Lafayette council to vote on camera program

Questions debated on safety goals

LAFAYETTE — The City-Parish Council is set to vote Tuesday on whether to do away with the city’s traffic camera enforcement program, but even if it’s kept alive, some council members are pushing for changes in the scope of the program and how it is managed.

Councilmen Jared Bellard, Andy Naquin and William Theriot have proposed ending the automated enforcement program, which began in 2007 and is touted by supporters as a critical tool to improve driver behavior.

Opponents dispute some of the safety claims and argue that the enforcement program’s main goal is to raise money for city-parish government.

The cameras snap photos of a driver and license plate when a vehicle speeds through a monitored intersection or runs a red light. The alleged violator is mailed a citation.

The program also employs two “speed vans,” vehicles equipped with radar and cameras that are dispatched throughout the city.

Beyond the three council members who have pushed the repeal, none of the other councilmen has made any public calls for the cameras to come down.

But even council members who say they will likely vote to keep the traffic cameras clicking have raised questions.

“I was never really in favor of the program, but it seems to have proved itself, I guess,” said Councilman Jay Castille.

Castille, though not an enthusiastic supporter, said he is leaning toward supporting the traffic camera program but will seek changes in its operation.

Castille said he wants to move the management of the traffic cameras from the city’s Traffic and Transportation Department to the Police Department, reasoning that police should oversee public safety programs.

The councilman also said he wants to limit the use of the speed vans to school zones and residential neighborhoods — banning the vans from major thoroughfares — and to limit the expansion of the traffic camera program in future years.

There are now 12 intersections in the city that are monitored by traffic cameras, but another 17 locations are being considered at intersections along Ambassador Caffery Parkway, Evangeline Thruway, Johnston Street, Pinhook Road and Congress Street.

Castille said he would like to cap at four the number of new monitored intersections each year.

“I don’t want to blanket the city with these cameras,” he said.

Kevin Naquin, who opposed the traffic cameras when he took office earlier this year, said he is now inclined to support the program after learning more about its effectiveness.

But, like Castille, Kevin Naquin said he wants to limit the expansion of the program to no more than four new cameras a year, put the program under the police department and to use the speed vans only in school zones and subdivisions that are experiencing problems with speeders.

City-Parish President Joey Durel and several council members have also talked of the need for tougher measures to ensure that drivers pay the violations issued through the traffic camera program.

The traffic camera violations are not treated like a conventional tickets written by a police officers, and the city’s current method of enforcing payment is similar to collecting a debt — reporting the unpaid violation to a collection agency or pursuing the money in small claims court.

That approach has met with limited success.

About 60 percent of violators pay their tickets, and the total dollar amount of violations that are past due by four months or more has grown to about $6.4 million since the program began in 2007, according to figures from the Traffic and Transportation Department.

“I would like to see more teeth in the enforcement,” said Councilman Keith Patin.

Patin counts himself as a supporter of the program and dismissed complaints that the traffic cameras are a “money grab” for city-parish government.

“You know what? If you don’t speed or you don’t run a red light, it’s not an issue,” Patin said. “... How can you tell me if you are breaking the law and we have your picture that you can’t be held accountable?”

Patin said the traffic cameras are a cost-effective way to supplement the work of the Police Department’s traffic enforcement officers.

“We can’t have police everywhere where they are needed all the time,” he said.

Theriot, Bellard and Andy Naquin all said that, assuming the traffic program is kept in place, they will also push for changes.

All three said they would like to see the contract with Redflex Traffic Systems, the private company that manages the camera program, come back to the council for renewal each year.

A proposed contract renewal with Redflex has a four-year term.

Andy Naquin said he would like to eliminate violations for people who roll through a right-on-red turn.

Violations for rolling through a right-on-red turn accounted for more than half of all red-light violations under the traffic camera program in 2011, according to figures from the Traffic and Transportation Department.

Those violations do not include drivers who stopped before turning, according to the Traffic and Transportation Department, but Andy Naquin said he sees no need to be so strict in the enforcement of right-turn-on-red violations.

“Basically, we are ticketing honest people,” he said. “I don’t see it has anything to do with safety.”

The city-parish administration has argued that, overall, the traffic camera program has dramatically improved safety, citing a recent study by Lafayette’s Traffic and Transportation Department that found crashes declined by 63 percent when comparing intersections before and after the installation of the cameras.

An earlier study of Lafayette’s traffic cameras by LSU also found a reduction in crashes, but to much lesser degree — 13 percent drop in crashes when comparing intersections before and after the installation of the cameras.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (5)


1) Comment by tball - 14/05/2012

Good points PanamaVet/Country Boy - Jefferson turned their red light cameras off, because of back door deals. And accidents have not increased!! The Citizens should vote to have cameras or not.

2) Comment by tball - 14/05/2012

Good points PanamaVet/Country Boy - Jefferson turned their red light cameras off, because of back door deals. And accidents have not increased!! The Citizens should vote to have cameras or not.

3) Comment by PanamaVet - 14/05/2012

The Advertiser is blocking posts by safety proponents. I would like to thank The Advocate for displaying them.

4) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 14/05/2012

lengthen the time of the yellow light cycle and you wouldn't need these cameras. This theory has been proven in other cities. But no it would cost a drop in money for the cities and this is what these cameras do.

5) Comment by PanamaVet - 14/05/2012

During a recent Lafayette Council meeting we learned that the year before the cameras were installed in Lafayette the Louisiana DOT reported 66 accidents. The following year they reported a 3%-8% reduction in traffic flow due to rising gas prices and 65 accidents in Lafayette. 66 to 65 is a 1.5% reduction when fewer cars were on the road. Lafayette claimed a 77% reduction in accidents. How so? They excluded accidents in which the vehicles were knocked into the intersection beyond the stop bar. If your car was knocked into the intersection it was not considered relevant to safety. We learned that Redflex does not put their red light sensors at the stop bar for your vehicle. They move the sensors closer to the light. This makes it possible to take a picture of a red light when the vehicle entered the intersection under yellow. The Louisiana DOT is forcing Lafayette to stop writing invalid citations and move all of their sensors to the stop bar. After the meeting Mayor Durel told KATC he refused to issue any refunds. It is his court system and he issued his ruling. The lawyers he hires to conduct citation appeal hearings will comply. Safety proponents are calling for adoption of federal safety guidelines for yellow light timing. We learned that the current formula has not been updated since the 1940’s and the Louisiana DOT has been examining a new formula. Georgia adopted the standard plus one second and cut red light running at photo enforcement intersections over 70%. Ohio followed suit. Cities have adopted the standard with great success. The Louisiana DOT has denied Lafayette requests for cameras on state roads because the Louisiana DOT is in the business of protecting people, not camera revenue. Lafayette should adopt the yellow light standard plus one second and use the results to determine if the contract should be renewed. I don’t expect them to because Lafayette government is focusing on money and Mayor Durel is not giving it back.