Houston voters end red light cameras, stuck with 5 million dollar settlement

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Technically this is still not over, but it looks very likely the red light company will accept the settlement and remove the cameras. Although we have to kick and slash and claw, we can beat this leviathan called the police state.


Here's how the settlement breaks down. All told the company will get a little more than $5 million. The city already has $2.3 million of it in the bank. But the rest -- more than $2.7 million -- still has to be collected.

If the settlement deal passes a City Council vote this week the red light cameras will soon disappear. But so will a bunch of money from the city's bank account. On Monday, the mayor told us giving the red light camera company nearly $5 million to go away is worth it.

"They were claiming damages of $25 million. So a settlement for under $5 million is a good deal," said Mayor Annise Parker.



Kubosh is a Houston traffic attorney who led the petition drive to get the cameras taken down. His advice to the 25,000 people who still have outstanding red light camera tickets: Do nothing.

"There's nothing they can do to enforce it," Kubosh said.

While that's not entirely true, the city is pretty limited, and if scofflaws don't pay up, Houston taxpayers could be on the hook for as much as $2.7 million in tax dollars.

"People don't have a choice to pay fines. They owe the city money and we will collect on the amounts owed," Mayor Parker said.

Let's hope. In the meantime, the guy who started this whole fight isn't done fighting, even after those cameras come down since a federal judge threw out the referendum.

"Have we stopped the cameras? No," said Kubosh. "Any subsequent mayor can come down here, and contract in the future to rape and pillage the citizens financially."
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8516046

[Anti Federalist]

Good work

[roho76]

I would file a lawsuit against the members who voted for the cameras to be installed in the first place. Make them pay the 7.1 Million.

Want to stop tyrants? Make it personally damaging for them to legislate badly.

[Danke]

There are pretty strong groups in Texas that teach people how to get out of tickets. I'd imagine the camera ones are even easier. Could that be one reason they are abandoning them? hmmm.

[mosquitobite]

I would file a lawsuit against the members who voted for the cameras to be installed in the first place. Make them pay the 7.1 Million.

Want to stop tyrants? Make it personally damaging for them to legislate badly.

This.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

There are pretty strong groups in Texas that teach people how to get out of tickets. I'd imagine the camera ones are even easier. Could that be one reason they are abandoning them? hmmm.


Probably. Cops have been pulling people over and writing tickets like mad ever since Houstonians voted the cameras out. Obviously this was to make up for the $10 million shortfall created by removing the cameras. But, and this is kind of the suck part, since they have ramped up traffic tickets, they've realized they can just make more money doing that instead. Therefore, it is likely the cops will never back off and just keep uping their quotas.

I'd rather have the police state clear and present instead of quietly taking photos. People will more like rebel against it. Houstonians were lucky to have people like Kubosh who stepped up and brought this issue all the way to the ballot box.

[jkr]

the people who sell these systems for cities to use on their neighbors are parasites, kinda like a tape worm

[roho76]

the people who sell these systems for cities to use on their neighbors are parasites, kinda like a tape worm

Couldn't agree more. These people need to be publicly embarrassed in front of their piers.

Also, if you own a restaurant or a business. Stop serving public officials and embarrass them in front of all your other customers.

Death of the police state through public embarrassment.

[aGameOfThrones]

Now, those voted for this scam should go without pay.

[donnay]

There should be an investigation of politicians who receive lobbyist money from these people!

[Philhelm]

Couldn't agree more. These people need to be publicly embarrassed in front of their piers.

Also, if you own a restaurant or a business. Stop serving public officials and embarrass them in front of all your other customers.

Death of the police state through public embarrassment.

I find the guillotine to be quite embarassing. :D

[Romulus]

why didn't they just wait until their contract expired then not renew it?

[Bern]

Thanks for the update Nate.

[Lishy]

Am I the only one who supports cameras on stoplights? I thought we support freedom of cameras and all that if outside in public? Plus it makes me feel secure, and it helps investigate criminals we see in youtube videos.

That said, it's the establishment that is the problem. Not the idea of stoplight cameras!

