RED LIGHT CAMERAS
www.highwayrobbery.net


Email Address
Site Index by Subject

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

City of Lynwood Documents
(and Information)

  Lynwood, pop. 66,000, is 5 miles south of downtown Los Angeles.

It may be possible to completely ignore a Lynwood ticket.
1.  If your "ticket" does not have the Superior Court's name and address on it, it is a fake ticket, which I call a "Snitch Ticket."  For more details about Snitch Tickets, see the Snitch Ticket section at the top of the Your Ticket page
.
2.  The LA County Superior Court does not report ignored red light camera tickets to the DMV.  More info is in "Countywide Information," which is Docs Set # 2 on the LA County Documents page.



Do you live in LA County?  Is Zev Yaroslavsky your County Supervisor?  (Until now, he has been representing the Third District, which includes the central and western San Fernando Valley, Malibu, Santa Monica, Venice, Beverly Hills, the City of West Hollywood, and part of Hollywood.)

Zev is termed out, and the upcoming Nov. 4, 2014 election will determine who succeeds him.

 Sheila Kuehl is one of the candidates. 

Sheila Kuehl authored 3
                  speed camera bills
Sheila "Kuehl Kams" Kuehl, in 2007

During her career in the California Legislature, Kuehl made three attempts to pass bills to allow the use of automated speed enforcement (photo radar) in California.

Please don't vote for her.  If she becomes a Supervisor, she will have a seat on the MTA/Metro board and she will be a vote to continue and expand their huge (101 cameras, so far) red light camera system.



Lynwood Docs Set # 1
Ticket Counts


2008 - 2009 Counts

In April 2009 the City sent me some tables showing the money it received from the court, and the disposition of the tickets. 


2004 - 2012 Counts

Total Violations Recorded, Notices Printed, Citations Issued [4]

New 11-30-05, updated 10-13-14

Cam #

IMAT-01
IMLB-01







Imperial
WB @
Atlantic
Imperial
@
Long Beach


The City's
Revenue
from Fines
(Thousands)
[8]
Total
Notices
Printed
as % of
Violations
Recorded
Total
Violations
Recorded/
Notices
Printed/
Citations
Issued
per

Invoices

[1] [4]

Nov04






136
67

Dec04






137
79
39

2004








Jan05






126
63
45

Feb05






107
60
47

Mar05






136
76
68

Apr05






110
58
39

May05






42

Jun05






16

Jul05






98
52
35

Aug05






40

Sep05








Oct05








Nov05








Dec05








2005








Jan06





43 %
256
111

Feb06








Mar06





47%
289
137

Apr06





35 %
292
102

May06








Jun06








Jul06





23 %
379
87

Aug06








Sep06





27%
350
95

Oct06





24 %
403
96

Nov06








Dec06








2006





32 %
3938
1256
(Proj.)

Jan07





50 %
344
171

Feb07








Mar07








Apr07





27 %
290
79

May07








Jun07





37 %
396
148

Jul07








Aug07








Sep07





23%
480
108

Oct07





33 %
356
118

Nov07








Dec07








2007





33 %
4478
1498
(Proj.)

Jan08





50 %
328
163

Feb08








Mar08








Apr08





20 %
361
73

May08








Jun08








Jul08





27 %
450
122

Aug08








Sep08








Oct08





43 %
442
189

Nov08








Dec08








2008





35 %
4743
1641
(Proj.)

