Until City Councilperson Meghan Sahli-Wells put her coloring book into play, the main storyline emerging from last week’s budget hearings was going to be expansion of the Police Dept.’s most controversial program, red light cameras.
A workaday resident of Culver City might presume that expansion means the police are increasing the number of red light cameras.
But no.
Lt. Bill Brown explained that only the number of “approaches” (or directions from which drivers approach the red light cameras) will grow, from 18 to 23.
Lt. Brown repeated a familiar police mantra, the more cameras, the fewer accidents that occur.
Approaches (also known as opportunities) are being increased because “we are looking at this from a safety standpoint,” Mr. Brown said.
Eleven Culver City intersections are marked with the unpopular red light cameras.
The scheme has been on the streets since the turn of the century.
Opportunities for slowing down drivers are being grown, again, even though police never have been able to publicly produce data supporting their favorite claim:
That red light cameras increase safety at intersections.
Repeated requests for statistical proof have gone unanswered.
What is verifiable is that red light cameras unfailingly arouse the ire of cornered drivers. With rare exceptions, they automatically are judged guilty, pay out hundreds of dollars that mainly are channeled to red light camera companies, a fraction goes to City Hall, the driver spends a full day in traffic school, and everyone except the driver leaves the scene with a smile, especially the camera suppliers.
The cameras have been thrown out of numerous communities.
