The Citizens of Murrieta Won! 

N – City of Murrieta
39/39 100.00%
Vote Count Percent


YES 15,682 57.14%
NO 11,763 42.86%
Total 27,445 100.00%

It appears there is going to be another lawsuit to attempt to void our vote!   ATS will not stop at anything to make millions off citizens. Tell city council we want them to listen to the citizens.  Please attend November 20th city council meeting at 6 pm.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 WE’VE GOT THE PROOF – RED LIGHT CAMERAS DON’T IMPROVE SAFETY

In Fact, They Decrease Safety

Click on Logo to go to Data Page

A DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF RED LIGHT CAMERAS ON INTERSECTION SAFETY IN MURRIETA, CA

  • Red light running collisions increased 120%
  • Rear End Collisions increased 325%
  • Broadside collisions increased 117%
  • ~ 12,000 tickets at almost $500 each; almost 4000 to Murrieta residents
  • Millions of dollars removed from our local economy
  • Thousands of valuable police man hours wasted
  • NO SAFETY IMPROVEMENT 

SEE THE PROOF http://banthecamsmurrieta.com/data.php

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

New ! Read the Safer Streets filing to see how much the camera companies donated to defeat the voters in Murrieta.

111921180-Safer-Streets-Filing[1].pdf 111921180-Safer-Streets-Filing[1].pdf
Size : 470.41 Kb
Type : pdf

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ATS PAID FOR ROBO CALLS TO MURRIETA RESIDENTS

Just got a ROBO call from Steve Flynn, the man who sued us to stop the red light camera petition from getting on the ballot.  The ending was.... sponsored by Traffic Safety Organizations and Paid for by major donor ATS.   Yes that is the camera company ATS.    They will not stop at anything!

VOTE YES ON N

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Deception and Lies

On November 6th, Murrieta voters will have the opportunity ban red light cameras from our city, something that residents in twenty-three other cities around the country have recently chosen to do. An astounding 73 percent of Anaheim voters said to get rid of them.

But red-light cameras mean big money for Wall Street backed camera companies like American Traffic Solutions (ATS), which makes millions of dollars running Murrieta’s red-light camera program.  This is why Murrieta residents have been subjected to a slew of sneaky tactics and fabricated safety claims from ATS’s local front organization, Safe Streets for Murrieta.

A widely distributed flyer from that organization shamefully exploits the deaths of accident victims by cruelly suggesting that red-light cameras would have saved their lives.  Each of the three instances cited in the flyer is heartbreaking, but the sad truth is that cameras would not have prevented any of the accidents. Deadly intersection crashes occur almost exclusively as a result of impairment, distraction, fatigue, or evading the police, not an attempt by drivers to rush the yellow light.  In one case, the collision was caused by a drunk driver who had a blood alcohol content more than 2.5 times the legal limit.  Another accident was caused by a distracted driver who was using a cell phone at the time.  The third was triggered by a 17-year-old unlicensed driver who didn’t even have a learner’s permit.

The camera industry’s cynical attempt to profit from such tragedies is unconscionable and anyone who engages in such tactics should be ashamed of themselves.

And the flier, from the company who sued citizens to prevent them from voting, is filled with other camera industry lies and distortions.  No, broadside collisions at camera intersections weren’t reduced by 66%.  According to the CHP Collision Database they increased by 125%.   Plus, at intersections with cameras, red light related collisions increased 120%, and rear end collisions increased 325%.  Meanwhile, red light related collisions at three nearby intersections without cameras went down 24%.  How can they claim cameras have improved safety when the collisions they’re supposed to prevent went up at camera intersections and down at non-camera intersections?

Their claim that in 2005 eleven people died in red light crashes in Murrieta is also a complete fabrication.  All eleven fatalities were caused by impaired drivers with almost half occurring on the highway, not on Murrieta city streets.  In fact, since at least 2001 there have been no fatalities in Murrieta where the primary cause of the collision was red light running.  That’s right, zero

Their claims about reducing red light violations from 5,100 per to 131 per month are nonsense too.  Do you really believe that happened?  What they’re doing, to fool you, is comparing apples and oranges and hoping you’ll fall for it.  Long before the cameras went in, the camera company estimated how many violations their ticketing cameras might potentially capture and they’re comparing that estimated number with the actual number of citations that were mailed in one low-violation month.  So here’s the truth: In the first full month of ticketing at each camera intersection, they issued a total of 197 tickets.  Years later, in July 2011 they issued 185 tickets, virtually no change.

