Citrus Heights Docs - Main Page - Red Light Cams

RED LIGHT CAMERAS

www.highwayrobbery.net

If you haven't already done so, please read the Citrus Heights section on the Camera Towns page.

City of Citrus Heights Documents

Some of Citrus Heights' tickets can possibly be ignored. If your "ticket" does not have the Superior Court's name and address on it, it is what I call a "Snitch Ticket." For more details, see the Snitch Ticket section on the Your Ticket page.

Do you live in the South end of Alameda County or the North end of Santa Clara County - State Sen. Ellen Corbett's former District?

In late 2014 Sen. Corbett termed out, and was replaced by this person

Wieckowski, Author of the anti-motorist bills SB 246, SB 1 and AB 666

who will be running for re-election to the State Senate in 2022 if his run for Congress doesn't work out.

Please don't vote for him for Congress in Nov. 2020.

Send him back home to his bankruptcy law practice.

As of 2019 he still is in the State Legislature in Sacramento and is author of SB 246 of 2019 (had it passed it would have added a 10% tax to each barrel of oil).

He was co-author of SB 1 which raised gas tax and car registration fees beginning Nov. 2017 and which was the subject of an attempted repeal, by Prop. 6 on the Nov. 2018 ballot.
In 2013 he was the author of AB 666 which - had it passed - would have increased the number of red light camera tickets.
Before reaching the Legislature he was a member of the Fremont City Council, and during his time on the council he approved two extensions of Fremont's contract with RedFlex: He was the maker of the 2005 motion to extend the contract to 2010, and in 2010 he made the motion to extend the contract to June 2017.

The City may need to refund a number of tickets issued after Aug. 1, 2015, as it appears it may have missed the deadline to set longer yellows at some of its camera enforced intersections. See Set # 5, below.

Two new cameras were added in July 2017. See Set # 4, below.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 1
Ticket Counts

Total Violations, Notices Printed [4]

