.

UPDATE: City Releases Numbers on Red-Light Camera Violation Fees

The city of Geneva has released numbers from 2011, indicating revenue from red-light cameras on Randall Road.

The data is just data and needs more explanation, but the city of Geneva released numbers on 2011 violation fees from red-light cameras on Randall Road, following a Freedom of Information Act request by freelance opinion columnist Jeff Ward.

Ward e-mailed the request to City Administrator Mary McKittrick on Feb. 17, and McKittrick e-mailed the chart attached to this article on Friday, Feb. 24.

Geneva has two red-light cameras in operation, at Williamsburg Avenue and Randall Road and at Fargo Boulevard and Randall Road. Both are among Geneva's most dangerous intersections.

City Administrator Mary McKittrick said Saturday that the Redflex fee is based on a set fee plus a transaction fee. Geneva's fees are associated with the number of tickets.

The drop of Geneva revenue in the last six months of 2011 would be an indicator that fewer people are running red lights and might mean that driver behavior is changing.

"We were happy to see that trend—although it's difficult to call it a trend because it hasn't been a long period of time," McKittrick said. "But we're hopeful that's what it means."

Geneva police Cmdr. Julie nash made a on red-light cameras and spoke in their favor.

At the time, Nash said 3,635 incidents had been recorded at Randall and Fargo alone. All were reviewed by police and 2,450 of those ultimately were processed. 

Nash said the cameras have helped determine the cause of several accidents.

"We've had a couple accidents where officers wrote the report based on what they were told had occurred. Fortunately for the videos, we were able to see otherwise," she said.

In October, Nash said the trial program had yet to show that it reduces accidents, but she was encouraged that it ultimately would increase safety.

"I was told to oversee this program. I now believe in this program," Nash said.

The data provided by the city show that Redflex received a total of $234,566.70 in 2011, with the city of Geneva gaining $177,223.31 from violation fees.

As the chart indicates, Geneva's income dropped significantly in the second half of 2011.

Red-light cameras recently became a campaign issue in the race for the Republican nomination for Kane County Board chairman. State Sen. Chris Lauzen held a press conference on Feb. 16, saying in every way possible if he were elected chairman.

he supports some legislation to limit the use of red-light cameras and it would be unlikely the city would seek a permit extension.

Genevas' red-light cameras were installed in 2010 and will be taken down in the spring of 2013 when the county permit expires, McKittrick said.

 

Red Light Camera Data 2011

Month Redflex Geneva January     $21,300.00     $30,030.98     February $20,013.60 $35,698.46 March $20,286.20 $29,670.76 April $20,232.30 $26,508.42 May $19,639.40 $28,486.35 June $19,438.50 $11,639.27 July $19,227.80 $7,814.28 August $18,992.60 $2,310.65 September   $18,875.00 $0.00 October  $18,860.30 $4,282.59 November $18,801.50 $0.00 December $18,899.50 $781.55

 

Redflex profits

Redflex website indicates that the company is doing well financially.

  • After tax profit of $7.16 million for the half
  • 84 percent increase in PCP net profit before tax
  • 49 percent increase in PCP net profit before tax before sale transaction costs (non IFRS measure)
  • 16 percent increase in PCP EBITDA – Results achieved despite a 9.2 percent adverse currency movement compared to PCP
Justin Eggar February 25, 2012 at 03:42 AM
Any ideas what caused the massive decline in citations issued in June and the remainder of the year? I'm assuming Geneva's income didn't just go away and that it actually does coincide with fewer citations.
Bob McQuillan February 25, 2012 at 04:10 AM
Without question something happened in June/July 2011 that changed the income stream, unless motorists got religion. Was there a "change" in procedures for issuing violations. Was there some type of major announcement in the late summer from any city employee? Somebody has to know what happened. Who is going to provide the FACTS?
Chad Baker February 25, 2012 at 04:10 PM
The way the Redflex contract is written, the City of Geneva pays them $4,395 a month per camera regardless of how many citations are written and an additional $4.80 per transaction processed. So based on these numbers, it looks like our tax dollars are paying for the cameras while very few citations are being issued. While I am glad to see that the Redflex computer is not issuing very many citations, my initial fears of our tax dollars paying for these things have come true.
D. Niel February 25, 2012 at 06:31 PM
Based on Chad Bakers comment, the City of Geneva will spend a total of $102,000 regardless of the number of tickets issued. For that amount of money the City of Geneva could hire a full time police officer. The increase in staff could be used to add to traffic patrol and a person who lives in the local community could be employed.
Chad Baker February 25, 2012 at 08:44 PM
Deb - Actually the city signed a 5 year agreement, so for all four cameras we are looking a 60 month total of $1,054,800. What a disaster!
Steven Sheehan February 26, 2012 at 12:21 AM
Kudos to Jeff Ward for playing the FOIA card on this. We don't tolerate "keep away" on the playground so why is it local officials are allowed to play " keep away" with the data? Keep digging!
LEE WILSON February 26, 2012 at 04:37 PM
I THINK THE CAMERA'S SHOULD CONTINUE, YOU NOTICE THE DIFFERENCE IF YOUR OUT THERE DRIVING. LEE WILSON
craig February 26, 2012 at 04:45 PM
There is something wrong with a system that generates more revenue for a private company than the city the cameras serve. Cameras serve one purpose, make money. Any other benefit is purely accidental.
Stephen February 27, 2012 at 06:13 PM
What needs to be REALLY PROVIDE is the BREAKDOWNS! 1. How many are right turns on red. 2. How many are stopping over the stop line. 3. How many are split second mistakes (many would be stopped by longer ambers). In addition, they need to state if any Amber times or grace periods have changed since these have been known to radically alter "violation" numbers. On top of that, what was the REJECTION RATE. In one town the vendor increased the "rejection" rate to give the illusion of less violations. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/31/3173.asp Fight the RLC FRAUD! Ban the CAMS! www.motorists.org www.banthecams.org www.camerafraud.com www.bhspi.org
Michael smith March 01, 2012 at 06:12 AM
Well seeing how it's not about revenue then why doesn't the city hire 3 new officers and post the officers there at the intersections? $312,000 per year should cover the costs. As Kevin burns has said they only issue tickets as if an officer was present.
Plate Hood July 03, 2012 at 03:45 AM
The Photo Enforcement program has never been about safety. How can blinding and distracting drivers with a searing flash improve anyones "safety". The entire Photo Enforcement program is nothing short of a money grab and nothing else. I protect my privacy and hard earned dollars from photo enforcement with the PlateHood. http://www.platehood.com
Martina Natoma July 03, 2012 at 03:54 AM
I AGREE 100%. Let the red light runners, who put our safety at risk, pay a fine, learn a lesson and possibly save a life.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »