Big Turnout At Pre-Bid Meeting For Speed Camera Contract
About 50 people listen as CDOT representatives outline speed camera program at pre-bid contrat meeting Tuesday
All the big names were there.
Redflex, RedSpeed, Gatso USA, American Traffic Solutions, Optotraffic–and other heavy hitters of the automated traffic enforcement industry–were sitting quietly in Conference Room B waiting for the meeting to begin.
About 50 people representing these, and other potential subcontractors considering a bid to become a vendor for Chicago’s speed camera enforcement program, showed up on the 4th floor of City Hall Tuesday morning to get more information about the contract.
In a nearly packed room, the meeting began with some clarifying words from Joseph Chan from the Department of Procurement and Contracts and then some background on the speed camera plan by Larry McPhillip from the Chicago Department of Transportation.
“Child safety is our primary goal,” said McPhillip before giving attendees the Cliff’s Notes version of the city’s vision for their speed camera program, state law and the city’s municipal code.
Lots Of Questions, Some Answers
A question and answer period followed but got off to a slow start. After a few seconds of uncomfortable silence reminiscent of the first day of high school, one or two brave souls got the ball rolling with a question or three. Once the tension in the room broke, a flurry of queries from attendees began peppering the representatives from CDOT and Procurement who were on hand for about an hour.
Questions covering the gamut of subjects related to this multi-million dollar contract with potentially 300 enforcement locations around schools and parks, included such scintillating topics such as signage requirements, pavement striping, permitting, wireless connectivity and enforcement technology preferences.
More interestingly, questions surrounding the “short list” provision of the bid specifications were answered by CDOT’s Scott Kubly. He explained that once the bids were submitted, a few of the leading vendors would be asked to pilot their technology at up to two locations to see how their equipment performs over a 30 day trial period before a final vendor was selected.
School Zone Confusion
But a good portion of the discussion centered around the potentially sticky area of issuing violations for school zone violations.
In a marked school zone, drivers must slow down to 20 mph during the hours school is in session and when children are present.
The normal speed limit of 30 mph is enforced until a child becomes present within the zone, where the speed limit, according to the law, immediately drops to 20 mph.
But what is the definition of “present” mean? Does the school zone speed limit apply when school is out? How will the vendor know when school is out or in? Does the speed limit drop around parks or just around schools?
What is the definition of a “child” for the purposes of enforcement?
According to CDOT’s David Zavattero, “a school age child is general someone under 18 years old.”
Challenging Technological, Legal Issues Pop Up
So how will the vendor, using only video, distinguish between youthful adults who look like children and mature looking children who appear to be adults?
“Because judgment is involved, this is a grey area,” answered Zavattero. “It is up to the vendor to identify whether someone may be school age. Ultimately it will be up to a hearing officer (to make that determination if the violation is contested.)”
“The ordinance certainly has some challenges when it comes to enforcing the law,” says Charles Territo, Vice President of Communications for American Traffic Solutions. “There are several issues we have to work through. This is one of the issues the Chicago Police Department and presumably the Attorney General will have to provide guidance on.”
But Territo, who’s firm operates over 300 automated traffic enforcement programs nationwide, sees the real burden of determining whether a child is present in or near the intersection for the purposes of issuing a violation falling on the shoulders of local law enforcement.
That’s because, according to state law and city municipal code, after the vendor identifies a potential violation, a Chicago Police officer will then review video before a violation is issued.
“The ultimate review will be by the police department and they’ll be responsible for determining whether a violation occurred,” explained Territo.”
Will Clout Cloud Bidding Process?
Earlier in the year, when details regarding Chicago’s speed camera enforcement program were being revealed, there was some worry that Greg Goldner, a political ally of Mayor Rahm Emanuel and who’s consulting firm lists Redflex Traffic Systems as a client, would use his relationship with Emanuel to give his client a leg up in the bidding for the speed cam contract.
Seemingly, based on Tuesday’s turnout, Goldner’s relationship with Emanuel has done nothing to deter other potential vendors from participating in the bid process.
Kubly was impressed with the attendance.
“There’s a lot of excitement about this within the industry,” said Kubly. “It’s a program that will have a lot of attention focused on it.”
“I think the process has been very fair, very transparent–we as a company are looking forward to the opportunity to participate,” said Territo. “The city sees how important it is to have an open process. The testament to that is the number of people who have attended the meeting. If that perception was different, you’d have a much different turnout.”
Final bids for Chicago’s speed camera enforcement program are due on August 9th.
There has never been a system of this type installed and operated anywhere in this country or any where else in the world ever before. There appears to have been no discussion of testing standards, training parameters, accuracy certification or technology accuracy so the drivers would have half a chance of a fair chancet. This makes red light cameras compared speed cameras seem like silly putty versus cast iron. The city nor the camera vendors do not have the technology experience to carry this off they shooting at dream targets with no firm plans or technology,to carry it out. But Chicago motorists will be the ones paying for experimentation, testing, errors and mistakes.
I smell various lawsuits popping up with speed cameras. At least with red light cameras, you either passed the intersection on green or yellow and if it was red then you get a ticket.