Intersection safety is best served by implementing proven engineering solutions, such as lengthened yellow light intervals. For example, after adding one second to the yellows, Loma Linda saw its violation rate drop 92% and Fremont, CA cut violations by 75%.

Don’t fall for the camera industry deception.  Join me in voting “YES” on Measure N on November 6th.  Remove the red-light cameras and put true safety improvement measures in place that won’t cost Murrieta drivers the hundreds of thousands of dollars per year that the cameras do.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Yard sign available

Email  noredcamsmurrieta@verizon.net

We will deliver the signs to your home.

Ban the Cams in Murrieta

Vote YES on N

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ban the Cams Committee was formed to  fight for Safer Roads in Murrieta.  We discovered Red Light Traffic Cameras do not make our intersections safe but raise revenue for the city.   Our goal is toban the use of red light traffic cameras in the city through the petition process.   A simple solution to make the road safer is:

  1. Length the Yellow light
  2. Make a four way red interval
  3. Synchronize the lights
  4. Make traffic lights more visible
  5. Improve intersections for motorist

http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/yellow-lights

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Murrieta Red-Light Camera Initiative to Remain on Ballot

A three-justice appeals court panel ruled Tuesday that the Murrieta red-light camera initiative be allowed to remain on the November ballot.

 

Victory for the citizens!

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

More Proof that Longer Yellow Signal Times Reduce Red Light Running Violations

We’ve previously shown how and why longer yellow signal times reduce violations and improve intersection safety and that, contrary to the claims of red light camera advocates, drivers don’t adjust to the longer signal times. We now have additional, undeniable proof that we’re right and those supporting photo ticketing are wrong.

http://saferstreetsla.org/364/proof-longer-yellow-signal-times-reduce-red-light-running-violations/

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 California Cities Removed Red Light Traffic Cameras

Anaheim

Bell Gardens

Berkeley

Burlingame

Compton

Corona

Costa Mesa

Cupertino

El Monte

Emeryville

Fairfield

Fresno

Fullerton

 

Gardena 

Glendale 

Grand Terrace

Indian Wells

Laguna Niguel

Irvine

Laguna Woods

Lancaster

Loma Linda

Long Beach

Los Angeles 2011

Maywood

Montclair

Moreno Valley

Napa County

Orange

Redlands

Ridgecrest

Rocklin

Roseville

Paramount

Pasadena,

Rancho Cucamonga

San Bernardino

San Carlos

San Jose (photo radar)

San Juan Capistrano 

Santa Fe Springs

Santa Maria

Santa Rosa 

Union City

Upland

Victorville (partial shutdown)

Westminster

Whittier

Yuba

Yucaipa

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Please Support our supporters. Click on the  logo below.


This lizard maybe isn't so innocent either.In Sept. 2008 Warren Buffett, owner of Geico, invested $5 billion
in Goldman-Sachs which, later that month, invested $50 million in one of the leading red light cameras companies, ATS.

http://www.highwayrobbery.net/redlightcamsjoin.htm 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

HighwayRobbery.net 

Some cities pay three times as much as others!  In their initial contracts, nearly all cities agreed to pay about $6000 per camera per month.  But now many of those initial contracts have expired, giving cities the opportunity to negotiate a lower rate upon renewal.  Some cities have negotiated hard, and now pay significantly less than $6000, often less than half!  Examples:  Bakersfield $3133, Baldwin Park $2659, Davis $2500, Del Mar $1500, El Cajon $3344, Escondido $2833, Gardena paid $3500 and was even offered $60,000 to not cancel the program (go to their Documents page to see how they negotiated), Hawthorne $2800, Laguna Woods has been paying $3000 and in June 2012 was offered a $67,500 discount when they threatened to cancel the program, Montebello $2500, Oceanside $3052, Oxnard $2733, San Francisco $3434, South Gate $2800, Solana Beach $2225, and Ventura $1800.

