Safe Streets & Photo Radar

215 thoughts on “Safe Streets & Photo Radar”

1. No link to the El-Basyouny study? Not like it’s a very credible study with a huge conflict of interest between the author and COE. I find it hard to believe that the “risk” of a collision doubles while traveling 65 in a 60 zone.
   I also fail to understand how shooting photo radar off an overpass on Anthony Henday Drive to catch these criminals going 105 in a 100 zone is helping with safety. With this much opposition maybe the city should consider that the “limit” is set artificially low in some areas?
   Time to stop this anti-car philosophy.
   – Derek (photo radar tickets: 0)

2. I hope that there will be more thought in the future around designing streets to “cue” for the speed at which we want traffic to go. Scona Road, for e.g., is designed to look like a highway, and it’s unsurprising that it’s a speed trap for many. Unless it’s gridlocked it ‘feels’ faster – I only maintain the speed limit there using my cruise control (and before I got a car with cruise control, I often failed to stay under the limit), because automobile traffic and pedestrian and bike traffic have been segregated so much that the visual cues say to drivers, “spread out and speed up”. Let’s have drivers see the world around them, and mix traffic, so our cues will instead be to slow down. This has some credible lines of evidence behind it: http://www.ite.org/membersonly/itejournal/pdf/2013/JB13AA40.pdf Designing roads for speed and then enforcing a low speed limit, is encouraging failure, and less safety, because you end up having people speed up to the natural rate of traffic and then slamming on the breaks when they notice the suspicious-looking vehicle parked on the grass for no apparent reason.

3. Mayor Iveson,

   If you set all speed limits to be realistic with the flow of traffic, I will cease complaining about photo radar. Until then, photo radar in my mind is unreasonable criminalization of the normal actions of everyday working people. Going 115km/h with the flow of traffic on Henday should not be against the law.

   Also concerning is the fact that you still don’t understand why people still think photo radar is a cash grab. People are now well aware where the money goes, what grinds our gears is how photo radar is run like a for-profit company. For example, does hiding a photo radar van behind bushes or on top of overpasses make the road any safer than placing it in plain view? No, but it makes the program more money. Especially now that city employees at running the program, I wonder if they’re more interested in justifying their existence than anything.

   I would also prefer not to hear the “well, stop speeding” argument from you anymore. You’re here to represent the people of Edmonton and address our concerns. As soon as you start lecturing people like that, your case for keeping photo radar loses a lot of credibility. People don’t like being talked down to, especially when they feel like they’ve been wronged in the first place.

   Regards,

   Thomas Simpson

4. Great post sir! I wonder though, for research purposes, what if the speed limit on the Whytemud was increased to 90KPH for one year, how that might impact the traffic data for that artery? Wold there even BE an impact?

   Some areas have perfectly reasonable limits, but others do not.

5. i guess you dont want to be re-elected eh Donny

6. Most of Your reasoning is fine.. however the tickets on the Henday have to stop. Nailing speeders for actively speeding putting people at risk is significantly different than operating a cash cow shooting everyday normal drivers at 5 over.

   Do you think this a joke MR Iveson. You think 17K+ people just decided one day, “Hey I’m gonna sign a petition for photo radar….” Open your eyes and your mind Mt Iveson. This is an awakening. An awakening from people representing all ages, gender, race, profession. This has only begun.

7. I don’t have a fundamental problem with photo radar. However, I have never seen it adequately addressed why radar is placed on busy arterial roads with artificially low speed limits (Scona Road), or major highways where they artificially alter the flow of some drivers in the flow of traffic, creating a greater hazard (Anthony Henday Drive).

   Pretty much anyone who drives the Henday daily will tell you the problem is not that *most* drivers may be going 10-15 km/hr over the posted limit – the problem is when all traffic is not flowing at roughly the same rate of speed, creating a hazard that is amplified by aggressive drivers who then weave in/out of lanes, tailgate, etc. The same is true on a smaller level on arterial roads with few exits.

   Why then, do we see radar deployed in these areas and not the more sensible locations of school zones, in which we have many pedestrians and vulnerable people regularly crossing the road, or, more importantly, construction zones during regular work hours?

   I, apparently, am one of the few drivers who actually reduces his speed to the posted limit in construction zones. I say apparently, because the result is that I am tailgated and passed at high rate of speed by other drivers. The ONLY construction zone I have ever seen photo radar active in was at 23rd avenue / gateway prior to the completion of the new interchange, and then only at night when no workers were present.

   If photo radar is truly about safety, which I support, then why are we not seeing its deployment specifically in locations that have known vulnerable safety issues? I would rather see a photo radar vehicle parked visibly in a construction zone every day earning no revenue (because it’s visible) as a deterrent tool than hidden on Scona Road, or the Whitemud, or a dozen other major roads where aggressive driving – which photo radar will never solve, but police can – and not speed are the primary safety issues.

8. …what should we do with the EXTRA revenue? I believe the reason for photo radar is making our streets safer – especially on the Anthony Henday at 3:45am when there is just me and one photo radar van who let me know I was traveling at 103 kph. I suppose this would be considered extra revenue because you would have to be PT Barnum to convince anyone the streets are safer with this ticketing policy.

9. Except photo radar should not be set at a threshold that seems unfair. Then it is correctly seen as a road tax. It’s simplistic to say just don’t speed. Ask any enforcement personnel who have done radar/speed enforcement, unfair enforcement ie using a low threshold, getting people in a transition zone, down hill. In an area that doesn’t have traffic accidents but is just a convenient “fishing” hole actually causes people to go faster elsewhere. Photo radar is perceived as a road tax grab by many drivers. Enforcement by actual police officers who use discretion, and who also treat the traffic stop as an observant investigation ie picking up warrants, drugs, other offences is perceived as much fairer. Even if a warning is given the effect of the stop to other motorists nearby is clear…. Recently the city has taken over photo radar and since they have done that they have been giving out tickets for 3-4 km over the speed limit. Continue to do that and the taxpayers WILL lose sympathy or concern for enforcement efforts

10. My issue with photo radar is that the trucks/vans “hide”, the better they hide and the less conspicuous they are the more tickets they pull in. But did they slow anyone down? Maybe in the long run people, a couple weeks later when they get their ticket in the mail they won’t speed where they got caught, but at the moment where they were ticketed they were trucking along speeding and could have caused an accident and continued on speeding. If people see a police car parked on the side of the road everyone slows down, there is a visual deterrent to speeding at that moment, if there is a police officer in the car and someone is speeding then that person may get a ticket. I would bet that having a marked police car on the side of the road is more effective at slowing people down then a hidden photo radar truck. I feel that police services time is better served on other aspects of justice than sitting by the side of the road ticketing people. So my idea is, why not have it so all photo radar trucks/vans be well marked so there is a visual deterrent to speeding, if people so choose to continue speeding by the bright and well marked truck, then they get a ticket. How hard is that?

11. Hello,

    I couldn’t help but agree with most of what you’ve written. And while I agree that enforcement should be beefed up in residential areas , there is a photo radar truck on 132 Ave which is a 4 lane wide road with good visibility that is only 50kms an hour. While driving on this road it is VERY easy to increase speed to 5 or 10kms over the speed limit to go with the flow of traffic. I have now started setting my cruise control to 50kms because I can’t trust myself not to speed on that road. My partner and I received 6 photo radar tickets (within a period of 2 weeks) all around the 60kms/hour mark (what we thought the speed limit was, but no posted speed equals 50kms, and I know we should know better, but we didn’t). As it is we both now use the unsafe practice of using cruise control to ensure the speed is adhered to to the letter on a road that as I mentioned is wide and with clear visibility. I believe excessive speed should be penalized, but if a motorist rolls up 2-5kms an hour over the speed limit, that shouldn’t have the same penalty as a person who’s 15-20kms over. In addition, why is there no photo enforcement on 134 Ave where the road is narrower and with poorer visibility and like 132 Ave is within a neighbourhood with a school / parks and community centres? Children wait for their buses on 134 Ave. Elderly people wait for their handibus on 134 Ave. Frequently I have had to watch carefully and wait for motorists to notice me crossing the road in a crosswalk on 134 Ave, and once even quickly moving out of the way for a truck speeding down that road – and yet, no photo radar? Seems a bit strange that the wider safer road has almost daily enforcement and the smaller road with poorer visibility does not. The 6 speeding tickets were not easy to swallow either – and given they were all within a short time frame it was impossible to correct the behaviour before the next one arrived. Definitely doesn’t seem like safety was the motivator there, more like a way to shave money off of what is already a tightening bottom line. Would be easier to swallow the loss if it were apportioned to community programs (parks / not-for-profits), but again, why only on 132 Ave, why not on 134 Ave between 97 street and Castledowns (113 A street)?

    Sincerely;

    Sarah Dixon

12. Once a long time ago. someone like Grant Mitchell said to someone like Lawrence Decore:

    “The most effective way to stop publication of the Johns’ names in the newspaper is to stop visiting Prostitutes.”

    Well, that worked well..

    People are human. They are in a hurry, they lose time, they are listening to Def Leppard on the radio, and the legislation, largely installed for the reinforcement of the happy notion that men can trust men, and here’s what happen’s if you don’t.
    Sometimes blatant cosmetic enforcement is just not that effective. It is not effective when there is a radar trap at the bottom of a hill, or on a clear road on a clear day, or when it is sunny, in Spring, and the blood rushes, along with the acute other senses to accommodate it. Or when the people in charge of the profit on a budget deadline set the traps. Because the philosophy that ‘people are human’ works like that, too.

    People do not die at alarming rates or at all at moderately accelerated speeds except in troubled areas, where there are a lot of other people, and awkward road conditions. The USA data compiled by other that those with a vested interest show this .. but we don’t see that here. And we will not. Which is fine. That is also human nature.

    We see a young, bright, fluent, handsome, articulate and appealing man who was elected for those reasons.
    Not as a statistician.
    And if we confiscate all vehicles, there is no speeding, BTW.
    But that will not work. Because then there is no income from speeding, either.

13. Hello Mr Iveson,

    A couple things that bother me about this article:

    “Thankfully, tax dollars were NOT used to cover these overruns”.
    -Really? Because i’m wondering where the funds ORIGINALLY came from. Regardless of it being justified with the dollar amount made from photoradar. The budget comes out of tax payers pockets at the beginning. I don’t care if it evened out at the end, they exceeded the original budget significantly and expect us to forget that?

    Also to note, if the risk of accidents has decreased over time, why take away something that is working? Ironically the moment the thresh hold was decreased below the 11km/h window, accidents have actually increased in intersections and on regular roads. At least thats what the city of edmonton website shows.

    Hiding around corners is NOT decreasing speeding if the amount of tickets are increasing. I’d be willing to bet somebody in office noticed the community as a whole was actually getting less tickets every year and saw the overspending on budget, hence the decrease in allowed speed limit. Is there a link to reports showing tickets issued in doing 6-10km/h and anything (+)11km/h in the past 3-5yrs? This would give us a clear indication if we as a whole were going in the right direction but somebody saw the loss before it was published and figured taking advantage of the public would be the better way to go.

    Using the vans that are fully displayed for safety in communities is perfect and what the main purpose of photoradar should be used for. Hiding on overpasses, blending in with other vehicles does not show the community that they are using this for anything else then a cash grab. When police officers are doing laser they are required to wear bright vests. Whats the difference that vans/trucks/priuses get away without having to be in plain sight and completely noticeable.

    I look forward to seeing your reply to the questions I have.

14. Thanks Don. Good information.

15. Honestly I don’t think Iveson is a bad person, but he’s honestly blind about all this Photo Radar stuff. The issue isn’t speeding (Sometimes when the flow of traffic is above the speed limit, then it’s actually safer to stick with the flow of traffic). The real issue is that drivers aren’t properly educated here in Edmonton. Too many people tailgate, drive non confidently, recklessly (even slower drivers do this), and at times people just don’t know how to drive (don’t even get me started on merging onto highways). Those are the things that the city should be dealing with. Not people which go lets say 10km over the speed limit especially in zones which require higher speed limits.

    My other issue with all of this is how the Photo Radar program is a cash grabbing program. Not a safety program. If it was about safety then Photo Radar vans wouldn’t be hiding in the bushes, behind signs etc. Instead they’d be out in the open which would actually get speeders to slow down. Plus the amount of Photo radar now being used due to the councils horrible budgeting skills is just ridiculous. They’re just trying to compensate for going over the planned budget.

16. Isnt this a democracy? If majority of citizens don’t want photo radar why do we still have it?

17. what we need is boots on the ground. Does photo radar stop the speeding? I don’t think so. What it does is make people slow down at sites that have the photo radar and where they think the vehicle is parked but then speed right back up when they pass. There has to be more than just a here is a bill in the mail. We need to have EPS out and stoping people and having demerit points given out. That way it would start to make a change when you are looking at losing your licence or your job. Photo radar is a cash cow!!!

18. You Don, are an idiot.

19. I used to be like you are Mr. mayor. A limit is a limit, anything over is exceeding the speed limit. Then I started wondering, why aren’t tickets given out for 51 in a 50 zone. I would think most people would agree that getting a ticket at 51 was silly. Then what should be an acceptable over-the-limit variance?
    I also wondered about the safety argument. Are the photo radar units put in places of high accident rates or in places where speed limits are low or change a lot. Here’s a location I see a lot. The 107 ave and 142 street traffic circle. That is a high collision spot. Three entrances to the circle have 60 kph limits, one has a 50. Where is the photo radar unit placed? Not entering the circle, where the collisions happen, but on the 50 kph exit. I can give more examples where the photo radar is placed in areas that catch speeders than in areas of high collisions. I am leaning toward the side that says photo radar is a cash cow.

20. Ryans’ comments are an echo of my feelings. We need more photo radar in sensitive areas. School/playground/construction zones
    And arterial connectors through neighborhoods. Generally speaking we do not see enough good old fashion speed control by actual officers either. I support any endeavour you may make with regard to Ryans’ comments and my concerns. I respectfully thank you.

21. Agree with Ryan’s comment above.

    ” Edmontonians recently said in the Edmonton Police Service’s Citizen Satisfaction Survey that their top safety concern – ahead of gangs and drug activity – was traffic, specifically speeding…”

    When the police intentionally hide their photo radar from traffic they do not address speeding as it does not slowdown traffic . Call it what it is – a tax on speeding. However please do not pretend to use photo radar to address safety for Edmonton’s drivers.

22. I agree with Ryan & also don’t have a problem overall with photo radar. The issue I have is sometimes the hazards associated with it. I agree with catching drivers who exceed the speed limit but in this city we also have a major problem with slow drivers. I travel Yellowhead everyday & can’t tell you the amount of times someone who is doing 70km/hr(posted limit) or even less & has then hit the brakes on a green light going East/West on the Yellowhead @ 104St causing a chain reaction of vehicles hitting the brakes. These drivers are also causing problems with traffic as people then get up behind them & start cutting other drivers off in order to get past the slow drivers. Now gravel trucks in this city are an entire other issue.

23. Thanks Don, you brought forward some valid points about photo radar. I don’t have a problem with photo radar, just how it is deployed. On 142nd Street, between 107th Ave and Stony Plain Road, there is photo radar camped out there the past two years…yet streets north and south of that, the speed limit is clearly 60 km. Cars are usually travelling with the flow of traffic, there aren’t too many bombing down this 7 block stretch…yet it is photo radar goldmine for those going over 50 km. To me this is a trap…signs are better displayed now but really is this the best place to nab drivers? If so, then majority of cars going down this route should get a ticket which I don’t think is happening. Let’s nab those drivers that have no regard for safety and driving excessive speeds or are being reckless/too aggressive…instead of just nailing common folks who are going with the flow of traffic. Right now optics look like photo radar is adding to the coffers of City Hall…and people are getting annoyed with everything going up for property taxes, utility bills, insurance. I think we all can make an effort to slow down (including me), but who do we properly target? I appreciate hearing your side of the story.

24. There are already countless studies that prove photo radar does not improve public safety. The fact this is being thrown in our face like it does is ridiculous as the majority of photo radar are in spots that do nothing to protect the public. Scona road is a great example, how about fort road? There are 3 spots in a 10 block radius, 1 of them is an empty field in an industrial area. How about the anthony henday? I’ve seen multiple trucks in the same direction on consecutive over passes. Yeah this sure helps with safety.

    There’s a greater discussion Don is ignoring while he’s busy twisting the words that some are asking about the photo radar discussion. If photo radar was being used like Don says it is people wouldn’t mind but sitting in the same spot for weeks at a time while nabbing speeders going 4km/hr over in industrial areas is hardly about public safety.

25. Thank you for clarifying these issues. It is most unfortunate that the vast majority of drivers I encounter daily do not seem to understand what the word “limit” means; hopefully they read this and now know! (This is most disconcerting when one is driving in the left lane, going the LIMIT, and people gesture/yell/swerve, etc., as if one is doing something wrong. Um, the limit is just that, no one is supposed to exceed it, even to pass people!). Anyhow, thanks for some much-needed info.

26. Spin it however you like Donnie boy. Fact is the program had over 40 million in cost overuns while simultaneously increasing the number of photo radar tickets issued. So it doesn’t take a forensic accountant to see what’s going on here

27. Imagine if the garbage collectors screwed up and then decided to recover the millions of dollars they wasted by more strictly enforcing limits on the weight of bags and size of containers — without letting anybody know about the change in practice.
    Then, when the issue comes to light, the mayor claims that it is all OK because “tax dollars” were not used to cover the losses due to the thousands of additional trash tickets issued to people who violated limits.
    The mayor weakens his moral authority by using safety as a smokescreen for what is a clear case of the administration trying to hide its errors on transition costs.
    Speeding is a problem. Enforcement can be an effective deterent. But that’s not what this was about. Period.
    We’ve already seen that promises made about Blatchford were wildly unrealistic. Now we’re trusting the administration is right about a big gamble on downtown redevelopment.
    Trust is hard to win and easy to lose.
    My faith in the city to admit its mistakes — and thus learn from them — is weakened when our mayor and council pretend the Emperor is fully clothed.

28. I agree with Ryan that the speed enforcement needs to be used a little more wisely. School zones, Construction zones as well as any high collision known area. I personally think that EVERY school zone in the city should have photo radar setups. And if you want people to REALLY slow down in construction zones? Have photo radar setup in both directions. Those are the people who should be paying, the ones who are endangering many lives.

    I think that photo radar is a voluntary tax. You dont pay if you dont speed. However, it is a tool that could be utilized much better than it currently is.

    Youre doing a great job Mayor Iveson! Keep it up!

29. How I see our photoradar program
    So a car is driving recklessly down the whytemud 2 Solutions here
    #1. Cop pulls him over hands him a ticket demerits off his license if its serious enough or enough demerits have already been taken away this reckless driver gets his license taking away. Or is giving the ticket drives off obeying the posted speed limit rest of the day hopefully learns a lesson.
    #2 Solution 2 reckless driver driving down whytemud passes photoradar car doesn’t realize he has just got a ticket keeps driving recklessly for the rest of the day putting every other driver at risk. Doesn’t receive the ticket for another week so assuming he continues his poor driving habits till he receives a fine of X amount of dollars, No demerits taking away just basically a slap on the wrist.

    If you want to get the speeders off the road scrap the funding for the photoradar program get more officers out on the street Pulling people over handing out tickets and demerits. Because if it really is “their top safety concern – ahead of gangs and drug activity” they would be able to put a little more effort into it rather than have an officer sitting around all day taking photos.

30. Ryan has touched on a part of the issue with how photo radar is currently being used, but there is still more to be said. Photo radar locations currently appear to be chosen based on where they can best hide from unsuspecting motorists. Considering the behavioral feedback loop is severely delayed from the time of the offence to when you receive the ticket, it’s unlikely that behavioral changes will occur. Even if the motorist does change their driving behavior, it is delayed until they receive their feedback. Also, hiding photo radar in sneaky places does not give the impression that they are trying to get motorists to slow down, but rather that they want to get as many tickets as they can before people catch on.

    This is an incredibly inefficient use of an excellent safety tool.

    Photo radar would be a very effective tool at reducing the speed of motorists to the posted speed limit when the radar is clearly visible and/or signed. It could be used to actually enforce the speed limit in critical areas like school and construction zones, as well as high density merge areas or intersections with high pedestrian activity. Having clearly marked and visible photo radar would actually get people driving slower. Sadly, I doubt Edmonton would adopt such an honest, fair, effective, and logical utilization of photo radar since it would result in significantly less photo radar tickets being generated. Welcome to the city where we say we want you to obey the law, but our budget is counting on that never happening. Prove me wrong, please.

31. This is all good and well, but:

    1) There IS a buffer (what world are you living in Don?), because;
    2) Speed limits are artificially low, and;
    3) It has been proven that the longer the delay between action and punishment, the less effective the punishment has on future behavior. If this is actually about safety and not money, then stopping speeders in the act should be prioritized. Why isn’t this the case?

32. This is a well-written post. I think it’s important that council understand that there are large numbers of people in this city that want to see more done to curb dangerous driving, and speed enforcement is an important part of the mix.

