Bluff City OKs U.S. 11E Speed Cameras
The Associated Press
Speed monitoring traffic camera, George Washington Parkway, Arlington, Virginia.
BLUFF CITY, Tenn. – If you’re one of those drivers who likes speeding down U.S. 11E, get ready to smile for the camera.
In a 4-1 vote Thursday, Bluff City’s Board of Mayor and Aldermen approved an ordinance allowing the city to install traffic enforcement cameras on its roads and use them to issue civil citations for traffic violations.
Alderman Melvin Carrier voted against the ordinance.
“I know what the people of Bluff City want, and I know what they don’t want,” Carrier said. “They don’t want the cameras.”
Mayor Todd Malone said the city will use the new ordinance, which is effective immediately, to install traffic cameras on U.S. 11E. Drivers caught speeding by the cameras will have to pay a $50 civil fine and $45 in court costs, according to the ordinance.
“The intent [behind these cameras] is not revenue,” Malone said at Thursday’s meeting. “The intent is to change people’s driving habits on U.S. 11E.”
When the board started talking about the cameras in December, Police Chief David Nelson said his officers used a portable trailer to monitor how fast drivers were traveling on the city’s 3.8-mile-long section of U.S. 11E.
More than half of the vehicles, 53 percent, were doing more than 5 miles per hour above the speed limit, Nelson said in December, adding that about 36,000 vehicles travel that 3.6-mile-stretch of highway each day.
Thursday’s vote is the most recent in a series of steps the board has taken to get the speeding cameras installed.
Now, board members must formally award a contract to a traffic camera operator before they can start using the devices on the city’s highways.
They have solicited bids from a few companies, including American Traffic Systems, an Arizona-based supplier of the cameras.
But not everyone is thrilled with the idea of installing traffic cameras. At Thursday’s meeting, Robert Miller grilled board members on their motives for installing the cameras and said he doubted it was for safety alone.
“Is the city of Bluff City turning to these speed cameras because of the downturn in the economy?” asked Miller, who is one of five people seeking a spot on the board in the May 19 election.
Miller also questioned whether the city would have to pay some of the costs associated with the cameras if they didn’t produce a certain amount of revenue.
Malone answered by saying there were no minimum amounts in a draft contract that American Traffic Systems presented to the city as part of its bid.
If it moves forward with the plan, Bluff City would become the second locality in the Tri-Cities to use speed cameras to handle traffic enforcement.
Mount Carmel, Tenn., started using speed cameras along a 2-mile-long stretch of U.S. 11W on April 1, 2008, said Jeff Jackson, the city’s police chief.
Between April 1 and Dec. 31, Jackson said, those cameras issued 3,949 citations for speeding and brought in $101,401 in fines and court costs.
“Our major purpose in this whole thing was to slow people down,” Jackson said, adding there are six stop-sign intersections along that stretch of U.S. 11W that were plagued with accidents before the city started using the cameras.
Most of the wrecks were caused when a vehicle failed to come to a complete stop and fully yield the right-of-way at one of the stop signs, Jackson said.
But the speeds drivers did as they went down the main highway only made the accidents worse, he said, adding the city had three traffic fatalities in 2008.
Mount Carmel installed the cameras in March 2008 and started using them in April 2008. Almost instantly, Jackson got the results he wanted.
Mount Carmel’s total number of accidents dropped from 95 in 2007 to 61 in 2008, while those with injuries dropped from 26 in 2007 to 17 in 2008.
“It was a very successful year,” Jackson said. “I’m not sure I’ve heard of a city that hasn’t had a reduction in accidents because of [the speed cameras.]”
| (276) 645-2518
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
I have no interest other than standing up for what is right. My point regarding the mayor, chief, and pd is that they are all in favor of the cameras because of the money it will generate for Bluff City, and essentially their jobs; not safety. A “big brother” system is not the answer. Get the officers out of convenience stores and on patrol. Constable Melvin’s idea regarding donating the profit from the $peed cameras is ingenious. Prove your motive Bluff City!
Well Jed you know so much about the speed cameras and all about the police department apparently you are against saving lives. You sound like a candidate that was raising the same issues during his speech. Explain why you do not want to save lives and why do you have bad blood against the Mayor, Chief of Police and other citizens in Bluff City? And do you really think 1 (one) officer can keep Bluff City safe. Get real, Like I said you know a lot about the way the city does business you must have some interest in this. Its apparent you are against this but like I said before I respect your opinion but downing people will not get you know where.
