Docs Set # 2
Cost Neutrality Adjustment & Successful Appeal

On May 27, 2004 The City of San Mateo signed a contract with RedFlex.  The contract included a "cost neutrality" clause, whereby the city did not have to pay RedFlex the full rent if fine revenue was insufficient to cover the cost.

There is a link to a copy of the contract in Set # 5, below.

Cost neutrality clauses are, in my opinion, a violation of CVC 21455.5(g).  Following San Mateo's lead, many other cities adopted similar clauses.  See Defect # 10 - B, on the Home page.
 
The following invoice, for the month of Aug. 2005, includes what may be a cost neutrality adjustment,  a "Performance credit" in the amount of $2412.00.  The timing of it would be consistent with the 12-month review provided in the contract.




San Mateo Ignored Warning by Police Association

In Nov. 2003, the California Peace Officer's Association sent the City a letter pointing out the constraints imposed by CVC 21455.5(g).  The letter was included in the council packet for the required public hearing, on November 17.   A typo in the last paragraph of the letter revealed that a similar letter may have been sent to the City of Whittier - and other cities as well.


Successful Appeals

In Sept. 2009 a defendant won his appeal on the cost neutrality issue.   P. v. Bullock.
In Nov. 2009 the City revised the contract - see Set # 5, below.

In Dec. 2009 another defendant won his appeal on a San Mateo ticket.  P. v. Schmidt.

In Mar. 2010, another!  P. v. Paul B.

Docs Set # 4
Countywide Information, Including Grand Jury Report, How Much They Get

The info in Set # 4 is applicable throughout San Mateo County.

In Sept. 2009 a San Mateo defendant won his appeal on the cost-neutral contract issue (P. v. Bullock).  In Dec. 2009 a Daly City appellant won on the same issue (P. v. Lopez).  The two decisions could affect tickets in these San Mateo County cities which signed cost-neutral contracts:
Daly City, Menlo Park, Millbrae, Redwood City, San Mateo, South San Francisco.
It is reasonable to expect that some or all of these cities will amend their contracts to remove the cost-neutral language.  San Mateo, and Millbrae already have (see Docs Set # 5, below, and the Millbrae section on the Camera Towns page).
Also in Dec. 2009 another San Mateo defendant (P. v. Schmidt) won his appeal, which was based upon missing warning signs and the control of the system by a private company.
Then, in June 2010, a Millbrae defendant (P. v. Durney) won his appeal, based upon hearsay/confrontation (Sixth Amendment) issues.
If you have a ticket from any of the cities listed above, please be sure to contact me!
And contact your local reporters - ask them to write about this, get the word out.

If you are going to fight your ticket, you do not want to do it before Comm. Kathleen M. McKenna in the San Mateo courthouse.   I strongly recommend doing a Peremptory Challenge to remove her from your case.  See the Challenges page of this website.  I also recommend doing a Peremptory Challenge of her if you are doing a Trial by Declaration.

In one of two Nov. 13, 2009 red light camera articles by Joshua Melvin, the San Mateo County Times reported that the county court's CEO John Fitton had asked,
"Are we doing right by the public?"

Court CEO John Fitton

Then, in a Feb. 16, 2010 KGO-TV segment by Vic Lee, Mr. Fitton stated:
"I would advise cities who are contemplating installing red light cameras to move cautiously. I know these systems generate revenue for cities, but safety-wise there are questions about whether the red light cameras reduce accidents."

Grand Jury Report, and Public Comments

In June 2010 the San Mateo County Grand Jury released a report about red light cameras.   The grand jury rules allow the cities to make formal comments about the report, but do not allow the public to do so.
Here is the final report (big file), including the initial report and the later comments by the cities.

$$ Distributions to Cities Up 39% in One Year

Court-provided reports show that red light camera ticket revenue flowing from the San Mateo County Court to the cities increased 39% in one year.

July 2011
July 2012 

San Mateo Docs Set # 6
"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.)