Arizona Budget Banking on Speeders
By PAUL DAVENPORT
Associated Press Writer

PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano says the deployment of new photo radar or other speed enforcement technology on state highways is all about public safety. But her proposed state budget counts on the anticipated speeding fines to help erase a projected revenue shortfall.

The proposal, submitted to the Legislature late Friday, anticipates $120 million in revenue the first year, including $90 million in net income after expenses from the statewide effort. Even bigger dollar amounts are expected in future years.


While some states use photo radar and similar technology on a limited basis in areas such as construction zones, experts said Arizona is in the vanguard of moving toward a widespread deployment of speed technology on highways.

"It wasn't designated primarily for revenue generation but since we have it (and) it works, we want to move statewide," Napolitano said. "We made that decision before the whole budget issue arose. Now we take advantage of it and use it for law enforcement highway safety purposes."

The governor's budget aides said Friday they could not immediately provide details on assumptions used to project the revenue estimate, including the numbers of expected violations.

Napolitano's plan needs approval by the Republican-led Legislature, and one key lawmaker expressed immediate opposition.

"I don't know whether Arizonans want to be policed by cameras," said Senate Transportation Chairman Ron Gould, adding that he plans legislation to require that voters decide the issue. "It smacks of Big Brother to me."

Proposals calling for even limited use of cameras have run into opposition in some states.

Maryland's transportation secretary on Tuesday told lawmakers that cameras in highway work zones would improve worker safety and reduce accidents, but lawmakers raised concerns on privacy, effectiveness and motive.

Arizona Automobile Association spokeswoman Linda Gorman said the 750,000-member group representing drivers supports photo radar as a way to improve traffic safety but not to help balance the state budget.

A year ago, Napolitano cited results from suburban Scottsdale's use of fixed cameras on a stretch of state freeway when she directed the state Department of Public Safety to begin researching the possible use of new speed enforcement devices.

An Arizona State University professor who studied the Scottsdale project found that it reduced speeding and accident rates. That system uses sensors embedded in the freeway to trigger cameras that snap photos of speeding vehicles. Motor vehicle records are checked to find the vehicles' owners, ultimately leading to citations for identified drivers.


___

January 19, 2008 - 5:57 a.m. CST

Copyright 2008, The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP Online news report may not be published, broadcast or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

I wonder how many people are going to get multiple tickets for doing 1-5 mph over the limit and then lose their licenses due to repeat violations.

Against it.

Quoted: I wonder how many people are going to get multiple tickets for doing 1-5 mph over the limit and then lose their licenses due to repeat violations.

The cameras are set to trigger at 11 mph over the speed limit.

Maybe I should write some letters.

Local and state goverments are starting to see their law enforcement arms as revenue generating departments of their goverment. This is a very dangerous path to take.

In England, people are putting tires over these type of cameras and setting them on fire. I could see action like this taking place in this country.

Quoted: Arizona Budget Banking on Speeders By PAUL DAVENPORT Associated Press Writer PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano says the deployment of new photo radar or other speed enforcement technology on state highways is all about public safety. But her proposed state budget counts on the anticipated speeding fines to help erase a projected revenue shortfall.

Bullshit.  It's about revenue and nothing more.

What they fail to tell you is that the state does not own the photo radar equipment, but instead, leases from companies that provide/operate the sytems.  The reality is that the state only sees a percentage (40ish %) of the revenue, while private enterprise is making a ton of money helping to nail John Q. Public.

It is utterly dispicable behavior...  

Freaking incredible. WTF OVER!!!!!

Quoted: In England, people are putting tires over these type of cameras and setting them on fire. I could see action like this taking place in this country.

Excepting the fixed camera installations along the 101 Fwy in Scottsdale (3 locations), I believe the Arizona highway systems are all mobile (vans, SUV's, etc.).

Our dyke governer ought to be impeached over this one...  

PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano says the deployment of new photo radar or other speed enforcement technology on state highways is all about public safety.

Well whaddya know...security at the expense of Liberty.  Whod'athunk?

I just sent an E-mail to their Governer, telling her that I will not visit her state if these cameras go into effect. Tourist dollars should count for something.

Here is the link if you want to do it as well.

http://www.azgovernor.gov/

Quoted: Quoted: Arizona Budget Banking on Speeders By PAUL DAVENPORT Associated Press Writer PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano says the deployment of new photo radar or other speed enforcement technology on state highways is all about public safety. But her proposed state budget counts on the anticipated speeding fines to help erase a projected revenue shortfall. Bullshit.  It's about revenue and nothing more. What they fail to tell you is that the state does not own the photo radar equipment, but instead, leases from companies that provide/operate the sytems.  The reality is that the state only sees a percentage (40ish %) of the revenue, while private enterprise is making a ton of money helping to nail John Q. Public. It is utterly dispicable behavior...