New 11-5-10, updated 2-4-20

Cam #	ANGG 01	AUAN 01	AUGR 01	AUGR 03	GRFS 01	GRPA 01	GRSU 01	SJGR 01	SU0A 01	SUOA 03
CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS RED LIGHT CAMERA PROGRAM	Wbd Ante- lope at Garden Gate	Nbd Auburn at Antel- ope	SWbd Auburn at Green- back [9]	Nbd Auburn at Green- back [10]	Ebd Green- back at Foun- tain Square	Ebd Green- back at Park Oaks [10]	Ebd Green- back at Sunrise [9]	Sbd San Juan at Green- back	Nbd Sunrise at Oak	Sbd Sunrise at Oak	[3]	Violations Recorded/ Notices Printed (excluding new cams added in July 2017) Per Official Monthly CMR Reports [1] [4]	Avg. Notices Printed (all cam- eras)	Total Citations Issued as % of Events Re- corded (all cameras)	Total Violations Recorded/ Notices Printed (all cameras) Per Official Monthly CMR Reports [1] [4]	Total Citations Issued/ Rolling Right Citations (all cameras) Per CVC 21455.5(i) Annual Reports [11]	Revenue from Court (thou- sands) [13]
Jan08
Feb08
Mar08
Apr08
May08
Jun08					[6]			[6]
Jul08															561 260
Aug08															689 269
Sep08
Oct08	[6]	[6]							[6]	[6]
Nov08															1583 685
Dec08															1599 676
2008
Jan09															1373 701
Feb09
Mar09
Apr09															2066 712
May09
Jun09
Jul09															1161 637
Aug09
Sep09
Oct09															1049 552
Nov09
Dec09
2009 [2]															7806 (proj.)
Jan10													527		670 375
Feb10													527
Mar10													527
Apr10													527		831 518
May10													527
2010 9 Months [8]	888 544	1120 608			499 248			4188 2458	930 508	603 379					8195 4745
Jun10													527
Jul10													527		1121 662
Aug10													527
Sep10													527
Oct10
Nov10
Dec10
2010 [2]															6324 (proj.)
Jan11	70 44	333 149	0 0		49 29		0 0	1438 331	231 112	54 34					2175 699
Feb11
Mar11															2141 629
Apr11															2285 710
May11
Jun11
Jul11	109 57	297 111	0 0		33 10		0 0	1452 292	233 119	68 33					2192 622
Aug11
Sep11															2059 664
Oct11	109 80	370 143	0 0		46 30		0 0	1324 266	260 126	61 32					2170 677
Nov11
Dec11
2011 [2]															8002 (proj.)
Jan12															1774 531
Feb12															1833 528
Mar12
Apr12															1923 516
May12
Jun12
Jul12	105 71	239 86	0 0		60 24		0 0	1293 325	288 176	50 29					2035 711
Aug12															1991 682
Sep12															1855 529
Oct12															1546 437
Nov12			NEW [9]				NEW [9]								993 326
Dec12	42 24	- -	0 0		55 40		0 0	791 209	- -	- -					888 273
2012 [2]															6029 (proj.)
Jan13	70 46	0 0	331 248		31 17		52 25	981 209	0 0	0 0					1465 545
Feb13	69 49	- -	689 235		43 28		132 72	801 193	- -	- -					1734 577
Mar13			765 208				184 107								2119 632
Apr13			743 226				195 90								2196 650
May13			1490 396				11 4								2764 760
Jun13			1450 339				154 54								2928 816
Jul13	106 69	0 0	1983 368		56 27		638 170	983 194	68 44	49 37					3883 909
Aug13	120 83	0 0	1227 214		79 39		908 350	829 184	94 58	105 73					3362 1001
Sep13	95 60	0 0	1033 257		65 41		967 403	884 176	120 45	95 60					3259 1042
Oct13			1124 257				591 332								2883 927
Nov13			1056 230				190 84								2367 629
Dec13			941 216				79 41								2290 628
2013 [2]			12832 3194				4101 1732							29%	31250 9116	4389 2943
Jan14			604 143				270 104								2137 608
Feb14			383 127				210 73								1694 470
Mar14			1383 219				189 101								3034 716
Apr14	88 59	157 46	629 219		69 34		593 225	1011 131	69 39	93 66					2709 819