[puppetmaster]

:)

[Pericles]

Am I the only one who supports cameras on stoplights? I thought we support freedom of cameras and all that if outside in public? Plus it makes me feel secure, and it helps investigate criminals we see in youtube videos.

That said, it's the establishment that is the problem. Not the idea of stoplight cameras!

After all, what woman wouldn't feel safer knowing that we can all watch her kidnapping, rape, and murder on video thanks to surveilence camers :)

[Keith and stuff]

How come Rick Perry doesn't push for a state law banning red light cameras? That's how we stop them in NH. I think even MA has a state law preventing them. Come on Rick Perry, I thought you were Mr. Conservative? Here is the state map if you want to compare, http://www.iihs.org/laws/cameramap.aspx New England and the Mountain West seem to have less of the cameras than other places while the Southwest seems to be the worst place.

[aGameOfThrones]

Am I the only one who supports cameras on stoplights? I thought we support freedom of cameras and all that if outside in public? Plus it makes me feel secure, and it helps investigate criminals we see in youtube videos.

That said, it's the establishment that is the problem. Not the idea of stoplight cameras!

http://i31.fastpic.ru/big/2011/1214/e1/8ff30d2f1b83aa7ac9c8ac688116b8e1.gif

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Am I the only one who supports cameras on stoplights? I thought we support freedom of cameras and all that if outside in public? Plus it makes me feel secure, and it helps investigate criminals we see in youtube videos.

That said, it's the establishment that is the problem. Not the idea of stoplight cameras!

You're right that it is not the actual camera that is the problem. It is the establishment and their use of cameras which violate the 4th Amendment. But since all the stoplights are owned by the state, how can you support the state here in it's unconstitutional activities?

[flightlesskiwi]

what makes me feel secure is excellent situation awareness and good aim.


Am I the only one who supports cameras on stoplights? I thought we support freedom of cameras and all that if outside in public? Plus it makes me feel secure, and it helps investigate criminals we see in youtube videos.

That said, it's the establishment that is the problem. Not the idea of stoplight cameras!

[Bern]

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Tuesday rebuked a lower court judge who had taken extraordinary measures to protect the red light camera program in Houston, Texas. A three-judge panel ruled that US District Court Judge Lynn N. Hughes erred last June when he blocked the organizers of an anti-camera referendum from participating in the court proceedings that Hughes used to nullify the election results (view ruling).

Houston had hired American Traffic Solutions (ATS) to operate issue red light camera tickets on the city's behalf through May 27, 2014. The program was one of the largest in the country until Francis and Randy Kubosh gathered enough signatures to place a charter amendment on the ballot banning automated ticketing machines. Voters approved the measure in November 2010.

Houston officials, who sought to keep the cameras running despite the vote, filed a lawsuit against ATS, which also sought to keep the cameras running. They brought the case before Judge Hughes, who has served along side the father of ATS General Counsel George Hittner for the past twenty-five years. Last year, Hughes insisted that he would be able to detect whether Houston made any attempt to lose the case to ATS intentionally and denied the right of the Kuboshes to defend their ballot measure. The appellate judges tore apart Hughes' reasoning, especially after ATS and Houston's lawyers sat together at the same table during oral arguments.

"There is no federal authority nor state law prohibiting intervention of right in this type of case," Chief Judge Edith H. Jones wrote for the appellate panel. "These intervenors are unique because they engineered the drive that led to a city charter amendment over the nearly unanimous, well funded, and longstanding opposition of the mayor and city council... They have raised substantial doubts about the city's motives and conduct in its defense of the litigation with ATS. Without these intervenors' participation, the city might well be inclined to settle the litigation on terms that preserve the adverse ruling on the charter amendment and thus preserve its flexibility to reinstate red light cameras in the future. This is no matter of simply defending city policy of one sort or another: it involves millions of dollars of revenue to city coffers during a period of considerable economic uncertainty."

The prediction that the city would rush toward an adverse settlement turned out to be correct. On Friday, the city agreed to settle with ATS for $4.8 million in a move that would allow the cameras to return at any time the city council chooses. The appellate court complained that it only recently had learned about this settlement "via the newspaper."

