Spokane7
50°
June 18, 2011 in City
Ticket-signing system jeopardizes Photo Red
The red light camera system in Spokane uses two cameras and a flash on a pole, plus a control box, which combine to monitor the roadway for red light runners.
(Full-size photo)
A judge on Friday ruled against the city of Spokane in a decision that may invalidate the system by which traffic tickets are generated using controversial Photo Red cameras.
The decision by Superior Court Judge Jerome Leveque overturns a previous Municipal Court ruling that found no legal problem with the method used to electronically affix a Spokane police officer’s signature to a ticket in Arizona before mailing the $124 citation to the car’s registered owner.
“This ruling basically invalidates the whole system as of (Friday),” said attorney Dean Chuang, who took over the case for the late John Clark, who initially challenged the red-light camera system.
Because city officials had not yet reviewed the ruling Friday, they declined to comment, except to say they will meet Monday to discuss the issue.
But last month, Mayor Mary Verner proposed using $400,000 generated by Photo Red cameras in a larger financial package to hire six police officers.
The city receives about $500,000 a year from 11 cameras that record drivers who run red lights or don’t come to a complete stop before turning. The city has plans to install four more cameras this year, and Verner’s proposal estimated that it would boost the city’s take to $750,000 next year.
But the ruling Friday could change all that, Chuang said.
The system requires that a police officer review images from the cameras, then decide whether an infraction has occurred. If so, the officer punches an “accept” button, sending an electronic signal to Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions. That company then affixes the officer’s signature to the ticket before mailing it to the driver.
Clark, and later Chuang, argued that state law requires that any signature signed under penalty of perjury must be written in Washington.
In 2010, Assistant City Prosecutor Janean Phillips told Municipal Court Judge Mary Logan that the company uses a secure network and password that can be accessed only by the officer reviewing the tickets.
“It’s not a big mystery. The purpose is to facilitate the efficient issuance of these infractions,” Phillips said at the time.
However, Leveque agreed with Chuang and overturned Logan’s ruling. Chuang said he believes the system is now invalid unless the city can change how the tickets are signed.
Closing Geiger: Wise or worrisome? 
Dazzeetrader11 on June 18 at 1:09 a.m.
It’s about money. Now. And it always was. Once the “safety ” of the red light cams wasn’t shown, Spokane should have stopped the program as Shogan promised he would.
NOW..it’s likely an illegal program. Whether on a technicality or just plain sense, the program shoul dbe dismantled. The citizens deserved a vote on it. The citizens didn’t get that.
As with Verner, Shogan , Rush and eventually Waldref and Snyder, this program should be gone as soon as possible. Just my opinion.
Is there anything Verner won’t tax to make up for her spending? Again..what has she done? Vote for Condon.
drywitt99 on June 18 at 3:23 a.m.
Leave it to Dazed to bitch about a program that contributes to safer streets……AND funds the police department……without costing a single, law-abiding citizen a dime????
Maybe we should just sell-off all traffic signs and lights…..and stop painting lines on the streets……we could drive under the “honor system.”
A real cost savings!!
schleufer on June 18 at 4:32 a.m.
why do we have arizona doing this anyway? why are our tax dollars supporting out of state jobs while we have plenty of unemployed people here to do the work.
a couple years ago i got a parking ticket in the mail from arizona for a type on vehicle i have never owned in my life. i did after several days of calling manage to get the ticket dropped but if i had just let it go they could have revoked my drivers license.
its not the cameras i have such a problem with, its the company. this isnt the first odor that has come from that direction.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on June 18 at 6:21 a.m.
The revenue split from a prior article is 1/3 to the city and 2/3 to the Arizona based “company”…. anyone else wondering who owns this company? j
D Statler on June 18 at 6:37 a.m.
Definately sounds like Spokane’s citizens are lining someones pockets.
SpokaneLiberal on June 18 at 6:48 a.m.
