Crime

Chesapeake’s New Red Light Camera

As Chesapeake begins its quest to join Virginia Beach as a photo-enforced city, I once again must question the need for red light cameras. Before I go further, let me say that I do not believe in their effectiveness. I think that increase the number of rear-end accidents at each intersection and I do believe that each jurisdiction uses them for a source of revenue and not to actually protect the public. You can’t really argue too much with the part about accidents increasing. VDOT’s own study in 2007 (The Impact of Red Light Cameras [Photo-Red Enforcement] on Crashes in Virginia) indicated that accidents increased at many Virginia intersections with red light cameras. True, they did reduce accidents at some, but the effectiveness is relatively unpredictable. The reason that I think that cameras are use for revenue rather than for safety: If it was truly about safety and the public was in danger, Police Departments would divert resources from other areas to fight the epidemic of red light running. A police-issued summons would add points to a driver’s license, a hefty fine and/or community service, and increased insurance costs for that individual. The impact of a camera-issued summons? $50. That is of course, if you choose to pay it. Thats the best part. By law in Virginia, you do not have to pay your ticket just because a ticket came in the mail. I discovered this recently in a Virginia Motorists Association article from 2009. Their article was commenting on an editorial at the time in the Washington Post. Basically, they cited two Virginia laws. The first, § 15.2-968.1, specifies how to send the summons. It says,

G. A summons for a violation of this section may be executed pursuant to § 19.2-76.2. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 19.2-76, a summons for a violation of this section may be executed by mailing by first class mail a copy thereof to the owner, lessee, or renter of the vehicle. In the case of a vehicle owner, the copy shall be mailed to the address contained in the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles; in the case of a vehicle lessee or renter, the copy shall be mailed to the address contained in the records of the lessor or renter. Every such mailing shall include, in addition to the summons, a notice of (i) the summoned person’s ability to rebut the presumption that he was the operator of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation through the filing of an affidavit as provided in subsection D and (ii) instructions for filing such affidavit, including the address to which the affidavit is to be sent. If the summoned person fails to appear on the date of return set out in the summons mailed pursuant to this section, the summons shall be executed in the manner set out in § 19.2-76.3. No proceedings for contempt or arrest of a person summoned by mailing shall be instituted for failure to appear on the return date of the summons. Any summons executed for a violation of this section shall provide to the person summoned at least 30 business days from the mailing of the summons to inspect information collected by a traffic light signal violation monitoring system in connection with the violation.

In other words, the city can send you a violation notice if you run a red light. It will be address to the registered owner. You can use the information contained on the violation to file an affidavit affirming that you were not the driver at the time of the violation. If you fail to pay or appear in court, the city must them serve a second summons. The next law tell the city how that summons must be served. § 19.2-76.3 says,

A. If any person fails to appear on the date of the return contained in the summons issued in accordance with § 19.2-76.2, then a summons shall be delivered to the sheriff of the county, city or town for service on that person as set out in § 8.01-296.
B. If such person then fails to appear on the date of return as contained in the summons so issued, a summons shall be executed in the manner set out in § 19.2-76. C. No proceedings for contempt or arrest of any person summoned under the provisions of this section shall be instituted unless such person has been personally served with a summons and has failed to appear on the return date contained therein.

That means that they have to physically serve you with a summons before you can be  fined for running the red light or for failing to appear. So what should you do if you disagree with the use of traffic cameras and you happen to run that red light? Forget about the violation. Chances are they wont serve you with anything. That costs a lot of money and cuts into the potential profits. If they do, its no big deal, just go pay the ticket.

Note: Running red lights is dangerous and you should never run a red light just in spite of it. Please, for the sake of everyone else, this is only for those times that you, say, don’t want to be rear-ended by the moron tailgating you three inches from your back bumper. Also, I have presented the text of the law for you to interpret and use as you see fit. While I have pointed out that the law requires the hand-serving of a second summons, my opinion does not constitute legal advice. If you want that, talk to a lawyer. Or, just don’t run red lights. If you do, it is your responsibility to know the law and to make appropriate decisions.