With speed cameras, there are too many variables such as if the location is close enough, are those students or adults, and the flow of traffic. If everyone is doing thirty mph then doing twenty isn’t safe.
I also laugh because, will the city want an increase in truancy because those kids hanging around schools or parks could potentially make money for the city by being outside of school but perhaps in protected zones. Bad kids could make money for the city.
Mike,
Holy crap! You’re right!
Doc…actually there is a system like this in another country..
In the UK.
Britain uses speed cameras to enforce and ticket speeding violations.
But they have a pretty liberal approach to them…they also tend to get burned up by people with petrol doused tires.
The Netherlands, Germany and France have Speed Cameras as well.
Drew,
In reference to European speed cameras, there does seem to be somewhat of a backlash going on.
In the UK, many towns are shutting down their speed cameras–there are less and less being used every day there.
Not sure if this is the case in the rest of Europe, but I do know of the vandalism aimed toward the cams there.
From my recollection, that violent anti-camera behavior has not occurred here in the U.S. (at least to the same degree) as it has on the other side of the Atlantic.
But who knows.
My question about speed cameras has always been: How does anyone – including the ALO – know the cameras were working properly at the time?
With red light cameras, there are photos and videos. But other than come kind of computerized radar system, how do you know its accurate. At least when you go to court for a speeding ticket, the judge asks the cop if he tested the camera before his shift. Of course, the cop is never going to say he didn’t, but at least he has to go on record as saying it was working and accurate. Where is the confirmation that the equipment is working accurately in the speed camera situation?
For the record, Automated Traffic Enforcement Systems have included speed enforcement for a number of years (2008ish nationwide)and most state laws require the operators, be they vendors or law enforcement agencies, to calibrate the system at the beginning of each operational day.
Typlically, these camera systems include either radar or ladar as prescribed by state statues. Radar and Ladar devices have been the staple of speed detection for decades and are widely accepted as both reliable and accurate. Regular Calibration is critical to the accuracy and proper operation of any technical instrument, the same here is true.
The Red Lite Doctor brings to “light” – no pun intended” a very good point that “There has never been a system of this type installed and operated anywhere in this country”. He is correct, what the City of Chicago desires is a camera system capable of detecting pedestrians in all directions within approximately 250 feet of the camera system. This in itself would be “revolutionary” and a break from the traditional deployment of a speed camera but in addition not only do they want 3 phonographs of the violation, which is the norm as required by most State Statues but, they also are requesting supporting lived action video for a duration of 12 seconds to accompany the photo – but of violations ONLY.
The “doctor” is right! This will be the FIRST of its kind. It’s a very aggressive request, but in understanding what the City desires are and the knowledge of the available technologies it’s completely doable and I would suggest it’s more than a speed camera program, its truly a public safety initiative – good child or not… young adult or big kid… the streets of Chicago will be safer.
Brutus,
You bring up some good points and insight to this issue.
But, I am not convinced the speed cameras will automatically (no pun intended) mean an increase in safety. It may.
Red light cameras, in my opinion, have had no effect on safety here in Chicago. Some would argue they’ve made intersections less safe. I won’t make that argument.
If you watch city policy on these enforcement issues over time, I don’t see how you come to any conclusion except that automated enforcement is more about revenue than safety.
Considering all the studies that show by extending yellow light times, red light running dramatically decreases. And that the city literally fights, fights any attempt to extend yellow light times, one cannot come to any conclusion that Chicago cares more about revenue than the safety of its citizens.
I am skeptical of the speed cams. But, I will try to keep an open mind. No matter what, I am very curious to see how some of this speed cam technology works and will be watching the deployment very carefully.
Thanks for the input Brutus.
Greg,
I worry about calibration too.
This is one of many questions which will need to be resolved over time. My skepticism remains strong.
That entire dog and pony show is a waste of time. Rahm’s buddy’s company has already been selected. They just have to go through these motions to give the appearance of competitive bidding.
With all the reserved zone parking, the new meter system, and the red light cameras I am finding going into Chicago proper just isn’t worth the hassle and risk. The speed cameras are only going to make it more so. I can’t be the only one who has just naturally dropped off bothering to go into the Chicago to do things and spend money because of these revenue grabbing hassles.
Anyway… these special enforcement zones were designed to cover nearly the entire city and they do. I see no other solution than to drive ~15mph pretty much everywhere. Don’t for instance think those speed cameras are going to be well calibrated. They are often in error all over the world. After all, the driver can’t prove he was actually just under the magic number. 5 under plus the need for the ticketing to be at least 6 over (as I recall) should be enough buffer zone.
I haven’t re-read the law recently, but I fear that the city will find a way to apply these cameras to the interstates where the big money is.
Lets see how transparent the location of all the cameras are when this is implemented. I can bet they will place more than 70% of the camera’s north and northwest side. Lets think of why it would be, vandalism would be low and drivers will pay fines. I hope someone will say the southside school zones/children are just important too or is this just for the revenue Mr. Mayor.
Oh look.. Another money grab.. Automated enforcement systems like this have been proven to cause more harm than good and only provide $$$ to the people that have buddies in the system. Seems like we ditched own gangster and replaced him with another.