Red Light Cameras LA Vote: Re-Rent --Reject?

CALENDAR - Events, Holidays: SEE page/bottom

Answer the Poll ----->

UPDATE #3 - LA City Council, June 20, 2011 - Item #40 - Vote
Politics is a messy business.... Did you follow proceedings today? I don't, for good reason, but today I dialed in and heard
  • Mr. Garcetti: "...we cannot impose a fee of 2/3 of most people's rent, putting them in impossible position."
  • Mr. Krekorian: "LA Police Commission looked at data, expert testimony and data from LAPD, examined the issue thoroughly and arrived at decision --Unanimous --said Dump the cameras so why is Council 'second-guessing' the Commission?" His comments crisp, cogent, intelligent = impressive
  • Mr. LaBonge: cited anecdotes about dead people --he "will always remember" hit by stupid drivers as "reason" to Keep the rented cameras; I think of LaBonge as 'cool guy' and he keeps giving evidence: gasbag
  • Issue (I dialed in after began): the 32 privatized intersections from rented cameras --come from company out of Arizona; Council voted, last year, to boycott all business with Arizona because of their immigration policies, so if LA keeps the cameras: they violate their own motion
  • Mr. Parks: strenuously objected to objecting to Arizona company -"if we reject the cameras for that reason then we should also reject tasers because they come from Arizona --we should tell the police not to use tasers, just shoot people." How...helpful...
  • Testimony from (smaller) city mayor: they extended yellow light length one second and reduced crashes and red light running to almost zero
  • Issue: state legislature, apparently, refuses to change law, which they "could do in one day" to enforce penalties for running red light, e.g., mark on driver license -enforce ticket payment; "they send us [City of LA] $157, send County $50, keep $500 and pile on fees and they don't want to give that up, but since the program has no "teeth" what's the point" --Mr. Rosendahl (--I'm pretty sure)
  • Mr. Koretz: wants yellow lights extended
  • Mr. Zine: objects to: "no consequences of getting a ticket -no enforcement"/always opposed the cameras, doesn't want to continue the cameras
  • Mr. Cardenas: the one who made Motion to 'study more' --he wants the rented cameras; didn't say anything about the hundreds of intersections that don't have cameras, but drivers get through them anyway.
  • Issue: if the City changes ALL major intersections so: yellow lights lengthened AND red lights up in all four directions = exquisite intelligent daVine remedy for the least amongst us -the stupid who run red lights --doesn't cost $2.7 million annually -violate anti-Arizona motion -put anyone's rent at risk -rip off anybody, Actually solves the problem, for majority. There would be some cost: labor to change the lights, BUT: intersections wouldn't be privatized, City would save major $$
How did they vote: Hahn, two others were excused - 12 voted
They 'pieced' out the Motion in five votes -for "more time" and "study" before contract expires July 31; bottom line: voted 6 to 6 --to put off Motion until tomorrow June 22.

Council members do listen to constituents so express yourself:
- click: SEE link below to contact Your rep
- call: 311 to get connected to your rep's office 8 am to 9:45 pm
- if you know your District's #: call 213-473-70-- --last two digits your district, e.g., Garcetti, Silver Lake 473-7013

Why I don't listen to Council proceedings--
they make me angry...before above issue: Council took up Item #38 & #39 - Autry Museum
Autry Museum owners, board in 2003 said they would 'honor, respect, promise to take care of Southwest Museum and its historical treasures'...instead: now they want to strip the treasures, pile those into the Autry and lock the doors --with "help" from a 'mole' from a major law firm who got himself onto a voting commission --a guy who wants to pack parks --ALL, with billboard ads.

LA City Council
: voted 10 yes/3 no and 11 yes/2 no
--to Help the Autry loot the Southwest Museum --to suck up $6 million buck 'grant.' If you care about Griffith Park: all aspects, details, Commissioners, law, politics, moles, LaBonge - SEE superb posts at Griffith Park Wayist --no fat lady singing, this will land in court....

