There are a lot more important things that you could be addressing instead of trying to implement more ways to grab money from Toledo citizens while they are already hurting from a world-wide pandemic. By only providing two days notice for this meeting is also lacking leadership and shows you really don't want to hear from the citizens of Toledo. I oppose this motion and believe I speak for the majority of the citizens in Toledo.
Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chillicothe and others have ended the use of these cameras through citizen initiatives. Columbus ended its program after the CEO of Redflex was convicted and imprisoned for federal bribery charges. This program seeks to do nothing more than establish revenue for the city. This is unethical and wrong, especially during a pandemic where government action has cost people their jobs and livelihood. The timing and presentation clearly demonstrate this issue is for revenue only.
The right for those accused of any crime to face their accusers is protected by both the 6th amendment of the US Constitution and the 10th amendment of the Ohio State Constitution. You cannot face a camera in court, nor should a camera carry the same judicial weight as sworn testimony of law enforcement as this ordinance would allow. Aside from the constitutionality of this ordinance, money and not safety is the main motivator here, and where money is the motivator corruption is sure to follow.
Is this the same company?
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/former-redflex-ceo-sentenced-30-months-corruption-awarding-chicago-s-red-light-camera
Doesn't look good is it is.
These cameras aren't for safety, they're in place to create revenue. If speeding is a safety issue then those violators should be pulled over to stop their wreckless behavior. We need to focus our efforts on bigger and better issues within the community
It over-penalizes the poor, with higher % of income fined, as well as drivers who travel all over the city as there work, like plumbers and electricians. Plus, is there data to suggest that these intersections are significantly safer because of the camera? Or, is this just a money grab?
The city itself has stated on the record numerous times that the cameras are a form of revenue for the city and no so much for safety. If this is truly a safety issue where are the statistics to back up the claims. Also why is the firm collecting the fees an out of state firm? How much of the fine stays local?
There are a lot more important things that you could be addressing instead of trying to implement more ways to grab money from Toledo citizens while they are already hurting from a world-wide pandemic. By only providing two days notice for this meeting is also lacking leadership and shows you really don't want to hear from the citizens of Toledo. I oppose this motion and believe I speak for the majority of the citizens in Toledo.
Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chillicothe and others have ended the use of these cameras through citizen initiatives. Columbus ended its program after the CEO of Redflex was convicted and imprisoned for federal bribery charges. This program seeks to do nothing more than establish revenue for the city. This is unethical and wrong, especially during a pandemic where government action has cost people their jobs and livelihood. The timing and presentation clearly demonstrate this issue is for revenue only.
The right for those accused of any crime to face their accusers is protected by both the 6th amendment of the US Constitution and the 10th amendment of the Ohio State Constitution. You cannot face a camera in court, nor should a camera carry the same judicial weight as sworn testimony of law enforcement as this ordinance would allow. Aside from the constitutionality of this ordinance, money and not safety is the main motivator here, and where money is the motivator corruption is sure to follow.
Is this the same company?
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/former-redflex-ceo-sentenced-30-months-corruption-awarding-chicago-s-red-light-camera
Doesn't look good is it is.
These cameras aren't for safety, they're in place to create revenue. If speeding is a safety issue then those violators should be pulled over to stop their wreckless behavior. We need to focus our efforts on bigger and better issues within the community
It over-penalizes the poor, with higher % of income fined, as well as drivers who travel all over the city as there work, like plumbers and electricians. Plus, is there data to suggest that these intersections are significantly safer because of the camera? Or, is this just a money grab?
The city itself has stated on the record numerous times that the cameras are a form of revenue for the city and no so much for safety. If this is truly a safety issue where are the statistics to back up the claims. Also why is the firm collecting the fees an out of state firm? How much of the fine stays local?
You can't face a camera in court. Stop violating our rights. The voters have told you this time and again.