Town of Sykesville conducting speed camera study
Three locations being tested; police chief hopes for community input
By Charles Schelle
cschelle@patuxent.com
Posted 11/10/09
At Monday's meeting of the mayor and Town Council, Mayor Mike Miller announced that the town is studying whether it is eligible for speed cameras, making Sykesville the first jurisdiction in Carroll County to announce it is actively studying speed cameras.
“We’re just looking at options,” he said. “At this point, we haven’t decided whether we’re interested or not interested.”
The council authorized the study at an Oct. 26 meeting in a late-night open session.
Rubber road tubes measuring traffic counts, speed and the number of speeding cars are placed on Route 32, Obrecht Road and one other location that Police Chief John Williams declined to disclose.
A law passed by the General Assembly went into effect Oct.1 to allow jurisdictions to install speed cameras.
The law allows speed cameras to be installed in public works construction and school zones, but it is up to individual jurisdictions to decide whether to use them. Sykesville’s council would have to approve an ordinance before the cameras could be approved.
The town has a draft ordinance, said Councilman Chris True, but the council has not introduced the ordinance yet.
If approved for a local jurisdiction, the bill requires governments to post camera locations on Web sites and issue only warnings during the first 30 days, Williams said. Drivers traveling at least 12 mph above the limit would be subject to a ticket and fines capped at $40.
Owners can contest the tickets in court and will not be given points on their licenses. Any money collected that is not needed to pay for the costs of the system can be used only for public safety, the law states.
Cameras would operate between 6 a.m. and 8 p.m. year-round, and the town would have discretion to operate cameras on holidays, he said.
Costs to pay for the cameras and administrative fees would be paid through money earned from the fines, Williams said.
Williams said speeding is the No. 1 issue in the community in his nine years of service.
He told the council that this past weekend an officer engaged in a high-speed pursuit into West Friendship that resulted in a DUI-arrest, and that a Carroll County Sheriff’s deputy clocked a driver at 91 mph in the 50 mph zone along Route 32 and Springfield Avenue.
“These are deadly issues,” he said. “These are issues that present an imminent threat to our community. It may not be with a gun or a knife, but it’s with an automobile.”
The Traffic Group, a Baltimore-based vendor, is completing a free study to see whether Sykesville has a speeding issue, Williams said. Each location will be studied three to five days, he said.
The results should be available for the Monday, Nov. 23, council meeting, he said.
“We need to determine that we do have a community-wide problem, and not just on that state road,” Williams said.
Williams said he would like to hear input from the community as well as the council about speed cameras, realizing it can be a divisive topic.
In addition to passing an ordinance, the council would also have to establish school zones, which is a public process, True said.
An issue with Sykesville’s size is that the law states that cameras must be in a half-mile radius of the school zone, and the town is about two square miles, Williams said.
The test cameras are within a half-mile of Sykesville Middle School, 7301 Springfield Ave., he said.
If approved, camera vendors would have to competitively bid to contract with the town, he said.
user comments (12)
user jed3d says...
These cameras have always been about revenue and not safety. I suspect that if you move forward on this, the ramifications to your political career will be unpleasant. I, for one, will not patronize another Sykesville business if you do this, and I live in Sykesville. Leave this to the People's Republic of Montgomery County and keep it out of Carroll.
Posted 12:36 PM, 11.11.09
user casualobserver says...
Suggest the Town deploy the cameras where they will effect the most severe violators. I, for one, am very weary of being passed like I am standing still when in fact I am at or very the posted speed limit. And if these are deployed, make the penalties stiff. Slow down or walk.
Posted 9:40 PM, 11.11.09
user lawdog says...
The area of Rte 32 that the town suggests these speed cameras is just up the road from the intersection in which a fatal accident, sadly, took another life...jed3d, this is not about revenue at all, it is about saving lives...
Posted 12:41 AM, 11.13.09
user jed3d says...
that stretch of 32 is straight and single lane. Rumble strips (as have been applied in some areas) would do a better job of minimizing the type of unfortunate fatalities that have occurred on 32 due to inattention and distraction. I'd rather have police officers patrolling for speeders, as small problems (speeding) can often lead to probable cause and solving bigger problems. I, for one, have no interest in a "Big Brother" society. One more question, why only the hours of 6am to 8pm? As the tv hucksters say... volume, volume, volume.
Posted 3:00 PM, 11.13.09
user vmail says...
Yea, inattention & distractions are a part of the problem, but speeding is a major problem, not just on MD 32, everywhere. Speed cameras work. They will force you to pay attention or you will be paying a fine. It is those who are vocal against red light cameras & speed cameras are the abusers.
Posted 8:56 AM, 11.14.09
user obiwan says...
jed3d is right this is a money grab pure and simple. These cameras are seen as infallible. They are not, time and again they have been proven to be wrong and incorrect. The belief by many is that the cameras can't be wrong. http://www.radar-detectors.co.uk/news_at_last_proof_that_speed_camerascan_get_it_wrong.asp Well yes they can be. I believe in a system where you are innocent til proven guilt, not the other way around.
Posted 11:20 PM, 11.14.09
user jed3d says...
Be careful when assuming, vmail. You know what they say. I was "caught" in a red light camera in Baltimore City by Jerry's Belvedere. This intersection (and others) was later found to have had the signal cycle accelerated in order to catch more "violators". In fact what ended up happening, was that people would slam on their brakes to avoid the quick red and accidents increased. Red light cameras and their cousins the speed camera are politically more correct than raising taxes and less painful than making budget cuts. Cash grab, pure and simple.
Posted 12:10 PM, 11.18.09
user says...
