Pickerington puts brakes on red-light cameras
Thursday, March 5, 2009 12:07 AM
By Jim Woods
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Pickerington is stalled on installing red-light cameras.
The suburb appeared to be on the road to becoming the first central Ohio community outside Columbus to use cameras to ticket drivers who run red lights. Pickerington Police Chief Michael Taylor advocated the cameras, and the City Council, in a nonbinding first reading, voted 5-2 for them on Jan. 20.
But the council tabled the legislation, at first to allow City Manager Tim Hansley to sort out contract details with Redflex Traffic Systems of Scottsdale, Ariz. Councilman Michael Sabatino now opposes the cameras, narrowing support to 4-3.
Meanwhile, a group calling itself Citizens Against Red Light Enforcement has mobilized and will meet at 6 p.m. March 16 at the Pickerington Public Library, 201 Opportunity Way.
Doug Brown, a Pickerington resident who organized the meeting, said that if the city approves red-light cameras, he will circulate a petition seeking a referendum vote.
To make the ballot, a referendum would require the signatures of 595 registered voters, an official with the Fairfield County Board of Elections said.
Brown said he thinks the cameras are about generating more money for Pickerington, not improving safety.
T-bone crashes tend to decrease after red-light cameras are installed, but that is offset by an increase in rear-end collisions, Brown said.
Although some studies have shown an increase in rear-end collisions at intersections with cameras, Columbus found no such crashes six months after it installed them in 2006. In 2007, Columbus safety officials said all crashes at intersections with cameras were down 65 percent.
Pickerington's crash data show there is no need for the cameras, said Councilman Brian Wisniewski, who has opposed them from the start.
In 2008, there were 102 crashes on Rt. 256 at four intersections - including the I-70 interchange - with five of them caused by running a red light, Wisniewski said. All but one of those accidents occurred at I-70, where the Ohio Department of Transportation will not allow the city to install a camera.
Sabatino said that crash data convinced him that the red-light cameras aren't justified.
Other communities also are turning against red-light cameras. Last year, Cincinnati voters approved a charter amendment that prohibits the city from using them to detect traffic violations unless an officer is present.
Chris Finney, a lawyer who organized the Cincinnati charter effort, said he knows of efforts to remove red-light cameras in Toledo and Chillicothe.
Pickerington has proposed installing the lights at three intersections along Rt. 256: at Tussing Road/Rt. 204; at Refugee Road; and at Diley Road/Grandview Avenue.
jwoods@dispatch.com
Thursday, March 5, 2009 12:07 AM
By Jim Woods
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
Pickerington is stalled on installing red-light cameras.
The suburb appeared to be on the road to becoming the first central Ohio community outside Columbus to use cameras to ticket drivers who run red lights. Pickerington Police Chief Michael Taylor advocated the cameras, and the City Council, in a nonbinding first reading, voted 5-2 for them on Jan. 20.
But the council tabled the legislation, at first to allow City Manager Tim Hansley to sort out contract details with Redflex Traffic Systems of Scottsdale, Ariz. Councilman Michael Sabatino now opposes the cameras, narrowing support to 4-3.
Meanwhile, a group calling itself Citizens Against Red Light Enforcement has mobilized and will meet at 6 p.m. March 16 at the Pickerington Public Library, 201 Opportunity Way.
Doug Brown, a Pickerington resident who organized the meeting, said that if the city approves red-light cameras, he will circulate a petition seeking a referendum vote.
To make the ballot, a referendum would require the signatures of 595 registered voters, an official with the Fairfield County Board of Elections said.
Brown said he thinks the cameras are about generating more money for Pickerington, not improving safety.
T-bone crashes tend to decrease after red-light cameras are installed, but that is offset by an increase in rear-end collisions, Brown said.
Although some studies have shown an increase in rear-end collisions at intersections with cameras, Columbus found no such crashes six months after it installed them in 2006. In 2007, Columbus safety officials said all crashes at intersections with cameras were down 65 percent.
Pickerington's crash data show there is no need for the cameras, said Councilman Brian Wisniewski, who has opposed them from the start.
In 2008, there were 102 crashes on Rt. 256 at four intersections - including the I-70 interchange - with five of them caused by running a red light, Wisniewski said. All but one of those accidents occurred at I-70, where the Ohio Department of Transportation will not allow the city to install a camera.
Sabatino said that crash data convinced him that the red-light cameras aren't justified.
Other communities also are turning against red-light cameras. Last year, Cincinnati voters approved a charter amendment that prohibits the city from using them to detect traffic violations unless an officer is present.
Chris Finney, a lawyer who organized the Cincinnati charter effort, said he knows of efforts to remove red-light cameras in Toledo and Chillicothe.
Pickerington has proposed installing the lights at three intersections along Rt. 256: at Tussing Road/Rt. 204; at Refugee Road; and at Diley Road/Grandview Avenue.
jwoods@dispatch.com