    As far as redirecting money, I would say that this is a bad idea. I love that every penny the city receives goes into traffic safety. As long as there’s enough people speeding that this program is turning a surplus, the program should be expanded. Empire build away!

    That said, I would like some of that surplus be used to expand money-losing enforcement programs. In-person enforcement that can give out demerits, increased (and increasingly random, rather than by-request) enforcement on side streets. Enforcement on non-speed offenses like tailgating. That sort of thing.

33. Photo radar can still be a cash grab. It doesn’t matter if the remaining balance of photo radar income doesn’t go into the general revenue. If wasn’t for the radar money going to police services then they would need a lot more money from the cities general revenue. It’s money the city doesn’t have to spend on the police.
    I would love to hear how Edison’s radar program isn’t a cash grab. I got a ticket for going 8 km/hr where the hwy 16 traffic is forced to drive throught their town. I’m sure that’s how they must pay most of their police budget.
    I guess the definition of cash grab for me would be if the lowering of the “buffer” is in any way related to money and not safety or technology. I’ve heard in edmonton it used to be 15 and now is more like 10. Did people start speeding less? If 10 is a safe buffer then why wasn’t it at 10 before? Or did the radar income start going down, and the police needed their cash flow to stay at the same level, so they lowered the buffer? It’s easy for them to hide behind safety justifications.

34. That is all fine except you are using these stats to justify bringing more money into the city and wasting it away instead of actually spending money properly. It’s so easy to spend money when you have unlimited access to it, for example the huge amount spent on the transition. If that happened anywhere other than government people would be fired left right and center. But in private industry it would never get that far because someone in the company would stop it, re-evaluate and start doing it properly.

    Back to the stats. Funny thing about stats is you can make them say anything you want. Watch this… 100% of vehicle collisions are caused by vehicles. See what I did there? Now if you want to look at it another way. A car is 100 times more likely to be in an collision if it has tires. These stats are “technically” correct and made up to say exactly what I wanted them to say. Now really if we brought in some other variables I would have to change my numbers. But really I just want to use the variables that support my case so we will leave everything else out. This is exactly how it seems that this city’s council is using these stats.

    Let’s see what I mean by that. So the city is giving out a record number of speeding tickets because of photo radar. Now since you don’t receive the ticket for a couple of weeks and you continue to speed after the camera took your picture shouldn’t those people have been in an accident by the time they receive their fine/”safety notice” if your twice as likely to be involved in an accident by being 5km/h over the limit? And since most of these tickets are for at least 10km/h over then really they are 4 times more likely to be in an accident. So if you look at it that way collisions should be increasing since there are so many people speeding by 10km/h over the limit.

    No disrespect Mr. Iveson, I don’t know you, I don’t know what life experiences you have, but you probably shouldn’t try to sell something unless you actually understand it. Reason I say this is because you obviously don’t understand all of the variables involved and this is proven by the fact that you once said “if you are 1km/h over the limit you deserve a ticket”. This leads me to believe you have other motives for loving these speed cameras so much.

    If this was done properly, like in areas of actual concern instead of highways (Anthony Henday, Yellowhead) people wouldn’t be getting so upset about it. If you want to know the real issues on those roadways maybe you should start enforcing rules like actual distracted drivers, slower traffic that does not keep right, tailgaiting. Maybe one day I will share with you all of the videos I have saved from my dashcam to show you some actual issues more than speeding.But then again that probably wouldn’t be of concern to you because there is no easy money involved.

35. It is good news that injury and fatality rates are coming down. I am sure that safer cars, better brakes, tires, better road surfaces, improved signage, better lighting and visibility all contribute to this positive change.

    The city’s active photo radar enforcement program correlates with this change, but likely has done little or nothing to cause this change.

    The #1 and #2 causes of fatal collisions are 1) following too closely and 2) making left turns into oncoming traffic. These collision causing factors are not something that photo radar enforcement can directly affect.

    In the Edmonton Police Service’s Citizen Satisfaction Survey, people ask the EPS to deal with these problems. Instead, what we get are photo radar trucks hiding in bushes and overpasses on freeways. Nothing at all to do with educating drivers and reducing fatal collisions.

    The hypocrisy of generating revenue via automated photo radar enforcement is apparent to the 17,000 people who signed the petition to end photo radar in Edmonton. 17,000 people in only 6 days, Don. http://www.change.org/p/city-of-edmonton-stop-our-photo-radar-program

    You (and other city councillors) make a nebulous claim that “the balance of photo radar revenue that comes to the City does not go into general revenue”? After paying millions operate its fleet of photo radar trucks, the City of Edmonton funds “traffic safety education initiatives and makes physical modifications to roadways that improve safety”.

    If the #1 and #2 causes of fatal collisions are 1) following too closely and 2) making left turns into oncoming traffic, why haven’t we seen “traffic safety education initiatives” to help Edmontonians avoid these dangers? Where do those millions of photo radar dollars go?

    Finally, why are speed limits set artificially low on main arterial roads and freeways? 50 km/h on Scona Road? 80 km/h on the Whitemud freeway? These roads are engineered to have higher limits. The optic of low speed limits on major thoroughfares is “it’s so they can grab more cash with photo radar”.

    Edmonton should end photo radar and adjust speed limits to a sensible, safe level. City Council should also instruct the relevant offices to initiate traffic safety education initiatives to reduce the Top 2 causes of fatal collisions.

    I appreciate your blog post on this topic. As mayor, what will you do to resolve the issues at hand?

36. A very good explanation of the Photo Radar program. I agree with the statement that we can put it out of business if we simply slow down. That said, I would be very interested in knowing what other Traffic Safety initiatives are in place from the Office of Traffic Safety. Everyday, I see drivers in Edmonton exhibiting dangerous driving behaviours that are not speed related (lane changes without signalling or shoulder checking, tail gating, driving too slow (an auto fail on a driving test by the way), etc). I would also be interested in knowing why there is no enforcement of traffic laws against bicycle riders. The vast majority of bicycle riders operate their vehicles as if they are exempt from the Traffic Safety Act and Rule of the Road legislation. When the bicycle is being ridden, it is considered a vehicle under both acts and the laws should be applied to them as well.

37. This is a very well written and explain post. However, I do feel that photo radar is not the needed answer. I have no issue with photo radar. If I’m speeding, I deserve a ticket. If I receive one, I pay it without complaint. Introducing school zones is also an excellent idea.

    However, you make reference to the police survey citing traffic as a major concern. However, speeding is only a very small part of this concern. People failing to signal, changing lanes without shoulder checking, turning illegally, tailgating, cutting people off, cutting corners, and running red lights are all a much higher concern to me than speeding. On my drive to work I have 3 curves where I have to be extremely careful on because people cut the corners so much that they would run me off the road if I was next to them. Outside of that, I have to react to bad drivers on a weekly, if not daily, basis in order to prevent accidents. These are not caused by myself or the other driver speeding, but rather by, failing to shoulder check, running stop signs, turning illegally, or failing to signal. Essentially, it’s lazy driving. Speeding is such a small issue on the roads as it has been addressed over the past handful of years. What now needs to be addressed is driver training and licensing (I realized this isn’t a city matter) and enforcement of the traffic laws outside of speeding.

38. Though I may not agree with absolutely everything in this post, I am so ridiculously happy to have a Mayor that is willing to take the time to write it.

    Not to mention the fact that it include sources, not just opinions!.

    I completely understand that this kind of time and attention can’t be spent on every “hot button” issue, but obviously this is one has weighed (somewhat unfortunately) heavily on council recently.

    Thank you, Mayor Iveson, for all you have done thus far and for all that you will do in the future.
    Please do not let the the endless drone of ill-informed nay-sayers weigh you down, and please don’t take on so much it burns you out!

39. I have to disagree with the comment Don said. Traffic accidents have decreased! But anyone who believes this is “solely” due to the fact there are more photo radar vans and intersection cameras is ridiculous. The amount of technology and advances in brake sensors, automated brake assistance, blind spot detectors and rear view sensors/cameras are the real reason there are less accidents. Also the driver training programs have only gotten more difficult for younger drivers to attain a new license and make it difficult for the elders to keep them. This also makes the roads safer, and creates less accidents. I am fine with photo radar being in the city if it placed in the spots that actually promote safety (school zones, construction zones, white ave, downtown) places of high pedestrian population. Not parked illegally on ray gibbon drive overpass or hiding in bushes. There is no reason edmonton and area should have more photo radar vans/cameras in one city then all of Ontario combined.

40. Don’t speed and you won’t get a ticket. I would be more than happy for the people speeding through my kid’s school zone to pay for a much needed play ground for them. If you don’t like the posted speed limit, I encourage you to take transit. Its a win all around. You won’t get a ticket and the roads will be less congested.

41. Interesting to see practically no one agree with don. Everyone agrees in it’s current state photo radar is unacceptable and changes must be made.

    Dons unwilling to have this debate and will be on tv tomorrow telling motorists it’s your fault if you get a ticket.

42. The issue that is getting most of the average voters interested and aggravated with this issue is the fact that photo radar is not being placed in areas that are safety issues. They are being placed in areas that have speed limits that have been set lower than the average driver is driving at. The the volume of tickets is of the utmost concern, not the effect on the safety of those on the road. You can argue the definition of the limit, however in the end the reasoning for these units becomes apparent.

    The photo radar owners that you employ get paid for the amount of tickets they write. They obviously, like city council see value in volume vs true affect on safety. Nobody gets paid for that.

    Well that’s not true. You do Mr. Iverson.

43. As the mayor said, don’t speed, and you don’t get a ticket. If you are driving with the flow of traffic and you’re speeding, that means you’re all speeding and should all get tickets. As far as photo radar being hid and thus unfair or ineffective, it’s still simple, DON’T SPEED and you DON’T get a ticket. Besides the idea is that you are frightened by the prospect of getting a ticket and therefore never speed, not that you see a photo radar and slow down until you’re past and then continue breaking the law, wasting fuel and endangering the lives of others! There is NO argument to be made for speeding.

44. Mayor Iverson, I guess you want to be a one time mayor, at least Mandel valued what the people of Edmonton were saying, you consider us all criminals because we want photo radar looked and and if deemed useless for anything other then a cash cow. Set the speed limits realistically around the city, 80 kms on the Whitemud or Yellowhead is a joke. Hiding the photo radar cars behind bushes or buildings is a joke also. Punish the speeders by demerit points………..oh yeh I forgot that means getting the police out of the doughnut shops and behind the radar guns like they used to be. Abolish photo radar and put the same amount of money into MANNED RADAR GUNS AND NO-ONE WOULD COMPLAIN THEN

45. I’ve only had one speeding ticket in 25 years, but think the use of photo radar should be used where there is a REAL safety issue/problem, and speed limits should be set in a more consistent manner – Why does a side street east of 83 street 2 blocks south of 76 Avenue has a 50km/h limit, when 76 Ave is 40 km/hr is ridiculous. If anything, it should be the other way around. And why is Scona Road only 50km/hr? Before it was improved, the speed limit was 60!

46. Please public the data for the past 5 years including where accidents have happened, the severity (injury, death, level of damage) and speed limit, whether speed was a factor, and then also where photo radar tickets have been given, the number, the amounts over the limit. Put the micro data out there and let the citizenry be the judge.

47. Dear Don,

    I really should commend you on your audacity in taking baby diaper scrapings and serving them up as pudding. Like Ryan, I nor my colleagues have a fundamental problem with photo radar or red light cameras. However when these devices are employed there is some expectation of ethical enforcement. What is disgustingly apparent within your fair city is that the technology has been leveraged to maximize income in the laziest way possible with a guise of “Public safety”. This is not even to discuss the glaring conflict of interest involved in a city department that can cover it’s financial incompetence by tightening the screws and self funding. Asking the administrators pointed questions hahahaha I’m sure that is like asking an alcoholic if they drink too much. It comes out after 5 years that there where cost overruns but nobody noticed since the bottom line was all fine and dandy.

    Where deployment is concerned, Schools, playgrounds and construction zones. Fill your boots, make the zones speed fines doubled when workers or children present and go nuts. Instead the ratio is easily 10 to 1 that they will be found hiding on the henday instead. Far closer to 25 or 30 to 1 if workers where to actually be present. Red light cameras, Same thing. just don’t short the yellows. better yet let’s extend the yellows 2/10’s of a second where you do have cameras and let’s see if tickets and collisions decline in lockstep. Further to the whole issue of photoradar is the disgusting lack of any type of real traffic safety initiatives within the city. Oh sure you will rent a bunch of electronic signs to put out all over town to tell everyone about your next revenue drive, er pardon me “big ticket event” but have they ever been deployed with the message “lights on for safety” or better yet “Wipers ON, Headlights ON” naahhh that would make sense. Instead let’s let people nearly rearend the zipperhead in the grey car on the overcast day. Maybe just once instead of having 5 cars and 10 officers revenue’n in a transition zone with a speed gun on an overpass pull over the clowns with no lights in a snowstorm and hand them 6 demerit $300 undue care and attention tickets.

    You could educate the pedestrian public that the flashing light means finish crossing the road and clear the intersection it doesn’t mean run across it and since you guys are so set on bike lanes how about an education campaign for cyclists that simply states “you are a pedestrian or an automobile. Pick a SINGLE set of rules” Can’t even count the number of times I have witnessed a cyclist who was behaving like a motorist reach a red light and convenient to only them suddenly become a pedestrian and cross on the crosswalk, all without dismounting of course.

    Want to reduce road rage and collisions on the mud from terwilligar to fox drive westbound? Get some F’n concrete and shorten the terwilligar merge lane so every dick in his Brodozer can’t go flying down it then try to cross 4 lanes in 200 feet to exit at fox drive. Whoever engineered that gem needs a good nutpunch.

    The point of all this is that Edmontons traffic safety is laughable at best and the manner in which you have chosen to use photo enforcement is a very Visible to All advertisement that your priority in it’s use is unquestionably revenue. Far worse than simply stating “yes it’s a revenue device deployed at our discretion” you hide behind obviously false pretense which can only lead us to the conclusion, “Mayor contains Pudding” Ironically, by stating that the cost overruns are now resolved and the moneypit filled either you will make a political move to look heroic by increasing thresholds after a “reasonable review” or are we the driving public to anticipate a gold plated education program and some serious road improvements with the sudden windfall at current ticketing rates?

    Just to be clear this is most definitely not sour grapes. i don’t get tickets in your town as those vehicles always have a detectible scent of cheap bacon and old doughnuts. Plus I don’t speed.

48. Honestly, I don’t think there is a problem with using photo radar to catch speeders. I myself have gotten a few tickets, and the only person I can blame is me. People who say they aren’t paying attention to the road when they are looking out for radar vans should listen to how ridiculous that sounds. If you’re not going over the speed limit, then you never have to worry about radar, and can pay attention to the road.

    If any change is to be made, maybe make the photo radar vans change their locations daily. There really shouldn’t be a van set up in the same location, or even fairly close to it day after day. If people know there is regularly a van in the same spot, they will slow down until they pass, then speed up again. Mandate that they set up in some of the quieter streets sometimes. I can assure you that there are many roads I have never seen a photo radar van set up, and the amount of speeding on some of them is ridiculous. The mobile speed indicator signs don’t really do anything. There was one in my neighborhood a while back, and while waiting to turn, I saw it light up with speeds of 68, 72, and even an 86. This was in a 50 zone.

    I guess that what the city is asking of it’s citizens is a simple behavioral change, and that is what people are really upset about. They want the city to bend to their own behavior rather than conforming to the majority.

    I think there really should be more speed enforcement by actual officers. Many people don’t mind paying for a few tickets a year because it has no effect on them other than a little lighter wallet. When demerits are involved, which cannot be given on a photo radar ticket, people may be more likely to adjust their behavior.

    I definitely agree with some of the people saying there are many more issues that cause traffic accidents. I am completely in favor of redesigning every major left turn to an advance turn and then a red light for the turning lane. Distracted driving laws need to have stricter enforcement. I see many people every day with phones held to their heads. Failure to signal, illegal u-turns, and blocking intersections are also major issues.

49. Well Mr. Mayor, I don’t expect you to have the courtesy to answer since you made your position ample clear by bellowing “I’ve had it with these people” into the cameras. Let me say it very simple: There is absolutely no improvement of traffic safety if a radar trap sits on a bridge over top of Hwy 16 westbound by the Henday cutoff right after a speed reduction, this is purely revenue generation, i.e. slam the brakes and cause a jam or get fined. There is also no improvement of traffic safety by having 3 radar traps within 3 bridges, again simple revenue generation. There are no pedestrians on the highway (Henday) and the speed limit is obviously artificially set too low on a highway with little traffic and wide open lanes. I have absolutely no problem with radar in the city, albeit not with entrapment techniques like City decaled work trucks etc. And while we are on the topic of traffic safety, it would be really nice to see some of those jaywalkers that I see every single day getting fined too but of course that would require personnel to do anything about them. Those are the people that I have had it with, the morons with earbuds, fixated on their idiot phone sauntering out into roads. Lastly, if the city made 40 million dollars from speed fines last year, where did they go? Where can we see these “safety initiatives”? It’s not by having Gerry Shymko speaking into a camera how we are all morons. A safety initiative would be going after people who are weaving in and out of traffic on the Yellowhead every day or all the texters and “hands free” talkers, none of which I see getting fined.

50. To add to all of these well known arguments against photo radar enforcement, now that they are ticketing within 3-5km/h over the limit…I have yet to see anyone mention the fact that OEM car manufacturers specs for accuracy of your speedometer allow as much as 8% difference in measured vehicle speed vs. indicated speed. Combine that with things like incorrectly fit or highly worn tires, the difference can be larger…8% over 100km/h = 108km/h, which would be a ticket now, even though your dash indicates 100. I’ve had this argument with Volkswagen of Canada themselves once, over a brand new vehicle…nothing they would do, as that was “within tolerances.”

51. The speed limit on H216 going around Edmonton is too slow. It could easily be 110 km/h. Given the recent speed limit increase to 120 km/h on some Canadian highways it seems this is even more so the case. So, to place so many photo radar in places where they are not needed (i.e. H216) instead of allocating to additional school zones or other places of high traffic fatality is very frustrating.

52. Sorry to here you think photo radar is not going anywhere. Perhaps you can tell me how you seem to think you have so much power ? While riding your bicycle maybe you could think about how much you contribute to our roadways ? The petition is not some trumped up bull and whether you care or not that is only the tip of the iceberg. People in this city are fed up with this cash cow, show me how the safety of the public is served with the location of these traps.You said photo radar is not going away, neither are the people that signed the petition.

53. Don iveson you stated that speeding etc is extremely dangerous, and that no one should ever speed etc. Well here’s some info I found on the National Motorists Association website. I’d really love to hear what you think of all these facts.

    Q. How should speed limits be set?
    A. Traffic engineers maintain that speed limits should be established according to the 85th percentile of free flowing traffic. This means the limit should be set at a level at or under which 85 percent of people are driving. Numerous studies have shown that the 85th percentile is the safest possible level at which to set a speed limit.

    Q. What are “realistic” speed laws?
    A. According to a pamphlet produced by the Washington State Department of Transportation relating to speed limits, “realistic” speed limits should invite public compliance by conforming to the behavior of the most drivers. This would allow the police to easily separate the serious violators from the reasonable majority.

    Q. Isn’t slower always safer?
    A. No, federal and state studies have consistently shown that the drivers most likely to get into accidents in traffic are those traveling significantly below the average speed. According to research, those driving 10 mph slower than the prevailing speed are more likely to be involved in an accident. That means that if the average speed on an interstate is 70 mph, the person traveling at 60 mph is more likely to be involved in an accident than someone going 70 or even 80 mph.

    Q. Wouldn’t everyone drive faster if the speed limit was raised?
    A. No, the majority of drivers will not go faster than what they feel is comfortable and safe regardless of the speed limit. For example, an 18-month study following an increase in the speed limit along the New York Thruway from 55 to 65 mph, determined that the average speed of traffic, 68 mph, remained the same. Even a national study conducted by Federal Highway Administration also concluded that raising or lowering the speed limit had practically no effect on actual travel speeds.

    Q. Don’t higher speed limits cause more accidents and traffic fatalities?
    A. No, if a speed limit is raised to actually reflect real travel speeds, the new higher limit will make the roads safer. When the majority of traffic is traveling at the same speed, traffic flow improves, and there are fewer accidents. Speed alone is rarely the cause of accidents. Differences in speed are the main problem. Reasonable speed limits help traffic to flow at a safer, more uniform pace.

    Q. Aren’t most traffic accidents caused by speeding?
    A. No, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) claims that 30 percent of all fatal accidents are “speed related,” but even this is misleading. This means that in less than a third of the cases, one of the drivers involved in the accident was “assumed” to be exceeding the posted limit. It does not mean that speeding caused the accident. Research conducted by the Florida Department of Transportation showed that the percentage of accidents actually caused by speeding is very low, 2.2 percent.

    Q. Aren’t our roads more dangerous than ever before?
    A. No, our nation’s fatality rate (deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled) is the lowest it has ever been. The total number of fatalities has also stayed relatively stable for several years. They do occasionally increase, but given that our population and the distance the average person drives are also increasing, this is not surprising, nor is it cause for alarm.