I will, gulp, slightly come to the support of Daisy. This is how we become a totalitarian state. Little things like traffic cameras. They don’t just catch “real” lawbreakers but also someone who didn’t stop for 3 full seconds. There is also no evidence they make us any safer at all. We are sacrificing privacy, the right to not have the government constantly use surveillance on us.
Where does it end? Should the police get digital copies of all text messages sent so they can make sure to stop drug deals, prostitution, and other crimes arranged by text? Should they also use audio monitoring software to record and analyze all calls made in the US as to monitor that illegal activity. I mean why would a “law abiding citizen” have anything to worry about this? And while we are at it how about all homes have to install security cameras in all rooms so the police can stop child abuse and other crimes usually committed at home.
The more we accept the ever-growing police numbers and presence and invasion into our lives in the false name of security the more we cease to be a free society. It isn’t Obamacare than really endangers us, so much as his insistence he can make war in Lybia as he wants and the everyday increase in Big Brother - like these cameras.
Orphan on June 18 at 7:03 a.m.
Double gulp, I 100% agree with SpokaneLiberal, very very well said. Our freedoms are slipping away daily due to stuff like this.
Ed Byrnes on June 18 at 7:37 a.m.
I concur with Dazzee, SL and Orphan on this one. Creeping government surveillance and intrusion create interesting coalitions.
Ed
Ninch on June 18 at 8:10 a.m.
We need to protect the freedom to run “red lights”… hardly. Remember driving is a “privilege” and NOT a “right.” Anyway, Spokane drivers are ubiquitous when it comes to running red lights and cause many near misses (only because others drive defensively) as well as accidents for those who are not on high alert.
Regarding electronic signature… easy revision to get that signature affixed in the State of Washington rather than Arizona.
As for all this money going to Arizona…. This kind of business apparently does not reside in Washington State, or the Arizona business had the best deal. FYI: City of Spokane contracts out many many technology services because it is significantly less expensive than hiring specialty hardware/computer staff… and if the latter did happen all of you would really be screaming about wasted money and be promoting contractual services.
But I guess the bottom line is that those complaining about “red light” speeding tickets are afraid they will be “victimized” by the system. Yet, one only has to drive legally (follow rules) and one will not get a ticket. Note: One is still in compliance of the law if one enters the intersection on a yellow light. It is the late charge by too many trying to beat the red light that is dangerous and in violation.
BTW: I think $124 for running a red light is way too cheap.
Ninch on June 18 at 8:19 a.m.
P.S. Coming to a full stop at a red light before making a free right term is the law… a much needed one. Many pedestrians and cyclists have been injured because the driver did not take the time to look. I myself have ended up on the hood of a car because of such non-compliance and looking to see if someone is in the crosswalk in front of the car or that a cyclist is in the blind spot on the passenger side. Maybe even 3 seconds is not even enough time to ensure safety from bad drivers who seem to always to be in a hurry and distracted.
de3 on June 18 at 8:27 a.m.
Left out of this story - if the Judge has ruled the system violates the law, then past fines will likely need to be refunded. Spokane remains bankrupt.
Orphan on June 18 at 8:42 a.m.
Ninch Who said we wanted to protect the right to run red lights? Like SL said where does the survalance end its time to draw a line in the sand.
BTW I have not had a moving violation for just over 33 years. I travel a lot and the drivers in Spokane are some of the worst in the country IMHO.
de3 on June 18 at 8:46 a.m.
This company got in trouble before, forging fake comments in the Spokesman-Review, in support of robo red light cameras:
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/sirens/2011/may/24/online-comments-lead-vps-suspension/
Ninch on June 18 at 8:49 a.m.
Then why refer to “red light” cameras at all as a precursor to government surveillance? Yes, they both use cameras, but so do shopping malls. In fact, anyone can now film anyone at anytime in a public space without violating anyone’s rights. There is no limitation.
Ninch on June 18 at 8:51 a.m.
No traffic fines will need to be refunded because of a technicality that was not ruled against until now. The courts will likely require a “fix” of the electronic signature. The traffic violations still stand.