So what did the Council members do this morning, June 17, on Intersections? Keep privatization --keep $2 mil bucks/Common Sense? If you didn't guess what members did you must have just arrived in LA. Members voted: to put off the vote until Tuesday, and no it wasn't a trick question. Details on motion & results -I waited all day, but wasn't posted, so I'll look for it Monday.

People have 'managed' to get thru intersections ever since Henry Ford got an assembly line going. But City of LA decided to flash-blind drivers in intersections --cause rear-end crashes --shove millions down a rented rat hole with 'newest' tech gizmo when we dumped the"old-fashioned" tech --cops watching, because?

If we ditch privatization of intersections and save money
Council member Cardenas with "help" from Bernard Parks wants to 'make sure' "public's safety" won't be 'compromised.' Ya, however will drivers manage without cameras....

Parks into 'mommy' government
Last attempt: he tried to pass a motion that people couldn't use tobacco in their home. --No prob on semi-automatic weapons in LA, butts our "real" scourge. Council members got so many complaint calls staff couldn't do any but answer the phone; motion died quiet death. What's next --tell us what to wear/enforce a dress-code?

Parks so busy: he didn't notice DWP collections agency contract--before it expired --millions can never be collected now, oops and he's head of Oversight --or show up at any march to Stop Gun Violence. He's just so very busy.... Thanks people in CD #8, with voters like you we'll be bankrupt -dead soon.

IF "money isn't the issue" --then WHY is cost of tickets jacked up by $hundreds --and "fees" added on? Someone told me he got a ticket via one of those private-owned cameras --cost him: $600. Money from tickets isn't funding government --they throw away that money also? You did just move here, right?

Well, at least another chance--
Your views to Council: call 311 MONDAY June 20 -UPDATE July 16 change: 8 am to 5 pm daily --hours cut, but Council managed to save --their own salaries --don't call don't whine about the results, and Answer the Poll ----->

Followed the cameras?
The controversy --red light cameras installed at intersections across Los Angeles --that flash when a car is in an intersection when it doesn't belong. It has popped up again after the announcement ten days ago of the Police Commission. Surprisingly, the Commission voted: to end the camera contract.

For disclosure:
-I wrote on this several months ago with stats from various cities
that showed the cameras don't reduce crashes, do not "pay for themselves"
-once got simultaneously 'frozen' in an intersection by sun, a stupid driver's
sharp left in front of me, way too bright flash 'snapped' by the first/just installed camera in Beverly Hills; when I could see again cars wanted me out of the way; instant enemy and livid, prepped to fight the ticket --which never arrived
-I am opponent: cameras cause/increase volume of rear-end crashes; City has to pay 3/4 of revenue collected to camera owners; neither ticket nor payment can be enforced legally.

If cameras instead of cops at intersections is such a good idea: why does the City rent instead of purchase?

LA City Council
I called each member's office to find out what Council was going to do, intended to publish long time ago, but it took amazing long time to find out, then in the middle of my survey Councilman Cardenas put up a motion --council file #11-1015 that asked for "more study" --sort of; the motion, I learned from last staffer I talked to: improperly worded; as written: if passed it cannot be imposed, yet staffers told me some members intend to vote "for" the motion. Council will have to first get legal clarification and/or rewrite the motion before voting.

----District # -Member -Intention
"---" pre-excused from Session, can only vote if attends
  • 13 -Garcetti---- --- (no) Silver Lake -out Navy Guard duty
  • 04 -LaBonge00---- (no) Griffith Park
  • 01 -Reyes -----0--- ?
  • 02 -Krekorian ---? - wants to hear arguments before vote
  • 03 -Zine 00-0-0--- (no)
  • 05 -Koretz ------no
  • 06 -Cardenas--0--- -motion: LAPD "public safety" report
  • 07 -Alarcon-----yes -on new motion
  • 08 -Parks ------yes -2nd on motion "public safety" report
  • 09 -Perry -------? --wants to hear arguments before vote
  • 10 -Wesson ----yes
  • 11 -Rosendahl- --? --wants to hear arguments
  • 12 -Smith ---------- --many calls but no staffer could say

    What does it all mean? Several staffers said: if ten "yes" votes contract on red light cameras will be brought from LA Police Commission to City Council, and paired with Cardenas Motion to request LAPD report. But: those staffers were incorrect, the motion can be passed with only eight votes.