First of all, this is a money grab. The town will split the proceeds usually a 60/40 with the company that installs the cameras. If it is not about money, than why not have the violator perform community service instead. Second, police stops allow the officer to do more than just write a citation, it gives them the opportunity to check out the drivers background(warrants, etc.) as well as the opportunity to talk to the person to see if they are drunk, legal to drive, and so forth. Third, they become essentially electronic speed bumps. Since these are mounted in fixed locations, once the driver passes them they resume the speeds they were doing before. Fourth, I would assume that they would be turned off by the schools in the summer while school is out(betcha they won't) Fifth, most jurisdictions set the electronic limit for the cameras to start enforcement at 12 MPH over the posted, so I assume that no one should EVER be written a ticket by an actual officer unless they are doing the same 12 over. Finally-the police chase that occurred a few weeks ago where a Sykesville police officer saw a car stopped at a blinking yellow light and was chased for miles for drunk driving and so on, would never have occurred if the car was just sent a ticket in the mail for speeding by a camera. The truth is the police out in the community do way more than a speed camera will ever do.
Posted 1:19 PM, 11.30.09
user says...
I attended the Sykesville Town Hall meeting where Police Chief Williams presented his findings concerning speed cameras and whether the town should install them or not. Here are a few things I found quite interesting: First of all the city is running short on money-with this said all of the arguments I heard concerning speed cameras had way more to do with revenue than "safety". No statistics on an increase in accidents or even pedestrians being struck were presented, the only evidence was the results of data generated by traffic monitoring devices placed in three locations in the town. For example on East Bound Obrecht road on 11/11/09, 93 vehicles traveled below the posted limit of 25mph, 2,747 between 25 and 36 mph, and 169 over 37 mph. This data suggests that only 5.6% of all vehicle traffic that day was going over the 11 mph over the limit that the chief feels is acceptable. I say feels acceptable, because the cameras he proposes will only ticket violators exceeding the speed limit by 12 mph. If speeding really is a major concern, than why is he saying that is is "ok" to break the speed limit by 11 mph before it is an offense, is the posted speed limit a law or a suggestion? I find it interesting that they are required by law to place signs up where these cameras are proposed to be placed-why? Why wouldn't they do the same for dui checkpoints, or even when an officer is sitting on the side of the road running radar? The chief stated that 1400 citations were issued during the year, which equates to 4 per day on average, yet the chief did not know of those tickets written, how many were for speeding offenses-how can that be? I also question how many citizens have actually complained to him about speeding. While the initial cry for these cameras is because of complaints and safety, the majority of the conversations about this topic during that meeting were over how much revenue these cameras would bring to the city. Sykesville is allowed by law to keep 10% of the revenues generated by these cameras, whereas a normal citation written by a Sykesville police officer goes directly to the state and then a portionof those monies colected given back at the end of the year to reimburse the police force. If their concern is truly about safety, then why shouldn't they continue that same arrangement, with the money going to the state? The chief noted how successful this program has been for Montgomery County, well that is great, but the majority of traffic going through that county is commuter traffic heading to DC, Rockville, and even Northern Virginia. He is proposing that these cameras will bring "voluntary compliance" which is a noble idea. What he fails to realize is that Sykesville is only two square miles, so the majority of those ticketed will be town residents heading to work, the gym, etc. I would be willing to bet that with in a month or two, no one will be speeding and the company that provides these devices, The Traffic Group, will no longer see the town as a viable place to do business with. The Traffic Group provides the cameras, the town contracts with them, and even negotiates the percentage of the split between the two. I also found it quite interesting that the chief tip toed around the question posed by a council member that it is illegal to have a "pay for performance". The chief, was clearly choosing his words wisely answering that question-perhaps because he knows that is illegal to have such an arrangement. There are a number of solutions to this issue with out installing these devices-speed bumps for are very effective. The second is for the police department to park marked police vehicles along the road ways in question, because we all know that we slow down when we see a police car. Perhaps the town should do away with take home vehicles for officers, they do us as residents no good being parked in front of an officers house somewhere else-I know of no Sykesville police officers that live within the town limits, as well as keep fuel costs for the city down. This would free up the vehicles to be placed in different locations each day, which is exactly what the chief proposed be down with a mobile speed camera unit. I believe that if the town is having money problems, then tackle them head on, but do not disguise this revenue generating idea under the age old cloak of "safety and what about the children"
Posted 10:35 PM, 12.20.09
user obiwan says...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-red-light-cameras-suburbs-18dec18,0,4307283.story This is an article from the Chicago Tribune that shows the effectiveness of red light cameras has been mixed at best.
Posted 7:28 AM, 12.21.09
user jed3d says...
Thank you so much "user _" for reporting about the council meeting. Very interesting, but not surprising.
Posted 2:12 PM, 12.21.09
user resident says...
-There is a debate as to whether this is about money or safety-I have the solution! To prove it has more to do with safety than money, all Sykesville has to do is not keep any of the revenues-just cover the operating costs of the vendor supplied system. This way all the extra money will go to the state just like it always has, problem solved!
Posted 3:23 AM, 01.28.10
related articles
Advertisement
reader comments
most popular
- read
- emailed
Advertisement
Advertisement
Way to go Chris!!!!!!
Posted in Sykesville resident leads attempt to repeal speed camera ordinance
...because they are 'specifically done to generate revenue, and nothing more....
Posted in Speed cameras elsewhere in Carroll? Not so fast
Only met him once, after the ground breaking for the new S....
Posted in Hoby Wolf, columnist, activist, advocate and Carroll County stalwart, dies at 85