    Q. If nobody follows the speed limit, why does it matter that they are underposted?
    A. According to a speed-limit brochure published in conjunction with the Michigan State Patrol, inappropriately established speed limits cause drivers to take all traffic signals less seriously. The brochure also points out that unrealistic speed limits create two groups of drivers. Those that try to obey the limit and those that drive at a speed they feel is safe and reasonable. This causes dangerous differences in speed.

    Q. Don’t lower speed limits save gas?
    A. No, research has shown that the 55-mph National Maximum Speed Limit, which was enacted specifically to save gas, had practically no impact on fuel consumption. This is partly because people do not obey artificially lower speed limits. It is also because the differences in travel speeds that result from unreasonable limits waste gas. Most fuel is used to accelerate to a given speed. Speed limits based on actual travel speeds promote better traffic flow, which reduces the amount of braking and accelerating on our roads. This has a positive effect on fuel consumption.

54. I love how this is filled under “term 2013-2017”, because this will be an election issue when it comes to elect a new mayor in 2017. What’s the definition of a one term mayor? Don Iveson! Or is this Mod Flander’s screaming “think of the children?” I don’t know how many kids play on the Henday or the Yellowhead Hwy, but I’m pretty sure its zero.

55. If it isn’t a cash grab make them visible. Why the hiding? why don’t you want people to know you are enforcing the speed limit? cash grab… I think so now. why are they placed in transition areas where all flow of traffic is speeding until they slow down ex gateway just after 23rd overpass there is three speed changes in a km how bout set up 2 km from a transition zone or hill this is just a cash grab. I’m not buying your garbage. sell it to the don’t speed so I don’t get ticket people they seem to buy what your selling. also explain to me how drivers in front of me noticing a photo radar van slamming on there brakes in the middle of the road is safe for me or my kids on the road. if it was marked and visible from a distance people may slow down gradually or not speed at all. end photo radar. anyone starys a petition which meets the required acts to force council let me know when and where and I will sign along with many others.

56. To the Mayor and all those saying “Don’t speed, and you don’t get a ticket” you are wrong. I was doing 45 in a 50 once, because I saw the van, and made sure I was not speeding, somehow I got a 65 in a 50 ticket. More recently, I was doing 51 in a 50 zone, a car pulled out from a side road, and cut me off, I did not have the space to slow down or stop without an impact, so I to evasive action and swerved around them into the empty lane, in order to keep control of my vehicle I hand to accelerate a little bit and I hit 63km/h just in time to get a photo radar. Now before you say “oh you could fight it in court” yes I could, but I live 90 min north of the city, the cost in fuel alone would be more than the ticket, never mind the day off work. Since most of the photo radar operators I’ve seen don’t pay attention how do you argue your case against a machine?

57. Oh I forgot.. the 10km/h “buffer’ was a buffer to account for mechanical and electrical variances. Speedometers don’t come from factory tune 100% bang on, I had 2 cars brand new off the lot, going down the highway at the same speed, I kid you not the speedometer on one read 100km/h the other 110km/h.. how are we to know which is correct? Then the photoradar devices have a variance of +-2km/h… hence the 10km/h BUFFER to prevent BS tickets from being issued

58. . . . “safety” says the condescending grammarian.

59. I moved a few years ago from Lethbridge to Medicine Hat, and when I arrived I wondered why traffic moved so orderly. Well, I found out that it was because they have photo radar everywhere! I hated it initially, but after the first ticket, it was easy enough to ‘stay on the right side of the law’ as they set their machines at 10 km/hr over. A moments inattention was not a particularly big deal, and traffic was as mentioned, safe and orderly.

    Moving then to Edmonton and getting passed like I was standing still while going 59 km/hr in a 50 km construction zone was a shock, as was the jumble of speeds everyone drove on the Whitemud.

    So, it was my reluctant conclusion that photo radar was good.

    Now you decide to bring radar in, and set the buffer at a km or two over? What’s going to happen is that people won’t stand for it, and there will be no radar again. By being a fanatic you lose everything. Thanks bud.

60. I’m tired of people blaming others for their own poor choices. Grow up and follow the rules, people!! You are not invincible and traffic laws apply to YOU. I’m 35 years old and a number of years ago I made the decision to stop speeding. I’d like to see many others do the same thing. Maybe we should start a petition to stop SPEEDERS in Edmonton – for the good of everyone living in our city. What a mental shift from the excuses used by those who don’t respect the law. Thank you for standing up on this issue Mayor Iveson.

61. Photo radar tickets fail on all the principles of effective deterrence and punishment, and that’s why they don’t curb speeding. A ticket is not certain, prompt, or predictable. You can speed often and not get caught (no certainty). When you do get caught, the punishment comes too late to have any connection to the deviant behaviour (not prompt). You may go by photo radar at 5 over and not get a ticket, but get one at 10 over at the same place (not predictable). From a sociological perspective, photo radar isn’t built to punish or deter effectively, and so it doesn’t. This is an immutable fact.

    Aside from that, I’m more astounded by the astronomical cost overruns of this program and shocked that council hasn’t been made to answer (and this is what motivates me to sign the petition). That the program is, overall, making money, is moot. This fiasco demonstrates shockingly poor planning, foresight, and management by the city. If Redford’s downfall started with a $45,000 trip, surely this council and mayor should be concerned about a scandal magnitudes worse?

    Finally, if speeding is the scourge of our roads, why do lauded defensive driving courses *teach* young new drivers to “go with the flow” and break the law? Because going 70 when everyone’s doing 90 makes you a hazard.

62. I bet you yourself break the law everyday by going over at least 1km/hr. If you say you don’t you’re lying, because its not possible. Photo Radar is not nothing but a cash cow!!

63. Don, if we are going to all of sudden switch to a zero tolerance on speeding system it is only fair to citizens that two things are done:

    Firstly, we should have been informed of the changes. Do you really think that all these people would be furious if the city hadn’t decided to switch their policy overnight and hand out thousands more tickets as a form of notice of the policy change? Do you think that speaks of any kind of integrity? It’s akin to letting your neighbour shortcut through your yard every day for years and then just getting a vicious guard dog without telling him. Sorry for the bite neighbour but you’re not supposed to be in my yard because it’s against the law!

    Secondly, if zero tolerance is the way forward then we need to take a serious look at the speed limits and where the traps are. You can’t expect people to drive at artificially low speeds because it’s the law. Spend the money and re-evaluate the limit on each road and set it according to it’s design. No more widening Scona road to freeway proportions and keeping the limit at 50. Fix the Whitemud so that it can have a higher limit that is safer because of the flow of traffic and the design. Put traps in places that make a difference, and not just make money. For example I have had many near misses on rowland road around Dawson bridge. This is a road that needs enforcement. There are about half a dozen residential roads and alleys that abut it with no lights and residents coming and going and yet people frequently barrel down this road in excess of 70 Km/h which is too fast for anyone to safely turn out onto the road given it’s curves and reduced visibility. I see a sign that says that the road is radar enforced and yet in 3 years of daily frequent use I have not seen a single photo radar trap or officer enforcing the limit. I did however experience months where good old Scona had traps in one direction or the other most days of the week with it’s one intersection which is controlled by lights and numerous lanes.

    Yes, the new rules are zero tolerance. If people are getting tickets for going 58 in a 50, that’s zero tolerance. Neither a car’s speedometer or the photo radar equipment are accurate enough for that kind of ticketing to be fair. Some variability in the speed you’re travelling at is inevitable when driven by a human and recognizing that a small and brief increase of speed in order to merge or change lanes or even avoid an accident is a normal part of driving a vehicle. If you want us to spend all of our time looking at the speedometer rather than the road, this is a great start.

64. I bet you break the law everyday by going over 1km/hr. If you say you don’t then you’re lying, because that not possible. Photo radar is nothing but a cash cow!!!

65. What a bunch of babies! Get over yourselves.

66. I think the photo radar is good as long as it’s ran right. I know of people getting speeding tickets for going 2-3 kms over the speed limit.
    I think that’s crazy & stupid & a money grab. The City should set out a limit past the regular speed limit before a ticket can be issued.
    If someone goes 10kms over the speed limit sure nail them hard with a ticket, but not someone going 2kms over.

67. mr. Iveson: your comments about speeders may be accurate to a degree but the fact you are so misinformed gives me cause for concern. it just so happens that i fix cars for a living and i know for a fact that these photo radar cameras at light s is what causes accidents. these lights are supposed to have 4 seconds between yellow and red i believe for people to clear the intersection. most in this city are at 2(i believe) they change way too quickly, if this isn’t a cash cow – then change it to work like it is supposed to work and reduce the accidents at these lights.you set these lights up to give more tickets out- period. i see way too many rear end accidents at these lights from people slamming on their brakes to avoid getting that ticket. also – you say that they should be in school zones – i agree but they are never in school zones- they are on the main arteries hidden so they can give more tickets.
    you have no sympathy for speeders, neither do i but i have no sympathy for a corrupt and greedy cash grab. i hope our petition works and photo radar is abolished. at least then it would force your police to start enforcing speeding properly.

68. Don’t speed = no problems. No one gets your money but you. All I see here is a lot of people complaining because they are getting caught doing something they know they shouldn’t. Research goes into setting speed limits – the numbers aren’t pulled randomly from hats. I’ve gotten a few photo radar tickets – they suck, but guess what, I don’t speed there anymore. I d rather take a less severe punishments (just pay the ticket) than actually lose demerits (and subsequently have my insurance increased) getting pulled over by an

    I really liked your post Mr Iveson. I like hearing that the excess
    money does go into traffic safety initiatives. Thank you for this well written article – you will continue to have my support in the future.

69. As usual, when a Mayor doesn’t have a leg to stand on, they show how mad he is and exclaims we don’t know anything!

    This isn’t an issue of citizens being above the law! Get off your high horse! This is about speed traps actually doing what they should, ridding us of speeders! I can go through speed traps until the cows come home and as long as I can pay the tickets, not much happens. Money simply gets collected into the City’s account.
    Not one is suggesting we stop catching speeders. Everyone is suggesting that photo radar is simply a method of getting tax revenue from the rich or stupid, take your pick. If you want to protect your children, and mine, use real officers, nail the idiots that speed, forcing them to pay higher insurance and eventually getting them off the road.
    I can drive through all the photo radar I want and never have to worry about much more than a bill. What’s wrong, afraid of losing a cash cow? That’s all it really is. Wake Up!

70. All this tells me is that a bunch of speeders are a bunch of whiny losers.

    If you don’t want a speeding ticket, then don’t speed.

    Smarter people than you (engineers) set the speed limits based on data, not just arbitrarily. This is a city of disparate seasons with dynamic weather conditions. A lot of drivers are not smart enough to alter their driving when conditions change (witness the first snowfall of the season – every damn year). Imagine the carnage on the streets if limits were higher on the Henday, Whitemud, etc.

    Limits, indeed laws in general, are to protect everyone from the idiots. Including idiots from themselves.

    To those who’d rather have “boots on the ground” to hand out tickets and demerits; there would still be a bunch of crybabies saying “these cops should be out catching real criminals!”

    And to the guy who said that a majority of Edmontonians don’t want photo radar: 18k signatures in a city of nearly a million does not a majority make.

    Hidden photo radar!?! Hah, there are plenty of signs that indicate photo enforcement of speed all over the city.

    That’s like a john getting angry that he got busted for soliciting an undercover police officer .

    People are so selfish sometimes: stop speeding for the benefit of all! In the big scheme of things, you are not that important.

    No more speeding, no need for photo radar. Problem solved for all.

    Mayor Iveson, I salute you as a purveyor of common sense in a storm of asinine comments from a very vocal, selfish, and ignorant minority.

71. I got my first ticket in years going 60km/h in 50 zone. Fair enough I guess. Although I do have a question:

    With all that revenue coming in do law enforcement forces get a raise is salary? Or maybe roads are going to get fixed faster? Or maybe we get more roads for alternative roots to fix the traffic issue? What is being done with it?
    Or is money just going to be used to put more cameras on the street to make a vicious circle of ticketing and aggressive driving?

72. Again Mr Mayor your info is flawed, the province of BC has already proven your entire article here as false…oh and not to mention the entire continent of Europe. BC has done away with photo radar and raised all speed limits on major highways and they’re accidents and tickets have dropped dramatically.

    Also Europe has been proving for decades that faster is safer, in a study years ago they found that drivers doing over the speed limit are not only more aware of they’re surroundings but generally better drivers.

    Your so called slow drivers cause more accidents then they prevent. While I do agree with the 30 km in school zones and 50 in neighborhoods their is no reason that a free way like the whitemud is 80 km when I can go south to Calgary and see that they’re comparable freeway is 100.

    Also if the phtoo radar is supposed to be a deterant then why are you hiding them? That to me is obvious entrapment and all but proves everyone’s theories of a ash grab for the city and the corrupted Alberta Government…

    It’s sad to say that with this letter you have posted here has really changed my perspective of you. You clearly have said your self that this amount goes here and this amount goes they’re (a big % to the Alberta government) so they can continue to fund they’re crooked thievery of the Alberta citizens.

    Maybe look at other provinces and countries before you say that it’s all safety when in reality it’s more of a hindrance and a safety issue.

    People looking behind them to see if a car is hiding taking they’re picture for doing 5 km over or on highway 16 or highway 2 for doing 10 over. Hell we pay more to the police or government agencts to write the tickets then it is for the actual tickets.

    Maybe it’s time for you and the PC party to actually listen to the residents of Alberta instead of your own I’ll informed ramblinds.

73. 100% agree Mr. Iveson. Speeding in Strathcona County has definitely increased since we lost photo radar, keep it in place. It does work. And even if it is a cash cow, there’s nothing wrong with a voluntary tax, better than the rest of us non-speeders paying for it!

74. So Mayor Iveson you have “had it” with people complaining about speed traps. Well sir, the people have had it with being shaken down on our streets by the city for millions of dollars. We’re not a city of hooligans Mr. Mayor, we’re just try to go about our daily business at a reasonable speed. Spend your anger and energy on addressing some of the real safety issues in this town instead of directing it at your constitutes sir. As is you’re not making us any safer, only more angry.

75. If you want people to respect speed limits then enact reasonable speed limits. When you create laws that are unreasonable don’t expect reasonable people to blindly follow them.

    The roads that we all complain about in Edmonton would be marked 10 – 20 km/h higher in Calgary.

76. Make every single photo radar ticket a mandatory court appearance. If its not worth the courts time to enforce a law, then by default the law only exists to generate cash.

    hypothetically speaking:
    If one could simply pay a court fine for killing someone and never have to face a court then would the size of the fine deter a killing or would it just put a price on what its worth to kill someone.

    I would think hypothetically that the city could potentially be making a killing. ;)

77. I can’t agree more with the mayor that road safety is so important as so many of us use those roads everyday.
    However, the argument using the number of deaths doesn’t do much justice.
    For example last year we had 29 cases of homicide is the mayor thinking about doing anything about that?
    An estimated 624 cases of sexual assault, are we doing anything about that? It’s statically 27 times higher than vehicular deaths. The argument can continue endless. I believe all we are looking for is some flexibility and common sense from the enforcement. If the limit is the limit then the should not be any homicide, thefts, assaults of any kind because that is the limit as well. No tolerance of violence.

78. To all who don’t know. It is illegal for any vehicle (unless emergency) to stop on a bridge, overpass, or shoulder of a highway. So if you get a ticket on the henday fight it because if the city is going to fine us for breaking a the speed limit a little they should also follow the law or be fined for being up there. Fight back at this because our police officers are breaking a law.

79. The photo radar was put in place for the same people who are getting the tickets, they created the problem and are now boohooing about it. If people didn’t drive like they are the only ones on the road and no one else’s life has any value but theirs, then there would be no need to have it, but that will never happen because alot of people are so self absorbed they think their life and commitments are more important than anyone else’s. I have been driving these roadways for more than 30 years and have never received any tickets what so ever. If you follow the rules you have nothing to be angry about, only the law breakers are upset.
    BOOHOO

80. Do you not realize when people get a photo radar , they just don’t speed in that area anymore? Hate to say it Iveson, but your days are numbered . Pretty shady of our mayor to be spying on people by hiding law enforcement. YOU make our roads MORE dangerous. We don’t care if you’re fed up , WE’RE fed up with your cash crab and your petty ways of reaching your hands into our pockets! Good luck next election. I have no sympathy for you when you get canned ! Time to wake up ! and BTW thanks for the definition on limit . I had no idea how incompetent the people in our city are. Next step is clogging up the court system with every ticket we get. Its just the beginning ! If you’ve ” had it with these people “, Keep in mind these are YOUR people . People that voted for you and if you’ve had it with us , then do us a favor and get out . We don’t need anyone that has that mentality towards our city and the people that live here.

81. Mayor Iveson,

    I have studied criminal justice and it is said that in order for a punishment, which is what photo radar is currently being used as, to be effective it must be swift, certain and severe (enough). My problem with photo radar is that is accomplishes none of these things. Getting a ticket in the mail days, or weeks after the incident is not swift. Likely by the time I get that ticket in my hand I have no idea what I was doing or where I was going, and I may note the address on the ticket and slow in that spot, but it wouldn’t immediately slow me down overall. Instead if an officer pulled me over and gave me a ticket when I was in the midst of speeding, it would immediately slow me down.

    As for certainty in regards to speeding it will never be accomplished, it’s impossible. I can speed one day without a ticket, either officer or radar enforced, and the next maybe I will get a ticket. Certainty would have to be the moment I go over the limit at any time I would be ticketed. Not realistic!

    Severity will very based on people’s ability to pay. For some people recieving a $100 ticket in the mail is nothing but a drop in the bucket. In which case it would not cause them to slow down. For others a $100 ticket would cause them huge financial strain, which is also not the point.

    I’m not suggesting that we do away with photo radar because I do not believe that will solve anything either. Instead I am suggesting using photo radar as a deterrant to speeding. As you have mentioned this is being done in community’s and school zones with the use of marked vans. I think this is fantastic! I see one of these vans and immediately check my speed to make sure I am under the limit. So I suggest all radar vehicles be marked and in plain sight, which is not currently happening. If this were happening and people could see the marked vehicles, rather than having them hiding behind bushes or on overpasses etc, I’m willing to bet that speeding overall would be reduced. If photo radar is truly about reducing speed and not a cash grab why not give this method a try Mr Mayor?

    Rosalyn Schmidt.

82. I believe that these photo radar vans can cause more accidents then they prevent. They are a distraction on the road for drivers who are busy looking for them and not paying attention to driving. Even for people who dont speed a driver in front of them jamming on there brakes at the last second is extremely hazardous and should not be allowed to happen. Worry about finishing the henday on the north east section and fix the south section at the queen Elizabeth north to henday west that always seems to get congestion.

83. If you really want to make the roads safer and make a difference we should not use photo radar. Instead that money should be going to actual officers to patrol the streets and enforce the laws and hand out demerits. Giving someone a fine in the mail with a picture attached does nothing and most people take forever to pay them anyways. Making a difference would be stopping people and the danger and giving them a legitimate fine and having them lose demerits off their license. Hopefully when they lose enough they will either change or lose those license. Once they lose their license the threat of the bad driver would go away and make the roads safer for everyone. Most people that support photo radar are only supporting the direct cash grab that benefits them so they can have a big fancy house and flashy car.

84. If you don’t want a fine, don’t speed. It’s that simple. People are very lucky that photo radar doesn’t involve demerits on your licence and higher insurance rates. Perhaps it should. Maybe people would slow down a bit and realize that they aren’t any more important than anyone else. And yes, I have received a photo radar ticket, this summer (my first ever), but obviously I was speeding and deserved it. If you don’t want to feed the cash cow…don’t.

85. Many years ago, I figured out a way to make parking and moving violations tickets irrelevant and with a zero net effect on my life.

    I used to get upset when finding a ticket on my windshield because I didn’t want to “box in” the car behind me and didn’t leave exactly 15 feet space from the curb… or in the mail for going 57 in a 50 Km zone with no other vehicles on the road… but now it just doesn’t matter anymore.

    You see – I used to sit down every year at tax filing time to figure out how much disposable income I had left… then if it was a good year, I’d write a $1000 cheque to my charity of choice (Children’s wish foundation as of late.) On bad years it was less. And all of the sudden it dawned on me that the City’s traffic violations income went to support in a round and about way similar programs – or even general revenue. So what I do now each year is donate 1% of my gross annual income – minus any moving/traffic violation I received that year. I am still a good citizen and I support charities the best I can within my financial abilities – but now it is calculated AFTER the effects of the City’s fines on my cash flow.

    So go ahead… ticket me… you can employ some middle age dude sitting in a truck all day eating doughnuts instead of giving the money to kids.

86. Hey Mr.Mayor,
    Can you please give some actual numbers rather than just giving us a percentage. I know the numbers are beyond what you need to pay for those listed. You should either reduce the cost of a ticket or put those costs towards feeding the homeless. I can not believe how many homeless people I seen as I was in downtown on the weekend. I do speed and if you want to see results start pulling us over rather than paying fines. I would like to see an actual statement posted of what every penny goes towards, it is our money in the end.
    Thanks!

