San Diego Docs - Main Page - Illegal Red Light Cameras

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

City of San Diego Documents
(and Information)

San Diego, pop. 1,198,000, is 5 miles north of Tijuana, Mexico, pop. 1,314,000

Docs Set # 1
Ticket Counts

New 11-3-04, updated 12-24-04

Violations Recorded and Citations Issued

The information provided by the City, until just now, consisted of monthly city-wide totals of citations recorded and issued. However, on Nov. 20 I received a letter containing a detailed breakdown by camera location, for each month from 1998 up to August 2004. Beginning Nov. 22 I will be typing much of that information into the table below, with more to be added as time permits.
(Note: The 1998 - 2001 program included twenty cameras, while the current program has eight so far.)
In an earlier letter the City provided some information about citations actually paid, as follows: For the period Oct. 1998 to Dec. 2001, 59,338 citations were paid and $16,279,772 was paid to the court.

								Harbor SB@ Grape [8] Left	[3]	Total Cites Issued as % of Recorded	Total Recorded/ Issued [1]
Sep98											2277 833
Oct98											2086 864
Nov98											2216 808
Dec98											4986 2062
1998
Jan99											3662 1541
Feb99											3728 1621
Mar99											3819 1605
Apr99											5393 1925
May99											5270 1743
Jun99											5085 1459
Jul99											6021 1608
Aug99											6278 2130
Sep99											5235 1887
Oct99								1020			8461 3396
Nov99								1024			7916 3417
Dec99								1098			8883 3713
1999
Jan00								1023			7376 3092
Feb00								985			7443 2860
Mar00								1025			9805 3533
Apr00								1247			9319 3621
May00								1112			9897 3622
Jun00								1004			12803 4494
Jul00								1077			13020 4516
Aug00								1186			11059 3813
Sep00								929			9154 3730
Oct00								1011			8313 3484
Nov00								1089			8231 3691
Dec00								806			7860 3145
2000
Jan01								749			6652 2385
Feb01								515			6569 1843
Mar01								615			7310 2012
Apr01								983			8231 2121
May01								643			7512 1357
Jun01								-			1438 0
Jul01								-			-
2001
	10th SB@ A	Mira Mesa WB@ Black Mtn	Monte- zuma EB@ 54th	La Jolla Vill EB@ Towne Centre	Im- perial WB@ 60th	Harbor WB@ 32th	Garnet EB@ Mission Bay	Harbor SB@ Grape [8] Left	[3]	Total Cites Issued as % of Recorded	Total Recorded/ Issued [1]
Jul03	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-			-
Aug03	41	97	-	-	-	-	-	-			448 138
Sep03	35	50	-	-	-	-	-	-			313 85
Oct03	38	51	25	12	-	-	-	-			451 126
Nov03	23	98	33	18	-	-	-	-			583 172
Dec03	31	93	34	22	-	-	-	-			532 180
2003
Jan04	52	83	23	31	-	-	-	-			536 189
Feb04	17	67	18	18	-	-	-	-			515 120
Mar04	36	61	15	25	29	-	-	-			665 166
Apr04	22	41	17	20	40	-	-	-			660 140
May04	30	35	7	20	21	4	7	-			730 124
Jun04	23	34	6	8	23	2	12	-			736 108
Jul04	21	27	20	12	18	4	15	-			722 117
Aug04	30	36	25	20	42	7	29	1193 234			1912 423
Sep04	26	54	17	32	40	5	31	1715 315			2411 520
Oct04	15	49	14	30	42	6	26	1513 296			2172 478
Nov04	33	48	10	29	27	4	30	1185 289			1830 470
Dec04
2004 [7]											248,524 87,487
Jan05
Feb05
Mar05
Apr05
May05
Jun05
Jul05
Aug05
Sep05
Oct05
Nov05
Dec05
2005

San Diego Docs Set # 2
More Reading

A lot has been written about San Diego's cameras. Here are links to some of it.

