Retired Police Lt. Greg Smith thought he had buried further debate about the state of red-light camera revenue in Culver City last week when he explained in detail why it is a boondoggle (“The Sad Truth About Red Light Cameras,” May 28.).
But this morning for the second time in two weeks, the Los Angeles Times reported that after surveying Southern California communities, Culver City, one of the program pioneers, stands a shining model for its neighbors who have been saddled mixed results, even throwing out the system.
“Today’s Times story is just as wrong as their first one was, and the statement attributed to (a member of the Culver City Police Dept.) is false,” Mr. Smith said.
“The favorable publicity that red-light cameras get far outstrips the financial gain for Culver City.Actually, there is a question whether there is any financial gain at all.”
Prior to his retirement last November, Mr. Smith was directly involved for a number of years as a Police Dept. representative to City Hall in budget-and-finance matters.
Less Than Honest?
It is his contention that, under the stewardship of City Manager Jerry Fulwood, City Hall officials have adroitly disguised the revenue truth about the red-light camera system. For what purpose, he doesn’t know.
Retired Police Chief Ted Cooke was an early cheerleader for red light cameras, said Mr. Smith.
“Chief Cooke was building his empire,” he said. “ When he promised the city the program would bring in millions in revenue every year— never mind that it never was realized — he was able to hire more people and further increase his power.”
Mr. Smith describes Culver City’s red-light scheme as one of those self-perpetuating programs that governments famously start and don’t know how to stop. It grows fast, he said, and nobody seems to know how to stop it.
One Part That Is True
He said it is true that Culver City gains between $2.5 million and $2.8 million annually from socking it to drivers who commit red-light camera violations.
“But what the public probably doesn’t realize,” Mr. Smith said, “is that very, very little of it comes back to the city.
“About $1 million of that total goes to the red-light camera company. Another $900,000 to Sacramento. Another $500,000 to cover the costs of staffing the program.
“What’s left?
“Along the way, all kinds of monies get mixed together — the money that comes back from the courts to the city and when the city itself starts moving money around.
“All that people see, though, is the $2 million-plus. But that is not accurate.”
Mr. Smith also disputed a claim made in the Times story by police Lt. Manuel Ariza:
“The city doesn’t break even or lose…It makes money at the end of the year.”
“False,” said Mr. Smith.