This is a fact.  The companies that install the fixed sites will only pick a location that will be profitable. They then offer to "sell" at pennies on the dollar, expecting to eventually get a return.

Cop management (Chief, Sheriff) will tell you they see little of the money.  The fact is the court system sees the money and actually bitches when they don't get their expected revenue stream, which eventually ends up in the State's coffers.

Radar vans are becoming very popular and they will start to appear everywhere in AZ.  Cops are getting the tickets too, even in patrol cars, and most will have to pay their fines out of pocket.  

Quoted: In England, people are putting tires over these type of cameras and setting them on fire. I could see action like this taking place in this country.

I used to have a link to a website with like 6 solid pages of photos of burned up cameras.  Evidently, the Brits don't like those things very much.  According to the website, new cameras sometimes only last a few hours.  

Quoted: Quoted: I wonder how many people are going to get multiple tickets for doing 1-5 mph over the limit and then lose their licenses due to repeat violations. The cameras are set to trigger at 11 mph over the speed limit.

Until the legislature says otherwise.  And we all know how trustworthy legislatures are when it comes to revenue generation when they're experiencing a shortfall.

"It wasn't designated primarily for revenue generation but since we have it (and) it works, we want to move statewide," Napolitano said. "We made that decision before the whole budget issue arose. Now we take advantage of it and use it for law enforcement highway safety purposes."

I think it might be a good idea IF the State of Arizona constructed a series of Autobahns (NO SPEED LIMIT) for High Performance Cars and Motorcycles and Banning Trucks, Buses from using them.

This would give people an Alternative: They could drive as FAST as they want on an Autobahn, or they could drive at more pedestrian speeds on a regular Freeway.

It would be great for Older People and Soccer Moms who feel intimidated by high speeds, and it would ease a lot of frustration among a more skillful group of drivers and riders.

Quoted: Quoted: In England, people are putting tires over these type of cameras and setting them on fire. I could see action like this taking place in this country. Excepting the fixed camera installations along the 101 Fwy in Scottsdale (3 locations), I believe the Arizona highway systems are all mobile (vans, SUV's, etc.). Our dyke governer ought to be impeached over this one...

Yup, red light enforcement is fixed, haven't seen any any fixed speed enforcement but 101 Scottsdale.

Quoted: Quoted: In England, people are putting tires over these type of cameras and setting them on fire. I could see action like this taking place in this country. I used to have a link to a website with like 6 solid pages of photos of burned up cameras.  Evidently, the Brits don't like those things very much.  According to the website, new cameras sometimes only last a few hours.

Yea, I have seen some of those photos.

Quoted: Against it.

The various police agencies and unions should be fighting this trend tooth and nail.  It is a direct assault against job security, and the cameras do not give professional courtesy.

Quoted: Local and state goverments are starting to see their law enforcement arms as revenue generating departments of their goverment. This is a very dangerous path to take. In England, people are putting tires over these type of cameras and setting them on fire. I could see action like this taking place in this country.

+1

I have noticed this for a while.

Quoted: Quoted: Arizona Budget Banking on Speeders By PAUL DAVENPORT Associated Press Writer PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano says the deployment of new photo radar or other speed enforcement technology on state highways is all about public safety. But her proposed state budget counts on the anticipated speeding fines to help erase a projected revenue shortfall. Bullshit.  It's about revenue and nothing more. What they fail to tell you is that the state does not own the photo radar equipment, but instead, leases from companies that provide/operate the sytems.  The reality is that the state only sees a percentage (40ish %) of the revenue, while private enterprise is making a ton of money helping to nail John Q. Public. It is utterly dispicable behavior...

Yup, after the Scottsdale/101 thing all Napolitano could talk about was the money Scottsdale made till some one finally got her to shut up. Then they took over the scottsdale cameras (and money they make) and started scheming for a statewide piggy bank hammer.

I seriously will not be suprised if one day I get a ticket in the mail with a picture of me driving 12 miles over on some stretch of highway out in the middle of nowhere from one of their "Cactus Cams".

Wow the government in the business of making money. Who'd have thunk it?

Speed camera + worn out tires and gasoline.

Quoted: www.speedcam.co.uk/g232.jpg

FTW!

Quoted: Quoted: Arizona Budget Banking on Speeders By PAUL DAVENPORT Associated Press Writer PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano says the deployment of new photo radar or other speed enforcement technology on state highways is all about public safety. But her proposed state budget counts on the anticipated speeding fines to help erase a projected revenue shortfall. Bullshit.  It's about revenue and nothing more. What they fail to tell you is that the state does not own the photo radar equipment, but instead, leases from companies that provide/operate the sytems.  The reality is that the state only sees a percentage (40ish %) of the revenue, while private enterprise is making a ton of money helping to nail John Q. Public. It is utterly dispicable behavior...