87. I went looking for this blog when the journal article posted an article today with a link to it while the article itself didn’t have a comments section. I just want to say I find the logic of people constantly saying that all they are doing is going “with the flow of traffic” bizarre. So because everyone around you is doing 115 on the Henday then you should too? So if everyone was say, I dunno, tipping cars over after Vancouver lost the Stanley Cup, then that would be okay too I suppose?

    The petition specifically says the speed limit on the Henday is too slow. On a freeway where people are often traveling a single car length behind each other at 100+k/hr we shouldn’t remind people to slow down? I am sick of speeders on the Henday, who ride up right behind me when I am doing 100. The maximum speed limit.

    Get over yourselves whiners. If you don’t want a ticket, then don’t speed. Simple. I should start a petition asking that change.org stop allowing frivolous petitions.

88. What frustrates me is people’s attitude to the speed limit. As a driver you are supposed to drive safely considering the conditions. The speed limit is the limit for the BEST conditions. Contrary to the driver thinking of him/herself as the ultimate Nascar Driver, other drivers’ opinions and ability as well as factors unrelated to skill and foresight may play into this limit. Just because you are awesome at this, does not mean you have the right to go faster than everybody else. You can be awesome at driving within the speed limit.

    Quoting from Wikipedia on Speed Limit (basic speed law): “Any person driving a vehicle may only drive so fast that the car is under control. Speeds must be adapted to the road, traffic, visibility and weather conditions as well as the personal skills and characteristics of the vehicle and load.”

    You do not have to drive the speed limit at all times. But somehow a lot of Edmonton drivers seem to assume that anyone driving under the posted speed limit does that solely to anger them. I find that inconsiderate and frustrating, not to mention it makes driving stressful.

    That being said, I received tickets in Edmonton when I had been unaware of what the actual speed limit was and had had to guess.

    We have 60 zones and 50 zones and 70 zones, and they all seem to be on comparable roads with 2 lanes in each direction. Why? For example, why is it 60 on 107th Avenue & on 149 Street, but 50 on 156 Street & on 95th Ave in the West End? What’s the difference? Were you to turn from 156th St into 95th Ave, you get no speed limit sign reminder (still 50), however you get a radar warning sign. I have pedestrians, traffic lights, buses, and traffic itself to worry about when driving on those roads but there’s like the tiniest speed limit sign on those roads on a stretch of 10 blocks.

    Make it easier for drivers to follow the speed limits by simplifying them. Idea: Make all 4-lane roads 60 or 70 if they do not have a sidewalk directly beside them, 50 if they do. All 2-lane roads could be 50 if they have no parking allowed on them, 30 if they do. If Scona Road has a speed limit of 60, state the reason for the lowering from 70 with it (Noise reduction maybe?) or reduce it coming to a high collision intersection, but say why!

    I think radar is important to enforce speed limits, be it done visibly or “sneakily”. There is no cash grab. It’s an economical punitive measure to prevent people from speeding – be it right at the moment or long-term (even if you have money, speeding tickets are inconvenient). Police officers are important and they are thankfully out a lot doing speed control. My main issue is that the speed limits should be clear so that drivers know when they are speeding.

    How often do you see a speed limit sign on the Henday?? Did you miss the one a km into your drive on it when you were wedged between a truck on the right and a semi on the left? Did you know that the speed varies between 80 and 100 km/hr? That’s excluding the various construction zone speed limits, of course.. I found myself driving in Edmonton many times not knowing exactly what the speed limit was.

    But if the flow is 115 in a clearly marked Anthony Henday 100 zone, it is because everybody is speeding. Arguing that a driver should not be punished for going with the flow doesn’t make sense. The herd stupidity cannot and should not overrule the posted limit. If you have a problem with the posted limit, go argue with the City, there may be good reason for the limit that you are not aware of. But until it’s changed, adapt your driving behaviour.

89. If, as you say, stepped up photo enforcement is for safety reasons and not a cash grab, then the radar should be placed in places with the highest accident rates and not where you can catch the most speeders. But photo is always placed on these big roads where the limit slows to 50 from 60 for no good reason.

90. Holy what a pompous response. You are not the law Judge Dredd. Nowhere did you show causation, aren’t you an academic?

    You make the laws that the citizens that elect you chose to. If you do not understand this basic principle you best leave.

91. To be honest I have no real problem with traffic enforcement in this city. I have like everyone else recieved a fair share of tickets but i have found ways to avoid that. That being said posting photo radar on anthony henday or yellowhead ,whitemud when the flow of traffic is 110 or 115km on a busy day is a cash grab to fund shitty road improvements and cops getting spiffy new cars and trucks and suvs as well as these beautiful new police stations. Photo radar should be increased instead in residential areas where daily I see people do 60 of 70 through a school zone which endangers the future of our city which rides on those childrens backs. It needs to be places in locations of significance where it will properly force people to slow down and think. To be frank the entire system needs to be reviewed, and changed to properly address the issues in the system as well as where the money goes from those tickets and not with out first consulting the constituents of this fair city and actually getting out input before makeing these desisons.

92. Good arguments. A+

    I prefer to take the LRT because driving with so many cameras around, merging into traffic, constantly watching your speedometer, and avoiding all the drivers riding your tail and weaving into the spots you leave for safety, is far too stressful. Nobody is doing anything to cite the bad drivers.

    So I take transit, and deal with 2 hour standing room only commutes, the mentally Ill and the violence, the body odor, pee stained seats, the noxious perfume, and getting smacked in the face with backpacks full of textbooks, because THAT is preferrable to driving the constant construction, pothole ridden, toll roads that are our Edmonton streets.

93. Folks, not everyone is going to be happy one way or another. You can’t just focus on one part of the argument, you need to take it on as a whole! I’ve gotten 2 photo radar tickets in my whole life and I’d rather have that than raising taxes to cover the cost of those programs. Let the offenders pay for it… I’m sure everyone against photo radar will be up at arms when taxes go up 3% to cover the revenue it generated once it is abolished. Does it make roads safer? Yes, probably. Is it a cash cow? Yes, probably. Does it stop people from speeding? Yes, where they know there is radar usually. End of the day folks, the only ones I hear saying it needs to be abolished are those who keep getting the tickets.

94. It’s interesting that the city is taking speeding very seriously but yet on the 2013 City of Edmonton collision report states otherwise. http://www.edmonton.ca/transportation/traffic_reports/collision-speed-reports.aspx

95. I have just had it with you, Mayor Iveson, absolutely had it. Hiding the cops in unmarked cars so you can “catch us” in the act; that’s how you deal with thieves, drug dealers and other criminals. Well we are not criminals, Mr. Mayor, we are just ordinary citizens. Treating us like criminals is no way to do your job. I think a lot of the anger about photo radar is because of this.

    If you were really sincerely concerned with safety then the photo radar vehicles would be clearly marked and clearly visible, because then EVERYONE would slow down. Right now, nobody slows down because they don’t even know the speed trap is there! How is that safer? Where is your evidence that it works? Seems to me, given the huge increase in revenue from speeding tickets, that it is not working at all.

    And stop treating us like we are stupid, which you are doing when you keep saying that the money doesn’t go into “general” revenue. It still goes to the City, who cares what budget bucket you choose to put it in. If it is not about the money then why not do something like donate all speeding ticket revenue to charity. Not only would this benefit people who really need it, but it might also soothe the anger if people knew that the fines were going to help the needy and not just to line politicians pockets.

96. Let me start by saying, I’ve never had a photo radar ticket. I think its a safe bet to say that everyone has exceeded the limit at one point or another in their driving career. In my present truck with 45,000 km, I’ve spent more than 20 days behind the wheel (averaged at 80 km/h). In that time there is a very high probability that I’ve exceeded the speed limit at least once for a non-zero amount of time. Does this make me a law breaker? yes. Does this make me an unsafe driver? maybe. The numbers are against me in this regard and no one is perfect after all. But, as per my lack of photo radar tickets, the photo radar system has not improved, or changed my behavior. It has had no impact on me. I choose not to speed regularly and I see this as my choice, not because the law tells me I should not, but because it’s my responsibility to be a good citizen.

    When I was 16 I received a speeding ticket from an RCMP officer (in another city). I remember every single sentence from the conversation with that officer. _That_ changed my attitude towards driving and

    ultimately my behavior behind the wheel. Up until that point, I was invincible and not mature enough to drive.

    Today, I have a decent middle class income. Certainly if I chose to speed I could budget and afford it and it would not have an impact on my behavior. Tickets are not a deterrent to me and won’t change my

    driving behavior. Especially tickets issued to me as the owner of the vehicle. I am sure for all the teenagers who arn’t yet mature enough to drive, and young adults making $100K+/yr they are in the same

    boat. I have friends who have received photo radar tickets. They have not paid them quite simply because they forget to. What’s $100 here and $100 there? a tank of fuel for the truck is $150. Photo

    radar will never get them off the street and they will continue to speed and be a danger to others. My deterant is my moral compass. Breaking the law is wrong.

    All that aside, I support the photo radar program. However I do not agree with the the implementation.

    1) Photo radar does not get bad drivers off the street – There is no demerits – In this economy, the fines are not effective deterrents.

    2) The owner is getting the ticket for perhaps his, perhaps someone else’s actions. Lets draw a comparison to a rifle used in a crime. Does the owner of the rifle get charged with the same crime that the rifle was used in? I would say no unless the owner actually committed the crime. I think this is is an ideological issue. You cannot charge a gun owner with first degree murder if you cannot prove beyond a doubt that he committed that crime. He does not have to prove his innocence, the court has to prove his guilt. At most he needs to take responsibility for his rifle, but guns don’t kill people, people kill people. Cars don’t speed, drivers make the choice to speed.

    3) If photo radar is primarily about safety, I think the vans need to be visible.

    Here is a scenario: My child is crossing the street, a photo radar van is present but covert. A vehicle speeds by and hits my son, killing him. The photo radar van snaps his photo and a ticket is sent to

    the driver two weeks later. The city gets ~$100, the owner of the vehicle gets a ticket, faces additonal charges and has to live with his actions for the rest of his life, and my son is dead. I think the photo radar ticket in this instance is inconsiquential.

    What if we had an oppertunity to save my son’s life? What if that van had lights, signs etc? Immediately that crossing would be safer by the fact that the van was present. The equivelent would be having a marked police car present. The speeding driver would have a better chance to see it, slow down and just maybe my son would be alive today. In this scenario, the city doesn’t get revenue, the owner avoids a ticket and avoids ruining his life, and my son is alive. In scenario 1 we ruin 2 lives, in scenario 2 we save both. Do we have a statistic for the number of collisions observed by a photo radar van? Those are the preventable collisions.

    4) We advertise how much revenue is being generated and how many tickets are being issued. The numbers are increasing. Does this tell us that speeding is on the decline? I don’t believe it does. It tells

    us that enforcement is catching more drivers speeding. Is this a measure of photo radar effectiveness as a revenue generating system? Yes. Is this a measure of the number of folks breaking the law? yes. Is this a measure of improved safety at that time in that area? doubtful. lets run a pilot project: Make the vans highly visible in locations where speeding is prevalent. Continue to issue tickets, and see if the number of speeding tickets generated goes down. If it does, we’ve improved safety measurably in that area. I think this would be a more appropriate measurement of whether a photo radar van is effective in changing behavior and improvement of safety.

    I am a business person, and I realize that the moment you do this, the program will have challenges funding itself. The anticipated result would be less tickets handed out, but more safety.

    5) The last objection is about the vans parked on the overpasses catching speeders traveling underneath.

    -From what I know to be true vehicles should not be “parked” on the shoulder of a roadway on a bridge. The vehicles are not marked, nor do they have flashing lights and safety sirens. At best they have a cone beside them. This decreases safety for drivers on that roadway, and puts the photo radar operator at risk. This probably opens the city for a lawsuit if an incident occurs. I wonder if the city already has had a collision incident with a photo radar van? Its not a construction zone, they are not tow trucks, or police (nor can drivers tell if they are).

    -These areas where photo radar are monitoring are very low collision probability locations. Highways that are straight and areas on those highways going under overpasses are low collision locations. IE:

    184 st, Henday in north Edmonton. I’d be surprised if there was one collision in that area as a result of speed considering the number of vehicles traveling under the overpass daily. Does photo radar

    improve safety in these locations? probably not. Yes the drivers are breaking the law, but are they operating unsafely? If the collision rate per 1000 vehicles is approaching 0 then speed is not a safety

    issue in that location, but rather a legal one.

    Every stat that we see talks about the number of tickets issued, but none talk about the total number of vehicles that were scanned. Some information says (http://www2.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=b0fa2800-bf4b-4f9a-85db-089501cc8e73) approximately 115,000 tickets handed out in 2011 for the entire city. What we don’t get is how many vehicles traveled through the city and were scanned. I think being transparent in this area would go a long way to help the public understand photo radar and why it’s in place. Doing some googling I found: http://www.gov.edmonton.ab.ca/transportation/road_projects/23-avenue-gateway-boulevard-calgary-tr-interchange.aspx Approximately 100,000 travel through the gateway interchange each day, and 115,000 tickets issued for the whole city annually. 36.5 million vehicles per year in this location, comparing with all of the tickets edmonton issued would mean 1 ticket for every 318 vehicles which is a number based in fact but much higher than reality for that location. Approximately 0.3% of the total trips result in a speeding ticket and this is comparing all tickets in the city to one location only. Is this van improving safety or enforcing law?

    6) I guess my primary objection is: Don’t put lipstick on this pig, tell us the primary reason for photo radar’s existance.

    Don’t tell me that you are improving safety in areas where there are few or no collisions.
    Don’t tell me you are improving safety by covertly hiding vans and issuing tickets 2 weeks later.
    Don’t tell me a photo radar ticket changes behaviour as there is almost no deterrant.

    Do tell me that you are enforcing the law to the letter of the law. Almost no one would object to getting a ticket knowing they broke the law. But don’t claim that photo radar improves safety, because the information that we have indicates that the actions of the city in the implementation of the program are not having the effect as designed.

    Tell us which intersections and roadways are benefiting from safety upgrades as a result of the revenue from this program. Show us measureable, reasonable statistics to support the notion that the upgrade actually resulted in fewer collisions or improved safety post implementation.

    I am absolutely in favor of nailing speeders to the wall and making them pay to upgrade roadways. I am not in favor of revenue in this program going to finance other initiatives.

97. Another thought: How about fining those that create dangerous situations by dawdling in the left lane? If it says 80 either do 80 or MOVE OVER. The highway traffic act defines the left lane as the passing lane, not the “I dawdle and you are screwed because I can slow you down” lane. Same goes for transport trucks, you don’t need to be in the left lane blocking traffic. But of course it’s easier to say “speeders are dangerous” than admitting that the ENTIRE way traffic runs in Edmonton is screwed up, from the pedestrians to bicycles, cars, trucks and even the city buses who feel that they don’t need to signal when leaving a stop or who race traffic and cut them off. No hope with this mayor of course, as for him it’s about prestige and low hanging fruits.

98. 20,000 signatures says something. If they want to run the numbers then run the damn numbers. Starting Jan 1st 2015 institute no photo radar for 1 whole year and let’s see how the numbers stack!

99. Don, there’s a treasure trove of statistical double-talk here and, as noted by a respondent above, a clear conflict of interest regarding the firm doing the research.

    Why don’t we compare the accident rates of Edmonton, with a city like Toronto, where photo radar was banned by the Mike Harris government in the 90s and continues to be. The government of Ontario correctly saw the problems with due process with automated photo radar very correctly outweighed any benefits to your ballyhooed safety increases or the amount of money it generated.

    If you are truly interested in safety and not the cash grab without due process (which should always involve human interaction and not a machine making the call) then publicise the locations of the cameras. THAT would truly reduce the speeds.

    And this piece from the National Post in 2007, regarding Ontario bringing back photo radar, pretty much disputes everything you say, Don. Additionally, the main reason they were thinking of bring it back, was to “reduce the deficit”. If walks like a duck, talks like a duck, it must be a cash grab. And here’s the best quote from the following article and my main opposition to photo radar:

    “… photo radar is not a substitute for investments in (human) policing, driver training and safer highway infrastructure.”

    http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/story.html?id=5d9671f2-62d1-476e-b26e-859685fa3632

100. Scrap phodar and throw the money at EPS to spend on traffic division if your only argument is for safety. Clearly this mayor is even more out of touch with reality than the new health minister was.

101. Photo radar has no evidence to prove it has help in any way, How many bad drivers has it taken off the road or changed thier driving habits? (0%) maybe 15%. But the real issue i have with Photo radar is this .. The speed limit is supposed to be the law BUT with photo radar this law is now only a guideline for those with money (they still speed all the time) so are we creating laws based on how much money you have? Real traffic cops giving real tickets cause demarits AND that changes the way people drive (seeing your vehicle Inc. rise and are about to lose you Lic.)

102. What is needed in this debate, is a map showing all of the locations of traffic accidents, and the location of all of the photo radar tickets together. This would be a true reflection of data that shows whether or not photo radar is placed for safety or for cash.

     Enough said.

     Publish the photo radar data and I will create the map.

103. Has the mayor and council gone overboard in approving the use of photo radar? Perhaps this may end up being our new slogan for tourists to read “Edmonton – Capital City of Photo Radar”.

     Although photo radar has its place as part of an overall strategy in reducing accidents, it seems it has now gravitated to past common sense and frustrating everyday citizens who are not typical speeders. I constantly see photo radar vehicles at transition points from 60 to 50 km zones. I have even seen photo radar vehicles just a few blocks apart on the same street. Those type of practices may be effective in issuing tickets and collecting cash, but in terms of safety for typical drivers who do not normally speed but just happened to miss transitioning their speed in time, or missed the signage that was blocked by a tree – it is very frustrating.

     When I hear comments from the mayor that citizens are breaking the law when they speed by 1 km – that’s frustrating as that is often not reasonable and it erodes common sense thinking. Typical drivers know it becomes a distraction when you constantly try to stay at the exact speed limit and that itself can be a safety issue in terms of focus. Drivers need to be aware of their environment, surrounding vehicles, pedestrians, signals, potholes, lines on the road, signage and not just their speedometer. There are many other strategies that can also be used in improving safety such as keeping lines on the road painted, ensuring proper signage, signage that is not obstructed by trees, timing of traffic lights, adding sidewalks where there should be sidewalks, better crosswalks, lighting, etc.

     Maybe the speed limits should all be 25 km to reduce injury, but that would be ridiculous as the congestion itself would cause havoc, slowing the flow of commerce, thus less taxes to fund hospitals and emergency medical services, then more people will ultimately suffer. My point is there needs to be a balance in reasonable driving speed and common sense in how much photo radar is used as part of the overall strategy for safe streets.

     Excessive photo radar is frustrating everyday citizens who drive at reasonable speeds and that frustration does not help build a safe driving mentality in the long run.

104. This is a hot topic that just won’t go away. Here’s my take on this. Without photo enforcement and the police, I could have easily killed someone last year because I decided to speed past a truck I felt was being aggressive. So I sped past the truck only to be pulled over by an unmarked police truck. My actions were stupid and because of my emotions I turned my car into a weapon. Luckily the cop decided to charge me with Driving at unreasonable speed instead of Careless Driving which I admit I deserved for what I did. I took responsibility for my actions and since then, I drive the speed limit regardless of conditions, etc. When a person gets emotionally charged, and it happens, stuck in traffic, late, bad day, etc……that person decides to turn their vehicle into a weapon and most times speed. There is no excuse to speed. Even 5km over is speeding. It does not matter. I won’t speak for anyone else. We all share the road and we are ALL responsible for driving safely. Your license is a privilege and not a right to speed. Be safe and take care out there. Let’s all ARRIVE ALIVE.

105. Mr Iveson,

     You seem to be missing the points that many of us are trying to make. I, for one, am not entirely opposed to automated photo enforcement. I am opposed to artificially low speed limits on major roads and the way in which these limits are enforced. If the Anthony Henday – a four/six lane freeway does not qualify for the provincial maximum speed of 110 km/h, it is hard to imagine a road that would. I am no expert in traffic flow, but I would venture to guess that most experts would agree that this limit is well below what could reasonably be considered safe.

     On top of that, automated enforcement vehicles are placed on top of bridges or behind objects in an attempt hide from drivers. These tactics do nothing to decrease the speed of traffic beyond a few hundred meters in either direction of known hiding spots. I challenge you to drive on the Henday under Ray Gibbons drive during rush hour. You will witness vehicles slowing down just before the overpass, and speeding away as soon as they are out of danger of photo radar.

     These two points remove credibility from the program. Again, I want to stress that I am not entirely opposed to using photo radar to catch the worst offenders, provided that the speed limit is set at an appropriate level.

     I can not vote for a person who thinks that the program as it currently exists is an acceptable way to control the flow of traffic.

