior to it e n t e r i n g a q u e u efor review by a n ICPD officer. There are some intersections that will have more in the queueth an o th e rs a n d th e e x a ct n u m be r o f v io la tio n s wi l l v a r y f r o m d a y to d a y . The department hasc o n s id e re d m u l tip le s tr ate g ie s to m a n a g e th e w o r k l o a d to in c lu d e u t iliz in g in j u r e d " lig h t d u t y "personne. St a t i on M aste r /C o m m u n i t y S e rv ic e Off ic e rs d u rin g s lo w e r t im e s an d w e have thet e c h n o l o g y to v ie w w e b ba s e d a p p l i ca t i o n s in th e p a tro l c a r . A traned and experiencedreviewer can review the violation in a manner of seconds and move on to the next one.The u s e of automated cameras is a tool to enhance th e officer' s ability to enforce th e trafficlaws, and not to replace the need for officers that work traffic. An officer that observes a redlight violation can still take enforcement action. With greater compliance we expect to free u pofficer time for other activities.


14/15

S v b M ; Nd b y

At th e J a n u a r y 10 a n d 2 4 Council m e e t i n g s , I v o t e d a g a i n s t th e p r o p o s e d r e s o lu t io n c o n c e r n in g th e u s e ofr e d light c a m e r a s a t i n t e r s e c t i o n s . A s I sa id during b o t h m e e t i n g s , h o w e v e r , I might c h a n g e my mind /v o t e ifm y c o n c e r n s ca n be a d e q u a t e l y addr e sse d . R e g a r d l e s s of h o w w e e v e n t u a l l y v o t e , I t h i n k it is i m p o r t a n t t ha tw e s ho w w e h a v e thoughtfully c o n s i d e r e d information a n d o p in io n s s u bm i tt e d by th e public.In an email I s e n t to th e Council prior to th e J a n u a r y 2 4 m e e t i n g , I r ec o m m e n d e d th at w e d e f e r our s e c o n dc o n s i d e r a t i o n of th e r e s o l u t i o n a n d s ch e du le a work s e s s i o n f o c u s i n g o n th e t o p i c . Th e Council d e c i d e d tos t ar t t h e F e b r u ar y 21 work s e s s i o n a half a n h o u r e ar ly in o rd e r t o d is c u ss it.My c o n c e r n s ar e lis t e d b e lo w . S o m e of th e c o n c e r n s i n v o l v e l e g al q u e s t io n s th e C ity A t to r n ey ca n a d d ress .Others i n v o lv e fac ts best addr e sse d by th e C i t y M a n a g e r . A n d at l eas t o n e i n v o l v e s v alu e j u dg m e n t s t ha tonly th e Council can m a k e .

Do these red light cameras constitute an intrusive and undesirable intrusion on civilliberties? Whether we should consider RL cameras to be a n intrusion on civil liberties that trumpspub l i c s a f e t y ( a n d o t h e r ) c o n c e r n s is a v a l u e j u d g m e n t w e c a n n o t as k th e s t a f f to m a k e . It' s o n eo n l y w e c o u n c i l m e m b e r s ca n m a k e , a f t e r tak ing th e publ ic ' s v i e w s i n t o a c c o u n t . That said , itwould be helpful (to m e a t l e a s t ) to k n o w w h e t h e r u s i n g t h ese c a m e r a s would es ta b l i sh a n y kind ofm e a n i n g f u l p r e c e d e n t . I w o u l d , t h e r e f o r e . as k th e s t a f f identify w h e r e Iowa C i t y g o v e r n m e n t isc u r r e n t l y u s i n g c a m e r a s to m o n i t o r ac t iv i t y in o u t d o o r p u b l i c sp a ces ; e . g ., at i n t e r s e c t i o n s , a l o n groadways, in public parks, in the Ped Mall, etc.

2. D o e s the possible u s e of red light cameras at intersections raise any important legalquestions about which we should be aware?This question has two parts:

a. I am d i s t u r b e d by th e t i m e ga p be tw e e n th e m o m e n t a v e h i c l e passes t h r o u g h a re d l i g h tand when the owner of the vehicle receives a notice of violation and fine in the mail.W h e n I i m a g i n e myself r e c e i v i n g a n o t i c e in th e mail 3 or 4 w e e k s a f t e r I p a s s t h r o u g h ar e d light, I s u s p e c t I would not be a ble to remember t h e event a n d h e n c e h a v e virtually n og r o u n d s to o bje c t o r a p p e a l . D o e s th is r a i se le g a l q u e s t io n s ( e . g ., d u e p ro c e ss ) t h a t w es h o u l d be a w a r e of before making a decision?

b. I a m d i s t u r b e d by th e d i s c o n n e c t b e t w e e n th e driver of th e v e h ic le ( w h o c o m m i ts th etransgression) and the owner of the car (who receives the fine). It seems to me that thefines should be charged to the driver, not the owner. Does this raise due process, equalprotection, or other legal issues about which we should be aware?

