Red-light cameras create red hot furor in Chicago

Aamer Madhani | USA TODAY

CHICAGO — In the most contentious mayoral race Chicago has seen in decades, there has been plenty of debate about the city's crushing pension debt, declining credit rating and incumbent Mayor Rahm Emanuel's decision to shutter 50 schools with low enrollment.

But another issue that is gnawing at Chicagoans keeps popping up: anger over red-light cameras.

The angst in the nation's third-largest city, where a red-light camera violation will set you back $100, is hardly an anomaly. From South Florida to Southern California, the use of red-light cameras by law enforcement agencies has emerged as one of the most contentious issues in local and state politics.

In Chicago, which has the most expansive use of red-light cameras in the country, the public outrage over red lights has been louder than most.

A recent Chicago Tribune/ARP Research poll found that nearly three out of four Chicagoans want Emanuel to eliminate or reduce the use of the cameras, which are used for the detection, photographing and fining of lead-footed drivers who blow red lights.

Emanuel's opponent in Tuesday's runoff election, Cook County Commissioner Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, has repeatedly hit the mayor for what he calls the "red-light ripoff" and made the issue a central part of his effort to win the mayoral race. If elected, Garcia has vowed to eliminate their use altogether.

The red-light camera system here has also been dogged by criticism from motorists and activists who say Chicago's three-second yellow lights (the minimum time under federal law) are too short, leaving drivers with the choice of running through a light and picking up a hefty fine or braking suddenly and risking the chance of being rear-ended.

A bribery scandal involving a top city transportation official and executives from the city's former red light camera vendor — which was selected by Emanuel's predecessor, Richard M. Daley — hasn't helped engender trust.

"It's been exposed for what it really is," said Mark Wallace, a resident of Chicago's South Side who has been hit with more than $1,000 in red-light camera tickets and has led protests in the city over the use of the cameras. "It's nothing more than a way for the city of Chicago to create a slush fund that brings in a lot of revenue."

Proponents say the cameras change drivers' behavior, make roadways safer and allow law enforcement to better use their officers.

Opponents, however, point to studies that show that the cameras don't reduce accidents. They also argue the cameras tread on treacherous constitutional ground, because municipalities are effectively contracting out police work to private companies.

At least nine states (Arkansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, South Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia) have laws on the books that prohibit or significantly reduce the ability of law enforcement agencies to use red light cameras.

Currently, 459 communities throughout the USA use red-light cameras, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. That number is down from the 2012 peak use of red-light cameras, when 540 communities were employing them.

Joseph Hummer, an engineering professor at Wayne State University in Detroit who has studied the effectiveness of red-light cameras, said that the cameras have long been a hot button issue for many communities.

But the public's awareness about municipalities aggressively pursuing revenue may be growing in the aftermath of the unrest in Ferguson, Mo., Hummer said.

The months of protests in Ferguson were triggered by the shooting death last August of an unarmed black teenager by a white police officer. But a Justice Department report released in March found that racial tensions had been festering long before Michael Brown's death, in large part because Ferguson police had aggressively enforced laws with an eye on raising revenue through tickets and fines, instead of looking out for the safety of residents.

"People are much more aware after Ferguson of law enforcement tactics that look like they are intended for just raising revenue, and they've had enough," Hummer said.

In California, Assemblyman Matthew Harper, a Republican from Orange County, recently introduced legislation that will prohibit the installation of new red-light traffic cameras in the state and will require safety studies of existing cameras.

"The intention of them was supposed to be to stop people from running red lights," Harper said. "People are still running red lights, and the red-light cameras are leading to more accidents than they appear to be able to prevent."

In Ohio, the cities of Akron, Columbus, Dayton, Springfield and Toledo are suing the state after it recently passed a law that requires a police officer to be present at camera locations to witness violations for citations to be issued.

The cities say the law, which was set to go into effect last week, defeats the purpose of the cameras, and the law amounts to an unconstitutional ban. A Lucas County judge granted a preliminary injunction allowing Toledo to continue to issue citations from traffic cameras while the lawsuits are sorted out.

Last month in Florida, two Broward County traffic judges tossed out 24,000 red-light camera ticket cases, voiding more than $6 million in fines by ruling the program violated state law. The judges concluded that communities were delegating police authority to its private camera provider and violating state law which says only law enforcement can issue violations.

There are also battles over red light cameras — legal and legislative — boiling in Colorado, Iowa, New Jersey, New York and Tennessee.

In Chicago, red-light cameras have become one of the highest-profile issues of the runoff election, trumped only by the city's $20 billion in unmet pension obligations, anger over school closings and Emanuel's acerbic leadership style.

But even if Garcia wins — polls show him to be well behind Emanuel — dismantling the red light camera system will be easier said than done. Chicago's contract with its current vendor doesn't expire until 2018.

Emanuel has touted the city's red-light camera program for reducing dangerous right-angle, or "T-bone," crashes. But a Chicago Tribune report last year found that while cameras in Chicago reduced T-bone crashes that caused injuries by 15%, they also increased rear-end crashes that caused injuries by 22%.

The mayor announced just weeks ago that he would remove cameras at 25 of the 174 intersections throughout the city and reduce the penalty for first time-offenders. That's in addition to cameras that were brought down at 16 intersections earlier in Emanuel's term.

Emanuel has dismissed criticism that his decision to take down the cameras was politically motivated. During the debates, he has doubled down on his position that the cameras are useful tools that can help make roadways and neighborhoods safer.

"I think the most important thing is to make sure that our officers are doing what they should be doing on public safety in the area of fighting drugs and gangs … and not writing traffic tickets," Emanuel said.

Hummer, the Wayne State engineering professor, agrees that red-light cameras can be effective tools, but only if they are employed properly.

"The main thing is that a camera program has to be a last resort, when all other counter measures … have failed," Hummer said. "Red-light running crashes tend not to happen by people who are running red lights by two-tenths of a second. The way it's being employed in Chicago and some other places is just penalizing people for being unlucky."