Ralph Morgan

Instructor: John Blois

English 101

23 March, 2017

Making A Case for Red Light Cameras

We have all seen it, sitting at a light waiting for it to turn green. It changes and you move

you hit the gas when a car tears through the intersection. Good thing you were a little slower

accelerating. Red light runners are unfortunately a fact of life everywhere. In 2006, an average of

5 violations per day for each intersection monitored occurred in Androscoggin County, proving

that red light running is indeed a major problem (Garder, Traffic 2). This puts other law-abiding

motorists, and pedestrians, at risk for injury or death. Red light cameras help prevent accidents,

generate income for the municipalities in their jurisdiction, and encourage motorists to follow

traffic safety laws. Androscoggin County should install red light cameras at light intersections.

One of the biggest benefits of red light cameras is increased safety. Per the Highway

Safety Insurance Institute red light running results in approximately 137,000 accidents and 800

deaths each year (Smile 9). Even if no one is killed these accidents result in injuries, loss of

income while recovering, and increased insurance premiums. In Texas, the Department of

Transportation preformed a study of 56 intersections and found a 30% decrease in collisions after

red light cameras were installed. While a study in Philadelphia found a combination of increasing

yellow light length with red light camera enforcement nearly eliminated red light running (Smile

9).
 Red light cameras serve as a useful reminder to help drivers to follow traffic safety laws.

During a 2004-2005 red light camera pilot program in Androscoggin County the number of red

light running violations dropped 28% (Garder, Traffic 2). Opponents of red light cameras claim

that accidents are increased by the presence of red light cameras because drivers either speed to

make it through the intersection before it changes red, or they hit the brakes and stop suddenly

(Richter 16). While it may be true that there is a slight increase of these occurrences when red

light cameras are installed, these are already things they do at lighted intersections even without

cameras installed. Studies have shown that 25% of those that run red lights do so intentionally

(Garder, Signal 8). These drivers are unlikely to stop unless there is punitive effect for their

behavior (Garder, Traffic 7). While the remainder of the red light runners can be attributed to

signal timing, speed, or difficulty in seeing light signals. These are all issues that can be

addressed easily and with little money. Yellow light times can be increase which can be effective

at reducing rear end collisions making these intersections even safer (Garder, Signal 8).

Many opponents of red light cameras feel they are unconstitutional and it seems the

Maine legislature agrees. In 2009, LD 1234 was passed unanimously to ban all automatic traffic

enforcement cameras, except at toll booths, in the state of Maine (Maine Bans). This begs the

question, how it can be unconstitutional to catch someone speeding with a camera, or running a

red light, but not when they fail to pay at a toll booth. Part of this opposition stemmed from the

increase in accident occurrences at red light camera intersections but, again that was addressed

with simply altering the yellow light length. Opponents also cited that the car owner is the one

that gets the ticket, not the driver of the car (Should). However, if toll booth cameras are

capable of capturing the faces of drivers, and they are, it is reasonable that with the proper

cameras this can be addressed as well. The county would just need a way to appeal the ticket so
blameless parties are not fined. Employing two traffic enforcement officers to review the images

and determine if a violation occurred also allows these same officers to appear in court to address

how they came to either conclusions (Garder, Traffic 7). This limits the right to question your

accuser crowd that has been so vocal in states such as Florida.

It is true that red light cameras have a big government, almost Orwellian, aspect. Some of

the opposition state that municipalities use the red light cameras only to generate money

(Should). However, research has shown that over time these intersections with red light

cameras see a significant reduction of red light running (Smile 9). As drivers become more

familiar with existence of these cameras they drive more cautiously which naturally results in

fewer violations and accidents (Garder, Traffic 7).

Certainly, the most vocal of opponents to red light cameras is the fiscal conservative.

According to Sisiopiku, who worked with the U.S. Department of Transportation to identify red

light camera systems costs determined they include the camera (approximately $50,000), in-

pavement inductive loop detectors ($5K per leg), and costs associated with camera housings,

poles, flash slaves, and wiring ($5,000 to $8,000). These costs range from $67,000-$80,000 per

intersection. Each intersection is different as speeds, approaches, and numerous other factors

must be considered for the camera to capture the image properly. This does not even include the

cost of the officers that must review the images and determine if a ticket should be sent to the

offender. The salaries of these officers would need to be considered as well. Per Salary.com the

median wage for a police officer in the Lewiston/Auburn jurisdiction is $46,945. Red light

cameras should be placed in the eight most trafficked intersections to begin with. With five to ten

subsequent intersections having cameras installed every year. With the cost of the cameras and

the officers that support their use we have a starting cost of $733,890. This could be worked into
an annual budget as they exist, but for sake of argument lets say the money will need to

generated elsewhere. Androscoggin County could issue a thousand ten year $1000 zero coupon

bonds sold for $755 each and earning 2.85% annually. These bonds would generate those funds

without difficulty and more if the county can place them higher earning investment. As violators

are ticketed the $131 fine combined with the number of violations 4600 over a six-month period

(Garder, Traffic 2) should be enough to pay off each section of installed cameras within two

years. Allowing the camera installation project to continue while still paying for personnel,

camera maintenance and future camera installations.

There is much controversy over the use of red light cameras to enforce traffic laws, but

the bottom line is study after study shows they reduce injury and death causing accidents

significantly and with slight tweaks to signal lengths can reduce accidents even more. They

generate ample income to support themselves and the communities they are in. They make the

driving public more mindful of how they are driving. They make our intersections safer for

pedestrians and motorists alike. The personal safety of our citizens should be paramount; let us

hope Maine reconsiders this safety measure in the future.