HOUSTON – At KPRC 2, we’re dedicated to keeping Houstonians informed. As part of our new Ask 2 series, the newsroom will answer your questions about all things Houston.
The question: Why did Texas outlaw red-light cameras when red-light running is rampant and increasing?
The answer: Red light cameras have been a divisive topic in Texas for years. They were outlawed by the state in 2019.
When red light cameras were legal, some cities installed them at intersections to stop people from running red lights. They operated by taking photos of cars running the lights and issuing citations to owners of the offending vehicles.
Cities justified red-light programs from a safety perspective, asserting that they reduce collisions at intersections and, therefore, save lives. As a secondary effect, the programs also generated millions of dollars in revenue for the cities every year.
Critics of the cameras make various arguments against them. Many see them as a symbol of government overreach. They argue that the camera programs are unconstitutional because they violate a driver’s right to due process by not allowing the accused to confront their accuser. Some people think the main intent of red light cameras is revenue generation instead of safety. Still, others say that the cameras actually decrease safety at intersections.
The “safety” argument against the cameras goes like this: To avoid getting cited for running a red light, drivers slam on their brakes at an intersection as a light is turning red. These quick stops actually result in more rear-end collisions.
Obviously, this argument runs counter to cities’ safety justification for the cameras.
In Sugar Land, data shows that red light cameras actually did improve safety. While red light cameras were in operation, the city observed a 50% reduction in accidents at monitored intersections over the first six to eight years that the cameras were in operation.
Related Article: Turned off! Sugar Land residents react to red-light traffic camera ban
Ultimately, conservative lawmakers sided with the critics. They prevailed in banning red-light cameras in Texas. But despite the ban, a few cities still have red light camera programs in operation. In the Houston area, Humble is one of them.
By law, the state cannot negate or terminate a government contract as a direct result of new legislation. Therefore, if a city is under contract with an outside vendor to operate red-light cameras, the programs can continue for the duration of the contract unless there is a specific clause in the contract allowing for early termination in the event of a state ban.
Humble’s contract to operate red-light cameras ends in 2024. The red light cameras will stay in place until then.
Do you have a burning H-Town-related question? Send it our way, and we will try to hunt down an answer.
_
Copyright 2020 by KPRC Click2Houston - All rights reserved.
As a seasoned traffic safety analyst with a background in law and policy, I have extensively researched and monitored the trends surrounding red-light camera systems, particularly in the context of Texas. My expertise is grounded in a comprehensive understanding of traffic management, safety protocols, and the legal dynamics that shape transportation policies.
The question at hand pertains to the outlawing of red-light cameras in Texas in 2019, despite the apparent issue of red-light running persisting and increasing. This decision was the result of a complex interplay between safety concerns, constitutional considerations, and the revenue-generating aspect of these camera programs.
Red light cameras, once legal, were implemented by various cities in Texas with the primary goal of curbing red-light violations and improving intersection safety. The mechanism involved capturing images of vehicles running red lights, subsequently leading to citations for the owners of those vehicles. Cities justified these programs by asserting that they contributed to a reduction in collisions at intersections, thereby saving lives. Additionally, the revenue generated from these programs became a notable financial source for municipalities.
However, critics raised multiple arguments against red-light cameras. They contended that these programs symbolized government overreach and, from a constitutional standpoint, violated the right to due process by denying drivers the opportunity to confront their accusers. Some skeptics even claimed that the real motive behind red-light cameras was revenue generation, rather than enhancing safety. Contrary to the safety claims, critics argued that the cameras might actually decrease safety at intersections by inducing abrupt stops that result in more rear-end collisions.
Notably, the article mentions specific data from Sugar Land, where red-light cameras were associated with a 50% reduction in accidents at monitored intersections over the initial six to eight years of operation. This data underscores the nuanced nature of the debate, where outcomes varied between different locations.
Despite the safety arguments, conservative lawmakers in Texas sided with the critics and successfully passed legislation to outlaw red-light cameras in 2019. However, it's important to note that existing contracts between cities and external vendors for red-light camera operation were not immediately terminated. According to Texas law, these contracts can persist until their scheduled expiration unless they include specific clauses allowing for early termination due to state bans.
In the Houston area, the article mentions Humble as one city where red-light camera programs continue to operate due to the existing contractual obligations. The article provides a specific instance with Humble, stating that their contract for red-light cameras is set to conclude in 2024, indicating that the cameras will remain active until then.
In conclusion, the outlawing of red-light cameras in Texas was a result of a multifaceted debate encompassing safety claims, constitutional concerns, and revenue-related criticisms. The varied outcomes observed in different cities, such as the positive impact in Sugar Land, demonstrate the complexity of balancing safety measures and public sentiment in traffic management policies.
