Board Nixes Speed Camera Enforcement Proposal


by on May 2nd, 2011

An example of a speed camera (Source: DaveBleasdale/Flickr)

Community Board 15 overwhelmingly voted down a proposal to place cameras automating speed limit enforcement along the city’s most dangerous roadways, citing Big Brother and revenue manipulation concerns.

A five-year trial program is being pushed by Transportation Alternatives, a non-profit advocacy group for mass transit, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. The plan would place a maximum of 40 cameras, similar to the currently installed red-light cameras, throughout the five boroughs in locations where speeding and speed-related crashes, injuries, and fatalities are prevalent. Owners of vehicles found to be driving in excess of the posted speed limit would receive fines, and the violations will be administered under the Parking Violations Bureau. The penalty will not include points against the violator’s insurance.

But the idea of more cameras keeping tabs on residents has some leaders feeling uncomfortable.

“It’s becoming a little too many cameras watching what individuals are doing, and on top of that you’ve already got red light cameras, you’ve got the police with license plate readers,” said Community Board 15 Chairperson Theresa Scavo, “How many more cameras do you need?”

The planned cameras would only photograph license plates and not drivers, but Scavo said her concerns extend beyond the Big Brother atmosphere it might create. She said many on the Board worried the that the state’s priorities would be on revenue, not safety.

“I think this is just going to be revenue generating the way the red light cameras are. They raise a lot of money, and the city’s in the hole right now, it would be a great way to revenue generate,” she said. “They’re really just trying to box people in the City of New York and money people out, a lot of people [on the Board] were thinking enough is enough.”

The Board was asked to vote on the proposal at their Wednesday night meeting. The Board’s recommendations will go to the Brooklyn Borough Board – comprised of leaders from each of the borough’s 18 Community Boards – who will then forward their concerns to members of the State Legislature, who must pass legislation to install the cameras.

But Transportation Alternatives has been fighting against the perception that this is about anything other than safety since at least 2003, when they created a fact sheet addressing many speed camera concerns. According to the group, 25 percent of motorists go at least 10 miles above the speed limit, creating a “deadly” situation. Documents from the group say that it would lower traffic speeds – and casualties – free up police resources, and reduce instances of discrimination and racial profiling.

A revenue generator it is not, according to Transportation Alternatives. They say New York City speed camera legislation would have a provision putting any revenues from a speed camera program back into the program, and a review of existing speed camera programs shows that none are bringing in significant revenues above costs. Nor is it Big Brother, since only the license plate is recorded and not the driver. They say that New Yorkers have become accustomed to red light cameras, which operate under the same principle, so “speed radar is no different.”

Meanwhile, they say, programs in London, Norway, Australia and a handful of smaller American municipalities have successfully reduced fatalities and the rate of speeding.

That’s not swaying the Community Board 15, though, as they seek to protect Southern Brooklyn’s commuters from the latest round of anti-auto initiatives from group’s like Transportation Alternatives.

“I personally think that [Transportation Alternatives' membership] are not what New Yorkers are representative of,” said Scavo. “I don’t believe they’re from Southern Brooklyn. I think they’re Soho or Park Slope people who have no right to dictate how we live down here.”

Related posts

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

  • Anonymous

    When you drive, your first priority is to look at the road. You cannot keep your eye full time on your speedometer. Who hasn’t driven on a road with a 30 mph speed limit and has occasionally drifted to 31, 32, or even 35 mph. That should not be a crime especially since speed limits were designed so that it is safe to go 10% higher than the limit to provide a cushion. These cameras, however, would be unyielding. 30.05 mph and you get a ticket, just like the red light cameras, pass a red light at .03 seconds after it turns red and you get a ticket. I’m not even sure if they go off if you flagrantly go through the red light 15 seconds later, but they will get you for .03 seconds.

    Anyone who doesn’t see this as a pure revenue raiser has to be blind. If the City can’t make money on them, that just goes to show how inefficient City government is.

    As for Transportation Alternatives, all they stand for is bike lanes, more pedestrian space, and making driving more inconvenient. I’ve never heard them fighting for mass transit, other than to issue a statement pro-select bus service, and that isn’t because it helps mass transit, but because it provides less street space for cars which is all they care about.