106. Just some snippets from Edmonton’s transportation website: http://www.edmonton.ca/transportation/traffic_safety/motor-vehicle-collisions.aspx

     “Ranked by the total number of collisions, the top three high-collision intersections in the City of Edmonton in 2012 were:
     1) 23 Avenue & 91 Street (76 collisions, 31 injuries)
     2) Yellowhead Trail & 149 Street (74 collisions, 15 injuries)
     3) And Whitemud Drive Westbound & Gateway Boulevard (59 collisions, 13 injuries).”
     Are there PR/speed lights on 23ave and 91st? Why are there PR trucks in the bushes pointed east-bound on Whitemud and gateway when it’s the west bound direction with the issue?
     “The top three high-collision midblock segments were:
     1) Whitemud Drive from 122 Street to the Terwillegar Drive interchange (54 collisions, 11 injuries); High Level Bridge (50 collisions, 6 injuries); and Whitemud Drive from 66 to 91 Street (39 collisions, 11 injuries).”
     There are virtually no PR on Whitemud between 66st/75st to 91st. Granted, it’s one exit, but if safety is the issue, there’s nothing there (not talking PR, but anything to prevent/reduce collisions). Also, there’s nothing in place on Whitemud between 122st and Terwillegar.
     “Collisions at intersections made up 54.5% (12,669) of the collision total, but resulted in 69.2% (3,002) of total injuries and 5 of the 27 fatalities sustained in 2012. Compared to 2011, the number of intersection collisions per 1,000 population increased by 1.4%.”
     So, why is PR concentrating on the Henday?

107. I wish Iveson would have been irked more over the $47 Million cost over-run during the transitioning of photo radar to the City, instead of shrugging it off as a ‘non-issue’. I wish he would have been more appreciative of taxpayers during the heighten radar photo enforcement that bought in $40 million to offset the cost over-run. I argue that taxpayers are drivers, and thus it was taxpayers money who covered the shortfall. The Mayor has taken the Transportation Department assurances . Taxpayers have not.

     I think taxpayers are getting tired of this sense of arrogant entitlement by politicians/lawmakers where staffers are not held accountable for cost over-runs, that petitions by taxpayers exercising their democratic right are dismissed, and gratitude is not required to be shown to taxpayers for ‘revenue’ paid to the City to cover short-falls.

     I supported photo radar UNTIL the Mayor shrugged !

108. To be honest, no citizen would complain if the tolerance of photo radar was something like 12%. Do 56 in a 50 zone, get a ticket. 112 in a 100, a ticket.
     We’ve all had to speed up to avoid a collision, or to make room for merging traffic, or get into traffic.
     Second, people want the photo radar vehicles to be visible. The nutcase drivers who have no regard for others will still be ticketed, as they get tunnel vision and don’t even notice anything until they’re 50 feet from it.
     Lastly, I wonder why Edmonton’s business owners have been so silent on this issue. Every dollar that photo radar takes from our citizens and one less dollar those same citizens have to spend in a retail outlet. A worst case scenario is that photo radar could actually be taking jobs away from the people, because the less a business earns, the less employees it needs.
     Find a balance that works for 90% of the populace.

109. On this policy Iveson has my vote to get tougher.

     Photo radar tickets for repeat offenders should come with demerits.

     Too many speeders are obviously not deterred by current fines. There’s a lot of high income speeders in this booming economy is probably what’s going on.

     Sure seems to me that the number of high speed tailgaters is increasing.

110. “Council asked point blank questions of Transportation Services administrators as to whether they built a self-funding empire to cover their overruns, and the answer was no.”

     This begs more disclosure:

     What is the minimum amount of photo radar revenue required for the program to break even?

     Is this more or less than before the city took over

     I can’t imagine the city running programs more efficiently than the private sector. Maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

111. While I agree that laws are made to be respected and obeyed I am also of the impression the law must make reasonable sense. In the case of our roadways many of the speed limits are low in comparison to similar roads in other provinces/states. If the speed limits were to be set at a reasonable rate for typical road conditions as in other locals they would likely be more respected and adhered to by typical and reasonable driving behavior as opposed to the dreaded penalty of the law. For instance in Montana they have day and night time speeds as well as specific speeds for truck/transport traffic. This makes sense in that no matter what you drive your visibility is hampered at night and more caution is warranted. In terms of the truck/transport traffic, those vehicles are larger, harder to control and take longer to stop aside from creating far worse consequences in the event of an accident/collision. If one were to take this a step further we could introduce season limits due to the fact a large portion of the year we have winter driving conditions that require more caution than driving on a clear, dry sunny day. These are solutions that make sense but only if the speed limit is not artificially lowered as a base line.

     The president/criteria for current speed limits were set decades ago for vehicles not often on the road anymore. Aside from very few vintage car owners that own vehicles without seat belts, the average car on the road has many more safety features than before. Air bags of all types, lane departure warning systems, heads up display panels designed to keep eyes on the road, crumple zones, new better tire/tread compounds/designs, more competent/reliable handling designs with longer lasting components as well as vastly improved breaking capabilities. none of these types of features were taken into account or when developing our current speed limit criteria. These criteria has not been revisited or revised since these features and others like them became available. In addition to mechanical enhancement of the vehicles we travel in today, we are also taking better care of ourselves. Medicine has improved in leaps and bounds over 100 years of driving. People have laser eye surgery to improve vision, easier access to more and better medical care has allowed drivers to be in better condition to drive.

     Public input, perception and trust is also key in seeing the laws set forth by society are followed. Hiding enforcement vehicles in obscure locations, unmarked/hidden in high traffic arterial roadways or between varying speed zones does not inspire obedience. The high visibility of a police cruiser does. While it is fair to say removing the photo radar program and replacing them with police (often with far more important responsibilities) is not a viable solution we can still learn and benefit from the valuable lesson they teach with visible deterrence . All emergency services are recognized by their visual and audio warning systems, ambulance’s with red and white lights, police with red and blue lights and distinct sirens and tones as well as service specific paint and markings exists to inform all around of their presence and urgency. While audio tones from a static vehicle are not practical parking them in plain sight witch distinct paint and markings along with a recognizable high visibility feature such as a neon green rotation light (I do not believe this color has a previous obligation to any other official use) would garner the attention and respect a reasonably set speed limit deserves.

     I beg you to remember that you alone do not decide what is best for our city. You were voted to be a voice of the people and carry out the will of the majority, not what you deem to be right or best. You have a responsibility to listen to each and every opinion and as of this after noon you have 18425 voices asking you to listen. As individuals we all have our own dreams and aspirations, but when we act as a whole we are stronger and all benefit.

112. I have no problem with enforcing speed limits, but photo radar does NOT enforce speed limits. Other than a monatary fine there is no action taken against the driver and no real deterrent for that person as most the time they have no idea that they have got the ticket (because the city hides the photo radar units as best they canny to trap drivers) until it is mailed to them 2-3 weeks later. Photo radar is a pass the buck type program so that police don’t have to police or so that they have so called more time to police other more important stuff… I say get rid of the mobile units that are hiding in the shadows and on bridges to put in unmanned units in heavy traffic, pedestrian or collision areas that are clearly identified so that drivers know that if they don’t slow down in that area they will get ticketed. Not moving them all over the place so people have no idea where they are at. People need a routine set in place before they are going to learn.

113. Having made several visits to Alberta and discussed your speeding control measures with your law enforcement officers, I must conclude that Photo Radar is not the answer to speed control. As your mayor himself states, income from Photo Radar is increasing… surely this indicates that it is not having the desired effect and is only being used as a “Cash Cow”!

     Here in the UK “Photo Radar”, or as we call it “Speed Traps” are considered to be just another tax trap for the motorist. They do not prevent speed limits being exceeded and the financial penalties can now be avoided by attending a half-day safety course. A fine arriving several days after the event by mail is just a frustration that if anything, will send the annoyed motorist out in the wrong frame of mind to drive in a controlled manner.

     There is nothing worse than being stopped at the time of the offence and asked what the emergency is. I know that this is a drain on officer resources and personally prefer the alternative that has been gaining popularity over here. It’s a roadside speed indicator that is positioned just inside the speed limit signs and it displays your actual speed. It’s then up to the driver to reduce their speed to the specified limit. It’s good to see how many motorists slow down when they realise what their speed is! If they then continue to speed and are caught by a highly visible Photo Radar vehicle, then they have no excuse and deserve the fine imposed on them.

     Over my 50 years of driving I have been caught exceeding the limit on 3 occasions. All of these were, in my opinion, unjustified because I was only just within the limit boundaries, travelling downhill and decelerating but my training always taught me to decelerate naturally and always keep braking for emergency situations. Hard acceleration and deceleration should be avoided as other motorists may not be able to react at the same pace as yourself especially when you drive a higher powered vehicle.

     Also, I was taught that when making a maneuver, the sequence to follow is: Look; Indicate then Maneuver. Today’s motorists in the UK seem to follow the sequence of : Maneuver, Indicate then Look! Perhaps our driving standards have dropped or at least, the level of training/testing of drivers has deteriorated! Surely this is a more credible cause for TRA’s than speed violations.

     Like many of the people who have posted comments here, I am not against speed limits, especially in residential areas and around schools, playgrounds etc But the dangers of Photo Radar being misused and it being easier (and cheaper) for a motorist to pay the fine than appeal against an unjust summons is in my mind a greater injustice to motorist’s human rights.

     If speed kills, what about emergency services exceeding the limits? OK, so their drivers are trained to drive fast so it’s safe for them! So why not train all drivers to the same standard as the emergency services before they are allowed a full licence? I admit to having a couple of incidents during my first few years of driving but can now boast over 40 years of accident-free motoring covering some half a million miles or close to a million kilometers or, twice around the world!

     It’s not speed that kills… it’s the sudden stop that’s fatal!

114. Way to go Don, deal with the issue just like EVERY other politician: Get backed in to a corner by YOUR people proving YOU wrong and what do you do? Just repeat the same “information” that you’ve been given and then try to belittle people by quoting the dictionary. Nice move kid. Remember that you’re not any better than us, you where voted in by us and will just as easily be voted out. Time to do some REAL work in office instead of showing up at all your “fundraisers” and “Comic Expos” Don. Time to be a Mayor and not a child resorting to child-like tactics to address your people. Shame on you Don.

115. It is a sad state of affairs when someone who stands up for civility is condemned. We are sharing a public space when we are on the road. The road can be a dangerous place and we are to look out for each other. In this context, for someone to say that they can decide for themself what the speed limit should be, or that they deserve a “buffer” to the speed limit are some of the most selfish and petty things I have ever heard. I think all this carbon dioxide must be stunting our ability to reason. Where’s the air?

116. Mr. Iveson,

     Although you cite the source of a scholarly article, you yet to provide any reference from this article. Additionally, you generalize the term law enforcement in the study, it is not distinguished between photo radar enforcement and general police enforcement.

     You make a great case in point, keep penalizing someone for something they do wrong. Yet have you looked into similar studies that were conducted through the province of British Columbia, in which photo radar enforcement is banned? Photo radar is a cash cow, plain and simple. Enforcement cameras are not placed in residential neighbours or dangerous roads where the speed should be reduced, they are placed in conspicuous locations where the city can make the most money. If you are going to have the program, use it properly. Do not use the program as an “excuse” for the lack of investment in human capital. Unfortunately, due to the negligence on behalf of the City of Edmonton, the cost overruns have eliminated the potential benefits of this program. The city is now forced to utilize this program as a cash cow to cover the operating expenditures and the capital expenditure, which you cannot discredit now that it has already been incurred.

     Additionally, you acknowledge there is a margin of error in operating the equipment, yet this margin of error is left to be dealt with in the courts. This is absolutely absurd! If there is a margin of error in the equipment, it should be factored in before the violations. You cannot expect people to take time out of their days, or possibly pay others, to go fight a margin of error that has already been acknowledged on behalf of the administrators.

     If you are going to use alternative forms of enforcement as a substitute to the investment in actual law enforcement officers, use these alternative forms properly and without abuse. The City of Edmonton has abused their power with photo radar programs and their negligence has now forced the citizens to call for it’s dismissal. This abuse is similar to the aircraft fleet abused by the Provincial Government, follow suit and stop the bleeding.

     Thank you,

     Troy Minogue

117. I have no problem with enforcement of speed limits, what I have a problem with is the cloudiness surrounding the policies. I have heard directly from police officers that they never enforced for less than 15 over. It is considered common knowledge that you are fine if not more than 10 over. Others have heard 10% is fine. I have to assume that at some point every one of these was official internal policy.

     If you want people to quit complaining about enforcement you need to remove the bureaucratic vaguery from the equation. You need to remove the judgement calls on what speed to enforce at with photo radar.

     I am well aware that modern photo equipment is considered accurate at 1% so you could easily enforce at 1kph over and I’m okay with doing that, but you need to tell us if you are going to do that. In the past I never got a ticket unless I was 15 over or more which was pretty rare (and likely meant I really needed to poop). Now I see people getting tickets for 8 over and even 6 over. If you get on TV and say “official policy is to ticket at 5kph over” that is fine, we will deal with that, but you can’t just lower the enforcement point behind closed doors and expect there to be no backlash. Tell us what the policy is; be transparent like you claim the city should be. Make it zero tolerance if you want but for God’s sakes TELL US WHAT THE POLICY ACTUALLY IS.

118. Also, targeting drivers 50 meters downstream from a downward speed transition is just plain jackassery. We all coast to slow down because slamming on our brakes is dangerous (with everyone tailgating) and the distance between the slowdown ahead warning and actual limit coming into play is too short with modern, fuel-efficient cars to coast down to the new speed. Nailing someone with a ticket who is in the process of slowing to meet the limit is horrible.

119. The one other thing I’d point out though is, if you are going to a zero tolerance policy, A lot of drivers will go to their own zero tolerance speed control meaning they will start running cruise control in the city. I suspect that might be a tad more dangerous than driving 5 kph over the limit.

120. Mayor, if you are truly looking into putting the money back into community funding I’m all for keeping the photo radar. I am apauled by how much the over runs are and I am slightly concerned this is still a cash cow, but like I said, if it’s going back into the community then that’s fair. I would like to see our older communities have better road ways and sidewalks. Avonmore is still waiting for new side walks and roads…just waiting for another elderly to break a hip trying to walk through our neighbourhood or bust another stroller trying to walk my son to the park :/

121. Thanks for assuming that because I signed the petition, I am a law breaker looking to blame you.

122. I am a safe driver and try my best to keep the speed limit. I have received multiple photo radar tickets in places that are ridiculous. Hidden cars, over passes and confusing signage.
     Don make a difference in the city and Stop this for-profit company from taking money from law-abiding citizens.

123. I am asking that (in the future) the City of Edmonton not fine anyone involved in “mob” activity in case we ever lose the Stanley Cup again, as it is much safer to “go with the flow”, and sometimes breaking the law is really the safest thing you can do.

     I mean, the mob is a dangerous thing. If everyone around you is tipping over police cars and throwing bottles, isn’t it safer to blend in and lend a helping hand? Look at what happened to that guy that tried to protect The Bay department store in Vancouver? He got hurt. If he had just picked up a garbage can and thrown it through that shop window he was standing in front of, he probably would have gotten home to bed on time that night.

     Now I’m not saying we are going to be in a Stanley Cup final again, certainly not in my lifetime. But maybe it doesn’t have to be about the Stanley Cup. Maybe it is just a good group of patriotic people enjoying Canada Day celebrations on Whyte Ave by drinking to excess. Those sidewalks can get pretty crowed and people can be unpredictable when drunk. If they start throwing bottles and you speak up, aren’t you really just asking for a punch in the head?

     If everyone around you is travelling over the speed limit, aren’t you being reckless by going the speed limit? Aren’t you the one who is a danger to yourself and other drivers. I mean, those people are going to have to go around you. They are going to ride up right behind you, they are going to get angry at you, they are going to speed even faster to get around you quickly and cut you off so they are one space closer to that red light up ahead. That kind of rage is what causes the worst kind of accidents. Speed doesn’t kill people. Not speeding kills people. Why punish people for doing the safest thing?

     Sure, those guys speeding in residential neighborhoods are bad guys, we’re not arguing that. That’s crazy. We should set up speed traps in every neighborhood street, because those guys are a menace to society. But when you gather all those guys onto a freeway, where we are all travelling in the same direction at once, far from small school children (except those travelling in vehicles), then the most dangerous driver is the slowest one, not the fastest one, he’s way up ahead of us and will get to his appointment like, 30 seconds faster and maybe find a choice parking spot near the door. Sweet. But for the rest of us, when we have to break or change our lane because Grandpa Sneezby is actually going 5km UNDER the set maximum, that is dangerous. That is anarchy. At the very least it is annoying.

     And that is why I am asking that the City of Edmonton not punish those of us who are only doing what everyone else is doing in the immediate area around us. Because when everyone does it, it isn’t wrong. Is it?

124. One question that I have is the following; does someone who never speeds have a say about photo radar? Is there a law that says that I must get a speeding ticket in the mail before I am allowed to question photo radar?

     Take 118 Avenue between NAIT and Abbotsfield Mall. Between 106 Street and 78 Street and between Wayne Gretzky Drive and 34 Street there are businesses, houses, apartment buildings, schools, lots of children and lots of pedestrians. Yet, the photo radar is usually placed in the one section of the road in which a fence in the median which prevents pedestrians from crossing; under the Rexall LRT station overpass.

     I would not recommend raising the speed limit under the Rexall overpass, as the section of road is too short. But, I do not buy the notion that the safest section of 118 Avenue is the place where speed enforcement is necessary.

125. What’s next? Photo Jaywalker?, Photo Seat belt? Photo phone while driving? Don’t kid yourself…with face recognition…..this is an absolute possibility! When will big brother stop watching my every move? If a human being catches me doing the offense (When I have full recollection and immediate reaction to the offense….sure), but when Mr. Roboto catches me SUPPOSEDLY speeding 11 km over the speed limit (61 in a 50) driving down a hill on a 3 lane thoroughfare where pedestrians cannot even cross the road due to a large fence ….come on. PHOTO RADAR IS ABSOLUTELY NOT SOLVING A SAFETY ISSUE…. BLACK AND WHITE…IT IS A CASH COW RECOUPING MONEY FOR THE CITY. ANYONE THAT THINKS OTHERWISE IS HIGHLY MISGUIDED. C’mon Edmonton let’s end this photo radar like most other jurisdictions…don’t put up with this nonsense anymore! Sign the petition and let’s end it!

126. Dear Mr. Iveson. I find your position unconvincing and disingenuous. I will not be voting for you again.

     Edmonton is full of the slowest, most careless and incompetent drivers I’ve seen in any city except Regina. This is the true problem. Setting up robots to catch people driving 51 kph in a 50kph zone is not going to improve safety, or anything else. The people causing accidents and creating risk would still be a problem if they drove at exactly the speed limit at all times.

     I would argue that slowing traffic to a crawl will merely speed the deterioration of driving skills and attentiveness. How about doing something to keep average moving speeds somewhere as high as 50 kph? If you want to reduce the motoring public’s risk exposure, it makes more sense to let them get on and off the roads in the smallest practical amount of time. But that’s not the city’s goal at all.

127. If speeding is so dangerous, then why are none of the causes in the 2013 City of Edmonton collision report because of speeding?http://www.edmonton.ca/transportation/traffic_reports/collision-speed-reports.aspx

128. Dear Sir

     I moved to this country seeking for a law that defines by rights and responsibilities. It is not a matter of being over the law, nobody should be above the law.

     I get the ticket by mail after 2 or 3 weeks from it happening. This means that I knew about it 3 weeks after the fact.

     I think the main thing for public safety is for drivers to slow down when they notice that they are speeding. Knowing about it after 3 weeks, didn’t make me slow down at the time I was speeding.

     I would suggest you implement something similar to the UK or even Dubai where the photo radars are fixed and visible to everyone. The minister of transportation announced the new system telling people that it is not a money grab, we are putting it up to be visible so that you actually slow down.

     If people violate the law then, double the fine, I accept that since you have done your part and tried your best to make people slow down.

     But hiding the photo radar beats the idea of promoting public safety and cause people to start to be suspicious of other intentions.

     Just a suggestion, copy from other successful implementation and you get better results.

     Thanks

129. I love the many thoughtful responses to the Mayor, many pointing out how out of touch he really is with reality. But, let’s face it he comes with a degree in social engineering or what’s that new buss word “Nudging”. He’s a huge proponent of biking, ETS and walking all of which I use from time to time. He is without a doubt, anti vehicle. How else can you explain the reason for doing virtually nothing until this past year, to improve our streets. It was a disgrace. He admitted finally that it (spending millions) is what the people want, as if he was some kind of hero. Really? You were on council for the past five years and you did nothing about the streets. Making drivers pay a hidden tax because our cars were deteriorating faster than they should have.

     I have to laugh with the mayor getting all “holy” about people breaking the law, and if they do so they should expect a ticket. I feel the need to point out that bikers are the worst by far at breaking the law. In fact I can honestly say that I have not seen a biker this past summer who had not broken the law or in the process of breaking a law. I live downtown and I drive downtown and bikers are the law breakers. It would take me several paragraphs to describe the crap I’ve seen. I use a dash cam in my car I have recorded hundreds of infractions. So Mr. Mayor what is being done about those law breakers???

     You can keep moving towards your Orwellian paradise Mr. Mayor. Camera’s on every corner, social engineering in every law, I for one will be standing up for freedom!!