3. What p r e c i s e l y is t h e problem that red light c a m e r a s at i n t e r s e c t i o n s would s o l v e ? H a v eother alternative solutions b e e n c o n s i d e r e d ? Is there scholarly a n d profession literature o nthe topic about which we should be aware? On first glance I s e e no compelling relationshipb e t w e e n R e d Light R u n n i n g ( RLR) c r a s h e s an d th e t o t a l n u m b e r of c r a s h e s an d i n j u r i e s a t th e 10c a n d id a t e i n te r s e c tio n s l is t e d in th e staffs m e m o r an d u m r e co m m e n d in g a do p tio n of r e d lightcameras. ( I plotted the data on a graph and saw no correlation between RLR crashes and totalc r a s h e r s a t t h o s e intersections over a 10 -y e a r period.) This t e l l s m e that manyother factors ( e . g. ,w e a t h e r , o b s t a c l e s t h a t block th e driver' s view, e x c e s s i v e l y brief yellow lights, driver distractions)a re involved in intersection crashes and injuries, and hence that red light cameras might be asolution in s e a r c h of a problem. Put differently, we should articulate a s clearly as possible th enature of the problem we' re trying to solve.C i t y s ta f f h a s d ra w n o u r a tte n tio n to th e e x p e r i e n c e s tha t tw o I o w a cit ies h av e h ad w ith R Lc a m e r a s . My g u t i n s t i n c t s t e l l m e tha t t h e r e is a s u b s t a n t i a l b o d y of s c h o l a r l y an d p r o f e s s i o n a lliterature that should also be considered.

S o m e individuals h a v e directed our attention to relevant literature. W. H. Kamery submitted ana r tic le by L an d la n d -Orban, Prach t , an d Large ( 2008). This ar t ic le c o n c l u d e s t ha t R L c a m e r a sd e c re a s e s a fe t y ( f e w e r s id e c o l l i s i o n s bu t m o r e re ar e n d o n e s ) a n d th at th e re a re m o r e e ffe ct iv e


15/15

w a y s of i n c r e a s i n g s a f e t y ; e . g. , a d d i n g a fe w s e c o n d s to th e a m b e r l i g h t t i m e s . This ra ises a f a c t u a lq u e s t i o n th e staff s h o u l d a d d r e s s : would a n y of th e traffic s a fe t y m e a s u r e s identified in th e ar t i c l ebe more effective t h a n RL c a m e r a s a t reducing accidents a n d injuries a t th e 1 0 candidateintersections?

Sue Travis' email dated Jan 1 7 , 2012, also directs attention to evidence that RL cameras increasethe numberorear end accidents.I a s k t he s t a f f to i n q u i r e i n to th e p u b li s h e d l it e r a t u r e an d r e p o r t ba ck to u s a b o u t w h a t t h e y find.On t h a t point, two former c o l l e a g u e s a t th e U of Iowa tell m e t ha t t he y know of a highly r e s p e c t e dr e s e a r c h e r at I o w a State U n i v e r s i t y ( A s s o c . Prof. S h a u n a H a l l m a r k ) w h o is q u i t e k n o w l e d g e a b l eabout this topic. Staff could discuss the topic with her, report back to us, and perhaps invite her tomeewthus

4. How much revenue might be generated through the use ofRL cameras, and howcould /should those revenues be used? This question has three parts:

a. In correspondence submitted to us, Susan Enle suggests that revenues should go into ther o a d s fund n o t th e g e n e r a l fund. Larry B a k e r s u g g e s t s t h e y could be u se d to r e du cep r o p e r t y t a x e s . With th es e a nd o t h e r poss ib i l i t i es in mind, I a s k staff to e s t i m a t e th e t o t a lr e v e n u e t ha t c o u l d be e x p e c t e d d u r i n g th e first full f i sca l y e ar a fte r c am e r as a re i ns t a l l ed ,to identify r e a s o n a b l e a l te r n a t i ve u s e s of t h o s e f u n d s , a n d to p r e s e n t a c l e a r r a t i o n a l e forr e c o m m e n d i n g o n e o v e r th e o t h e r s . My o w n g u t in s t in c t s t e l l m e tha t th e r e v e n u e s s h o u l dbe u se d to f u n d traffic s a fe t y m e a s ur e s, bu t n o t to e n h a n c e r e v e n u e s for an y spe c i f i cdepartment. But I have no definitive opinions on the matter.

b. Several residents have also expressed considerable skepticism about relying on a privatefirm to install and operate the cameras. The concern, as I understand it, s that the privatefirmwould have a financial incentive to find ways to detect more violations, and hence toincrease its revenues. Staffshould address this pont.

c. Last, Ryan Denke urges us to consider the possible repercussions ofbad contracts andl a w s u i t s t h a t t e n d to c o m e from p ho to e n fo r ce m e n t . On this point, is t h e r e a b o d y ofe x p e r i e n c e nationwide a b o u t which w e s h o u l d be a w ar e before deciding how to p r o c e e d ?

iowa city ordinance no. 12-4466

Documents