May14			489 175				610 236								2661 816
Jun14			613 149				549 176								2702 695
Jul14	97 52	97 7	644 97		84 25		388 131	1094 76	72 28	113 74					2589 490
Aug14			618 157				483 250								2379 726
Sep14			505 130				510 237								2501 757
Oct14	118 85	253 74	601 260		79 50		452 236	1004 169	83 39	110 84					2700 997
Nov14			445 186				295 167								2045 830
Dec14			493 179				348 212								2209 848
2014 [2]			7407 2041				4897 2148							30%	29360 8772	4317 2379
Jan15	121 96	159 44	460 181		73 47		340 194	727 123	101 72	85 58					2066 815
Feb15	103 53	228 55	364 151		63 45		286 144	662 129	82 57	83 57					1871 691
Mar15	143 94	190 43	802 266		88 43		469 246	994 181	88 51	121 96					2895 1020
Apr15	139 97	204 48	699 185		86 49		489 257	945 136	96 65	119 100					2777 937
May15	176 112	322 100	1003 223		88 40		432 204	836 157	91 62	103 62					3051 960
Jun15	135 82	327 48	879 208		84 40		569 190	917 145	31 18	86 61					3028 792
Jul15	118 67	426 89	820 215		87 37		577 221	1141 149	97 55	85 70					3351 903
Aug15	123 76	159 60	797 191		91 29		608 219	884 128	104 55	75 62					2841 820
Sep15	120 86	151 50	649 133		78 31		448 212	805 119	103 50	79 63					2433 744
Oct15	159 128	119 55	670 143		72 33		460 245	912 131	110 58	91 73					2593 866
Nov15	115 90	89 44	688 145		50 31		484 243	908 142	88 50	80 69					2502 814
Dec15	157 121	45 25	527 128		69 39		430 204	748 118	76 37	113 102					2165 774
2015 [2]	1609 1102	2419 661	8358 2169		929 464		5592 2579	10479 1658	1067 630	1120 873				32%	31573 10136	5387 2980
Jan16	124 97	154 62	608 152		66 31		386 200	885 150	94 58	127 96					2444 846
Feb16	150 105	149 62	662 191		70 44		422 223	933 155	80 47	114 91					2580 918
Mar16	158 100	122 48	765 99		73 42		562 240	1029 120	90 46	150 115					2949 810
Apr16	159 95	141 35	906 126		86 41		622 219	1020 114	117 50	157 111					3208 791
May16	164 114	138 37	878 76		97 45		582 165	1090 82	112 60	115 60					3176 639
Jun16	151 105	177 45	856 52		108 39		689 182	1244 89	122 72	63 54					3410 638
Jul16	145 102	149 46	1252 80		123 33		657 166	1243 91	141 91	200 152					3910 761		53
Aug16	167 96	157 41	1095 118		131 49		720 223	1149 135	148 82	199 158					3766 902		57
Sep16	169 100	106 25	840 83		105 38		613 202	897 86	104 57	180 138					3014 729		55
Oct16	149 96	126 38	857 141		87 36		563 232	966 124	121 70	130 95					2999 832		57
Nov16	139 108	143 43	805 160		101 60		542 270	873 107	90 52	145 94					2838 894		60
Dec16	148 105	104 36	694 135		75 46		522 260	932 115	79 48	164 115					2718 860		54
2016 [2]	1823 1223	1666 518	10218 1413		1122 504		6880 2582	12261 1368	1298 733	1744 1279				26%	37012 9620	5821 3225
Jan17	149 103	128 49	697 177		66 36		394 221	867 140	94 49	145 94		2540 869			2540 869		65
Feb17	130 90	128 56	628 98		75 41		431 220	828 96	107 65	123 93		1450 759			2450 759		63
Mar17	170 114	145 62	754 118		110 56		563 267	896 160	136 81	138 97		2912 955			2912 955		90
Apr17	167 111	135 67	828 136		101 50		516 201	849 160	107 63	152 112		2855 900			2855 900		74
May17	177 116	134 42	850 198		109 45		631 236	1204 201	151 83	184 138		3440 1059			3440 1059		76
Jun17	182 66	175 44	801 141	NEW [10]	111 49	NEW [10]	626 202	1324 198	145 93	159 114		3523 907			3523 907		76
Jul17	189 103	139 21	586 65	21 0	128 50	45 3	609 145	1036 123	123 87	149 111		2959 705			3025 708		68
Aug17 [10]	205 106	141 30	568 106	193 62	94 28	328 89	645 214	1185 128	147 60	158 127		3143 799			3664 950		73