Jan09
226
46
161
43



23 %
387
89

Feb09
301
79
119
41



29 %
420
120

Mar09
349
83
178
45



24 %
527
128

Apr09
393
52
86
4



12 %
479
56

May09
372
33
126
36



14 %
498
69

Jun09
266
44
122
33



20 %
388
77

Jul09
345
109
57
16



31 %
402
125

Aug09
385
144
21
0



35 %
406
144

Sep09





47 %
392
186

Oct09
312
173
123
61



54 %
435
234

Nov09





53 %
362
193

Dec09





56 %
342
190

2009





32 %
5038
1611

Jan10
299
158
89
25



47 %
388
183

Feb10





55 %
399
218

Mar10





56 %
420
234

Apr10
273
115
73
26



41 %
346
141

May10
292
149
123
72


13
53 %
415
221

Jun10




11
46 %
400
182

Jul10
266
109
85
42


10
43 %
351
151

Aug10
307
140
118
52


14
45 %
425
192

Sep10
[5]
287
95
139
48


10
34 %
426
143

Oct10
124
2
102
39


13
18 %
226
41

Nov10




9
37 %
292
107

Dec10




10
44 %
255
113

2010




90
44 %
4343
1926

Jan11
219
85
105
55


10
43 %
324
140

Feb11
211
78
96
55


8
43 %
307
133

Mar11
597
83
109
42


15
18 %
706
125

Apr11
11
5
2
2


11
54 %
13
7

May11
291
42
187
48


11
19 %
478
90

Jun11
307
39
162
25


7
14 %
469
64

Jul11
294
35
117
25


7
15 %
411
60

Aug11
545
90
147
20


4
18 %
601
110

Sep11
417
190
179
102


3
49 %
596
292

Oct11
466
203
207
87


4
43 %
673
290

Nov11
386
111
162
42


7
28 %
548
153

Dec11
335
155
197
68


5
42 %
532
223

2011




92
30 %
5658
1687

Jan12
336
157
160
58


7
43 %
496
215

Feb12
279
141
217
124


12
53 %
496
265

Mar12
354
153
190
107


12
48 %
544
260

Apr12
406
199
212
98


8
48 %
618
297

May12
335
147
189
75


10
42 %
524
222

Jun12
432
239
198
94


10
53 %
630
333

Jul12
456
246
177
97


10
54 %
633
343

Aug12
451
214
192
93


11
50 %
619
309

Sep12




10
62 %
449
278

Oct12




12
60 %
453
273

Nov12




11
68 %
418
284

Dec12




9
67 %
447
300

2012




122
53 %
6327
3379

Jan13




10
67 %
367
246

Feb13
193
124
207
136


15
65 %
400
260

Mar13




15
57 %
361
205

Apr13




13
54 %
423
228

May13




12
62 %
485
299

Jun13




10
61 %
351
214

Jul13




12
51 %
341
175

Aug13




8
41 %
263
108

Sep13




11
45 %
256
116

Oct13




10
53 %
376
199

Nov13




8
57 %
350
198

Dec13




7
42 %
346
146

2013




131
55 %
4319
2394

Jan14




8
63 %
365
231

Feb14
169
103
192
126


17
63 %
361
229

Mar14




13
63 %
248
156

Apr14




10
53%
403
214

May14




11
47%
489
232

Jun14




13
43%
289
125

Jul14




8
34%
462
158

Aug14




8
37%
480
177

Sep14








Oct14








Nov14








Dec14








2014




132
(Proj.)

2283
(Proj.)

Cam #

IMAT-01
IMLB-01







Imperial
WB @
Atlantic
Imperial
@
Long Beach


The City's
Revenue
from Fines
(Thousands)
[8]
Total
Notices
Printed
as % of
Violations
Recorded
Total
Violations
Recorded/
Notices
Printed/
Citations
Issued
per

Invoices

[1] [4]


This table made by highwayrobbery.net, using official documents obtained under the California Public Records Act.

2010 - 2012 official documents (to Feb. 2012)
2009 - 2012 official documents (to Mar. 2012)
2010 - 2012 official documents (to Aug. 2012)
2004 - 2013 official documents (to Feb. 2013)
2006 - 2012 official documents (to Sep. 2012)
2006 - 2013 official documents (to May 2013)
2013 - 2014 official documents (to Mar. 2014)
2006 - 2014 official documents (to Aug. 2014)

[  ] indicates a footnote.
[1]  Totals are as provided by the City.
[2]  YTD = Year-to-date total.
[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 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).  Figures in blue type (or, if you are looking at this table in black and white, in italic type) are total Cites Issued (filed with the court), per RedFlex's monthly invoices to the City.
[5]  Data was received on 9-7-12.  Intersection-by-intersection data will be posted to this table as time permits.  The official documents are available at the link above.
[6]  The camera enforcement is believed to be on traffic on the first-named street, but the direction of enforcement (north, south, east, west, thru, left, right) is not yet available.
[7]  Data for these months was requested on:
[8]  The City receives approx. $150 of the (approx.) $500 fine.  For source of fine revenue figures, see Set # 4, below.