130. 121 Comments and not a single person agrees with how this program is being ran.

     GET A CLUE DON!

     This is OUR city, you are elected to run it on OUR behalf. This isn’t YOUR city.

     The citizens of this city don’t agree with how this program is being ran. We want changes to this program and not changes on how to spend the money!

     Most people are all for photo radar, in construction zones, school zones and intersections. Hiding a city vehicle on an over pass on the Henday is doing absolutely NOTHING for safety.

     If safety was the real issue, why hide the vans at all? How does a person getting a ticket two weeks later in the mail get them to slow down?

     Where are these stats coming from and who is this source of yours?? 5kmh over in a 60kmh DOUBLES the changes of a collision?? Is this guy for real? 99% of the cars out there are traveling 5 over the limit. So if we all slow down 5kmh collisions in this city will drop by HALF, good one.

     IF Photo Radar really works on slowing people down, then WHY is the programs profits sky rocketing and why is the number of tickets quadrupled??

     IF the program really worked, it would be its own worst enemy! Everyone would have slowed down and having it around would be pointless anymore, but no just the opposite, more tickets and more money. The PROOF is right in front of your eyes, Photo Radar does absolutely NOTHING but steal money from peoples pockets. Its not slowing people down and its certainly not a deterrent if you can’t see the van and go flying past it.

     Get off your high horse and act like a mayor, not our school teacher. We don’t need you to save us from ourselves, we need you to ACT on our behalf, like you were elected to do!

131. I didn’t know that much about Don when he was elected; I was heartened to hear that he was a positive forward-looking individual.

     Then photo-radar. It’s absolutely scandalous that the City spent $53 million on a budget of $4.7 million. Everyone was outraged – except Don. Seemly totally oblivious to this rank incompetence, he seemed happy to perpetuate by dinging the people of Edmonton. Hardly worried at all about what this signalled to the rest of bureaucracy, he’s just happy that he’s swimming in cash. Happy but clueless.

     I don’t drive now, I’m immune to speeding tickets. In fact, as a cyclist and a pedestrian, I’m annoyed at speeding vehicles. I think photo radar is a good idea.

     I have had only one photo radar ticket – on the Yellowhead when they left up one construction barrier on the side of the road. The work had completed, the workers were gone, in fact no other signs of construction at all. But a canny quota filler realized that this was easy pickings. With Don’s greed to cover rank incompetence, every dodge in the book will be used. Don is happy to avoid the spirit of the law and apply the letter to suck up revenue. Shameful man.

     I’m all in favour of enforcing the speed limits but our Transportation Department’s expertise is certainly not in roads. Look at all the ill-designed roads, illogical signal sequences, and horrible maintenance. This is a department that has been brutally ineffective since at least the 1950s. Don may think: “I’m a law maker, I make laws not to be casually obeyed as it suits you, I make laws so that they get obeyed.” In this case, you’re just a rubber-stamp for a clueless department. A department that can make endless mistakes and never be penalized for it. Why? An utterly clueless mayor. A utterly vain jackass.

132. I’ve had it with you! You never got my vote to begin with and you sure as hell arnt getting it now. This city is crooked, it is a cash cow, i cant wait for the next election, looks like u have lost 18000+ votes, idiot

133. I’ve read all the comments here and most of you don’t know what you’re talking about. First of all, it’s NOT police officers that are behind the wheel of a photo radar vehicle. They are peace officers; that’s entirely different. Why do police get blamed for everything? They are heroes. Second, the donut shop comments need to be given a rest. Police officers are mobile and there’s a lot of them. A donut shop is a quick place for a quick break so, yes, you see them there often. I’m sure if you looked around the coffee shop in your office building, it would NOT be empty. Do you get criticized when you get a chance to take a break?! There are many days where police do not get that chance and are going from call to call, protecting the city. Third, the “bacon” comment is rude and childish… GROW UP! Fourth, how many times have the police stopped people for speeding and all they got was “isn’t there a murderer you should be after?” Can’t win I say; when you get caught doing something wrong and have to pay for it, whether it is monetary (meaning “money” for those of you who are clearly uneducated) or demerits, you’re pissed. I am no saint; I’ve had photo radar tickets and when the light flashes, you know you’ve been caught. I would say most times, you are expecting the ticket in the mail, so this stuff about getting the punishment weeks later is an excuse to be ignorant. I do agree that the radar should not be set below 5-7 kms/hour. There has to be room for error and if you took it to court, it may get chucked. That would cost more for having the Peace Officers attending court. I alo agree that it is better to have them in school zones and construction sites. Photo radar helps get the police officers off traffic duty and shields them, somewhat, from putting their lives at risk by jumping in front of speeding vehicles. You try that and see how fun it is. For the guy that started the petition, you say there’s thousands that support you and that is true. You believe that’s a high number do you? 18,000 signatures in a city and surrounding area close to 1,000,000 people is hardly good support. You wouldn’t win an election with that. If you think you would, run for office and see if you can please everyone. Life is 1/3, 1/3, and 1/3. You can please 1/3 of people, you can’t please 1/3 of people and the other 1/3 don’t give a s*%$. Additionally, the reason that you see most people here in support of abolishing photo radar is likely because they are the 1/3 of people that can’t be pleased. People that are against something, complain. People that are for something, tend to remain silent. Hmmm… most people are silent on this. What does that tell you?

134. The issue here Don is that you lack the comprehension to begin to understand what safety actually means.

     The one and only statistic in your arsenal that supports your standpoint is the drop in fatal accidents since 2007 when photo enforcement was introduced. The part you failed to either acknowledge or mention, is that fatalities have been on a steady decline since the invention of seatbelts decades ago. Technologies get better and less people die. Pretty simple. And this has been going on throughout the country and is not limited to the city of Edmonton or other municipalities running photo enforcement. Your precious photo radar has absolutely nothing to do with the equation.

     Your other argument is nothing more than a bully attack on the citizens you were elected to serve. Saying that we need to “Stop crying about being caught breaking the law”. Are you that out of tune with the general public that you think that is our issue with the photo enforcement problem? Our problem is not getting caught. Our problem is that you have manipulated the paws and the system to ensure people are punished for an action that is not unsafe.

     If you are choosing to ignore any science, reasoning, or common sense. And still want to remain under the misconception that slower equals safer. Then why is photo enforcement never placed in Edmontons worst roadways for accident occurrence? If you truely believe it is for safety then should it not be in the more dangerous areas?

     When traffic safety engineers make recommendations for a speed limit on a stretch of road, it is because they are educated in the field to be able to make that decision. What education do you have that you feel qualifies you to supercede a professionals recommendation? As far as I am aware you do not have any of said education. The Scona road issue is a perfect example of manipulating the laws to earn more revenue. The road is both designed and recommended to be a faster speed limit, yet your arrogance and ignorance allows you to think you know better. And once again this an area with very low accident rate, yet one of the number one radar hot spots.

     The City’s own crash statistics which can be found right on the City of Edmonton website, speak a very different story than the one you keep preaching. Perhaps you should actually take a read of those statistics yourself. Majority of accidents are from rear ending, hitting parked cars, and driving off the road way. And a very miniscule amount even list speed as a factor. This overwhelmingly points to Distracted Driving as the number one cause of accidents in our city. With possible impaired driving being the number 2 cause. With these things in mind, any reasonable person would expect to see the city writing 100 distracted driving tickets for every one speeding ticket they cite. And driving through another 100 checkstops before ever seeing a speed trap.

     I am sure as defence you would try and claim that the city does enforce those laws as well. But any simpleton can spot the massive disparity in the numbers. Why do I see at a minimum 1 photo radar or speed trap per day, buy I’ve only ever witnessed 2 checkstops my entire life in Edmonton? Why do I see speed enforcent at all when the crash statistics overwhelmingly support that speeding is not an issue in the slightest? How many rear ending accidents(the number one type of collision here) happen when someone driving a perfectly safe and reasonable speed for conditions, slams their brakes when they see photo radar?

     I pay property taxes to the city. The only city funded entity I can make any use of at all is the roadways. So I essentially pay taxes strictly for having a good road to drive on, and have that road be enforced to a point that it is safe for me to travel on. Yet I am constantly bombarded by near miss accidents repetitively through the day. Drivers have a behaviour that they don’t think they need to use signals, or put their phone down, or keep right except to pass, all because the police force does not enforce those things. People are well aware that speed is the only real offence that is targeted. So they are free to drive dangerously so long as they do it under the speed limit. YOU Mr. Iveson. Have a due dilligence to serve the people and correct this issue. I should not be taking my life in my hands everytime I get on a public roadway, because YOU want more money from the pockets of someone who was a little late to slow down when going through a speed transition area. I want the safety On the roadways that I pay for through my taxes. You have been successful in setting up a system that has created more hazard than was already present. And now you are being called on to fix the mess. Don’t you have kids or family whose safety you value? If so then please view this matter with an open mind, examine all the data available, get over your ego to admit you made a mistake, and change your viewpoint to one of SAFETY!

135. Dear Don,

     Please let me know if you need any help in ceasing the insanity that means to stop photo radar. While I disagree with some of what you said and the background info that led you to some conclusions, I agree that speeding needs to be controlled.

     I would support a massive increase to photo radar implementation but would like much of the profit to go directly into road development. NOT maintenance, but development so that we could increase the speed on roads. Many roadways are 10-20 Km/h below what they should be but due to poor design or deteriorating roadways, the speed limit is lowered.

     There are sites where it is clear that the limit is artificially reduced to increase revenue however and this should be stopped.

     The real travesty with this ridiculous petition is that a reduction in photo enforcement would result in more officers handing out tickets to drivers (as opposed to registered owners) which would allow insurance companies to continue blindly robbing citizens based on conjecture and lies. Your stats however from the U of A need to be looked at closer.

     Rather than looking at studies about what might happen… look at places like vancouver, california, texas, etc. where accidents were reduced by managing traffic and not handing out fines.

     If you have any interest in saving lives you need to address the slow vehicles on hwy 216. today, millions of dollars in damages are happening and Lord knows how many injuries, due to slow vehicles. Some of these are due to government allowing vehicles to travel at well under half the posted speed limit (which is insane in my mind) and yet many more are due to horrible road design. You need to close the 216 intersections at 119st and 127st. If a family member of mine dies here you will not see the end of that lawsuit.

136. Hi Mr. Iveson,

     I have a few thoughts on the photo radar issue as a citizen with a massively overpowered vehicle. As I seldom travel outside my work to home to grocery store routes, I have become very aware as to where all of the photo radar hotspots seem to be. Those don’t deter me from speeding; what deters me are the actual police speed traps that capture unsuspecting motorists and hand out the yellow tickets which take a couple demerits off their licenses.

     To me, quoting the definition of the word “limit” from the dictionary seems to insult the intelligence of the very people who voted you into office. We all know what a limit is. Have you, Mr. Iveson, ever heard of the word “uncertainty”? If not, let me introduce you to the topic. It is known as the inherent error in all measurements, no matter how accurate the measuring device. That being said, both the speedometer in a car and the laser/radar measurement device possess a certain level of uncertainty in the measurement of speed, albeit more so on the speedometer of the car. So, say a person is happily cruising along a 60 km/h speed limit road and their speedometer says they are going at 62. Their actual speed, due to reasons unbeknownst to them, is 65, and they pass a photo radar that measures their speed at 67. All of a sudden, they are slapped with $78 photo radar ticket, and it becomes quite apparent why the majority of people are incensed with this “cash grab” program. This uncertainty is further accentuated by other factors such as whether the car is accelerating or decelerating, and whether the car is going around a curve (otherwise known as the cosine error of LIDAR systems).

     My point here is that the general public, and those who have signed the petition in question, are normal, law-abiding citizens. They drive normal cars at normal speeds, and, on occasion, will exceed the speed “limit” (what does that word mean again?) because of carelessness or anxiousness. Those who drive overpowered cars, like me, could care less about the existence of a photo radar program, since we have bought into the higher risk of getting tickets either from an actual police officer or a stationary camera-car. I would say you should rethink who your audience is, Mr. Iveson, as it seems like you have opened up a can of mayoral worms.

137. Mr. Iveson

     Photo radar would be an effective means of enforcing the law if it made people accountable for their actions. If you can demerit people for going through a red light why don’t they get demerits for breaking the speed limit?

     This solves a few problems in my opinion. People that consistently speed, putting others at risk, will have to answer for their actions and possibly lose their license for a short time till they can bring themselves to operate within the law. They will also have to pay the appropriate amount of insurance for the risks they take. Maybe insurance rates for good drivers would lessen if people that got speeding tickets were accountable and had to pay the proper rates for their associated actions.

     Just my opinion.

138. The majority of responses on this topic clearly articulate my opinion and observation as well. Furthermore, I agree it is convenient that access to the source for the statistics cited have not been provided and as mentioned, there is a definite conflict of interest with who is providing the research. As a first-responder of 14 years, of which the last four have been in the City of Edmonton, I find it difficult to believe that speed alone is responsible for collisions. I agree that it adds to the severity, but very rarely is speed, in and of itself, the sole cause. I would like to see more enforcement of the recently enacted distracted driving laws as this seems to be a much stronger cause for collisions in most circumstances.

139. It would be interesting to see those accidents caused by speed.

     I feel like photo radar does not solve an issue as it does not prevent speeding, it only costs money to speed. Police should be policing.

     Maybe photo radar should adjusted where demerits are deducted after a certain amount of tickets are incurred.

     I think most accidents are caused my people ignoring yellows and crowding intersections, running yields and driving aggressive. Generally putting other people in a foul mood.

     But I also feel like having interchanges on #1 Yellowhead Trail & 149 Street NW, #7 Yellowhead Trail & 127 Street NW much like Yellowhead and 97th street would be lessen then number of accidents.

     The traffic circle on #5 118 Avenue NW & Groat Road is thoroughly confusing being a hybrid intersection roundabout.

140. I like photo radar.
     You can get serviced by an under-age prostitute, with a crack pipe in one hand and a bottle of Jack Daniels in the other while steering with your left knee doing 120 kmh in a 50 kmh zone.
     One MIGHT be too inebriated to remember and that’s when you REALLY appreciate the picture in the mail two weeks later.
     Keep up the good work keeping these streets safer.

141. Mr. Iveson: It is nice that you are so perfect that you have never gone +1 over the speed limit while keeping your eyes on the road at all times.

     For the rest of us imperfect mortals (95%+ of the good citizens of Edmonton) who require a bit of a buffer so we can drive safely with due attention to the road, please cut us some slack and stop painting us like we’re quasi-criminals. I was under the impression we elected you to represent us, not sit in sanctimonious judgment of us.

     P.S. I’m a law-abiding mom who’s never had a photo radar ticket before and drives slowly. I would say that I don’t “speed,” but since you define it as ANYTHING over the speed limit, I guess I’m guilty as charged in your eyes. What I want to know is how you think I can keep my kids in the car safe if I have to keep my eyes glued to the speedometer or drive with cruise control in the city, both of which are VERY unsafe.

142. First off, I agree you have to enforce speed limits. But there are good ways and bad ways to do that. A bad way is what the City of Edmonton is doing on a all out “blitz” basis in my opinion. At every turn you will see photo radar somewhere in this city. Edmonton is the worst city I have seen for the number of photo radar intersections, and roving patrol in all my travels across North America.

     I do not see an issue with traffic flowing freely at 110 km/hr on the Henday. What is the purpose in “hunting” down people driving 10 over when the traffic is flowing smoothly. It is total BS that “safety” is used as an excuse for photo radar. We all know photo radar is set up at locations where it is easy to nab people going over the limit. The Henday is one, Scona Hill is another with a 4 lane divided roadway at 50km/hr; ridiculous. This is just a blatant cash grab.

     Lets see photo radar put where they belong. In school zones when school is in and the 30km/hr zone should be enforced. Leave the free flowing traffic alone and just go after the idiots driving recklessly. Common sense people, common sense. Get the $$ signs out of your eyes; I don’t care where the money goes.

143. Mr. Iveson,

     I’d like to remind you that you were voted in by the people to represent the people- not push your own agenda. I voted for you because I thought you would be a fresh, positive form for Edmonton.

     Your desire to do everything to ignore the people who solely are responsible for you holding your position is an outright slap in the face to Edmontonians. We aren’t asking for the legalization of drugs. We aren’t asking to be able to murder one another.

     What we want is for you to take a true look at our speed limits and make appropriate adjustments to areas deemed excessively slow. We are asking for you to use photo radar responsibly and effectively. By the end of the day, we aren’t asking you of anything drastic or outrageous.

     Why don’t you start a legacy to your name by actually listening to your people? As it stands right now, I can assure you that myself and 5 of my family members, who previously voted for you in the last election, will NOT be voting for you again unless changes are made.

144. Since 2006 There has been an increase of collisions. Prior to 2006 there has been less then today … Photo radar was not present during 1990’s-2007 So if you are saying its a response to traffic collisions. Then why would it ever been set to use if the stats show better Stats prior to 2007 it’s contradicting.

     Hiding in bushes and illegally parking in places cause more fustration in drivers . LET THE PEOPLE VOTE . if its a democracy let them vote.

145. Painting someone going 5km over the speed limit on the Anthony Henday as a criminal threat to our children is irresponsible. I you need people to buy into photo radar as a solution give us something better than rhetoric and cost recovery.

146. Photo radar defies the basic principle of punishing the wrongdoer. It simply punishes the owner of a vehicle.

     Speed enforcement should be done by a police officer so that he/she may check for a sober driver, valid insurance, valid drivers licence, safe vehicle, warrants, criminal activity, etc.

     Speeding is only a symptom of a greater road safety problem. The cause needs addressing.

     Photo radar is nothing more than a cash-cow, designed to make a government look like it is doing something for traffic safety.

     Speed should be enforced by police officers, with regard to what is reasonable and prudent for the conditions; taking into consideration the driver, the vehicle, the traffic, the weather, etc.

     Photo radar violates one’s right to face one’s accuser.

     Photo radar electronic surveillance violates citizens rights to a peaceful, anonymous existence.

     The government has reached the limit on unopposed taxation. Photo radar facilitates a new tax under the guise of safety.

     Speed limits in Alberta are influenced more by bureaucrats than engineers.

     Photo radar will drive away tourism by discouraging tourists from travelling in Alberta.

     Photo radar could actually increase accidents and deaths by increasing speed variance and encouraging photo radar avoidance techniques (like tailgating, sudden braking, etc.).

     Photo radar does not provide reasonable notice to adequately defend one’s self (as guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms). One is unaware of the infraction and can’t take notes, remember the specifics, etc.

     Photo radar violates one’s right to equal treatment under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as photo radar tickets are not sent to all out of province drivers.

     If we allow photo radar, the next thing the government will do is install transmitters in our vehicles.

     Photo radar will ticket far more than just the “high-risk” or “worst-of-the-worst” drivers.

     Photo radar resentment will ultimately do more harm to police-citizen relations — at a time we need better relations.

     If the systems screws up, innocent drivers could get notices (it’s happened in Alberta many times already!)

     Not to mention illegally parked vehicles, entrapment and no margin of error.

     What about cost over runs?

     Let’s not forget Don, your a public servant.

     When your administration stops breaking the law, becomes accountable for their actions and starts solving problems maybe people will have more faith.

     Oh and ps. Take your stupid bike lanes to California. Bikes have no business on our roads that are covered in snow half the year. If anything they should have dedicated trails that don’t take away from road density.

     Can’t wait for the next election so I can watch your career crash and burn.

147. Don,
     Do the right thing and eliminate this cash cow. I feel ” hunted” now by these PR people and it has gone too far. Get real tired of seeing daily PR sitting along 156st. – 93 ave when this road I rarely see accidents? The only reason they are there is its 50km/h along 156st and 60km/h along 149st. With 149st being very busy more people are using 156st to get on the Whitemud but forget its 10km/h lower…similar road but different speed so PR has figured it out its a $ pit for them. I drive a lot for work and see the biggest problems are careless drivers and improper training to begin with. Rather see it harder for 1st time drivers to get there licences. Edmonton is a great City but this PR is a runaway now.Let the EPS set up their radar traps, patrol more of the busy roads, and the people of Edmonton will be safe. Do the right thing Don and listen to your fellow Edmontonians and abolish it….a good legacy for you when your Mayoral career and duties are over.

148. Mr. Iveson: If it was REALLY about getting people to slow down, why did the City hide the enforcement at lower speed limits? Why didn’t you just tell us through a big awareness campaign that there was no more buffer when you eliminated it and get people en masse to gradually slow down without incurring tickets or causing mass confusion? That’s what the Province of Alberta did when they hiked the speeding fines.

     Why continue to collect massive amounts of photo radar revenue and deny that anything had changed? I can’t think of any explanation other than that you did NOT want people to slow down. It looks to me like you wanted them to continue to speed so the City could cover their disgusting cost overruns and financial mismanagement.

     I voted for you, but boy, am I ever sorry now. I had no idea you held Edmontonians in such contempt that you would justify your administration’s misuse of OUR tax money, make us cover for it by implementing photo radar in an unsafe manner, and then blame and berate us for the whole situation.