Sep17	152 101	161 35	641 130	216 82	92 36	416 262	596 228	1143 125	112 47	179 130		3076 832			3708 1176		59
Oct17	171 96	199 68	632 124	199 61	75 39	461 261	557 204	1195 149	115 75	206 163		3150 918			3810 1240		67
Nov17	180 101	132 54	471 130	168 45	80 37	345 158	498 178	843 118	116 66	149 107		2469 791			2982 994		69
Dec17	138 91	148 51	491 132	106 32	61 27	324 213	483 216	1154 152	121 64	130 82		2726 815			3156 1060		79
2017 [1]	2010 1198	1765 579	7947 1555	903 282	1102 494	1919 986	6549 2532	12524 1750	1474 833	1872 1368		35243 10309		30%	38065 11577	7780 4407
Jan18	140 98	132 42	414 108	67 14	69 35	216 131	316 147	1054 88	106 66	132 90		2363 674			2646 819		83
Feb18	155 99	134 41	432 85	51 16	62 16	225 116	333 114	1127 72	132 78	143 99		2518 604			2794 736		65
Mar18	165 90	138 27	531 64	89 22	81 14	306 152	454 107	1141 71	117 57	161 98		2788 528			3183 702		77
Apr18	167 104	158 56	566 122	96 31	67 20	352 184	478 155	1184 102	126 66	163 115		2909 740			3357 955		69
May18	174 104	190 52	535 65	97 24	74 30	345 183	503 128	1323 80	120 63	191 125		3110 647			3552 854		55
Jun18	187 102	200 47	427 56	96 23	72 20	352 140	533 141	1208 100	140 88	169 111		2936 665			3384 828		60
Jul18	188 116	202 61	555 97	107 41	68 23	371 145	520 162	1482 114	113 60	187 138		3315 771			3793 957		55
Aug18	149 97	170 58	618 129	140 47	47 17	381 198	498 166	1362 139	110 70	162 118		3116 794			3637 1039		65
Sep18	191 106	160 39	636 120	117 32	98 53	338 173	470 140	1373 101	120 56	187 148		3235 763			3690 968		55
Oct18	161 100	161 49	615 124	126 29	72 42	349 172	482 173	1169 79	122 65	185 123		2967 755			3442 956		70
Nov18	163 104	122 42	517 91	96 29	54 32	295 183	312 104	1037 78	129 67	306 204		2640 722			3031 934		65
Dec18	160 112	150 48	524 162	93 41	55 37	266 170	389 176	972 152	168 99	333 234		2751 1020			3110 1231		55
2018 [2]	2000 1232	1917 562	6370 1223	1175 349	819 339	3796 1947	5288 1713	14432 1176	1503 835	2319 1603		34648 8683		28%	39619 10979	6372 2743
Jan19	157 109	133 27	474 94	131 37	94 38	263 154	361 113	1020 75	113 50	140 92		2492 598			2886 789		67
Feb19															2533 710		62
Mar19															2947 965		72
Apr19															2892 1002		61
May19															3232 1126		64
Jun19															3264 997		54
Jul19															3364 1112
Aug19															3302 1080
Sep19															3088 1349
Oct19	212 150	192 72	602 228	60 22	94 58	339 264	492 282	1150 204	117 57	195 149		3054 1200			3453 1486
Nov19															3151 1229
Dec19															2545 1032
2019 [2]															36657 12877
Cam #	ANGG 01	AUAN 01	AUGR 01	AUGR 03	GRFS 01	GRPA 01	GRSU 01	SJGR 01	SU0A 01	SUOA 03
CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS RED LIGHT CAMERA PROGRAM	Wbd Ante- lope at Garden Gate	Nbd Auburn at Antel- ope	SWbd Auburn at Green- back [9]	Nbd Auburn at Green- back [10]	Ebd Green- back at Foun- tain Square	Ebd Green- back at Park Oaks [10]	Ebd Green- back at Sunrise [9]	Sbd San Juan at Green- back	Nbd Sunrise at Oak	Sbd Sunrise at Oak		Violations Recorded/ Notices Printed (excluding new cams added in July 2017) Per Official Monthly CMR Reports [1] [4]	Avg. Notices Printed (all cam- eras)	Total Citations Issued as % of Events Re- corded (all cameras)	Total Violations Recorded/ Notices Printed (all cameras) Per Official Monthly CMR Reports [1] [4]	Total Citations Issued/ Rolling Right Citations (all cameras) Per CVC 21455.5(i) Annual Reports [11]	Revenue from Court (thou- sands) [13]