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/TOW2M5R366XU3Z3LY22IB6UQME Shamil

      @BrooklynBus I agree with you 100% its all about money…putting money into their own pockets. I came very close myself when a driver in front of me had to make a sudden stop in order to avoid red light camera, I came inch to his bumper with screeching tires…but car behind me hit me resulted in minor bumper to bumper accident. And yes you are absolutely right about squeezing roads making narrower and less space to find parking spots. You know people do whatever the hell they want to do….just a side note I own bike for recreational purposes and not to drive on the bicycle my wife to work or taking kids to places and etc. Bloomberg can screw himself I am not going to drive my bike to get from point A to point B just because his dumb ass things its good idea. Its not good IDEA for me

    • http://twitter.com/ohhleary Chris O’Leary

      That’s a flat-out lie, BrooklynBus. Transportation Alternatives launched a full-on assault on Albany over the past several years when MTA funding was on the verge of cuts, leading bus trips, letter-writing campaigns, and organizing its members to lobby to restore the cuts.

      Once again, you have no idea what you’re talking about.

      Where is your evidence that “these cameras would be unyielding?” That’s a flat-out lie and scare tactic. No one has suggested that. Even in all of TA’s materials, they cite statistics about those who exceed speed limits by 10 or 15 mph. No speed camera implemented anywhere in this country issues violations for people who exceed the speed limit by 1 mph.

      TA’s mission is about SAFETY, not “space.” Speeding cars kill people, plain and simple. These cameras are proven to save lives. Why do you oppose something that saves lives and keeps people from breaking the law? Because some lobbying organization that you irrationally despise supports it? Because you don’t believe overwhelming evidence that they are not revenue generators? Every single time you comment, you seem to offer skepticism of the facts presented, yet offer no evidence of your own.

      By the way, it is your responsibility as a driver to watch your speedometer and obey the speed limit. If you don’t think you can do that, you shouldn’t be driving.

      • Anonymous

        I’ll just say one thing to you. Why do you get a red light ticket if you go past the red light at .03 seconds? Because if they allowed you 3/4 of a second, 75% of the revenue would be lost. Both lights are always red for at least one second. In some places it is two or three seconds. To misjudge a light turning red by .03 seconds, especially with varying amber cycles depending where you are is not worth a summons. Also, who will be verifying the accuracy of the cameras. What if you go through a red light because you have to let an ambulance go past? Will the camera know that?

        The City just has a very poor history when it comes to reasonableness in letting you make a case for parking tickets, red light cameras, etc., that this would make any long time New Yorker suspicious.

        Where is your evidence that a 5 mph grace would be allowed which is the minimum needed?

        And why do I get the impression that you do not drive?

        • http://twitter.com/ohhleary Chris O’Leary

          For your information, I do drive, and have driven since the day I turned 16. And when I was in Drivers’ Ed, I learned that if I see a yellow, I’m supposed to prepare to stop. You can’t “misjudge a light by 0.3 seconds,” because there are at least three seconds before that in which you KNOW the light is turning red. I don’t blow through a red light, because if an actual, human police officer was nearby, he wouldn’t give me a “grace period” if I ran a red light. Nor does a camera.

          I, too, have driven 1 or 2 miles over the limit at times, because I know that won’t get me a ticket from an actual, human police officer. The same holds true with speed cameras. In Washington, DC, which has the most speed cameras of any place in the US, speed camera violations aren’t issued unless the driver exceeds the speed limit by 11mph. The same holds true in Arizona, which vigorously uses speed cameras. It will be the same here. And if it isn’t, you know what? I won’t support it.

          Who will verify the accuracy of the cameras? Well, who verifies the accuracy of radar guns? Who verifies the accuracy of police statements that appear on summons written by officers? Go to court if you think you’re in the right. And what’s the easiest way to stay out of court in the first place? Don’t break the law.

          By the way, I only support speed cameras in areas with pedestrian traffic, because that’s where they’re effective in saving lives. Some states have used them on interstate highways in rural areas, where I think they’re a waste of money and do little to change behavior or save lives (I may be a little biased here: on a cross-country trip, I got a speed camera ticket in Arizona for going 76 in a 65 on I-10 outside of Phoenix).

          Regardless, you’re skirting the major issue here: safety. The data in the TA report that’s linked in the article clearly shows that red light cameras and speed cameras reduce red-light running and speeding, which account for the great majority of all accidents, fatal and non-fatal. And yes, red light cameras cause more rear-end crashes, but those result in far less injury than red-light running.

          It feels like the vast majority of drivers in New York City routinely break the law, yet take no time to worry about the consequences. The reason I’m so careful when I’m behind the wheel is because I’m also a pedestrian and a cyclist, yet so many otherwise reasonable people become maniacs once they’re in the driver’s seat. The DOT’s current campaign, “That’s Why It’s 30,” addresses the consequences of speeding, but I’ve seen no change in driver behavior. If everybody breaks the law and the NYPD is too cash-strapped to enforce it, this has to be the logical next step.

