Printer-Friendly
Email this Story
Post a Comment (1)
Sheriff moving ahead with red-light cameras
Smile, red-light runners. You may soon be on camera in Loudoun.The Loudoun Sheriff's Office is in talks with three different vendors about leasing cameras and other equipment to photograph motorists running red lights at several of Loudoun's more treacherous intersections. If installed, the cameras would be a first for Loudoun.
Two years ago, about 40 red-light cameras operated in parts of Fairfax and Arlington counties and the City of Falls Church, snapping photos of the license plates of vehicles running stoplights.
However, in a much-ballyhooed event, the cameras were turned off after a decade-long pilot program ended in 2005. State lawmakers, though, voted this spring to allow all Virginia localities the option of employing the cameras starting July 1 of this year.
"We're not going to have these things everywhere," said Sheriff Steve Simpson.
The Loudoun County Board of Supervisors would need to approve the use of the cameras and the budget money to lease them. If it does, Simpson said Loudoun would probably start with two placed at high-accident intersections. Areas being considered are along Route 7 at Sterling Boulevard, Countryside Boulevard and Potomac View Road. However, the Sheriff's Office would be able to move the cameras if it thinks a different intersection needs monitoring.
Once installed, deputies would verify license plate numbers and addresses, while the camera vendor would mail out the $50 tickets to offenders.
"There is the Sixth Amendment issue: You have a right to know who your accuser is," said Mike George, a former Fairfax County police officer and the Democrat running for Loudoun sheriff.
He said cameras should be employed only as a last resort. To make intersections safer, he suggested reducing speed limits on stretches of road leading up to lights. He also said more radar enforcement should take place near intersections and some traffic lights may need to be "re-synced."
In contrast, Sheriff candidate Greg Ahlemann, who defeated Simpson at the Republican convention in June, said he opposes the cameras because they're "only revenue makers." He compared them to the user fees now being assessed to some reckless drivers in Virginia – though, at $50, the fine for running a light is considerably less.
Also, the cameras "would further citizen surveillance," he said.
Safety, not revenue gains, said Simpson, who is seeking re-election as an independent, is why his department wants the cameras employed. He said, while data show the cameras, found in 20 states, do cause more rear-end collisions, he said he expects the number of "more severe" T-bone-type crashes to go down at intersections monitored by the cameras.
Simpson said he hopes to brief the board's Public Safety Committee on the cameras this fall, but that it was "not likely" to have them operational before the end of the year.
Said Simpson: "Improving highway safety is my only concern."
Contact the reporter at jjacks@timespapers.com
At least the sheriff admits that these cameras increase the number of rear end crashes which, by the way, can cause injuries, vehicle damage, and traffic tie-ups equal to the "t-bone" crashes. In one experiment conducted in another jurisdiction during the last time these cameras were deployed, nearly 50 events were recorded in one month. Then the amber light for the main road was lengthened by one second, and the number of violations the next month dropped to two. Simply taking this extra second from the 4-way red time built in to the signal change would appear to significantly reduce the problem while not materially affecting the green time for either roadway, and at far less cost than these cameras. Perhaps this should be tried at the "problem intersections" to see if it helps resolve the problem before the cameras are installed and the "collateral damage" of more rear-end crashes occurs.
Posted by J.W.
Report Offensive Content
You must be logged in to post a comment.