This table made by highwayrobbery.net, using official reports provided by the City under the California Public Records Act.

Official report, Jan. - Sep. 2010
Official reports, Jan. 2011 - July 2012
Official reports, Aug. 2012 - Feb. 2013
Official reports, Jul. 2008 - Apr. 2013 (28 MB file)
Official reports, May 2013 - July 2014
Official reports, Apr.2009 - Feb. 2015
Official reports, Spring 2015
Official report, June 2015
Official reports, Late 2015
Official reports, Aug. & Sep. 2015
Official reports, Oct. - Dec. 2015
Official reports, Early 2016
Official reports, Late 2016
Official report, Dec. 2016
Official reports, Sep. & Dec. 2014, June 2015, Aug. 2016, Jan. - Aug. 2017
Official reports, Sep. 2017 - Apr. 2018
Official reports, 2018 - 2019
Official reports, Late 2019

[ ] indicates a footnote.
[1] Totals are as provided by the City.
[2] Annual total, or annual projection by highwayrobbery.net.
[3] Un-used columns are to allow for later expansion of City's system.
[4] Any figures in red type (or, if you are looking at this table in black and white, the upper figure when there are two or more figures in a cell) are what RedFlex calls Total Violations, or all incidents recorded by the cameras, and due to time limitations may have been posted here only for selected months or locations. If there is sufficient public interest, the remaining months will be posted. The figures in black type are what RedFlex calls Notices Printed, and represent the sum of genuine citations issued (those filed with the court) plus any Nominations mailed (not filed with the court, a.k.a. Snitch Tickets).
[5] The official report for (date) was generated shortly after the end of the month. As a result, many violations were still "in progress" and the eventual number of "approved violations" would be expected to be greater than the number shown in the official report. Before being posted in the table above, the citywide total figures given in the official monthly report were adjusted by assuming that the "in progress" violations would be approved in the same proportion that violations were approved during the previous calendar year. For (date) the proportion used was .XX.
[6] Per the City document (see link in Set # 5, below), these are the enforcement start dates for these cameras. Also per that document, warning notices were issued until the enforcement start dates.
[7] Includes enforcement of posted "no turn on red" signs.
[8] Figures are from report covering Jan.1, 2010 to Sep. 30, 2010. Month-by-month data has been requested.
[9] Activated on Dec. 31, 2012, per Bee article of same date. Began issuing real tickets on Jan. 31, 2013.
[10] Two new cameras were added in July 2017. See Set # 4, below.
[11] From the annual reports required, beginning with 2013, by CVC 21455.5(i). They become available by the Fall of the following year.
[12] Full camera-by-camera data was received on (date) and is available at the link above.
[13] For source documents see Set # 14 on the Sacramento Docs page.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 2

Mickey Mouse Tickets - Mostly Right Turns & Mostly to Visitors

An official report showed that in 2014, 62% of the City's tickets were for turns, mostly right turns.

In May 2016 a report prepared by RedFlex for another client disclosed that 70% of Citrus Heights' tickets go to visitors.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 3
"Late Time" Graphs

The City provided bar graphs of Late Times, etcetera, for all of its cameras.
These graphs track violations recorded, not tickets issued.
Where there is a large number of long Late Time violations in a curb lane, it is believed to indicate heavy ticketing on right turns.
(The curb lane will be the lane with the highest lane number.)

The picture above is an example from another city.

Jan. 2008 - Sep. 2010:

ANGG
AUAN
GRFS
SJGR
SUOA-01
SUOA-03

July 2013 - All Cameras

June 2014 - All Cameras

Aug. 2015 - All Cameras (Tabular Version)

June 2016 - All Cameras (Tabular Version)

Bar graphs have been received from more than fifty other cities - see the list in the expanded version of Defect # 9.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 4
The $$$ Contract - and Two New Cameras in July 2017

Like the cities of Baldwin Park, Capitola, Highland, South San Francisco, Victorville and Walnut, Citrus Heights failed to hold the formal public hearing required by CVC 21455.6 before it approved the 2007 contract - see the expanded version of Defect # 6.
2007 Contract July 2007 Staff Report July 2007 Minutes

The 2007 contract includes an illegal "cost neutrality" clause, whereby the city will not have to pay RedFlex the full rent if there aren't enough fines to cover the cost. See Subsection B. of Defect # 10.

The contract possibly provides a monetary sanction against the city if city traffic engineers lengthen the yellows. The contract reads:
"Cost neutrality is guaranteed except as follows: If the Customer [the City] fails to maintain the minimum yellow light change interval as established by Section 21455.7 of the California Vehicle Code."
The passage is open to two conflicting interpretations.
1. The City is required to maintain yellows that are at least as long as the length specified by the Code - but can be longer.
2. The City is required to maintain the exact length specified by the Code, and may not set yellows that are longer.

The contract also specifies that there shall be equipment to issue citations for right turn violations, and penalizes the City should it choose not to enforce those violations.

In Nov. 2012, six or seven months before the end of the initial term of the 2007 contract, the City amended the contract, to extend it for three more years.
2012 Staff Report and Amendment

The amendment retained cost neutrality, and city council agreed to pay $5500 rent per camera, which is way too high. Many other cities have obtained a price of $3000 or less. The City will overpay $540,000, compared to a $3000 target, over the three years - and there is no escape clause in the contract.
2014: Sample Invoices and Payments
To cover the extra rent (above the $3000 target noted above), the City will have to issue an extra 5400 tickets during the three-year period 2013 - 2015 (assuming that 2/3 of those ticketed pay up and that the City's portion of a fully paid fine is $150).
(To see what other cities are paying for their cameras, see FAQ # 17.)

2015: Three More Years -- or Seven!

At their Dec. 10, 2015 meeting the city council approved, 5 - 0, a staff recommendation to extend the program for another three years, with the option to (later) add two additional periods of two years each - for a potential total extension of seven years, ending in Dec. 2022.
2015 Staff Report
Contract Amendment, and Minutes of the Meeting

The City agreed to pay $36,500 per month to rent the cameras.