The Original Sin - Revealed by Their Own Documents
Before San Diego started up its first camera system, they had to select the intersections where the cameras would be placed. This internal memo shows that their focus was on money, not safety.

2001 Think Tank Study of San Diego's First Camera System
In 2001, the San Diego Police Department contracted with PB Farradyne to conduct a review of the City's red light photo enforcement program.
The report (2559 K pdf) included (at page 79) this graph showing the effect of lengthening the yellows at a number of the City's camera-monitored intersections.

The Farradyne study also included (at page 80) this table comparing the effectiveness of cameras (enforcement) vs. engineering countermeasures (lengthening yellows, better intersection markings, etc.).

A Compilation on a Private Website, from 2002
http://www.hwysafety.com/nma_rlc_timeline4.htm
See the entries for Jan. 14, 2002, which discuss the effect of the lengthening of the yellow lights, as documented in Chap. 6 of the Farradyne report.

City Manager's Report, 2002
In June 2001 San Diego turned its camera system off. In Sept. 2002 the city manager submitted a report to the city council, on the subject of re-starting the system.

Armey's Website
Congressman Dick Armey's website contained a number of items about San Diego. There is a replica of his website here on highwayrobbery.net, at: The Red Light Running Crisis - Is It Intentional?

The City's Website
The City maintains a website with a lot of red light camera info on it.

San Diego Docs Set # 3
The Dismissals in 2001 - People vs. John Allen

P. vs. John Allen included numerous briefs by both sides, and numerous rulings by the judge. Here are some of them.

San Diego Docs Set # 4
Dirty Deeds, Part I

New 8-19-05

In August 2005, I got this email. I have had a couple previous emails about this happening with old San Diego tickets. Does the San Diego City government have no shame?

If this has happened to you too, let me know.

Dear Mr. Editor:

A funny thing happened on the way to the gas station. Well, I don't know if it is REALLY funny, but you have to read about this.

Yesterday, I went to the gas pump to put gas into my car (so far so good right?). The pump, equipped with accepting debit/credit cards, refused to take my card. So I went into the store and the woman there said my card had been declined. Well, being unemployed I knew I didn't have a LOT of money in the account but even with the high price of gas in CA right now, I knew I had more than enough for a tank of gas. I used cash for my gas and went along my merry way. After a job interview, I went to the ATM at a branch of the bank I use. My card was refused and the little paper said that there may be a problem with my account. So I went into the bank. My Vice President of Customer Service inputted my account number and told me that my account had been closed and was referred to "Legal Process". I asked her what that meant. She tried to explain it to me and I am sure she was doing a great job HOWEVER I had no clue what she was taking about. She made a phone call or two for me and let me talk to a representative in Legal Process. They told me that they couldn't really tell me anything except that the CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD put a "levy" on my funds and had withdrawn EVERY PENNY I HAD IN MY ACCOUNT to pay for "something". I called the FTB and they told me it was about a traffic ticket and that they couldn't tell me anything else except the case number.

The next morning I called a collection agency and he told me that the case number referenced a traffic violation dated: NOVEMBER XX, 1999. Yes, you read that right ... 1999. I went to the referenced Superior Court and spoke with a representative from the collection agency. All she could tell me were the details and made me a copy of the citation. Apparently, on NOVEMBER XX, 1999 in the city of San Diego, California, I ran a red light and the camera took a picture. I swear on a stack of God's Holy Bibles ... I NEVER received notification of this violation. Never, in the almost 6 - repeat - SIX years since the violation have I EVER received ANY notification of this ticket. As a responsible citizen, I would have taken care of this ticket in 1999 when it happened.

So, SIX YEARS LATER, I have monies withdrawn from my account (oh, did I mention that I am Unemployed and the monies were extremely important to me?).