We have these revenue raising machines here. And for every moronic study the gov puts forth as proof positive that these things work there are 10 studies that show they don't work.

The only things these cameras do is raise money for the gov, redflex/lockheed Martin and give gov the excuse to not hire police officers.

Lockheed Martin and Redflex are the biggest proponents of their so called life saving/dirver behavior changing technology. They refuse to acknowledge the concept of regression and that most ticketed drivers are not locals.

ETA, and if you don't pay the fine here our city council has give redflex the okay to screw up your credit.

Note to self. Avoid driving through Arizona.

Although im against it. If someone is doing 11+ over the speed limit, they deserve what they get.

Does this now mean they don't need as many police officers, or will it just mean longer stops at the donut shops

Quoted: Although im against it. If someone is doing 11+ over the speed limit, they deserve what they get.

Nothing wrong with driving 80 or more in open areas with no population which is half of AZ ,CA and TX and other western states. Just because some people can't handle it doesn't mean everyone should be stuck going 70 out in the middle of no where.

Big -1 on this....

Not so much because it catches more speeders...

But because it will mean that more serious crimes slide under the radar (NPI)...

One of the major 'bennies' to traffic enforcement by actual cops pulling people over, is that police-citizen interaction is increased...

Now, there's no real difference for us law-abiding folks...

But if you've got a trunk full of pot, or outstanding warrants, are driving a stolen car, or are attempting to make your get-away from an armed robbery...

You've got to LOVE speed-cameras instead of actual traffic patrols...

Sure, you'll get your ticket... But you'll avoid getting busted when Officer Friendly checks your license & registration, or because he wasn't there to smell the huge pot stash filling your trunk...

Ditto for folks driving without licenses/vehicle registration...

Think about it...

Real cops on patrol = 'real' criminals busted for serious offenses when stopped for speeding...

Cameras on the roadside = tickets issued that may or may not be paid, assuming the plates are valid & the car is being driven by it's owner....

And you KNOW they will cut patrols once the cameras go in, to save money....

Quoted: Quoted: www.speedcam.co.uk/g232.jpg FTW!

+1

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: In England, people are putting tires over these type of cameras and setting them on fire. I could see action like this taking place in this country. Excepting the fixed camera installations along the 101 Fwy in Scottsdale (3 locations), I believe the Arizona highway systems are all mobile (vans, SUV's, etc.). Our dyke governer ought to be impeached over this one...   Yup, red light enforcement is fixed, haven't seen any any fixed speed enforcement but 101 Scottsdale.

Our fixed red light cameras in Tucson are also used for speed enforcement.  Yes, hit green too fast and you will get a love note in the mail.

When the city of Tucson got their first radar van, the Pima County Sheriff went through the paces and did studies and tried to resist them.  Political pressure has made him sway and several are now on order.  Politicians are all in bed with someone.  Someone else knows it and knows what buttons to push.  The mobile units are manned, so it is unlikely burning tires will be thrown under them.  I wish they were unmanned, because those photos from Europe would be the inevitable result.  


Here is a rant/informational post from the HTF:

TPD: "The primary responsibility of the Radar Van will be to ensure the safety of our children."


Even the traffic division hates this revenue generator:

http://tpdinternet.tucsonaz.gov/Radar/index.asp.

LINK

Although the locations may be accurate, today I found the times are way off. No it didn't get me.

Yes, some cops have received tickets from it. (a Bureau Chief got one in the last 30 days)

Straight from the top, this is how the courts make money. They actually bitch if agencies don't write enough tickets. True, the LE agency loses money on tickets, but the courts don't.

This van is manned by a retired Deputy. It is equipped with a very narrow beam, low scatter Ka band radar that your detector probably won't pick up. A few days ago, they had it on a street I drive every day that is not a typical area for speeders. A powerful flash is employed head-on to identify the driver, even in daylight. Digital technology and camera quality is not easily defeated by traditional blocking methods. A warning sign is required to identify the van if it is deployed on roadways with speeds greater than 45mph.

I may be able to understand placing this P.O.S. in school zones or areas where people typically drive 20-30 over, but some of the listed locations are total BS!

It is set at 11mph over......narrow beam is set at a 23 degree angle from the curb. It flashes if it gets you. Due to the narrow beam, if you see the van and stab the brakes, you can save yourself.

In the first approx. 20 days, a TPD officer compares the photos to see if the gender matches. If the gender doesn't match, or a clear image isn't present, the cite can die immediately. They can send a notice of violation and ask you to identify the driver. Hillary Clinton would be a good choice to list, as you are not legally obligated to identify the driver.

It takes approx. 30-50 days (this process may be much faster now) for the first and second mail notice they mail that you can ignore. After the second mailing is ignored, a process server is assigned to serve a ticket, which adds $50 (this may be $100 more now) to your cite if you decide to pay. There is a 90 day statute of limitations on issuance of a traffic citation. If you don't get served, it dies. This would be when you train your household more diligently about security and not answering the door for anyone you cannot clearly identify.