Based upon the age of the Citrus Heights cameras, and using the Elk Grove price table (below) as a target, Citrus Heights should have agreed to pay no more than $21,392 per month during the initial three years of the extension. At the $36,500 price it agreed to pay, the City will overpay by $544,000 during the three year extension, compared to Elk Grove prices; during the potential seven year period the City will overpay by $1,619,000. To cover that extra rent, the City will have to issue an extra 16,190 tickets during the seven years (assuming that 2/3 of those ticketed pay up and that the City's portion of a fully paid fine is $150).

Part of Elk Grove (CA) contract
with Redflex
Table imaged from 2014 contract between RedFlex and the City of Elk Grove, California, which has five cameras.

Until the three year extension ends in 2018, there is no way for Citrus Heights to escape from the too-high prices - the 2015 amendment did not add an escape clause (formal title: Termination for Convenience).

RedFlex Invoices, 2016

The previous cost neutrality clause was replaced with a novel cost neutrality clause (the other ones in California are in the City of Bakersfield and the City of Ventura) under which the term of the contract will be extended one day for each day's worth of fine revenue the City falls short of paying RedFlex.

July 2017: Council Approves (Fait Accompli?) Two New Cameras

At their July 13, 2017 meeting the city council considered a report prepared by Lt. David Gutierrez and approved (4 -1, Daniels: nay) the installation of two new cameras.

In the second paragraph of his report, Lt. Gutierrez wrote:

"... collisions at most of the monitored intersections have decreased significantly."

Then, in a July 28 Bee article Lt. Gutierrez was quoted as saying:

“We’ve experienced a reduction in collisions at every single one of those intersections."

    Lt. Gutierrez used a stat (total collisions) that includes both injury accidents AND minor accidents ("fender benders") even though the likelihood of a fender bender getting reported varies wildly from year to year and decade to decade depending upon a police department's priorities and budget. On the other hand, injury accidents nearly always get reported. Using the injury accident stats Lt. Gutierrez presented to the council on July 13, we see that injuries were up at four of the seven intersections having cameras.
His report to the council also revealed that fatalities are soaring:

    2012: 3
    2013: 1
    2014: 0
    2015: 6
    2016: 5
    2017: 4, as of July

    Was it (the July 13 agenda item asking the council to give permission as required by CVC 21455.5(c)(2)(A)) a fait accompli? In other cities it usually takes months, not just two weeks, to get a new camera installed, calibrated, and running. Even if the camera equipment communicates wirelessly, it still takes electricity to run the circuitry and the strobe lights, and getting the power company to set a meter can take a long time.

This listing of contracts and amendments was up-to-date as of July 13, 2017.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 5
Possible Big Refund in 2017 - for 2015 Tickets!

The City may need to refund a number of tickets issued after Aug. 1, 2015, as it appears it may have missed the deadline to set longer yellows at some of its camera enforced intersections.

On 4-7-15, in response to highwayrobbery.net's public records requests for information about locations having red light cameras, the city clerk emailed ten Engineering and Traffic Surveys dated 2013 and seven signal timing charts bearing "date[s] printed' in 2013 and 2014 but which were blank in the spaces for "date installed," "prepared by," and "approved by." More recently, on 8-23-16 the city clerk postal mailed seven more signal timing charts, for the same locations and all bearing the "date printed" of 6-17-16. Of them, five had "date[s] installed" in mid-2016, and two of them were blank in that space.
Speed Surveys and Timing Charts

1. For camera ANGG the 85th Percentile Speed was 46, which would require a yellow of at least 4.7 seconds. (The new statewide rule effective Aug. 1, 2015 requires that the 85th Percentile Speed be rounded up to the next 5 mph increment, and that the resulting number be used to look up the applicable minimum yellow. The lookup table requires a 3.9 yellow when the so-adjusted 85th is 40, 4.3 when it is 45, 4.7 when it is 50, and 5.0 when it is 55.) The ANGG signal timing chart printed in 2014 shows a setting of 4.8 seconds, which is long enough, but we are concerned that there is no evidence that said setting actually was installed at that time. While the timing chart printed in 2016 shows 4.8 seconds and does carry a "date installed," the 6-17-16 date indicated was ten months after the effective date of the new rule.

