Posted 11/04/2010 05:39:00 PM by Douglas

Red-light cameras defeated in the City of Houston.

Houstonians rejected the city's red light camera program in a hard-fought ballot contest, delivering an immediate $10 million hit to an already dire budget situation at City Hall.

With all votes counted, 53.2 percent of voters demanded a decisive end to the use of the devices, which had been used to issue more than 800,000 tickets and collected $44 million in fines since 2006.

I know those figures don't include all those that don't pay, but that's $55 a ticket. But it's not about the money. Except that it is. I don't generally read the opinion page of the Hearst-on Chronicle, but this is a bit much:

The city of Houston, its police department, area trauma centers and the contractor managing the cameras receive millions of dollars in revenue generated by the red-light citations. Since the city installed the system in 2006, nearly 800,000 tickets have been issued with $43.7 million collected.

On the other hand, the financial heft and organization behind the camera opponents comes largely from traffic-court attorneys, including Paul Kubosh, who make their living helping motorists fight tickets. Kubosh claims the city's motive for installing traffic cameras is profit rather than public safety. In his case, it's a pot-calling-the-kettle-black situation.

You can't rebut the "it's all about the money" argument for the cameras with "they want money, too." It's such a stupid argument.

I don't think anyone thinks running red lights is a good idea, nor do I really think that most reasonable people think it's an effective attempt to enforce criminal law. But here's the rub that I don't see how either side can refute: In four years they've issued over 800,000 tickets. One thing is very clear. The cameras do not stop people running red lights.