DickAdams on June 18 at 8:54 a.m.
A copy of my letter to the city council and copy to Mary Verner is copied and pasted:
TO ALL:
The Spokesman Review today published a story regarding photo red and possible problems we may have.
When Mary Verner was a councilwoman, she was the only person, and to her credit, responded to my concern about implementing photo red. I had pointed out to the city council that the Minnesota Supreme Court rendered a decision outlawing photo red in the state 3 days before I sent my concerns to the council. Ms. Verner, asked the city attorney if my letter should be something to be concerned. The city attorney assured Ms. Verner, that my letter was nothing to be worried about. The city attorney stated that Minnesota law differed from the proposed ordinance the city of Spokane was recommending re photo red. Ms. Verner received a reply from the city attorney in short order, and at the time I thought almost too fast for a good look see. Ms. Verner thanked me for my concern but was convinced the Spokane city attorney was correct in his reply back to her.
I`m thinking about my concern years ago about photo red and even a follow up note at the time, expressing same. No one other that Ms. Verner did their homework to look into the matter. IMHO, today`s SR story points out the red flag that has been waving ever since.
I returned late today from a trip back to Minnesota. I intend to write some observations in my travels the last 2 weeks about other cities and what they are doing during the economic down turn. Again, I will comment about Cooley`s and the mayors broad brush sound bites about what they have said about other cities.
Dick Adams
leekinny on June 18 at 9:00 a.m.
I’m a pedestrian, who has had more than one close call crossing when the ‘walk light’ is on, in my electric wheelchair. Two were very close. Buuuutttt…..
ebyrnes said:
“I concur with Dazzee, SL and Orphan on this one”
I agree with them. I’ve never been comfortable with this system even though I will never get a ticket. Approving of this sounds a bit like saying, ” I don’t have anything to worry about. I’ll never break the law.” It’s wrong to give away civil liberties for any type of fuzzy blanket of ‘perceived’ security.
leekinny on June 18 at 9:03 a.m.
Oh, I don’t agree with Dazzee on who to vote for. But, she’s right about the cameras.
misjustice on June 18 at 9:16 a.m.
Spokaneliberal wrote, “Where does it end? Should the police get digital copies of all text messages sent so they can make sure to stop drug deals, prostitution, and other crimes arranged by text? Should they also use audio monitoring software to record and analyze all calls made in the US as to monitor that illegal activity. I mean why would a “law abiding citizen” have anything to worry about this?”
Sorry, Spokane but that is already happening under cover of the misnamed “Patriot Act” the gubmint sifts through all of our transmissions whether by text, e-mail, or phone.
The red-light cameras will not come down; the flaw in how the “tickets” are signed will be addressed and the revenue stream will continue. The city has come to depend on the money, shifting the funds into the general revenue to address things that the money was never intended to fund. As I recall when the cameras were first being debated the money was to be used for traffic safety; now it’s being used to prop up the budget and for anything and everything the city wants to use it for. But certainly NOT improvements to traffic safety.
Thanks for posting (a part of?) your letter Dick…
MrBloggy on June 18 at 9:30 a.m.
photo red
post 911
patriot act
suicide pact
johnny law
jumped aboard
the fear train
Battle Dress
Uniforms
Yes, the public
is the enemy
combatant
law enforcement
declared war
not the citizens
who do
they work for?
police state
is here
welcome
to the fourth reich
macht snell!
eagleproducer on June 18 at 9:31 a.m.
Ninch: I am an expert on Production law and you might want to read up on the rights of depiction people have, including in public spaces. What you claim is simply not true.
schleufer: Arizona has a much lower minimum wage than Washington. They are also home to most of the private prisons in the U.S. Arizona has created a business environment that enables the surveillance state.
ninch: If this ruling stands those previous tickets won’t stand. It’s an issue of jurisdiction, as was warned of, and there will be a class action suit to recover those fines.
eagleproducer on June 18 at 9:37 a.m.
