- Connect
- Login
- Print Subscription
|
Welcome,
| |
| |
- Most Commented
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- Most Emailed
- Popular
- Popular
« News Home
Youngstown police chief seeks traffic cameras near schools 
The cameras would not be utilized to make money, a city councilwoman says.
YOUNGSTOWN — Traffic cameras could be in use by the city as soon as early next year to catch speeders near schools and possibly in other parts of Youngstown in the future.
City council members support a proposal from police Chief Jimmy Hughes to make a deal with a company to place cameras by schools.
“We want to utilize them to reduce crime and increase safety,” Hughes said.
ACS Government Solutions, a Washington, D.C., company, gave a presentation Wednesday to council’s safety committee about its traffic cameras. Sometime this month or in December, officials from two other companies will propose the city use their services.
The cameras would film vehicles driving by schools — Youngstown State University is not included — and monitor the speeds of motorists in school zones, said Councilwoman Annie Gillam, D-1st and safety committee chairwoman, and Councilman John R. Swierz, D-7th, a committee member.
“It’s basically for safety,” Gillam said. “This is not a money thing. This is a safety thing.”
The cameras could be operating during the first three months of 2010, if everything goes smoothly, Swierz said.
There haven’t been many accidents on and/or near school grounds, but there are problems with speeders in school zones, Gillam, Swierz and Hughes said.
“There may not be accidents, but there is speeding going on” by schools, Swierz said.
If the city moves ahead with the traffic cameras, it would receive about 65 percent to 75 percent of the revenue generated from speeding fees with the company selected receiving the rest, Hughes said.
Those caught speeding on camera wouldn’t be charged with a moving violation; it would be considered a civil matter, he said.
The company chosen by the city wouldn’t charge a fee for Youngstown to use the cameras, Hughes said.
Besides the revenue split, other issues would need to be resolved before a company could be hired.
They include: the fine amount, how fast a motorist could go over the speed limit to be in violation, where the cameras would go, and would they be stationary or moved around, Hughes and the council members say.
Proposals for traffic cameras in Warren and Niles were made and never implemented largely because of residents’ opposition.
Girard used a mobile camera in 2005, suspending the practice in mid-2006 pending a court ruling on whether it was legal to use it. The judge ruled in the city’s favor, but Girard didn’t bring back the camera.
“There has been controversy,” Swierz said of traffic cameras. “We aren’t looking at this as a money maker. But if you don’t speed, you won’t get a ticket.”
Gillam said she opposes using the cameras in any other location but by schools.
But Swierz and particularly Hughes are interested in expanding their use. Swierz is open to using cameras in places with many vehicular accidents.
Additional cameras could help police solve serious crimes if they tape criminal activity, Hughes said. “We hope to utilize them at special events and hot spots” for crime, he said.
“We can gather intelligence on other crimes. It may record information about a murder or other serious crimes.”
- Requires free registration.
Comments
Revenue Raising at it's best. Tell the Y-town council NO NO NO! Cameras are never about student safety - it's all about revenue raising. Just ask Cleveland and Akron how much revenue they get from their cameras.
Well since you know why don't you tell us??
I would agree that setting traffic cameras,to catch speeders is all about revenue,but not in school zones.Have you ever watched people driving,through school zones.People speed,they don't care about children crossing the street,this is a great idea to protect children.However I'm sure that Youngstown will move the cameras to other locations,to catch speeders,that is what I disagree with.
If it's not about the money, why don't they take the fees the cameras generate and give them to the schools, or a youth organization, or something?
Of course it's about the money!
It's totally about the money.
Why? Because if they HAD the money and they weren't concerned with bringing in more, then they would have a Youngstown cop stationed somewhere in the vicinity of each school specifically for the purpose of catching speeders.
Hm, but they've got to go to the alternative, because it's cheaper out of their pockets and it's a quick way to make some cash.
Can't they pull a few cops from the circle K on mahoning and have them patrol the schools?
If it is not about money, donate the proceeds to the schools.
Another example of something that is widely, widely accepted in other parts of the country being a source of controversy for people in the Valley. Stories/comments like these remind me of that movie "Pleasantville," where this whole town is stuck in the '50's...not all that pleasant, though, is it?
JeffLebowski, PERFECTLY said........
For safety's sake lets put cameras at all the crack houses and ticket the customers .
most cities give a 30 day notice from the time the cameras are installed to when they will begin issuing citations
Where is the due process?? You're filming a vehicle, not the driver.....how do you prove who was driving? If I'm going to be sited, you need to prove I was the one operating!
Real Simple - If you don't speed through a school zone then you have nothing to worry about.
what youngstown police chief needs to do in youngstown. is put up cameras on the streets of all these drug houses in youngstown. maybe that will help with some of this crime going on what dumb a idea to come up with chief and council members you all should be voted out of office
No, Lifes2Short, it's not that simple. The camera can malfunction. It can take a picture of two cars, one of which is speeding and one that is not. In a still picture, how can you tell which is which? The problem is, with the camera, you're assumed to be guilty until you prove yourself innocent. How is that even legal (aside from the fact that money talks)?
Cameras do nothing about drunk drivers, cellphone-blabbing drivers (aka the new drunk drivers), expired plates, wanted criminals, . . . none of that. They can all drive past the camera in complete security - as long as they don't speed. They're no more about safety than the man in the moon.
BTW - what ever happened to those gunshot recording devices the city was supposed to buy, that would "deter crime" by informing the cops when someone fired a gun, and triangulating where the gunshot came from? Are they keeping us safer yet, or did the city come to its senses on that particular fantasy?
Well write/email/call these cities and ask them how they do it and if its legal and if it cut down on driving recklessly through a school zone and how it benefit the children. And if you want, I can get more cities on this list......
And also, well your at it, ask other cities how they deter crime in there cities (and hopefully it won't shock you, but there is crime in every city in every state) and what avenues they keep the cities crime free. (And if you do find such a city or city's, please let me know, because I would be there in a heartbeat).
Traffic Cameras in School Zones
Seattle
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/lo......
Lynnwood
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/2009061......
Bellevue
http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/east_king/be......
Gaithersburgh, Rockville, etc
http://www.gazette.net/stories/082907/mo......
and on and on....
Lifes2Short....I don't condone speeding or reckless driving in a school zone, but I do not agree with these cameras for the reasons I stated. Also, having lived near a school zone (Wilson) the kids walking to and from that area were juvenile punks that would dare cars to hit them. They would purposely walk in traffic and in front of cars. I'm surprised more kids weren't injured because of their antics!