Other cities have agreed to continue paying close to $6000!  Some are:  Emeryville $6000, Encinitas $5370, Fremont $4800, Glendale $5500, Marysville $5700, Modesto $5500, Newark $5700, Redding $4500, San Leandro $5200, San Mateo $4980, Santa Ana $5370, Victorville $6000.  One city (Murrieta) has even accepted a substantial increase in price.  Because the contracts can involve multiple cameras over a term of 60 months, the difference can amount to more than a million dollars.

Some cities have negotiated the ability to quit with little notice.  In 2010 RedFlex agreed to contract terms allowing Montebello and South Gate to end their contracts with only 30 days' notice, penalty free.  And in 2011 RedFlex agreed to a contract allowing the City of Napa to end its contract with only 10 days' notice, penalty free.  Other cities, such as Victorville and San Bernardino, have struggled, unsuccessfully, to escape from their contracts.

In June 2012 RedFlex offered the City of Riverside a $300,000 discount when their Public Works Director recommended the cancellation of the program.

RedFlex gave the City of Baldwin Park a $350,000 credit towards past camera rent, and a $75,000 credit during each year of the renewal term.

A possible explanation for the many failures to negotiate a good price would be that the police who do the negotiation have grown too close to their counterparts at the camera company.  A local newspaper obtained
emails revealing that in one city, the deputy chief responsible for negotiating the city's red light camera contract was asking the camera company about employment at the same time she was negotiating the contract, and the sergeant who ran the program was offering to assist the company with lobbying and marketing.

 

http://www.highwayrobbery.net/redlightcamslinksref.htm

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Camera Companies, in order of prominence in California, largest coming first -

RedFlex Traffic Systems, Inc. of Phoenix, AZ ( redflex.com ) is listed on the Australian stock exchange as RDF.  In early 2011 shareholders rejected a $304 million purchase offer from the Carlyle Group and the Macquarie Group.

ATS (American Traffic Solutions, atsol.com) is headquartered in Arizona (as is RedFlex), and is privately held.  The Sept. 2009 articles about ATS' purchase of Nestor indicated that before purchasing Nestor, ATS had contracts with 170 communities in 17 states.
Among the Nestor customers ATS inherited was the City of Santa Maria; on Nov. 24, 2009 the City announced that ATS had - "...against the City's wishes..." - terminated the contract, and would be removing the cameras within 30 days.  As of Aug. 2011 ATS had contracts with these California cities:   Capitola, Cathedral City, Cerritos, Covina, Davis, Millbrae, Murrieta, Pasadena, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Juan Capistrano, and South San Francisco.
In Sept. 2008 Warren Buffett, owner of Geico, invested $5 billion in Goldman-Sachs which, later that month, invested $58 million in ATS, for a 1/3 share.
In May 2011 ATS was in the news twice, once because of its heavy-handed use of Astroturf lobbying, which led to the suspension of one of its vice presidents.  Then, that same month it fired another VP and filed suit against him for (allegedly) "diverting opportunities away from ATS," while working for ATS.
ATS has a lot of lawyers, and they are top notch, smart, aggressive.  Any city council considering signing a contract with ATS should ask itself:  "Do we feel lucky?  Is our city attorney as smart as their attorneys?  Does our guy understand these contracts as well as they do?"  More reading:  See the Murrieta and San Bernardino Documents pages here at highwayrobbery.net, and also Google ATS and Houston, Texas and Bellingham, Washington.

http://www.highwayrobbery.net/redlightcamslinksref.htm

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________ Lawsuit to Stop the Petition to be placed on November Ballot  (6-7-2012)

We are being sued to stop the petition to Ban the Red Light Traffic camera petition from  the November ballot.  This is a critical lawsuit because it takes away the citizens right to petition the government.  

Read the lawsuit below:

TrcDocsMurrietaInitPet4WritAgainstFromJpgs.pdf TrcDocsMurrietaInitPet4WritAgainstFromJpgs.pdf
Size : 4990.263 Kb
Type : pdf

 Vote YES on N to remove the RED LIGHT TRAFFIC CAMERAS

November 2012 Murrieta Ballot to remove the Red Light Cameras!