2. For camera AUAN the 85th Percentile Speed was 44, which would require a yellow of at least 4.3 seconds. The signal timing chart printed in 2014 shows a setting of 4.6 seconds, which is long enough, but we are concerned that there is no evidence that said setting actually was installed at that time. While the timing chart printed in 2016 shows 4.8 seconds and does carry a "date installed," the 5-20-16 date indicated was nine months after the effective date of the new rule.

3. For camera AUGR the 85th Percentile Speed was 48, which would require a yellow of at least 4.7 seconds. The signal timing chart printed in 2014 shows a setting of 4.6 seconds, which is not long enough. While the timing chart printed in 2016 shows 4.8 seconds, it does not carry a "date installed," and if that 4.8 was installed on or about the date printed (6-17-16), that would be ten months after the effective date of the new rule.

4. For camera GRFS the 85th Percentile Speed was 48, which would require a yellow of at least 4.7 seconds. The signal timing chart printed in 2014 shows a setting of 4.8 seconds, which is long enough, but we are concerned that there is no evidence that said setting actually was installed at that time. While the more recent timing chart shows 4.8 seconds and does carry a "date installed," the 6-17-16 date indicated was ten months after the effective date of the new rule.

5. For camera GRSU we haven't yet received a speed survey.

6. For camera SJGR the 85th Percentile Speed was 47, which would require a yellow of at least 4.8 seconds. The signal timing chart printed in 2014 shows a setting of 4.3 seconds, which is not long enough. While the timing chart printed in 2016 shows 4.8 seconds, and does carry a "date installed," the 4-15-16 date indicated was eight months after the effective date of the new rule.

7. For the two SUOA cameras the 85th Percentile Speed was 44, which would require a yellow of at least 4.3 seconds. The signal timing chart printed in 2013 shows a setting of 4.8 seconds, which is long enough, but we are concerned that there is no evidence that said setting actually was installed at that time. While the more recent timing chart shows 4.6 seconds, it does not carry a "date installed," and if that 4.6 was installed on or about the date printed (6-17-16), that would be ten months after the effective date of the new rule.

The above too-short and/or undocumented yellows were brought to the City's attention on Feb. 13, 2017. On Mar. 29 they replied that all but one of the yellows were long enough well before the deadline. On April 18 we wrote back to them about the two month delay they noted at San Juan and Greenback.
On May 17 Lt. Gutierrez sent the following brief reply:

"I apologize for the extended delay. I just got back from vacation. Issuing refunds is not within our jurisdiction; however, if a violator paid any fines, it means they were found guilty of the red light violation by a judge after evidence was presented in court."

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 6
Grand Jury Slams Camera Program

A June 25, 2015 KCRA piece (archived copy) revealed that the Grand Jury slammed Citrus Heights and its camera program.
Among other things, the Grand Jury report (archived copy) said:

"Citrus Heights chronically and systematically ignores its own policies for oversight, testing, monitoring, maintenance and record keeping."

If you would like to read some grand jury reports from other counties, about their red light cameras, see the Grand Jury entry in the Site Index.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 7
Doing a TBD? Statement of Identification Required

The Sacramento Superior Court has been attempting to keep defendants from using a Trial by Declaration ("TBD") to raise the question of identity. When you contact a court and request a TBD, most courts will give you, or send you, the necessary forms. But Sacramento County, in addition to supplying the usual state-approved TBD forms (TR-205, TR-200), has been sending out a special form that they created for their own local use. The form asks you to admit ("stipulate") that you were the driver.

For more info see Set # 5 on the Sacramento Docs page.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 8
Info on CHPD Site

There is some red light camera program info at the police department's website.
If the link has stopped working, drill down:
citrusheights.net > your government > departments > police > inside CHPD > patrol services > traffic > RedFlex.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 9
Prevailing Wage Action

RedFlex' construction work in Citrus Heights was the subject of a Prevailing Wage action by the California Department of Industrial Relations.

Citrus Heights Docs Set # 9
More Coming

There may be some more Citrus Heights information posted in the next few weeks. Mark your calendar to remind you to come back here and look!

---------------------------------
RED LIGHT CAMERAS
www.highwayrobbery.net
www.highwayrobbery.net