Obviously most of the posters here have a vested interest in the profitability of $peed cameras in Bluff City. At a time when local municipalities are lacking revenue, officials seek new income sources to protect their jobs. During these tough times, the people have to reduce and control spending. Bluff City is unwilling to reduce; therefore they must seek additional revenue.
If the $peed cameras are about safety, why are the citations not reported as moving violations? This would prevent habitual offenders from repeating their violations, as they would eventually lose their license. That would not generate as much revenue, which is what the $peed cameras are all about.
The Redflex company that operates the cameras in Kingsport and Jonesborough is incorporated in Australia and has a headquarters in Phoenix, AZ. Maybe the mayor can steal from Redflex like he did his 32 creditors in December.
The two “major highways” than run near Bluff City were in existence when Bluff City had only one officer. Do patrol officers really play a huge role in controlling the huge drug problem (assuming one exist) in Bluff City? Bluff City does not dispatch their officers. They rely on Sullivan County for dispatching. They also rely on Sullivan County for detectives and drug enforcement. Other than routine calls and traffic enforcement, Bluff City Police Department has no other purpose. Those routine calls were covered for years by the Sullivan County Sheriff’s Department.
A couple of years ago, a Bluff City officer was terminated from his position for sleeping in his patrol car that was parked in a cemetery while on duty. Upon his termination, he declared that sleeping on duty was a common practice for Bluff City officers. This shows the lack of leadership in the Bluff City Police Department. Was an internal investigation launched after this came to light, or was the chief asleep at the wheel?
Chi Chi hit the nail on the head with the gun analogy. Now it is $peed cameras, what is next? Who has time to miss work to fight a ticket that is illegally issued? This is the reason this scam is successful. If we do not fight for our rights, we will lose them.
Apparently to some, it is easier to act like a sheep and let our wonderful Bluff City leaders take us wherever they wish. As for the rest of us, we do act like sheep, dogs, or wolves. We act like the Americans by which this country was founded. Had our founders acted as many of you in Bluff City have, $peed cameras would be the least of our worries.
After reading today’s letter to the editor, in the Bristol Herald Courier, by Constable Gary William Melvin, I must agree. If the $peed cameras are truly about safety, then donate all of the profit to charities. This would be a great way for Bluff City to show that they care about the safety of the people and that they are willing to give to the community. Of course, the camera company will still control the cameras and make a profit, but at least a portion of the money would be put to good use.
chi chi if you will go back and read my comment you will see i didn’t mention any certain person not having any common sense but evidently since you felt compelled to reply on that you must be one of those individuals. the cameras are a bias witness to a violation of state law and although you receive a citation in the mail just because a vehicle is registered to you does not mean your automatically guilty, that is why there is a court system in place to dispute the facts and you have that right whether its a citation issued in person by a law enforcement officer or if it was issued through the mail. and contrary to what jed seems to think if you dispute a citation in court and are found to be innocent there is no charge or court fines unless you feel you need a lawyer and hire one at your own will. and as far as putting cameras in the stores well you don’t have to worry with that they already have them in fact several of them so if your so compelled go ask the manager to pull the video and look for an officer smacking one of his clerks on the rear and i believe you’ll be surprised to what you find.
and jed you are not presumed guilty in fact your presumed innocent until proven guilty and further more i believe you need to call these companies who maintain the cameras and the other police departments who already have them in place and I’m sure you will find that every violation has to be viewed by law enforcement before any citation is issued to ensure it is an actual violation. for someone who thinks he is so smart you don’t know your tail from a hole in the ground.
Jed,
People like you are the reason that Bluff City is one of the poorest municipalities in the state. “You remember when we only had one officer?“ is the type of comment that people make who are completely ignorant of police work and the contemporary substance abuse ridden society. Thirty or forty years ago, the population of the town was smaller. Additionally, there weren’t two major US Highways that run through the town. When Bluff City chose to annex, they signed a social contract with the citizens and businesses in their jurisdiction. They are bound to provide police protection. This requires a minimum of ten police officers to ensure that adequate law enforcement coverage is provided, as well as maximizing the safety for the officers who protect you. And for that matter, substance abuse was a recreational thing in the days of having one police officer. The amount of police officers in America getting pummeted by distracted motorists while working a wreck, or getting shot to death responding to domestic violence calls, was considerably lower in these unprogressive times you speak of. Today, substance abuse is one of the leading predecessors for violent crimes and crimes against property. More and more people are turning to it to escape from the reality of how bad things are. This trend will most definately lead to a rise in crime.
