But the blade just loves ACORN. I believe they are an out of state organization. But, they were registering every park bench in the state as a residence in order to get the messiah elected. Hey blade, the company in charge of the red light cameras is in another state. The publisher of your stupid, liberal rag lives in Pittsburgh. Shut up blade. Let the people speak. No wonder they are losing readers. How do we even know these cameras are timed and working correctly? There are a lot of questions associated with these cameras.

I always enjoy it when people don’t even bother hiding their disdain for democracy. Why do you think homeless people should not be allowed to vote?

Back to topic. . .Did Toledo put up any money to start up this program? There has to be a better way to generate 1.8 to 2.5 million than red light cameras. . .have the mayoral candidates chimed in on this? I am curious to see hear Opal Covey’s position.

The podcast of last nights Eye On Toledo also addressed the Blades one-sided, inaccurate editorial, but the podcast has yet to be posted. Those are normally found at
http://www.wspd.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=eyeontoledo.xml

Now there could be layoffs since the huge amount of money the City planned to generate, 2.5 million dollars now appears to “only” be 1.8 million dollars that will be taken in. There are plans to increase the fines in February according to this WTOL story and because so many of you are law abiding citizens as well as driving 5% less than you used to? Layoffs of City Workers will happen around October 1st.

How much higher will the fee go? Last February it was raised from $95.00 to $120.00. The City now gets 55% of the take and Redflex Traffic Systems Inc., of Culver City, California gets 45% of the take.

In 2007 the cameras generated $606,025

Does anyone know the breakdown of how much money the city has collected from fines versus the company who installed and maintains them?

Toledo’s local version of the National Enquirer!

“a person is much more likely to be killed or injured as the result of a red-light violation than any other driving situation at an intersection”

Sounds solid. But wait a minute. What “other driving situation at an intersection” is there? Right on red, failure to yield, or perhaps – slamming on your breaks unexpectedly from fear of the camera?! The statement is meant of course to convince the inattentive reader that red-light violations pose the greatest risk to all drivers.

This assertion, when thought about critically, has no weight, especially when exposed to the fact that many studies show an increase in accidents at camera equipped intersections in the long run.

The author also cites to Chief Navarre as stating violations at each intersection equipped with a camera have gone down. How is that calculated? Unless such intersection had been previously monitored by a police officer 24/7, who in turn issued a citation for every violation he or she saw (discretion be dammed) then the comparison is a fallacy.

My position on the red-light camera systems, their true purpose and problems, and their assault on due process and liberty has been expressed before. This short rant is more to the Blade authors’ lack of insight, critical thought and logic. My mistake for expecting such from a newspaper.

TAHL

Actually, Lisa, people can run as many red lights as they want and NOT pay the fine.
According to Maggie Thurber, she said at the Monday meeting that Toledo has not, as yet, sued anyone over non-payment of the fines.

I believe the important word is ‘yet’ … Toledo hasn’t filed any suit in Toledo Municipal Court to collect the fees they’ve imposed. Before a judgment can be issued, there needs to be a suit…

Oh – and I’ll be discussing the editorial and what’s missing tonight on WSPD’S Eye On Toledo at 6 p.m.