        • http://twitter.com/ohhleary Chris O’Leary

          For your information, I do drive, and have driven since the day I turned 16. And when I was in Drivers’ Ed, I learned that if I see a yellow, I’m supposed to prepare to stop. You can’t “misjudge a light by 0.3 seconds,” because there are at least three seconds before that in which you KNOW the light is turning red. I don’t blow through a red light, because if an actual, human police officer was nearby, he wouldn’t give me a “grace period” if I ran a red light. Nor does a camera.

          I, too, have driven 1 or 2 miles over the limit at times, because I know that won’t get me a ticket from an actual, human police officer. The same holds true with speed cameras. In Washington, DC, which has the most speed cameras of any place in the US, speed camera violations aren’t issued unless the driver exceeds the speed limit by 11mph. The same holds true in Arizona, which vigorously uses speed cameras. It will be the same here. And if it isn’t, you know what? I won’t support it.

          Who will verify the accuracy of the cameras? Well, who verifies the accuracy of radar guns? Who verifies the accuracy of police statements that appear on summons written by officers? Go to court if you think you’re in the right. And what’s the easiest way to stay out of court in the first place? Don’t break the law.

          By the way, I only support speed cameras in areas with pedestrian traffic, because that’s where they’re effective in saving lives. Some states have used them on interstate highways in rural areas, where I think they’re a waste of money and do little to change behavior or save lives (I may be a little biased here: on a cross-country trip, I got a speed camera ticket in Arizona for going 76 in a 65 on I-10 outside of Phoenix).

          Regardless, you’re skirting the major issue here: safety. The data in the TA report that’s linked in the article clearly shows that red light cameras and speed cameras reduce red-light running and speeding, which account for the great majority of all accidents, fatal and non-fatal. And yes, red light cameras cause more rear-end crashes, but those result in far less injury than red-light running.

          It feels like the vast majority of drivers in New York City routinely break the law, yet take no time to worry about the consequences. The reason I’m so careful when I’m behind the wheel is because I’m also a pedestrian and a cyclist, yet so many otherwise reasonable people become maniacs once they’re in the driver’s seat. The DOT’s current campaign, “That’s Why It’s 30,” addresses the consequences of speeding, but I’ve seen no change in driver behavior. If everybody breaks the law and the NYPD is too cash-strapped to enforce it, this has to be the logical next step.

          • Anonymous

            Most of what you say here makes a lot of sense. A few can be disputed. First, a police officer would never give a red light ticket for .3 seconds because that can’t even be detected by the human eye. That’s like a photo finish at a horse race. You have to replay the evidence to actually see which came first, the car or the light.

            Second, there are not at least three seconds before the light turns red. Most of them supposed to be three seconds, but at least ten percent are only two seconds. Whenever there is a third cycle, they skimp on the yellow. Also, I’ve seen a handful of intersections that are 1 second or less, but are meant to be three seconds. No once checks unless someone complains. I videoed one where the yellow was no more that a quarter of a second, and I am aware of a signal in Queens where the amber is about a half second. The only times it is more than 3 seconds is if the speed limit is 40 mph or higher which are very few roads in the city proper.

            In NY they would tell you one thing to get you to support the cameras, then turn around and do something else. You just cant trust them. Remember how the lottery was to solely benefit education and provide additional funding for it?

      • 1989 MCI TC40-102A

        Careful. He is skeptical at times, but his statements should not go unheeded and he always provides evidence, even if he doesn’t provide it right away. As someone whose best friend works for the city and whose father used to work for the city (thank God I can use the past tense!), I can understand the skepticism aroused by these proposals.

        I don’t know about TAl (calling them TAl since TA usually refers to the Transit Authority, helps me distinguish) and his comment about them taking cars off the road, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this were one of their ulterior motives. I’ll tell you now that I support that, considering the fact that cars are chiefly responsible for everything on the road from bumper to bumper traffic to disastrous bus service; the less vehicles (hint: cars) on the road the better.

        I hear the complaints about making driving less convenient, but understand: The motorist is still in the comfort of his car, sitting down, lots of space around him, climate control, radio, etc. The same cannot be said for a bus rider. Both groups gotta take the good with the bad. The less convenient it is to drive, the more you’re forced to use public transportation.