If Spokane is indeed “ubiquitous” in the running of red lights, why don’t we try to figure out the primary causes for that? From my lifetime of experience in Spokane I think it would be a good idea to get a new traffic engineer and do much more study of how traffic flows or doesn’t. The timing of certain lights in Spokane make absolutely no sense and are super irritating to many who have to drive here on a daily basis.
Orphan on June 18 at 9:50 a.m.
I will second Eagles motion to get a new traffic engineer.
Dazzeetrader11 on June 18 at 10:05 a.m.
All the money generated to date is “fruit of the poisonous tree” if the law is found to be illegeal for any reason. It follows then, that any and all fines, etc levied on citizens should be given back.
Evidence dervied from an illegal action should be removed. If the eveidence is illegally obtained, I wonder if the tickets, monies, etc would be null……….since it comes under “exclusionary” rule.
CommonSenseJoe on June 18 at 10:26 a.m.
I never quite understood why it is when people who are dead to rights caught breaking the law are let go, it’s called a “win” for society? Someone please tell me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the criminal justice system, in large part, about accountability? Letting people off who break the law doesn’t seem like accountability, and doesn’t seem like a “win” to me.
The basis for this judge’s opinion seems a little thin to me, anyway. I mean, e-signatures are the wave of the future. It’s not like a computer automatically generated this ticket, or some pencil necked geek in AZ was watching the video and made the call. Nope. Here we have an officer who reviews all the videos of people breaking the law, and if they determine there’s a basis to issue the ticket, they hit a button putting their electronic signature on a ticket. Granted, the ticket is generated in AZ, but 99% of the activity takes place in good ol’ Washington state, USA. From what I can tell, the only part AZ has in all of this is generating paper tickets to send off to people throughout the country who use the same or similar system. Seattle has the same system I believe, so I’m sure this has already been dealt with over there - at least a similar issue.
This is the problem with electing family law judges who went to Gonzaga law school to the bench… they don’t know up from down, and they don’t keep up on the newest technology. I doubt Leveque even knows how to turn on his computer without help from his staff.,, that is unless he’s still doing everything with a typewriter.
Thoreau on June 18 at 10:52 a.m.
Getting charged the same fine for turning on red without completely stopping and blowing right through an intersection is unfair. One is quite more hazardous than the other. Yet, Spokane charges the same fine.
How many of us have turned on red without stopping? I bet most.
How many of us have blown right through an intersection? I bet few, since we know the latter is much more dangerous and irresponsible.
The cameras must go.
misjustice on June 18 at 10:52 a.m.
******In fact, anyone can now film anyone at anytime in a public space without violating anyone’s rights. There is no limitation****
Law in WA state says you can film someone but you can’t record them. ie: filming is okay but taping what they say is illegal. Why do you think the police don’t have cameras in their cars? It is illegal to record someone (in WA) that doesn’t know they are being recorded & give consent to that recording.
Also, I think anyone that gets a traffic violation, whether it be speeding in a school zone or running lights or stop signs, should be given a minimum of a $500 ticket plus court costs. Maybe they would stop to think about that they’re doing the next time they break the law!!
dkerns on June 18 at 11:15 a.m.
It didn’t take long for someone to trot out the old saw—”driving is a priviledge not a right”.
Tsk, tsk, and for shame.
http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/-driving-is-not-a-right-it-s-a-privilege-122412604.html
Orphan on June 18 at 11:44 a.m.
Gramma You are incorrect about recording someone in public, see Flora vs Washington for one example. It is unlawful to record a private conversation in Washington State. A conversation in the park, grocery store, on the street etc is not private in most cases. In my office with the door closed would be an example of a private conversation. Stop and think about it every soccer mom with a vodeo camera would be breaking the law.
Cops dont record because it can be used in court against them.
PlanB on June 18 at 11:45 a.m.