I chose to appear before the judge in Traffic Court (for a ticket almost SIX YEARS OLD). When my name was called, I rose and went to podium. In paraphrase, this is what the judge determined and told me: use of the red light camera was deemed illegal for the year I was given the ticket. My case was "dismissed" and my civil assessment fee was waived. Let's all rejoice over that OK? And I am sincerely thankful that the case was dismissed and the fee waived. BUT, my money that was taken by the FTB will NOT be returned to me anytime soon. The clerk, while giving me instructions and having me sign the paper I need to carry around with me until further notice, told me that I will receive a check from the FTB in about TWO MONTHS. Did you read that slowly? The money, that was erroneously taken out of my account for a ticket that was deemed unlawful will be returned in TWO MONTHS. For someone Unemployed, two months is two months too long. Also, I went to my bank today (they listened so wonderfully) and she told me that I probably will NOT get my bank fee of $60 returned. WHAT? A traffic ticket that was deemed unlawful that has taken SIX YEARS for collections to finally notify me and I HAVE TO PAY for a fee that I should never have received at all?

Like I said: A funny thing happened on the way to the gas station yesterday. That attempt to pump gas resulted in a whirlwind of activity. What resources are available to me and what do you suggest I do now?

Sincerely,

Motorist in San Diego, CA

Another Dirty Deed is in More Reading, above. See the item entitled The Original Sin.

San Diego Docs Set # 5
Dirty Deeds, Part Duh

In October 2006 I was trying to contact the court San Diego Superior Court Records Department, to get a copy of a brief I wanted to put up on the People vs. John Allen page (see Docs Set # 3, above). My old number for Records was no good anymore - it just led me in circles, listening to endless menus where I could listen to endless recorded info. So, I started calling other numbers. One that I called was the main number for the central traffic court, (858) 565-1006. I heard this recorded message*:
"For red light photo enforced citations issued by the City of San Diego Police Department, if you did not own the vehicle or were not the driver, please call the Traffic Violations Bureau at (800) 369-5352 for information on how to proceed."
That was all that the recording had to say about dealing with "not-the-driver"San Diego red light camera tickets, and it seemed misleading. Next, I called the "Traffic Violations Bureau," ("TVB"). My call was answered immediately, by "Yolanda."
Me: How do I proceed if I was not the driver?
Yolanda: You have to identify the driver.
Me: Do I have a choice?
Yolanda: You could go to court and contest the ticket.
After I asked Yolanda the right question ("Do I have a choice?"), she didn't mislead me; she provided accurate info, that I could go to court. So, you may be wondering why I'm writing this up.
The court is supposed to be neutral territory between litigants - the City and the motorists it is prosecuting. As such the court should not be telling motorists who have phoned it that they should call the City or their contractor, the TVB. At the very least, if the court is going to provide the number for the TVB, the court's recorded message should not give the impression that calling the TVB is the sole option. First (or "top") billing should be given to pointing out that someone who was not the driver can stay on the line, and make a court appointment. Further, the recording should make it clear that the very official sounding "Traffic Violations Bureau" is actually a private for-profit company - if the TVB is to be mentioned at all.

Immediately after the recorded passage about San Diego tickets (above), there was this:
"If you were issued a red light photo enforcement citation by the Poway sheriff please call (858) 513-2800 or 513-2888 to schedule an appointment."
That was all the recording had to say about dealing with Poway camera tickets.
I didn't call the Poway sheriff, but am pretty sure that he would have told me to ID the driver.
My objection to the Poway portion of the court's recording is basically the same as above: Why is the court directing a litigant to contact his opponent, and not speaking of the option to stay on the line and make a court appointment?
*Please note that what I heard was the daytime recorded message. The after-hours message is different.

San Diego Docs Set # 6
Dirty Deeds, Part Duh & 1/2

Some of San Diego's tickets do not provide the full address and phone number for the court - or they are not signed in handwriting - all of which are required by law.

See Defect # 8 - C for more about this omission.