Lynwood Docs Set # 2
"Late Time" Graphs

The City provided bar graphs of Late Times, etcetera, for its camera.
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.)

Grand Terrace late times bar chart
The picture above is an example from another city.

Lynwood Bar Graphs, Imperial/Long Beach Bl. 2008 - 2009
Lynwood Bar Graphs, Imperial/Atlantic 2008 - 2009
Lynwood Bar Graphs, Mar. 2012 (starts at pg. 12 of pdf)
Lynwood Bar Graphs, July 2014

Bar graphs are available for more than fifty other cities - see the list in the expanded version of Defect # 9.




Lynwood Docs Set # 3
The Contract - Paying Too Much, So Issue More Tickets!

Lynwood signed a pay-per-ticket contract with RedFlex on Dec. 18, 2003, just before the effective date of CVC 21455.5(g) (as of 2013, 21455.5(h)).  The contract provided:
"RedFlex will be paid $89 for the first three Citations issued on a single day from a particular Designated Intersection.  RedFlex will be paid $80 for the fourth and subsequent Citations issued on a single day from a particular Designated Intersection."

Then, on Dec. 18, 2008 the City signed a
new five-year contract including an illegal "cost neutrality" clause, whereby the city did not have to pay RedFlex the full rent if there wasn't enough fine revenue to cover the cost.  See Subsection B. of Defect # 10.

The 2008 contract penalized the City should it choose not to enforce right-hand turn violations.

That contract also said:  "Definitions.  'Warning Period' means a period after the Installation Date of the first intersection approach..."  (Emphasis added.)  See Defect # 6.

The 2008 contract set the monthly fee per existing camera at $5000.

Had the council negotiated a $2900 fee like that in the 2007 contract of the City of Garden Grove, it could have saved $2100 per camera per month, or $252,000 for the two cameras over the 60 months of the contract.
To see what other cities pay, go to FAQ # 17.

2014:  New Contract

On the council agenda for Oct. 1, 2013 there was a staff request for the council to "provide direction" about the possible extension of the contract.
Staff Report and Minutes, 10-1-13
The council asked for the item to be brought back, at a later meeting, with a detailed analysis.

On the council agenda for Mar. 18, 2014 there was a staff report recommending a five-year extension of the camera program.  During the meeting, the sheriff told the council that 77% of all tickets have been going to visitors - and a councilmember proposed that the fine be reduced for City residents.  The council voted to "table" the matter.

The staff report also revealed that after some negotiation, RedFlex had provided the City a "Cost Neutrality Clause Repayment" of $28,242.

The staff report prepared for the June 17, 2014 meeting recommended a five year extension and the continuation of Cost Neutrality.  The city council voted 3 - 2 (Ayes:  Castro, Santillan-Beas and Hernandez) to extend the contract, but for only three years (ending June 30, 2017), at a new rent of $3400 per camera per month.

In April 2014 the City of Elk Grove, California approved a new contract which specified the following rents for their RedFlex cameras.


From Exh. D of the Elk Grove Contract

Because Lynwood did not negotiate for that same schedule of rents, the City will pay 59% too much over the three years, $90,448 extra.  To cover that extra rent, the City will issue an extra 904 tickets (assuming that the City receives an average of $100 for each ticket issued).
 

Lynwood's
new contract does not contain an escape clause - a way for the city council to end the program before the three years is up.


This list of contracts and amendments was up-to-date as of  Oct. 6, 2014.




 
Lynwood Docs Set # 4
The Revenue


The City's monthly ticket revenue from the court is available in the Revenue Spreadsheet on the
LA County Docs page.



Lynwood Docs Set # 5
More Coming


There may be some more 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