My city councilpeople promised me that if the cameras did not demonstrate a safety improvement during the first year, the contract would not be renewed. Well, there has not been an improvement. This demonstrates a basic and significant problem within the city government. Someone needs to spend time managing and maintaining these systems. It’s a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.
CommonSenseJoe on June 18 at 12:31 p.m.
Threau,
You think there’s a difference between running s red light because you’re turning versus running through an intersection? It’s pretty clear you’re not allowed to run a red light regardless of whether or not you’re turning. That’s just like saying you shouldn’t be ticket because there wasn’t an accident. I posted earlier about how bad Spokane drivers drove, this just supports that post.
Orphan,
Cops don’t record because they don’t have the money for the cameras. I’m sure that if you asked any officer, they’d LOVE having the ability to record the dirtbag criminals they come in contact with. It would also do away with a lot if bogus lawsuits against the police department. All I have to say is, be careful what you wish for because you just might get it. A lot of criminal cases would be much easier to prove with officer cameras.
eagleproducer on June 18 at 12:40 p.m.
orphan: The “soccer mom” is covered because of “intended use” of the media, not privacy concerns.
Ed Byrnes on June 18 at 2:50 p.m.
I am fine with LEOs using cameras, in fact I would applaud it, because if it helps bring justice, whether it is to a criminal or a cop, it is a good thing.
Ed
Squid on June 18 at 4:09 p.m.
When the cameras were installed on Ray and Freya, they added a little bonus sign that says “No Turn On Red.” If you turn on a red light, no matter how much common sense or safety you use, or how little traffic there is, you get a ticket. This is just a way to earn revenue and slow the traffic flow.
Watch and see….. Soon there will be cameras for speeding in certain areas and they will be in areas that the posted limit is set too low…. Or they will lower the speed limit in the areas with cameras.
Byrdie714 on June 18 at 5:02 p.m.
Then there will be fines for one to pick their nose…….
ChefGus/ John Olsen on June 18 at 6:22 p.m.
Thanks for the explanation about how the cameras actually work with regards infractions…. so if i Enter the intersection with a “yellow light’ not a red light … then i am legal?? and get my Jetta on through without incident?… i watched the light and photo at Division and Sprague ( a really nasty intersection because of the railroad overpass)…. and it seemed the flash of the camera occurred after the red light…? so That is the”deal’…. if so then i don’t object quite so much to the tightening of regulation.. does not feel as if there is a lot of “interpretation” needed…. and indeed Spokane Drivers are the worst I’ve encountered any where on earth… John..
Orphan on June 18 at 6:27 p.m.
Eagle
Read RCW 9.73.030 it has to do with privacy not intended use. Please cite something anything to back up your your “intended use” phrase. No one has an expectation of privacy in a public place. Also read Lewis,Townsend and Flora V State of Washington.
CommonSenseJoe
You are correct recording devices work both ways. I think they would pay for themselves by preventing the the bogus claims and supplying evidence to avoid trial costs. It would also keep law enforcement honest and sadly that is becoming more and more important. So remind me again why law enforcement isnt using them after all if you have nothing to hide why would you mind.
nslopeofw on June 18 at 9:50 p.m.
Interesting piece on which states are the least free. A bit scary:
http://weaselzippers.us/2011/06/17/blue-states-have-less-freedom-in-the-50-states/
fishinjay on June 21 at 1:54 p.m.
There is no right to privacy in public. Period. End of story. Quit trying to find loopholes to justify your desire to break the law. I wish they would put red light cameras at every intersection.
If they ever want to put cameras in your house, or monitor your phone messages, or any of the other extreme examples used by the excuse makers, then I’ll stand right next to you fighting it. But cameras in public places are not your house or your personal communcation. They are public places. What you do there is open to anyone and everyone, including red light cameras.
Verity on July 25 at 4:59 p.m.
It’s ironic that they would interview an excuse for a woman like Janean Phillips for anything. You can’t trust a word that comes out of her mouth. She is not exactly an upstanding human being. She’s a liar and a cheating slut.