149. I have a question for you! Do you think those of us that are fighting for this photo radar petition stupid? You must considering you felt the need to add in the correct meaning of limit.

     I signed that petition loud and proud. Simply because if this whole thing is about making the streets ‘safe’ put the cars trucks and whatever in a school zone, residential or construction. Why have these guys on the over passes of the henday? Oh wait I know that answer! Because they know they will catch people going 110 and beyond even when they are going with the flow of traffic! As stated by numerous Edmontonians this is a cash grab.

     You say this is for the safety of your kid! Yes I have one too and I would love her to be safe when she’s in school so let’s be real. The only place she will be walking around to get to school is in residential and a school zone… ease up a little.

     As for you people that say “just don’t speed” there is legally a 10% tolerance in your speedometers. Oh and cause its so safe to stare at your speedometer instead of the road the whole drive to make sure you don’t go 1 km over. Get off your high horse people.

150. Hello Don,

     My thoughts on photo radar are that they should be deployed in construction zones, school zones etc where there are pedestrians at risk of being hurt in a collision. On the major arterial roads I feel that peace officers/sheriffs/police should be patrolling the henday, whitemud, yellowhead etc.

     My issue with photo radar is the fact that drivers A) will slow down for the camera and speed up right afterwards. Which in fact doesn’t make the roads safer. However it does help with major intersections so there is a place for it
     B) getting a fine with no real consequence is like slapping a toddler on the wrist with no punishment. If photo radar involved demerits being issued I would consider my entire argument nearly invalid but for me this is the biggest difference as far as safety. Real drivers suffer real consequences when their license is being taken away for too many speeding tickets, rather than paying the 600 dollars and keep cruising along because once you pay the money you’re off the hook. That’s not JUSTICE, that is what makes it a cash cow.

     Thanks for your time Mayor.

     Sincerely,

     Steve Basaraba

151. Thank you all for the feedback. You have raised good questions, some of which are addressed in the update I provided at the top of the post with links to more material, including Dr. El-Basyouny’s relevant studies here.

     A comprehensive report on traffic safety, including the role of automated enforcement, is due before Council’s Transportation Committee on November 13th, and the public is welcome to present.

     Furthermore, Councillors Sohi and Loken submitted an inquiry today – with strong support from all members of Council – that will ensure more of your questions and concerns are addressed in the reports. Here is a post from Cllr. Sohi’s website with the full text of their 15-point inquiry.

152. Here’s the thing… Maybe if people were a little bit better at managing their time, they wouldn’t feel the need to speed everywhere because ideally they would allot a reasonable amount of time to get from point A to point B *going the speed limit* in order to get to their destination on time. Just a thought.

     Another thing is that I have personally only received one photo radar ticket and have never been pulled over… I knew that when I got my photo radar ticket that I was indeed speeding, I was on 127th street crossing 137ave going south where the speed limit changes from 60 – 50 once you cross the intersection. I got my ticket in the 50 zone going 61. Yeah, it’s bummer getting that in the mail, and it’s a bummer that the speed limit changes so quickly once you cross intersections, but the fact of the matter is that I was speeding! I broke the law and I suffered the consequence of it – it sucked, for sure! Being a university student means I’m poor as hell so it was not by any means a form of pleasure having to finance this unavoidable expense, but I haven’t received another ticket since, and that is simply because I haven’t been speeding. In no way has obeying traffic laws decreased my quality of life – if anything actually, it has increased my ability to avoid collisions and be a more defensively driver so I can avoid harm, whether it be fatal or not, by the hand of people who think they’re above the law and driving like madmen.

     Consider this – you are in a mall, and you pass a dollar store. You go in and you steal a $1 chocolate bar. You get caught stealing and are arrested/charged/banned from the mall – point is, you face punishment. What are you going to say to that? “I think it’s bullshit that I’m suffering the consequences of such a minor offence… I could have stolen much more valuable items but I’m facing punishment for a $1 chocolate bar.” Yeah. Sounds ridiculous that you would face any sort of consequence for stealing a chocolate bar… But is it the fact that it was a chocolate bar that you obtained unethically? No. It is the fact that you stole anything at all and that regardless of the value of the item you stole, you still committed the criminal act of theft. If you had the intent and acted based on the premise that you are risking getting caught and you do it anyways, you had a criminal mindset, and that is the point.

     So now let me ask you this: if you are speeding on your way to work to avoid getting yelled at by your boss for being late and you are ‘only’ going 5-10km over, you may justify your ‘minor traffic offence’ by violating the laws of the speed limit as a lesser evil in comparison to the greater evil of getting reprimanded by your boss at work for your inability to manage your time sufficiently. Let’s now say that your act of driving 5-10km over the speed limit as an act under the influence of anxiety over not making it to work on time causes you to be a little less attentive, combined with a decreased reaction time due to speeding, and you become oblivious to the fact that there is a pedestrian approaching a road marked cross walk – until they begin crossing the road assuming that you saw them and are going to slow down and stop. By this time, you’ve seen them too late, you might slam on the breaks if you have enough time, but even then, your tires skid, your vehicle overtakes the pedestrian who is now smeared all over your windshield, and there’s a high possibility that the driver behind you did not expect your sudden halt and maybe the results in them rear ending you. Your original commission of the ‘lesser evil’ of exceeding the speed limit by what you may think is an ‘appropriate buffer’ in order to avoid the ‘greater evil’ of being yelled at for tardiness, has now resulted in committing a far worse evil of manslaughter. It might seem like such a minor ‘should be acceptable’ offence to you, but remember – you committed the act knowing fully well that it is against the law and you could get caught; you KNOWINGLY take that risk, therefore any consequence of that risk should be mentally accepted prior to acting.

     So think about it. If you really need to get somewhere on time and you are running late – do the repercussions of being a little bit late really outweigh the repercussions of potentially taking an innocent person’s life, being convicted of manslaughter, and living a reasonable percentage of the life you have left rotting in prison with the heavy feeling of guilt over killing someone’s innocent mother, daughter, brother, son, etc, just because your time management skills are sub-par at best?

     Seriously. Just don’t speed. Whether it’s 3 over or 30 over – minor or major – you’re still breaking the law and you’re still putting innocent people at risk.

153. Unlike many Edmontonians, I agree with the Mayor.

     I see many comments that speeding on the Henday is no big deal and why should I get ticketed at 105 km/h and so on. Why did you get a ticket? Because the speed limit clearly states 100 km/H MAXIMUM. You really can’t get any clearer than that.

     But the most annoying statement I keep reading is “go with the traffic flow.” Just because everyone else is speeding does not make it legal. If that were sound legal advice, then drug dealers could just say, “Well everyone I know is a drug dealer, so what’s the big deal.” Obviously I’m exaggerating, but that’s how ridiculous it sounds to me. However, it brings to mind the age old saying, “would you jump off a cliff if all your friends were doing it?”

     In my humble opinion, photo radar can and should be used extensively in high-speed locations (Yellowhead Trail, Whitemud Drive and the Anthony Henday), while regular police officers issue traffic citations in safer, slower speed areas. Having police officers dashing out into traffic going 110+km/h on the Henday is not safe for the police officer or drivers nearby.

     If I was in charge, there would be photo radar on every overpass on those roads 24/7, because that seems like it might be the only way to get people to slow down.

     Speed is a major cause in the severity of collisions and people need to learn to slow down or leave a few minutes earlier, it’s that simple. Most people think they are great drivers (as high as 90% if AMA is to correct), but provincial stats show that almost that many collisions are caused by driver error – which sounds like the problem is the average driver, not road conditions or anything else.

     Your meeting/appointment/kids swimming lesson is not a valid reason to endanger the lives of myself, my family and other Edmontonians, period. Either accept that you will be late or leave 10 minutes earlier.

     I don’t speed and haven’t received one in 20+ years. If you don’t like speeding tickets, don’t speed. It’s really that simple.

     Most people think they are great drivers (as high as 90% if AMA is to correct), but provincial stats show that almost that many collisions are caused by driver error – which is proof to me that drivers are the problem.

154. Interesting that Ontario, a province without photo radar, and with roads far more congested than Alberta, has an auto accident fatality rate that is half of Alberta’s (2011). Ontario moved away from photo radar several years ago (an election promise from the Harris Conservatives) and concentrated on the issue that really affects road safety…distracted driving. They didn’t go the lazy cash grab photo radar route, they actually have police on the roads, in the traffic, enforcing the laws the way they are meant to be enforced. The results speak for themselves.
     http://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/roadsafety/TrafficCollisionStatisitcs_2011.pdf

155. Anyone with half a brain cell knows photo radar is nothing more than extra spending money for our already overspending government. I have never had a photo radar ticket, but I have nearly been in accidents because of it. Everyone has witnessed this – as you are driving down the freeway, it instantly appears like a sasquatch is crossing the freeway as brake lights all simultaneously light up like a Christmas tree as people approach the cameras. As soon as they pass this camera, speeds increase to over the speed limit again. These cameras aren’t a reminder to a speeder that you should do the speed limit all the time, it is a caution for 100ft to slow down so you don’t get the ticket, and then you can speed up again. And for some reason, people think that you should do 20km less than the posted speed to avoid a ticket. And, for anyone who thinks this isn’t the case, watch the traffic next time you pass a camera. It is very predictable – Everyone slows down for a very short distance, and then the pedal gets hammered to the floor shortly after. The only possible reason that ticket #’s could go down is that people wise up to their existence. Many people drive like idiots and no photo radar will stop this, other than the 100 foot section passing the camera. Do I think that speeding is O.K?…absolutely NOT, but I certainly know better than to think this is making the city safer. It’s like talking on your cell phone while driving, it’s not getting any better. I think people are just getting STOOPIDER! One more thing, IF this is actually working, then why on earth are we still getting MULTI-MILLIONS of dollars in fines paid each year? Could it be that it’s not really working? No…it couldn’t be that!

156. @Kelsey: You give a hypothetical. Here’s another one.

     I’m a mom, never had photo radar tickets, mostly use LRT, but drive on weekends for kids’ activities and groceries. I tend to drive slowly, being a good time manager with no rush to get anywhere and believing that a minute saved is not equal to a life risked. However, I’m cognizant that driving too slowly disrupts the flow of traffic, which can be an unsafe distraction. Consequently, I put my speed at around the bottom half to quarter of drivers for speed. Prior to the new photo radar policy, this meant in a 50 zone, typically drove around 50-58.

     After I learned the City had been secretly adopted a new enforcement policy on photo radar, I slowed down even more, about 47-53 in a 50 zone. This got me a few honks and some rude hand gestures. Sometimes this happened when my young kids were in the car. The first few times, my heart started beating fast. My kids also got anxious: “Mom, why did that guy scream/swear at you?” My answer: “Because I’m driving slowly to go with the new speed policy, but not everybody knows about it yet, so some people haven’t slowed down yet and think I’m wrong.” Inwardly, I curse the City for putting me in this spot.

     Word spreads. We learn the City has overspent their $5M photo radar budget by something like $48M. Hmm, those bureaucrats don’t want to get in trouble for blowing the equivalent of an, I dunno, 5% property tax increase, through mismanagement, do they? Might this cause them to overzealously enforce? But no, the Mayor asked them a question and they denied it. He’s satisfied. He’s not interested in citizens’ concerns.

     Meanwhile, more stories come out. Photo radar is lurking at transition zones. You come up a 60K hill to a 50K road, and photo radar is waiting for you right at the change in case you didn’t slow down fast enough – ie., didn’t slam on your brakes because a car is right behind you. Photo radar is waiting for you at narrow underpasses, where the speed changes and if you slam on brakes, there is no maneuvering room and the car behind you – whose visibility is slightly impaired by the underpass – is going to slam right into you and your precious children.

     The Mayor continues to insist that anything over the limit (li – mit) which he so condescendingly defines for us, is reckless endangerment of our fellow citizens. So now my 47-53 in a 50 zone is not good enough. I’m practically a criminal in his eyes. So now I can’t go over 50 at all, ever. On the other hand, I know from my defensive driving class that driving way below the flow of traffic isn’t safe either. So my range of speed has to be much narrower, maybe 47-49. That’s really hard to do. I hate cruise control in the City – it slows my reaction time and makes me a danger on the road. So I have to keep an eye on the speedometer at all times, especially in places where my attention on the road is needed – underpasses, transition zones, hills. This feels really unsafe to me.

     I really hate this. I really hate the City for putting me in this spot. I’m not going to sacrifice my children’s safety and lives for a few measly bucks from a photo radar ticket. So I think I’ll keep driving 47-53 in a 50 zone. If the Mayor wants to continue to insist he can ticket me at this speed, go right ahead. If he wants to call me a criminal, so be it. I’ll remember him at the next election time.

157. I watched Mayor Iveson give a rather confrontational response on the news the other day where he almost dared anyone to come out and speak against photo radar. I personally have no problem with photo radar. I have a problem with the B.S. being spewed about how it is saving the lives of school children.

     I have never seen children walking to school on the Whitemud at 111 St. at the bottom of the hill by the utility buildings. I have seen several near miss rear end collisions caused by people stomping on their brakes at these locations. I have never seen children walking up the hill by the Old Timer’s Cabin, or for that matter on 170 St. northbound by the Brick Warehouse building. All favorite photo radar locations.

     What I do see on a daily basis is traffic on Riverbend Road between Rabbit Hill Road and 53 Avenue travelling at 70-80 kmh in a 50 zone totally unchecked. You never see photo radar here even though there are three elementary schools and a junior high school along this route with plenty of kids walking. I never see photo radar on Rhatigan Road where moms speed past my house at 60-70 kmh after dropping their kids off at the elementary schools down the road.

     I guess what I am saying is don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining. Photo radar is not being deployed around schools to make kids safe. It is mainly used on major traffic routes to generate revenue.

158. I have a novel though… let’s enable charge backs, Say I took my time and money to fight my BS photo radar ticket, then if/when I win in court I can invoice the City for my expenses to fight said ticket (mileage/time off work/parking), so my $117 ticket would be a $400+ invoice to the city.

159. Dear Mr.Mayor:

     Please let me start by saying that I’ve only received ONE, ONLY ONE speeding

     ticket in my lifetime, that was back in April 1998, by the Stony Plain RCMP

     detachment going 121 km/h in
     a 100 km/h zone, just ONE mile west of the
     Highway 44/Villenueve Overpass on Highway 16.

     YES. I HONESTLY DESERVED THE TICKET.
     (letter capitalization for emphasis)

     Ever since then, I have smartened up quite a bit
     and have made a point of being more conscientious of the speedometer.

     My quarel with photo radar has nothing to do with it being any sort of so-called
     “cash cow”. Such being the most commonly resorted-to arguments against it.

     Because, you know what, Your Worship and all fellow comment-posters on this
     page: any fine levied by any tier of government, be it municipal, provincial or
     dominion (i.e. federal) can readily earn the epithet of “cash cow”.

     A traffic-violation ticked issued by an officer of the law, the traditional
     old-fashioned way can be “cash cow”.
     A fine levied for unshovelled sidewalks in winter can be a “cash cow”.
     A fine levied for violation of local after-hours noise-abatement
     bylaws/ordinances can be a “cash cow”.

     The Dominion of Canada, United States, Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain and
     other places are states predicated upon the Rule of Law. One cannot merely
     cherry-pick which laws they want to follow versus which others they don’t want
     to follow.

     So, if one wishes to put said “cash cow” on a diet:
     Well then,
     Drive the posted speed limit (50 km/h or 30 M.P.H.) etc….
     Keep you walks shovelled in the winter time,
     turn your stereo/music down at night so others get some shut-eye.

     If you really don’t like the law, then wait for the next elections, to get
     incumbents replaced with more-libertine minded seatholders. Such is the right
     enjoyed by Canadians, Americans, Australians, British etc….

     Notwithstanding that: it is an unfortunate facet of functioning of the human
     mind that attention will, sometimes wonder, we are all human, we all make
     mistakes.

     But Kelsey, your analogy a 2 or 3 km/h over the speed limit along side
     of the theft of a $1.00 chocolate bar from a dollar-store is not a good
     one.

     Nobody “makes a mistake” of walking out of the store with $5.00 of candy bars.

     You see, Kelsey, Jamie and others of like-mind:

     In even a petty-thievery in the dollar-store, there is that element of pre-
     exiting premeditation and planning of strategy of how best ot evade the sight of
     the store staff/management before pilphering candy out of that store.

     But, no deliberate forethought goes into thinking:
     “oooh let’s see, Oak St. has tonnes of photo radar, but Elm St. has none, so I
     think that I’ll rip up the pavement doing 70 km/h in a 50-zone. (Equiv.:
     45 M.P.H. in 30-MPH-speedzone).

     Please do not construe this as a defense of speeding and breaking the law, I’ve
     always made a sincere effort to keep one eye on the speedometre every five
     seconds. And I’ve mentally pre-alerted myself to when I am about to enter a
     school zone or a busy downtown thoroughfare with traffic lights on almost every
     block.

     And if I get a photo-radar ticket, it’s because, one my part, I was speeding and
     have to suck it up!!! And once again, it illustrates the beauty of democracy,

     one can vent on forums such as this one, and hang in there until the second or
     third Monday of October of 2017 and put in a Mayor and Council whom will
     discontinue photo radar.

     This is nothing against you, let alone personally, Mr. Iveson. I actually voted
     for you last October in 2013; but I don’t expect to agree with EVERTHING that
     my winning candidate will think, say or do. And I really do appreciate Your

     Worship erecting a website with forums such as this where citizens can share
     their minds….

     Thank you for taking the time to read this.

     Joe Mahoney,
     Ward 2.

160. Clean up the image.  If the photo – radar operators are hiding and being sneaky the perception is that the program is about revenue.  If they were visible then you could claim with credibilitiy that the program is about safety.
      

161. This is too much !!!!!!

162. Photo Radar is a great invention for keeping our roads safe. In the event it is being used properly. A Truck/car/Van on an overpass is not using this tool wisely. Sure it gets lots of tickets out there. The photo radar department does need to cover their butts for the cost over runs. But, a vehicle pulled over to the side of the road on a bridge deck is a hinderance to the traffic that is trying to cross over the bridge. Hazard lights and a Pylon just don’t cut it for a photo radar vehicle presence. Make photo radar visible in a safe location out of the way of traffic visible to everyone. A bright orange photo radar fleet all the way. HAHAHA. I wonder if the city has a guerrilla warfare expert running the photo traffic department. Soon all the leaves will be gone and the city will start strategically placing snow piles to hide their trucks. Enough, is enough. I’ve only ever gotten 1 photo radar ticket in my life. It was when I drove 50km/h through a playground zone that was marked 30km/h. I deserved it through my own stupidity. Has it has caused me to be more careful….yes, it has. So, why these vehicles aren’t placed in places like the loop a Hawaralak Park or in a construction zone is beyond me?????? Use it to keep people safe and not pad department coffers.

     The mayors views and opinions are not stupid and be is not a butt head. He has valuable in site as we all do. But, don’t shut us out or tell us that a committee will be looking into it and hope it goes away. Or try to tell us that no one person is above the law. It’s not about that. All I want to see is the tool being put to better use. Prove us wrong and take photo radar off the over passes and put it on my street so my daughters can cross the street safely and not have to worry about some idiot doing 80km’s plus in a 50km/h zone. This you better not do over 100kms/h or faster or we will ticket you. Take a drive through Idaho or Utah. Their major freeways are rated at 130kms/80miles an hour. Hmmmm!!!!!

163. Mr, Iveson,

     The photo radar system in its current iteration is predatory. If these trucks were visible would it not be a better deterrent to speeding, rather than hidden in the bushes, behind utility sheds, on the far sides of over passes? One has to ask what the true purpose is then? Is it maximizing traffic safety or is it maximizing revenues from this program. The same question bodes with the strategic placement at speed transitions. In both cases I would suggest it’s the latter. Further, I would suggest it’s even counter to public safety to have these units hidden as they are as I have often witnessed people slamming on the brakes at the last second as the speed traps come into view in the periphery. If they are in plain view are we not more apt as a collective to keep to posted speeds?

     Beyond this I think it shows hubris to think that you are going to affect a global shift in thinking on speeding by heavily punitive fines, being doled out in the mail as a postscript to the infraction. While some people may observe the date time and location, others do not or are rather simply infuriated by this increasingly pervasive and creepy measure of proxy law enforcement and none the more likely to change their habits…except perhaps in the voting booth.

     People are in a hurry, there is always going be a degree of speeding. Isolate areas that are problematic and dangerous and apply photo radar resources there in an educational deployment and quit cashing in on the driver doing 55km on Scona under the guise of public safety.

     PS:

     Quoting dictionary terms to your constituents is effing didactic…

     di·dac·tic

     adjective

     -in the manner of a teacher (or “lawmaker”), particularly so as to treat someone in a patronizing way.

164. The problem is: the enforcement of the law is not just – and by that I mean people sense that it is not doing what it is supposed to do – deter speeding. Although there may be a link between speed and traffic safety, there is no evidence this method of enforcement leads to reduced speed. or enhanced public safety.

     It is obvious to people that hiding photo radar on the side of the road, running it when traffic volumes are low, and getting a ticket two weeks after the fact, sent to the owner, not the driver, can not logically be a deterrent to speeding.