Please donate to help us next year to purchase signs, banners etc to remove the Red Light Traffic Cameras. See Donate page.  Thank you!

________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

MURRIETA: Red-light camera petition validated

Enough signatures on petitions seeking to ask voters to decide whether red light cameras should be allowed in Murrieta have been validated to move the issue forward, Murrieta City Clerk Kay Vinson said.

City Council members will review the validated petition during the Nov. 1 council meeting, which is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at City Hall, 24601 Jefferson Ave.



Read more: http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/murrieta/article_87e96385-dc4b-5ac6-8112-54e571570109.html#ixzz1bnoPJrN0

______________________________________________________________________

MURRIETA: Red light camera ban petition submitted

A petition to ban red light cameras in Murrieta was submitted on Tuesday.

Murrieta resident Diana Serafin has spent the past six months collecting signatures in an effort to scrap the city's five-year-old traffic camera program. If the petition is successful, voters will decide in November 2012.

read more http://blogs.pe.com/news/digest/2011/09/murrieta-red-light-camera-ban.html  __________________________________________________________

MURRIETA: Petition to ban red-light cameras submitted 

A resident submitted a petition to the Murrieta city clerk Tuesday with more than 6,350 signatures in support of an election asking voters if they want to ban red-light cameras in the city.

The signatures, gathered by resident Diana Serafin, will be delivered to the Riverside County registrar of voters office.

Serafin's signatures filled nearly 340 pages, and the names were counted twice by a five-member team from the city clerk's office.



Read more: http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/murrieta/article_b2adda04-9fae-5e28-8037-d26881b8d727.html#ixzz1YgywVOkr

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Freedom of Information document from City of Murrieta.  Our taxes at work.  Taxpayers paying twice for the Cameras - Tarp bailout of Goldman Sachs, who bought ATS and the $290,099 for the program. 

 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The City of Murrieta has four Red Light Cameras, three on Murrieta Hot Spring Road and one on Clinton Keith and Nutmeg.  The City Council voted to add 2 more cameras on Murrieta Hot Springs, one at the 215 freeway intersection and one at the 15 freeway entrance.

A ticket can cost a person between $471 . If you attempt to defend yourself in court and lose, it will cost you $768.

Our goal is to stop Taxation by Citation in Murrieta CA.

If a Red Light Camera ticket is issued, one cannot fight it in court.  The courts in Riverside have decided the camera picture is proof you are guilty.

We all know camera videos can be manipulated.  Other concerns is how often is the equipment calibrated, maintained or replaced. 

The taxpayers of Murrieta are paying over $6000 a month rental for each camera.  The taxpayers, then may receive a ticket from the cameras they are paying for.    What a scam!

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Pros and Cons

Pros

• City raises needed revenue
• Cameras can determine who caused accident if it is a streaming video.
• Reduce traffic Police Officers
• More tickets can be issued per hour."A police officer can write about three tickets in an hour,"

 

Cons

• Taxation by Citation – Cities need money!
• Increase accidents - Rear end accidents up 60%
• Does NOT stop accidents
• Fines about $500 plus court costs & traffic school
• Cannot defend yourself  legally in court - Guilty by Picture?
• Denial of Due Process – 6th amendment – cannot confront camera company
• Guilty until proven innocent – pay fine first court second
• Mega Lawsuits against for profit camera companies & cities
• Data Manipulation
• Illegal contracts in California
• Illegal tickets issued

•  No standards/ no calibration – violates state law
•  Snitch tickets no court location
•  Cities & camera companies profiting – out of state
•  Green, Yellow & Red lights shortened
•  Hurts local businesses
•  Blinding Flash (3 seconds blinded)
•  Invasion of privacy - Big Brother watching
•  Creates distrust and animosity for local officials
•  Misidentification – Who’s picture?  Take the 5th  amendment
•  Points on your record
•  Insurance goes up
•  Cannot catch drunk drivers
•  Cannot catch unlicensed drivers
•  Cannot catch unregistered cars
•  Cannot catch uninsured drivers

 Ban the Cams in Murrieta.

 

 

 

 

This free website was made using Yola.

No HTML skills required. Build your website in minutes.

Go to www.yola.com and sign up today!

Make a free website with Yola