One of the two camera setups at Queen and Geary serves as a frequent illustration for stories on photo enforcement of traffic laws.
In all the dialogue about Albany’s coming red-light and speed cameras, nobody mentioned House Bill 2095, passed by the Oregon legislature last spring. The new law, requested by the League of Oregon Cities, took effect Jan. 1 and expands the allowed use of photo radar.
For years, Albany was one of only 10 cities authorized to use photo radar under previous law but had not done so. The law change now allows all Oregon cities, even small ones like Tangent, to install photo radar cameras.
I mention Tangent because the town of 1,200 south of Albany told legislators that photo radar might help slow down traffic on Highway 99E.
Drivers take the highway through Tangent at speeds as high as 60 mph, which is dangerous to people crossing the road, according to City Manager Joe Samaniego.
“Using photo radar is an additional solution to reduce the number of drivers speeding through the City of Tangent,” Samaniego wrote in a letter submitted to the Joint Committee on Transportation before it approved the photo radar expansion. (Whether Tangent plans to install photo radar, I don’t know.)
Albany Police Chief Marcia Harnden also supported the bill.
“Automated speed enforcement is a key technology that allows us to monitor and enforce driving laws with our limited resources,” Harnden wrote to the committee. “This is particularly important in our school zones… We do not currently have the staff or resources to monitor and mitigate speeds in those school zones.”
She also wrote: “Passage of this bill will allow the City of Albany to have greater ability to improve safety in and around our schools and other areas where excessive speed creates an unreasonable danger to the community.”
In December, the Albany City Council authorized the police to contract for red-light and speed cameras in one school zone on North Albany Road. Other light and speed cameras are to be set up at Queen and Geary, Santiam and Geary, and Queen and Elm (also close to a school zone).
Harnden has not proposed photo radar in other school zones, but maybe that will come later.
The new law allows photo radar to be used around the clock. Before, speed cameras could be used only four hours a day.
One possible complication: The law allows photo radar to be used in school zones and residential areas. It allows the use “in other areas if the governing body of the city makes a finding that speeding has had a negative impact on traffic safety in those areas.”
The Albany council has made no such “finding” for any of the intersections, none of which are in residential areas, for which it authorized speed cameras last month.
On North Albany Road, people have wondered how the cameras can tell whether the speed limit is 20 mph, which it is from 7 to 5 on school days, or 40 mph at other times.
State law has a partial answer. It says that in school zones without a flashing light, like on North Albany, signs warning of speed enforcement “must … indicate that school is in session.”
Presumably that would require someone at the school or the police to switch on the sign when “school is in session” and turn it off at the end of the day. Does that sound likely or even feasible?
Commuters on that road will find out if and when the city goes through with what the council authorized last month. (hh)
One wonders if Harmden is a Huge 1984 fan!
Hasso, you are spot on!
Big DUBIOUS question Mark for N. Albany rd at the schools.
“Automated speed enforcement is a key technology that allows us to monitor and enforce driving laws with our limited resources,” Harnden wrote to the committee. “This is particularly important in our school zones… We do not currently have the staff or resources to monitor and mitigate speeds in those school zones.”
So what laws does she have staff or resources to monitor?
So why doesn’t the city put live surveillance cameras in higher crime prone areas? My guess is that while they might record criminal behavior, they wouldn’t make money for the city. Good for the citizens (if acted upon by the authorities), but not so good for the city (insufficient monetary returns).
Like college football or building zone changes, its all about the money. Note safety mentioned, but not revenue. Whole truth unacceptable. Like fees as opposed to taxes–no vote allowed. Who’s the fool.?
That raises racial profiling issues… I’ll let others dig deeper into that “can of worms”.
Several years ago The flashing light on N.A. Rd was operated by the school. It was on all year because “they did not want people to forget it was a school zone”. I contacted the Benton County Sheriff who investigated, read the law and forbid that practice. The school should not be trusted to manage the light.
Correction that was on Spring Hill Rd at Fairmont School
” It says that in school zones without a flashing light, like on North Albany, signs warning of speed enforcement ‘must … indicate that school is in session.’
Presumably that would require someone at the school or the police to switch on the sign when “school is in session” and turn it off at the end of the day. Does that sound likely or even feasible?”
I’ll suggest that no “manual” setting would be required. The sign on the pole would simply indicate hours of enforcement. Modern-day equipment is easily programmable. It would be set for those parameters remotely as to when & what speed the cameras operate…
Since this is going to cost the citizens dearly. I think it would be appropriate to let us know how many traffic incidents are required to utilize intrusive Speed Cameras.
How bad is the traffic in North Albany? How many tickets and incidents have occurred there in the last year?
I live there. It doesn’t seem justified to me. The bigger problem is when traffic backs up on a regular basis because of the bridge.
How will the cameras know when school is in session? Photos of alleged red light and speed violations are date and time stamped.
So if I get a ticket on an in-service day for going 40 mph, when the NAMS reader board says “no school,” it’s up to me to challenge the ticket by obtaining proof from GAPS that school was not in session at the time shown by the date and time stamp?
As a N. Albany resident who bike rides, walks, and drives throughout the district, I welcome an operating speed camera at N. Albany Road & W. Thornton Lake Drive — not only during school hours but also during off-school hours when many drivers in their SUVs and pickups regularly speed through the intersection at 45+ mph often tailing the car in front of them notably downhill from the Gibson Hill intersection roundabout. That is far too fast on a busy residential road. The 40 mph posted speed limit is too fast for N. Albany Road. Its not conducive or inline with the vehicle and traffic policies of the OR DMV. I’m not against driving fast (65-70+ mph) but I do this where it’s safest and sensible — on the freeway. On busy residential roads with houses, schools, pedestrians, and bicyclists speeds should not exceed 35 mph at any time. City of Albany Police, speed camera ticket away!
Each Camera generates $$$150,000 per year in ticket revenue.. and the Camera company gets $50,000 per Camera of taxpayers money. Win/win situation right?
It seems these cameras will have to write A LOT of tickets to pay for themselves. If you are ticketed it will likely raise your car insurance rate A LOT. The vendor that sells these cameras gets paid… was it $5000 a month? What a way to make money of the backs of the citizens of Albany.