Downtown Garage Cameras

Image from PilotOnline.com

As you may already know, Downtown parking garages are getting cameras installed. I think that it is a great idea. The garages should have cameras. I do have a couple of concerns. My major concern is why they have clear domes? Everybody knows that a tinted dome on the ceiling is a camera. The clear dome simply allows would-be criminals to time their break ins to the camera. Whether you believe it or not, a car can be broken into and the criminal can escape in under 60 seconds. A few months ago, a couple of Downtown garages were hit by criminals that broke into cars and stole the GPS units out of the windshields. They would drive into the garage in a stolen car. They would drive slowly through the garage looking for GPS devices. When they found one, the passenger would exit the vehicle, smash the window, snatch the GPS, return to the car and exit the garage. Sometimes, they would hit three or four cars on the way out. They break-ins have stopped but more due to the increased diligence of patrolling police and security guards from Downtown buildings. This is not just Downtown, either. A similar thing has happened in garages in Portsmouth and at the Oceanfront. It has even happened in parking lots at malls such as Lynnhaven and Greenbrier, where you can see the flashing lights of security a mile away, making it easier to target, break-in, and get away without being caught. Crime knows no boundaries.

These cameras should have tinted or reflective domes. People would still know that they are cameras but they would not be able to see which direction they were pointed. This would deter crime. A criminal however, is just like any other businessman. A criminal will research opportunities, evaluate risk versus reward, and make his decision. The cameras and increased patrols, increase risk. In order to fight the other two factors (opportunity and reward), we have to make people realize that they cannot leave valuables in sight. A GPS is easily visible and would bring in $50 or so at a pawn shop. If people will lock their doors and hide all valuables from view, they criminal’s opportunity is greatly reduced. If you take valuables with you, you reduce the reward. Finally, keep your cars either clean or completely trashy. If you have a fairly clean car, something as simple as an empty bag on the seat or floor may look like it could contain something of value. If you have a car that is definitively trashy (like mine usually), a criminal would have to see something worth having before breaking in. Common sense and diligence is the only way to stop criminals who break into cars short of hiring your own security.

Cities Without Suburbs – A Book Review

Cities Without Suburbs - By: David Rusk

I recently finished reading a book by David Rusk called “Cities without Suburbs.” I highly recommend this book to everyone. The book argues in support of regional cooperation and/or consolidation of suburbs with their historically central cities. Going beyond your typical benefits of regional cooperation, this book explains, with evidence, that there are many benefits for regional consolidation of services. He thoroughly identifies the problems facing inner cities today including, increasing poverty rates, decreasing tax revenues, and the inherent problems with solving complicated social, transportation, housing, economic, and budgetary problems when cooperating with a number of municipalities. Using census data, he explains why cities that have expanded their boundaries to encompass their own suburbs have historically done much better than cities that are unable to expand their boundaries.These locked-in cities lose revenue, resources, and opportunities in the long run to their independent suburbs. This same reason is also why suburbanites fight consolidation/annexation. They believe that their suburbs are doing well and that they don’t want to take on the inner city’s problems. There are a couple of problems with this philosophy, however. First, history and statistics have shown that suburbs that are independent from their central city do not grow as fast as suburbs that are connected to their city. In fact, the average income for the entire region is lower for regions that are segmented versus those that are not. Second, when connected to their suburbs, central cities have fewer problems and the region as a whole has a lower crime rate and a better quality of life.

While I have always felt that a regional Hampton Roads would be a good thing, this book got me thinking that it should go further than that. It is certainly a step in a positive direction to have regional organizations. Certainly don’t get me wrong. Our current institutions such as HRT, SPSA, HRPDC, HRTPO etc all have their problems but when it comes down to it, they make certain things simpler for our area. Imagine if each city had to run its own bus service. You would have to transfer to another bus every time you crossed a city boundary. What if each city had to compete individually for transportation money from the state and federal government? You think we get shorted our share now? Despite current and planned or possible future regional entities, we still need to go further.