        Next step is to lobby for public transportation (P/T) improvements, using the logic that you have no choice but to use P/T, and therefore the TA would be guaranteed your money/revenue as well as that of your troops (those who lobby with you). Put their backs to the wall, let them know that you need to get from point A to point B and that you will pay them (the fare) to do this for you.

        When you deal with the city and city agencies enough, it gets to the point where you do “irrationally despise” them and similar organizations. Because they do everything backwards. I feel the same way sometimes.

        There are three pieces to this puzzle. The first one is making driving less convenient, the second one is people reacting by no longer wanting to drive [as much], and the third one is these same people lobbying for P/T improvements so that they have alternatives to driving.

        • http://twitter.com/ohhleary Chris O’Leary

          But the crux of his arguments is regularly something that can’t be proven, and is the result of some irrational distrust.

          “What if the city enforces the speed limit strictly?” That’s not what other speed camera systems do, and there is no evidence or precedent to support his concern.

          Just like “what if the DOT is conspiring to selectively use historical data from traffic engineers to justify bike lanes and has tons of evidence to the contrary?” He essentially said this last week, but has no evidence to back it up, and some of the most powerful lawyers in the city have yet to show any evidence of this, either.

          You’re entitled to your own opinions, but you’re not entitled to your own facts.

          • Anonymous

            The distrust is not irrational. The older you get, the more distrustful you become because you’ve seen more first hand and know that much more too.

      • Anonymous

        I just checked the Transportation Alternatives site. I found the efforts that you referred to as well as a few useful reports on speeding up the B41 and curbing parking permit abuse, but you have to look hard to find them.

        All the stuff right up front relates to promoting cycling and the first thing you see is their effort to get cyclists to report unfair tickets they receive. I would have rather seen a plea to cyclists to obey traffic laws which they flagrantly ignore.

  • Anonymous

    When you drive, your first priority is to look at the road. You cannot keep your eye full time on your speedometer. Who hasn’t driven on a road with a 30 mph speed limit and has occasionally drifted to 31, 32, or even 35 mph. That should not be a crime especially since speed limits were designed so that it is safe to go 10% higher than the limit to provide a cushion. These cameras, however, would be unyielding. 30.05 mph and you get a ticket, just like the red light cameras, pass a red light at .03 seconds after it turns red and you get a ticket. I’m not even sure if they go off if you flagrantly go through the red light 15 seconds later, but they will get you for .03 seconds.

    Anyone who doesn’t see this as a pure revenue raiser has to be blind. If the City can’t make money on them, that just goes to show how inefficient City government is.

    As for Transportation Alternatives, all they stand for is bike lanes, more pedestrian space, and making driving more inconvenient. I’ve never heard them fighting for mass transit, other than to issue a statement pro-select bus service, and that isn’t because it helps mass transit, but because it provides less street space for cars which is all they care about.

  • Anonymous

    Soooo if i go 35 in a 30 speed limit zone, i can get fined?

    • Anonymous

      Unless they allow some grace. Since you don’t even get an allowance of .001 seconds grace from a red light camera, why should they give you any grace with a speed camera? At least when police give speeding tickets, they allow for some inaccuracy of the radar gun and won’t issue a ticket unless you are going at least 10 miles over the limit.

      Also, who says they will ever calibrate these cameras. How do we know that in the future they wouldn’t be issuing tickets for 29.8 mph and tell you that you were going at 30.75. Just like parking tickets, the burden would be on you to prove that you are innocent. People would be too lazy to request a calibration of the camera and would just pay the ticket to get it over with.

      You are supposed to get 3 seconds of amber signal, but at some intersections it is less than that because they are only checked when someone complains.

  • Anonymous

    No one wants to feel under nit picking scrutiny 24/7, however, those who complain about speeders, hot heads, accident prone locations and illegal parkers cannot get a pass because they happen to live there. Solutions are not so simple. If the painted bike lane serves to visually guide people in a hurry that they don’t have space to pass on the right, squeeze by and take off someone’s mirror or hit someone exiting on the street side of a parked car, then maybe it’s not such an awful thing.

  • nolastname

    Yes, shed a little camera light on the subject please. Hell ya’ never know what else could be captured in a frame of video. No more/any speed bumps, traffic lights, flower pots, stop signs and did I say no cameras.
    Sounds like Manhattan Beach just wants no traffic. Oh, well.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisanne001 Lisanne!

      All they’re asking for is a tall gate running the length of West End Avenue. Doesn’t seem like a lot.

      We’ll make a deal with them, the lock will be on the West End Avenue side of the gate.