The appellate ruling focused solely on the question of whether the Kuboshes should have been parties to the litigation between Houston and ATS from the start. The panel ordered the issue should be reconsidered at a new trial where the Kuboshes would be able to defend their initiative. The appeals court signaled with their language that they did not share the view that the public vote merely meant "people in Houston want to run red lights," as Hughes said in proceedings on November 26. Instead, the court referred to the "haste of the litigation" that Judge Hughes placed "on a fast track" in a way that suited "the city's pecuniary motives." The sponsors of the initiative vowed Tuesday to ensure Houston officials can never bring back cameras.

"ATS just must have said to Houston, 'Whatever you do, do not allow the election results to stand,'" Citizens Against Red Light Cameras spokesman Philip Owens told TheNewspaper. "It ended today with the court ruling because the Kuboshes aren't going to stop until those election results stand. That's it for ATS. They lost."

A copy of the interlocutory ruling is available in an 85k PDF file at the source link below.
...

Source (with reference links): http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/36/3698.asp

[Sullivan*]

How come Rick Perry doesn't push for a state law banning red light cameras? That's how we stop them in NH. I think even MA has a state law preventing them. Come on Rick Perry, I thought you were Mr. Conservative? Here is the state map if you want to compare, http://www.iihs.org/laws/cameramap.aspx New England and the Mountain West seem to have less of the cameras than other places while the Southwest seems to be the worst place.
That map is BS. I live in Montana and there's cameras all over the place in the Helena area

[roho76]

why didn't they just wait until their contract expired then not renew it?

Probably because people want tyranny to stop immediately, not at the end of a contract.

[flightlesskiwi]

from Bern's post:
"ATS just must have said to Houston, 'Whatever you do, do not allow the election results to stand,'" Citizens Against Red Light Cameras spokesman Philip Owens told TheNewspaper. "It ended today with the court ruling because the Kuboshes aren't going to stop until those election results stand. That's it for ATS. They lost."

i cannot emphasize how vastly important to pay attention to what local "officials" are doing!!!

recently in my town after a group i'm involved with applied a negative referendum to an affordable housing ordinance, put the negative referendum to a vote and WON, the city PTB decided to take a look at the city charter 2 years earlier than required. why?? the main reason: to see if the negative referendum measure could be done away with or changed. fortunately, the council and mayors were advised that negative referendum is considered a free speech issue protected by the BoR.

i call all of this local stuff tyranny lite. so few people have been paying attention for such a long time that local "officials" are as brazen as the federal government.

[mrsat_98]

Now, those voted for this scam should go without pay.




I find the guillotine to be quite embarassing. :D

nawwwww to good for them.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/City-settles-suit-cameras-down-in-2-months-3160980.php


City Council approved a payout of at least $4.8 million Wednesday to settle a lawsuit and take down Houston's controversial red-light cameras, finally ending a legal battle that began after voters banned the devices in a referendum 15 months ago.

The cameras were turned off and outlawed by council in August but have remained mounted at 50 intersections while the city's camera vendor pursued breach of contract claims in federal court.

The settlement calls for the cameras to be taken down within 60 days.

suck it big sis.

[Feelgood]

http://i31.fastpic.ru/big/2011/1214/e1/8ff30d2f1b83aa7ac9c8ac688116b8e1.gif

Does this damn thing ever stop chewing? I have been watching now for 10 mins! :)

[Danke]

Does this damn thing ever stop chewing? I have been watching now for 10 mins! :)

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091029190236/uncyclopedia/images/9/9f/Chewing.gif

[QueenB4Liberty]

Hell yes!! :D

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Am I the only one who supports cameras on stoplights? I thought we support freedom of cameras and all that if outside in public? Plus it makes me feel secure, and it helps investigate criminals we see in youtube videos.

That said, it's the establishment that is the problem. Not the idea of stoplight cameras!


The problem is that the presence of red light cameras cause accidents instead of preventing them. Do you support cameras that cause car accidents?

[JK/SEA]

red light cameras today, high flying armed drones tomorrow...

wait...too late...sorry.

[DamianTV]

They find every way possible to soak the public for everything they are worth. Either Taxation by Citation, or putting the "Legal Expenses" on the public. The money lost from this settlement could have been much better used. Maybe build a Park?