Let’s look at one thing that our region does. It may seem minor but think about it. Tourism. Our region has many great tourist attractions. From the Virginia Beach Oceanfront and Ocean Breeze to Colonial Williamsburg and Busch Gardens/Water Country and everything in between such as Nauticus and the Wisconsin, Hampton Roads has a lot to offer. Each city spends millions a year in tourism advertising money to attempt to attract visitors to patronize their respective city. While places like Virginia Beach and Williamsburg spend money to directly advertise their attractions, other places such as Chesapeake advertise to attract visitors to stay in their hotels, hoping to capture tourists’ shopping dollars at Greenbrier, etc. The reason this has to be done is because otherwise, Chesapeake makes no money off of Virginia Beach’s tourists. If our cities were one jurisdiction, however, things would be much different. We could combine our money to advertise for our regional attractions and the whole area would benefit. The area of Chesapeake would benefit just as much from tourists that came to Greenbrier as from those that never shopped west of Lynnhaven.

The same goes for transportation. Think of our major projects. The HRBT is a good example. As it stands, Hampton and Newport News want an expanded HRBT. Norfolk, however, is against it because the outcome on our side of the water would be destroyed properties. If we were one city, though, we would be much more likely to support it. An expanded HRBT would almost certainly be a catalyst for a better business climate on the Peninsula. Norfolk doesn’t really care about that. Hampton voters can’t vote for Norfolk’s City Council. As one city, the Peninsula’s economic climate would be Norfolk’s economic climate meaning that the expanded HRBT would benefit the city. Same goes for the Dominion Blvd. project. Peninsula, Norfolk and VB leaders can see how it is important to Chesapeake and the region overall. Secretly, though, they also know that Chesapeake residents are not their constituency. They can support Chesapeake’s project but at the same time they are obligated to do what is best for their constituency.

We can look at social issues. Public housing for example. First, current housing projects were built in Norfolk, Portsmouth, Newport News, and Hampton simply because the cities were there. Chesapeake, Virginia Beach, Suffolk and the counties of Hampton Roads did not have the capacity to support large scale housing projects at the time. Current housing policy no longer supports concentrated ‘projects.’ Studies have shown that everyone does better when the poor are dispersed throughout the middle class housing areas. This dispersion keeps the poor from feeling hopeless about their situation. Their income rates increase as does the pass rate for their school children. College attendance and graduation rates increase. Despite the objections by some middle class areas, the property values do not decrease and crime does not increase. In cities that are serious about this policy, overall crime rates tend to decrease and overall income averages go up. In our area, however, due to our segmented cities and therefore our segmented housing authorities, the residents of the current projects cannot be transferred to other cities using funds from their home city to pay the rent. This condition severely limits the ability of our housing authorities to successfully assist the poor residents of the housing projects. As one city, the authority could move residents freely around the region to make sure that they have the best opportunity to advance their situations.

I think that this can be accomplished with the right amount of public support. This will not be easy, however, and will take careful consideration to make a thorough proposal to the General Assembly (required for consolidation in Virginia). This will require public education and public input to make sure that all issues are addressed. I know that not everyone will support this but that is typical of any major proposal. I also know that if we could consolidate our area so that the central cities encompasses 60-75 % of our regional population that we would be a force to be reckoned with at the state, federal, and economic levels.

Anti-DUI Simulator

Great story and video by the Virginian-Pilot. Great initiative by the Virginia State Police.

http://hamptonroads.tv/hrtv.php?id=6688009

Hell Froze, I Agreed With… PETA

Michael Vick gets his own TV special? Really? Apparently BET is going to run a special entitled, “The Michael Vick Project” so that people can “really get to know [Vick] as an individual.” I know Vick. I have never met him, but I know him. ANYBODY who can stand there and watch two animals kill each other and call it entertainment should rot in jail. You can tell who a person is by the way they treat others, including animals. Don’t get me wrong, I am the farthest thing from a PETA nut as you can get. I enjoy my burgers and chicken nuggets. I do believe, however, that a domesticated animal such as a cat or a dog should be treated with the same respect as you would a neighbor. Once again, I would never buy sweaters for my dog or even buy a dog meant to wear a sweater, but I would certainly not leave my dog in a car on a hot day. If I was walking my dog and another dog attacked it, I would put myself in harm’s way to protect my animal t the best of my ability. Dogs fight viciously, going after each others neck, leading to the bloodiest, most painful death a dog could endure. Vick should not be on TV. He should not be in the NFL. If he had never gotten caught, he would still be doing it. I think that people should boycott anybody making money off of Vick, because, by doing so, they are capitalizing off of his fame built by dog fighting.