    If all five members who have been excused from the Friday session remain out, and motion for more study on public safety is re-worded, the camera contract could be renewed on month to month basis, up to one year --by eight "yes" votes. Yuck.

    The reason it took so long --to find out each member's position, was reaching the staff person who knew the answer --and they on phone call after call, at meetings, in staff sessions with the member. This is the third project I've done where City staff were invaluable. I think most constituents haven't got a clue: how hard staffers in City government work.

    No? After working all week Do You routinely go back in and work Saturdays --Sundays --Saturday nights --or ever, and for no pay? Whatever your views of Council members, they and we are lucky to have those people doing the work, making stuff actually happen. The City broke, near dysfunctional, but without those people: it Would be dysfunctional, we would find out what chaos is like. Thanks staffers, special thanks to Stephanie.

Want to give your yea/nay to your City Council member:
call 311, 9 am to 9:45 (10) pm
give your zip code, operator will connect and heads up: like anyone who gives service, it doesn't hurt to say "thanks."

This bill NOT a 245 –council cannot order this/ANY commission to do “X” and asking Police to do “more study” --more “study” as in: prove a negative, i.e. fewer head-on crashes Vs rear-end crashes?? How is that a Good Thing for LA? –Crashes are crashes –trying to avoid photo-snap and Ticket.

But after ticket mailed out: judges know the law –enforcement, making red light runner PAY cannot be enforced. Therefore? Police gonna trot on over to court, pow wow with judges: get them to Make people pay. Ya, that’ll work, judges LUV being told what to do…. lol

Wendy Gruelle: rules
Controller Gruelle did an audit which showed: year on year net losses --these cameras cost us. She has done impressive work --wouldn't she be GREAT as next Mayor? With her brains, tenacity, knowledge, skills: she couldn't Possibly do as poorly as allllll those men....

If cameras instead of cops is such a Good Idea: Why doesn’t City BUY the cameras instead of renting and giving away ¾ of the revenue that is collected? Don’t tell us ‘we’re broke’ –slash paramedics from dwindling funds then throw $2 MILLION bucks a Year down a ‘rented’ rat hole. Ya, I GET that state government/law forbids lawmakers from considering revenue when deciding an issue –they all claim purely “public safety” the issue. Except: When you need a paramedic –your house ablaze: $2 Million Does MATTER –jobs –paramedics, cut for lack of funds. We could just let people die on sidewalks, like plenty of other broke cities. My vote: for paramedics, against stupid cameras.

Nothing daVine
about extreme bright flash light on a driver in an intersection. Best: DUMP privatized “supervision” of intersections.

–Then BE a better driver Period. STOP getting behind the wheel after boozing it up –EVERYONE around you: wants to KEEP their arms –legs –eyeballs –life. You don’t want somebody’s death on your head: Don’t booze then drive. –Answer that oh-so-NOT-important phone call later –or pull over; NO you cannot ‘squeeze in’ a text message AND see traffic/drive defensively at the same time. –You ain’t special, the Rules DO apply to You. Don’t run red lights/when it goes yellow: stop and get home in ONE piece, not parts that need burying. The End of red light cameras instead of cops. Let’s have big dollop of Common Sense.

Check back for follow up: I will post results, on-going, and put up a poll for You to vote.

* * * * *

tag: los angeles city vote privatize intersections, run red light, traffic flow control, advertising Griffith Park Southwest Museum Mt. Washington

No comments :

Post a Comment