Daily Archives: February 9, 2009

 

Yesterday a group of who watch Sioux Falls city government closely had lunch to compare notes and fellowship. We all kind of have our pet areas we watch.

 

I found out yesterday that the Event Center Task force still meets, and they have put NOTHING on hold. They still intend to push the legislature for a tax increase in 2010 to help build the Event Center. They also have decided on a location. They want to tear down Howard Wood and build it there, it is believed that Darin Daby from the School Board is on board with the idea.

 

Anyhoo . . .

 

The discussion switched gears to the red light cameras (something I am opposed to) when one guy in our group mentioned he challenged his ticket since he was a member of a national motorists club (they also oppose the cameras to). It all started after he got his ticket and contacted them. They provided him with a form so he could see if the cameras and lights were timed correctly, they were not. Something he brought up in his hearing. Also in his hearing the city engineer could not answer the timing question and the reason they gave why the cameras were put in was because of a lady being killed in that intersection. His response to them made total sense, “So the rest of us citizens are being punished for what one person did?” You can thank the Argus Leader for their media blitz about the death (she was an employee).  Though her death is tragic, and no disrespect is meant by me saying this, he is correct in his response. The person who was responsible for her death had their day in court and received punishment for the crime, so why are the rest of us being punished for it? After he told us the story, a fellow city-watcher was invited over to tell us about his class-action against the city for his ticket. He is the first person out of 19,000 tickets issued to sue the city over his ticket, and he has a good chance of winning.

 

Here’s some ‘Fun Facts’ about the camera that the public has NO clue about

 

–          Most motorist clubs oppose the cameras because they are deceptive. There is several lawsuits across the country challenging the cameras. The states usually lose and take the camera’s down. In Michigan they were forced to give the money to education, and once the state realized they were not getting a cut anymore, they took them down.

–          South Dakota State law states you can turn right on red as long as you stop first and yield. The city has NO authority to dictate that at any intersection.

–          The camera’s are timed to the nano-second and take the picture of the offender before they are supposed to. Motorist clubs have proven when cameras are timed this way, it caused the city to collect 50% more tickets and actually causes 50% more accidents. I guess people have seen city workers timing the cameras in the middle of the night (1 AM – 2 AM). If they are not doing anything deceptive, why do they do it in the dark of night?

–          If you get a camera ticket at the intersection it is a ‘civil’ offense, not a ‘criminal’ offense, because for it in order to be criminal, a police officer has to write the ticket. If you don’t pay the ticket the worst that will happen is the city will sue you in small claims court and have a judgement against your credit. This is wrong, because the city should not be able to disrupt your credit because of a traffic violation.

–          The independent counsel has a direct conflict of interest because they are hand selected by the city and they negotiate a fee they receive on every ticket that is paid. They basically are receiving a commission for everyone they get to pay the ticket.

If you are interested in joining the class-action, email me and I will give you the name of the lawyer representing it. Fb.art@sio.midco.net