      DISCLAIMER: The above was written in full awareness of the fact that there are numerous people in Manhattan deserving of our respect, who are fair minded and assets to their community and the greater one in which we all live. Of course, these people can count a sense of humor as being one of their admirable traits.

      • nolastname

        Yes, TY lisanne. There are a lot of fair minded people in Manhattan
        Beach. It’s like anything else when there are bad apples in a basket.
        I do wish more of the kind, compassionate people would make themselves
        more known to the surrounding communities.

      • Anonymous

        Didn’t know you were a lawyer also. Must have missed the part where they asked for a “tall gate”.

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisanne001 Lisanne!

          Actually, I did study law. It’s useful in a lot of areas. It was the ONLY major my father wanted me to take up. I wanted to be a musicologist, he thought that was a waste of money. Unfortunately though, I had to take a leave of absence and never got around to completing my studies. I completed enough to “think” like a lawyer.

          But I see that what these people REALLY want is a gate, and a fence, just like in the old days. I’m perfectly willing to accommodate them. Oh, don’t worry, I’ll get you a special key that works on both sides.

  • Eminem

    I love that: “Big Brother concerns”. Yeah, they might just catch drivers on cell phones, speeding, swerving, going through red lights…. What exactly are people doing in cars that is so private? Anyway, you can just go on facebook and find out when they last took a…oh, forget it.

    When to Big Brother excuse for not pursuing lawbreakers fails, the apologists can always fall back on the phrase “aggressive policy ticketing”

    • Faba

      What you never fingered a girlfriend in in the car? Perhaps a boyfriend?

      1984, reread it, you old enough to have read it before.

    • Anonymous

      Don’t tell me you support this proposal.

    • Steve

      All these people with their Big Brother concerns had government issued drivers licenses with their pictures and home addresses on it, plates and registrations. But if the government wants to make people safer by getting them to slow down, watch out! That’s Big Brother.

  • Mike

    At least in some states there is signs warning motorists that there are Red Light Enforced cameras, that is good.

  • Real Brooklyner

    Real New Yorkers have nothing to learn from other cities and other people. Who cares if it’s worked in London? We like our streets dangerous! People getting hit by speeding cars is what makes this neighborhood have character.

  • Greg

    The situation right now is people are driving recklessly and much too fast, and they are badly injuring and killing people. But Theresa Scavo supposedly thinks that a potential “Big Brother atmosphere” is the more serious concern.

    Right. Really, she just wants the freedom to keep speeding and doesn’t care who is affected by it.

    • BigBrother

      Did someone say my name???

      • Anonymous

        Quit watching me.

    • Anonymous

      No, she is smart enough to see the real reason behind this proposal. Revenue. If you think the streets will be safer because of a few cameras, you are mistaken. Within a week the locations will be published on the internet, and everyone will slow down slow when they reach the cameras and then will speed up again.

      • http://twitter.com/ohhleary Chris O’Leary

        Actually, Washington, DC publishes the locations of all of their speed cameras on the District’s own web site. They see no need to keep it secret: if the speed cameras are meant to slow traffic at a specific location to safe speeds, they still do it, regardless of whether people know where they are ahead of time or not.

      • http://twitter.com/ohhleary Chris O’Leary

        Actually, Washington, DC publishes the locations of all of their speed cameras on the District’s own web site. They see no need to keep it secret: if the speed cameras are meant to slow traffic at a specific location to safe speeds, they still do it, regardless of whether people know where they are ahead of time or not.

  • Faba

    You know what I like about BrooklynBus and Chris guy? These two are like two nerds arguing about Star Trek.
    You… ou know Captain Kirk in episode 203, season 2 tricked alien from planet Urusala 349 in to surrendering even though Kirk had no more photon torpedoes left. And and you know what? That makes him better captain than Picard. Also…also… if… you close one eye and tilt your head to the left while watching episode 304 season 3 you can see Uhura’s right nipple for .0225 seconds. My future…and only girlfriend will be just as hot as Uhura and she will have powers, super powers like Q.

    Fucking nerds.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisanne001 Lisanne!

      Just remember it’s the nerds that actually run the world. And know they everything about us. So we have to be nice to them.

      • Anonymous

        Nerds hacked SONY………

        That is all.

  • Pingback: Report: Camera-Monitored Intersections Rigged With Shorter Yellow Signals | Sheepshead Bay News Blog

  • Pingback: DOT Claims The AAA Red Light Camera Study Is Totally False | Sheepshead Bay News Blog