It is also people like you who make outrageous false claims in futile attempts to smear the good names of police officers who are working for less than $10 an hour. Let me tell you something, These guys put their lives on the line for everyone who lives, works, or visits that town. You must have a pathetic sad little life if all you have to do with it is hang out in gas stations and online discussion forums. I don’t care how many years you worked, or how long you have lived in Bluff City, or who you know, or how important you might think you are. You need to find some kind of constructive hobby that doesn’t involve your boredom induced delusions that instigate internal investigations, thus, wasting police resources that could be working to keep your family safe. The only barrier that the sheep have from the wolves is the sheep dog. If the wolves metaphorically outnumber the sheep dogs, its gonna be a bad day for the sheep.
Bcemployee, I live in Bluff City, I do believe I have common sense and know right from wrong. I will admit when I have done something wrong and will own up to my mistake. I have to disagree with you on the fact that “all the people who complain are the ones who are violating the law and think they should be held to a different standard for whatever reason”. I was recently mailed a ticket from the City of Kingsport for not stopping at a red light. I was not aware that I had not run this light nor had I been in that area on the stated day. Someone had borrowed my vehicle on that day and ran that light. Luckily this person assumed the responsibility, but if not, I was the one guilty even though I was not driving the car. So they have a picture with my vehicle running a red light and I am assumed guilty. How is that legal? It is no different than if a person killed with a gun registered to someone else and the innocent being blamed because the gun was legally registered to him or her. The reason why our country is in this poor state that is because people like you are too passive and do not fight for your rights.
As far as the questionable behavior that Jed observed, I have witnessed several incidents with Bluff City Officers at convenience stores. If you report it, it is your word against theirs and we all know about the “good ol’ boys club”. Here is a thought, while the red light/speed cameras are installed; lets install cameras at convenience stores to have evidence of this behavior. Since we will have “pictures”, we can assume them guilty!
bcemployee, are you the officer I observed at the Shell on 11-E Saturday night smacking the clerk on the butt? Bluff City seems to be as corrupt as Appalachia, VA. The cameras company distribute tickets the vehicle’s owner, not the driver. The alleged offender is presumed guilty. The alleged offender must pay additional fees to fight the ticket in court, despite court cost being included in the fine. The tickets are mailed from the private company, not the police department. Apparently, it is difficult for those of who cannot think for themselves to understand. It is not about breaking the law and getting a ticket. It is impossible to have a rational argument with irrational sheeple.
what the *#@# i believe bluff city must have very few citizens that has any common sense. i don’t know that the cameras violate any constitutional rights, any citizen of bluff city or the state of Tennessee, or the US has the right to charge and prosecute any criminal act that occurs in their presence. so in saying that why would the cameras infringe on your rights. I’ve noticed all the people who complain are the ones who are violating the law and think they should be held to a different standard for whatever reason. obey the law and you have no worries, if you get caught speeding be a man or woman and admit you screwed up pay the fine and go on about your business and take it as a lesson learned. and jed if you witnessed an officer smacking a convenience store clerk on the butt with a flash light why don’t you not report this, instead i think you probably made this up because you have nothing better to do but sit at home and make up reasons to cause turmoil, my point being you don’t have to lie to make friends… be yourself and I’m sure everyone will dislike or like you for who you are and not because you can tell a lie! some people i guess just got to have some ind of drama going on around them 24-7 or they can’t stand their self.
rawhide, you added to my point. A company that profits from the cameras installs the cameras; a company that only makes money if their cameras ticket people. It is no different than me taking a picture of your car and sending you a bill for speeding. This practice is unconstitutional. Class action lawsuits have been very succesful against these companies. Some of us can fight for our rights, while the rest of you sheeple follow your so called leaders to the end.
No doubt, the speed cameras are on the way for Bluff City. The board hasn’t made a final decision as to what company will install the cameras. So you bunch of new faces running for alderman might as well quit whinning and sucking your thumbs. Mayor Malone, Weaver and Wells are here to stay. Lon Gene Leonard will soon be a has been.
Advertisement