FYI improper display of a plate is approx. $106.

I also found out that the approved red light cameras will be able to write speed on green tickets too!


CONSIDER THIS A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FROM WILDEARP WHO ALREADY PAYS ENOUGH FUCKING TAXES!

if it was not about revenue but about safety they could pass a law on speed regulators in the cars....IE the car itself can not speed.....but they don't do this .....

OBEY!!!

Quoted: www.speedcam.co.uk/g232.jpg

    molotov cocktail  ?  

Quoted: I wonder how many people are going to get multiple tickets for doing 1-5 mph over the limit and then lose their licenses due to repeat violations.

The roads are safest when no one is driving on them.  But I guess if that's what they're after...

Quoted: Quoted: www.speedcam.co.uk/g232.jpg     molotov cocktail  ?

Burning tire.  You can still see some of the steel strands from the belts.

Considering all of the places where the local government was sued,
and the judge ruled the cameras were unconstitutional (like where I live)
I can't believe some places are still moving forward with it.

Quoted: Quoted: Arizona Budget Banking on Speeders By PAUL DAVENPORT Associated Press Writer PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano says the deployment of new photo radar or other speed enforcement technology on state highways is all about public safety. But her proposed state budget counts on the anticipated speeding fines to help erase a projected revenue shortfall. Bullshit.  It's about revenue and nothing more. What they fail to tell you is that the state does not own the photo radar equipment, but instead, leases from companies that provide/operate the sytems.  The reality is that the state only sees a percentage (40ish %) of the revenue, while private enterprise is making a ton of money helping to nail John Q. Public. It is utterly dispicable behavior...

I had better get in on the front end of this . . . don't want to miss out on the $$$$ to be made operating this equipment.  

I support the destruction of speed cams 100%.

Quoted: I think it might be a good idea IF the State of Arizona constructed a series of Autobahns (NO SPEED LIMIT) for High Performance Cars and Motorcycles and Banning Trucks, Buses from using them. This would give people an Alternative: They could drive as FAST as they want on an Autobahn, or they could drive at more pedestrian speeds on a regular Freeway. It would be great for Older People and Soccer Moms who feel intimidated by high speeds, and it would ease a lot of frustration among a more skillful group of drivers and riders.

To much FAIL in that statement. EVERY BODY thinks they have "mad skillz" and will be afraid of being a "pussy" if they take the slow highway.

And this is news how?

In Alaska we got so pissed off at photo radar that there was nearly a riot.

Constant pressure on the municipality of Anchorage and the Assemble forced them to back down. The Assembly member whose brainchild was photo radar: Mark Begich. The same guy who is now Mayor and hasn't met a tax he doesn't like.

Quoted: Quoted: Arizona Budget Banking on Speeders By PAUL DAVENPORT Associated Press Writer PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano says the deployment of new photo radar or other speed enforcement technology on state highways is all about public safety. But her proposed state budget counts on the anticipated speeding fines to help erase a projected revenue shortfall. Bullshit.  It's about revenue and nothing more. What they fail to tell you is that the state does not own the photo radar equipment, but instead, leases from companies that provide/operate the sytems.  The reality is that the state only sees a percentage (40ish %) of the revenue, while private enterprise is making a ton of money helping to nail John Q. Public. It is utterly dispicable behavior...

You are correct.

DC says its all about decreasing accidents and fatalities, but after 2 years accidents and fatalies have not decreased in places where they have put speed cameras, yet they want to expand into other areas "for saftey".

its BS. I will be sniping these cameras pretty soon.

I do not think they will meet their revenue estimates as folks adjust to them and slow down.  The funding will fall off and so will the maintenance.  

But....but.....The LEOs always tell us it isn't about the revenue.
Please tell me they weren't lying to us peasants ?!?!?

Quoted: But....but.....The LEOs always tell us it isn't about the revenue. Please tell me they weren't lying to us peasants ?!?!?

Say it ain't so!  

designed primary as revenue generation...
yea, it is all about driver saftey.
horse fucking shit.
i can drive very safe at 85 mph, my vehicle can drive safe at 120 mph, but i choose to not go that fast. interstate speed limits are far too slow in wisconsin(50-55 MPH)
just annother tax, with blue tax men to enforce it, or in some states, electronic boxes to photograph you and mail a ticket

I am O.K. with red light cameras.  I can see how that could in some remote manner justify the safety for the inconvenience.  But speed cameras are just unacceptable.  And I have always wondered why people do not burn these things in the middle of the night.  We know where the vans are normally parked.  Are they occupied by someone, or are they just parked and left unmanned?

What is the best round for speed cameras?