     If you want to keep the roads safer and keep traffic at safe speeds, fine. But this method of enforcement does not do that. Which is why people oppose it., and see it as simply a cash grab, rather than a legitimate deterrent.

     It’s hard to draw analogies, but here’s what it’s kind of like: as if someone in an outdoor place where there was no smoking allowed, lit up a cigarette with no one else around, and two weeks later they got a bylaw ticket in the mail from being watched on a camera. Yes they broke the law, a law designed to minimize harm to others, but a more effective deterrent would have been a bylaw officer asking them to put the cigarette out. And since they weren’t actually harming anyone else, the purpose of the law was not being violated, even if the letter was.

165. Your photo radar van on 109 street southbound, just south of 111 avenue takes up valuable street space and forces me on my bike to go dangerously close to traffic passing me from behind. I have been almost hit numerous times as I pass the photo radar van. These vans can put bikers at risk, but it seems the city only cares about making revenue from cars and doesn’t care about actual traffic safety.

166. Mayor Iveson – thank you for taking a most principled stand against speeding drivers. I trust your resolve will remain firm and that all the whiners & complainers will not unduly influence a lessened focus on public safety. Nail the speeders, nail em hard!

167. Mayor Iveson talks down to us peasants that his artificially low speed limits, gotcha style enforcement, and cash cow is all in the name of safety. What a pompous man. My story: I own a small business named Diapazon Ventures Ltd of 10 employees, and travel in and around Edmonton. My employees are courteous and responsible drivers, I have not received a single complaint from the “how’s my driving, call XXX-XXXX” stickers plastered on the trucks. However, I’ve received four tickets this summer from our esteemed mayor for the following speeds over the limit, consecutively: 6 over, 8 over, 14 over, and 9 over. Granted, the 14 over may be justified and the employee was held responsible, however the frivolous tickets are not charged to the employee, as they were obviously keeping with the speed of traffic. Thanks Don Iveson, I’m confused how I can put blame on my employees when it is not about “safety” and all about dollars.

     When laws are made to generate revenue as opposed to ensuring the protection of citizens, they become perverse. This is what our “lawmaking” mayor is doing. 8 km over on Anthony Henday is a perversion of laws and holds no common sense. His comments here are an insult to regular, hard working individuals like myself. The next election is four years away, however myself, my family, and right of my employees are angry enough that we’ve written it on our office wall, we will not vote for this man again. Too many cute photo ops, not enough sense in his head. We are done with you Iveson, and I’m not alone. Your pompous comments have gotten the coffee shops talking. You are a thief.

168. Sneaking around hiding behind bushes at 1 AM within 20 metres of speed changes 60 to 50 km/h. has nothing to do with safety.

169. Hi, It has been getting worse than collecting money by the photo radar company. Every time when I see the city of Edmonton pick-up truck I just press my break pedar even if I am following the speed limit. At the same time I have to worry about any collision from back. Please stop using the city of Edmonton vehicles with covert and camouflager. Please stop hiding the cars behind bush. Please don’t locate the vehicles in natually accelerated spots like Smith bridge. And most of cars are driving 90 Km/h on the Whtemud Drive, so it is more dangerous to keep the speed limit because other drivers try to pass my car. I am not sure it is the best way to remove notorious drivers from our roads. They seem to be rich enough to pay fines and don’t care road safety at all. I hope you change the way to use the photo radar or stop it.

170. I am pro safe roads however I got two tickets while I was not driving my car, that’s wrong! That’s like go to jail being innocent, if a real police pull off the car the ticket would be given to the real infractor, even if I allow someone drive my car I can not know if the person is speeding by few kms over the speed limit. Also there are a bunch of driver doing worse things than speeding for 20km/h, for example don’t stoping in a red light to turn left, zinc zagging in the road, etc, and many other bad maneuvers that can not being catch on camera (not one in a parked car).

171. We can all see that Mr Iveson’s agenda is bleed the citizens of Edmonton dry by any means possible. The changing of the traffic enforcement rule’s (dropping them from the old 15km over down to less than 10km). These new rules would be illegal in all 27 EU countries (go check their laws, this is actually true) . But that’s “OK” by Don Iveson because he knows that can cash grab Edmontonians for another $33 million. He is aware that the world auto manufacture’s tolerances for accuracy on the speedometers is nominally 10%. The requirements for sale in the EU is to be within 12km/h. Using any production built car from anywhere in the world, you can be doing over 10km/h faster than its speedometer says and it is still legal to sell that car in Canada, the US or any EU country. Thus between the auto makers and Mr Iveson it would seem as users of Edmonton’s roadways we have to pay speeding fines, even when we believe we’re being law-abiding-citizens.

172. If photoradar is about safety and education through enforcement why is the speed limit not posted next to the sign warning of photoradar?

173. You are an idiot Mr. Mayor. The speed limit should be the speed that 80% of cars drive, not what you legislate. You are out of touch and I look forward to you being removed from office.

174. @Hainesy My perspective is that the purpose of a speed limit should be governed not by how fast people can travel but the optimum trade-off between speed and safety. As a driver who frequently travels a familiar stretch of road I might consider the speed limit too low; but what do I do if a ball suddenly bounces into the road from between parked cars?

     My point, Hainesy, is that the speed limits are not arbitrary and that, even though I too am an excellent driver, I am not qualified to determine what is a safe speed. But if I feel that a certain road’s speed limit is too high or too low I can talk to my councilor or contact the appropriate department by phone through 311 and ask to have it reviewed.

175. @Hainesy: My perspective is that the purpose of a speed limit should be governed not by how fast people can travel but the optimum trade-off between speed and safety. As a driver who frequently travels a familiar stretch of road I might consider the speed limit too low; but what do I do if a ball suddenly bounces into the road from between parked cars?

     My point, Hainesy, is that the speed limits are not arbitrary and that, even though I too am an excellent driver, I am not qualified to determine what is a safe speed. But if I feel that a certain road’s speed limit is too high or too low I can talk to my councilor or contact the appropriate department by phone through 311 and ask to have it reviewed.

176. Dear Mr. Mayor,

     Thank you for standing up for those of us who are law abiding citizens. I am tired of being bullied by other drivers who think they are exempt from our traffic laws and feel the need to tailgate me for going the speed limit. I fully support photo radar and will continue to do so. I wonder what all these speeders would be saying if it were police officers pulling them over instead…likely that the police officer was at fault or wrong. If you receive a ticket regardless of how it was issued, the driver is at fault, no one else.

     Keep up the good work!

     Sincerely,
     Linda (photo radar tickets: 0 Speeding tickets: 0 Accidents: 0)

     Sincerely

177. Mayor Iveson,
     I don’t disagree that going insanely fast is dangerous, however I see cameras flash on people who are not going much faster than others.

     People need to pass other incompetent drivers sometimes and for them to get penalized for momentarily speeding just enough to pass someone who may be a dangerous driver is not justice, it is nit picking.

     I personally see more danger in drivers who blow stop signs or people who drift in and out of the lanes, or are busy texting while driving.

     Accidents are caused by people tailgating too close, not paying attention, driving drunk, running stop signs, not knowing how to navigate traffic circles or four way stops… In fact I think people who drive too slow are hazards just as much as excessive speeding. Speed does not cause accidents, irresponsible and stupid decisions do. Speed is irrelevant if there are no accidents.

     With that being said, excessive speeding can reduce reaction times but the speed limits in the city haven’t changed with the times. Perhaps they need to.

     There needs to be an increase in many speed limits in the city. If there is no one on the road at 1 am, why is it so taboo for the one vehicle to go a little faster?

     Also, when my car was vandalized and broken into I was informed that the police no longer investigate these things. Why can we have police officers sitting on the side of the road giving people grief for an extra 5 km over the speed limit instead of investigating crimes?

     If you really want to make the roads safer, consider not spending 40,000$ per camera (which requires constant calibration to remain accurate) and instead fixing the dangerous potholes sitting. Around the city.

     I have reported many potholes repeatedly over the last 6 months as have others as there is a seniors complex right along that road. Not a single finger has been lifted to fix them. Imagine if a senior tripped on a pothole crossing the road and twists their ankle or breaks a major body part due to the unfair priorities in the city. My last car was destroyed beyond repair by potholes and the city was held liable for that and had to pay me out for the car. My replacement car is also becoming damaged. I do my part by reporting dangerous road conditions and the city doesn’t bat an eye, but they are quick to jump down our throats over something that hasn’t been proven.

     It may state that collisions and such have been reduced due to cameras. The fact is that correlation does not prove causation. The city leaves out other factors other than speed and treats speed as the only threat on the road. The fact is some drivers have extraordinary driving abilities and some don’t or don’t even understand the rules of the roads.

     Painting every citizen with the same brush is simply not right.

     We pay for these roads through our taxes, maybe we should have a say in how they are run, considering this is a democracy.

     Don’t forget there are people who arrive in Canada from other countries who were recently able to exchange their international licenses for an Alberta license. Isn’t it even a consideration that the reduction in collisions is due to the discontinuation of that process?

     So to simply blame all collisions on speed is not right.

     I would rather see police out and about who can use human judgement to assess these situations than automated cameras that cannot differentiate between passing, and sometimes even which vehicle was actually speeding.
     This would create jobs and maybe put a little faith in the city again.

     As far as I am concerned, this program is so quickly defended due to its revenue than actual safety considerations.

     Throwing some numbers out to the public doesn’t change the reality of the situation.

     I voted for you because I thought you would be able to address our concerns appropriately. So far I am seeing you tell us what you want is right and what we want is wrong.

178. Also note that according to your government, the city doesn’t have to follow the disclosure of photo radar locations. Why would you tell the public that they can review all photo enforced locations in the city and then put photo radar at locations that are not disclosed. When I asked the courthouse this I was told the city can do whatever it wants.

     That is entrapment as far as I am concerned

179. The council statement is deliberately misleading in that it bundles several issues into 1statement. Yes there is a need for reduced speed limits in school zones. But the main complaint in Edmonton is how photoradar is sited.
     A grey SUV in the bushes of the Whitemud after a curve IS a distraction & so unsafe.
     A pickup sat on the outside curve on the exit ramp from the Hendy to stony plain rd IS a distraction & may be hit by other vehicles in icy conditions. There is a similar problem on the ramp between Yellowhead & A Hendy.
     in the UK, these enforcement vehicles have high visibility rear markings so they can be clearly seen – they still generate 1,000’s of pounds revenue. They do not sit at the side of main arterial roads, but off them so they can be safe. Fixed cameras have a yellow reflective high visibility backing. The enforcement system is highly visible & safely sited for both the operator & other road users.
     I have seen photo radar on 118 sat a few feet behind a bus that is waiting repair, rear hood up. The photo radar looked like it was a service truck with 4way flashers on – NOT an enforcement vehicle.
     Solutions;
     Start making the vehicles highly visible as a potential obstruction on the roads.
     Site these vehicles in SAFE positions.
     Static vehicles do NOT make roads safer, only the immediate vicinity of that vehicle.
     Put more marked or unmarked vehicles on the road to catch the bad drivers, speeders, tailgaters etc & provide the crews of these vehicles with Hi Visibility jackets so they are visible day & night.
     If more speeders were caught by mobile enforcement rather than photo radar, then 3 demerit points with the fine would be a far bigger deterent than photoradar fine.
     Yes i have had 3 photo radar fines, which was annoying (not all in Edmonton) I also was stopped by RCMP out of town & yes the 3demerits hurt more than the fine. I am no angel, I am not against photoradar BUT only if it is used fairly & safely. Oh & a ticket for 57km in a 50km zone is unfair & bordering illegal as the equipment used to catch speeders is calibrated, the average speedometer in a car is not. In the UK, a police vehicle has an auxilliary speedometer that is regularly calibrated as the vehicle supplied item would not suffice in court. I know i’m not in the UK, but they have been doing this much longer & show what works & how it is done, making large sums of money from fines & actually improving the safety of crews & road users.

180. Not paid for with tax payers dollars you say? So Does that mean If I get a ticket I can stop paying taxes? Because clearly paying these tickets aren’t coming from the tax payers dollars!

     Has anyone been stopped at a red light than you get stopped at another red light so on and so fourth than went down the same street the next day at the same time and after getting stopped once tried going about 10 over the speed limit and suddenly I wiz right through all of these lights green green green. Try it sometime you may just amaze yourself at the timing of these lights and somehow they are all pretty much set up as a sweet spot.

     getting these tickets hidden on the bridges in the bushes around curves where the speed changes where you could easily miss the sign say a semi passes you or your not used to the road or even Dips in the roadway where you may not notice it until you are going a few KMS over the posted limit.

     That is what I call Entrapment
     In criminal law, entrapment is a practice whereby a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit.[1] It is a type of conduct that is generally frowned upon, and thus in many jurisdictions is a possible defense against criminal liability.

     In a sense the Judicial system is putting out a sting operation they are hiding people In spots where people are susceptible to going over the speed limit, While creating an atmosphere that is conducive and mentally tricking people to do so.

     As for the number of collisions per 1000. There are many ways to Skew numbers They could have picked a particularly bad year to compare with the current numbers, there are also more people here that werent before and potentially a fewer number of people that are drivers verses the whole population. With the exception of maybe 4 very slick days last year we didnt have that many bad winter days The bad year could have had a particularly icey winter which would make the likely hood of accidents Jump exponentially. As our winters as far as driving conditions go have been milder for the most part.

     As a tax paying citizen Than why don’t we fix the setup so traffic can flow freely’?

     Because we are in the business of skewing numbers here is food for thought I am making this basic as it is an example. If the project cost 50Million over 5 years that is 10 million/yr if each officer is paid a salary of 50000$ a year That is 200 officers employed for 5 years that sounds great on paper 200 people employed for 5 years at a decent salary.

     The part that skews it is your overhead police cars training weapons your excess taxes and the excess for your officers, office staff buildings ect superiors so to make the math easier lets say the overhead for all that is another 50K so each officer is worth 100K that employs 100 officers and office staff pays the bills.

     And the kicker is instead of corporations making al ot more money off of cameras and monitoring You have added 100Jobs of people that can go out and physically make the roads safer. Not just take from the many to give to the few. (arena nobody can afford to go to? Art Gallery profiteered by the rich paid for by the many and so on and so fourth

181. With photo radar gone for the speeders,just how fast will they the speeders want to go then. If it was 60 do they want to do 100. Keep the radar and give a little buffer. Police discretion for speeders that take it to far .Maybe 24 hours in jail with no charges, just straight to jail from the infraction. Same as talking on the cell, do as China does,straight to jail from the infraction for 24 hours then 48 then a week.and so on.With no photo radar just what is the limit. Dont put yourself in a bad position in the courtroom.
     If the speeders want to

182. Mr. Iveson

     I always maintain appropriate speed limits in school and construction zones and I try my best to keep my speeds reasonable everywhere else but find it far to easy to be going 10km above the posted limit. Poof there goes $110 dollars of my hard earned money. I have police officer friends who will admit to never pulling over an offender of +10km (with the occasional exception of 50 km zones) due to the fact that they don’t believe it poses a safety hazard.

     I find photo radar to be quite an unsafe distraction. Even while obeying the speed limits I find myself hitting the brakes when I spot the trucks hiding in the bushes all around the city. The thought of how easily a picture taken of me from these hidden assailants can cost me my hard earned money is constantly keeping me on edge even when I’m not in the wrong.

     Sincerely, Justin

183. Welcome to Hazard County! ya’ll.
     [laughs Rosco P. Coltrane]

184. Mr Mayor,
     Since clearly you are all about statistics and definitions, here is s treat for you:

     Out of the 178 original posts on this website:

     120 of the people disagree with PR or are unhappy with the way it is run
     31 people agree with PR
     22 People are somewhere in the middle

     That is….

     67% against current PR
     17% for PR
     12% unclear

     So if this was a “survey” which is a tool the city commonly uses, and this was meant to represent our city, than it should be clear that the majority of people are not in favour of this program.

     And just a reminder Mr mayor,
     de·moc·ra·cy (d-mkr-s)
     n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies
     1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
     2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
     3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
     4. Majority rule.
     5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

     So as this is a democracy, the people have spoken.

     Its not your job to tell us what to do. It is your job to listen to us.

185. Mr. Iveson. Posting all these comments. Did you read them all? I think not. Do you want Edmontonians to believe you are a listening and engaged Mayor. I think so. I think you are quite ingenious and equally deceitful.

186. @ Jennifer

     Respectfully, in regards to your point see this survey: http://globalnews.ca/news/1595766/the-citizens-of-edmonton-have-had-enough-man-petitioning-against-photo-radar/

     5366 voted for photo radar and 4694 voted against

     So the people have spoken?

187. Don,
     It is time to own up and admit your fault. How may newspaper articles are required? How much debate? Why not address your people? Call a press conference, do the right thing. stop hiding, man up. Fix this so someone else doesn’t have to.

     “Mistakes are always forgivable, if one has the courage to admit them.”
     Bruce Lee

     “A man must be big enough to admit his mistakes, smart enough to profit from them, and strong enough to correct them.”
     John C. Maxwell

188. @MIke:
     Surveys are done by selecting a sample group.
     The entire city was not asked only selected individuals, therefore the accuracy of a survey could be questionable. If a different group were selected to survey, there would no doubt be different answers.

189. Automated Traffic Enforcement
     Technology Guidelines
     Province of Alberta
     (September 2014) Revised

     These are guidelines and do not necessarily have the force of law. They do require municipalities and the police to collect and keep data. I requested some of the data after receiving a violation ticket and the prosecutor dropped the charge. Unless motorists insist that the municipalities comply with the guidelines (and they often don’t) the municipalities will continue to collect the revenue. Judges are reasonable about this and since there is no opportunity to defend yourself at the time of the supposed violation judges are inclined to insist that the guidelines are strictly complied with. Each individual will have to decide for themselves whether it is worth the effort. It took me about an hour in total to see the duty counsel with a copy of the guidelines before he decided to cancel the ticket. They have complete discretion to do that before any question of a not guilty plea and trial date arises. As usual, it is up to individuals to insist the province and municipalities comply with their own guidelines, approximately 12 pages and easily available on the internet. Of course the vast majority of people have no idea about the guidelines and municipalities and prosecutors of course make no effort to inform the public. That might reduce revenues.

190. C. Public Awareness
     • Existing automated traffic enforcement technology sites must
     be advertised on a monthly basis by notifying the local media
     and posting on an established web site, where possible

     Is your municipality complying with that guideline? The City of Lethbridge isn’t and the prosecutor knew that. Just as an example.

     Not to encourage scofflaws, but if the province and cities and police require complete compliance with the TSA, the province and cities and police should be held to the same standard. The Lethbridge City Police website technically complies with the guideline, but if you actually check the website the date and locations of photo radar enforcement is incomprehensible. When it could be so clear. Up to each individual.

191. thay is biggest lie I have ever heard all surveys are nothing a lie 99 percent of surveys a lie if you believe what you are saying you belong in prison 99 percent of universities in alberta dysfunctional all kids mentality of 12 years old god will be here very soon to punish your sick lies majority of people 40 years o;d and undert dysfunctional all schooling lawers liars no education lots of my friends lawers no brains only education there is comes from experience any body misses a day from work dysfunctional lazy biggest scam ever for last 30 years only police and lying lawers making money scam most impotrtant people on earth private sector that have education you belong in jail 55555555555life sentences if you believe what you are saying you do not belong in society yickets only being given to people that are safe drivers rich people are driving like lunatics getting away with it rich people think they are better other people bo education at all no skills many people in alberta breaking down arrested for no reason whatsoever people that do not come from broken homes good not one single child comes from broken home is stable minds shattered you could not be more wrong good teenagers commiting suicide false arrests how would you like to be arrested no reason whatsoever go to jail 70 years for no reason nobody ever forgets getting a ticket no reason everybody in Edmonton very angry driving not safe to drive 95percent of police officers Edmonton dysfunctional only people 35 years old and over think properly schooling 95 percent a scam I went to college 7 8 times did not learn 1 thing teachers were very funny education idoes not come from a book experience most books are a lie someones opinion a lie god is coming to punish all people that lie you are destroying so many people sick went to court majority were oldrer people breakdown robbed of life savimgs best drivers on earth safest getting tickets

192. Don,

     I support you 100% on the photoradar enforcement. I do not agree with comments that allude to the fact doing 115 KMPH in a 100KM road should be ligitimized. That just defeats the purpose. Also Photo Radar is not a distraction of yoiu drive the limit. Simple as that !! The public needs to understand the science behind roadway engineering and why those speed limts are set up. I ask that you do not relent on this front.

193. Mr I’ve son, your she’ll game won’t work with me. All you are trying to do is justify the cash cow by offer cash back to the city and it’s residents. But you are not speaking to the facts. The fact is that nobody agrees that tickets should be handed out on the Hendry for going 5-10 km over the speed limit. Most edmonton residents have spoke up and told you where we want the roads to be safer but you refuse to make those adjustments because you know it will cost you revenue. And clearly when photo radar is hidden it is not intended to slow people down its only intended to bring revenue. Personally I think you politicians love fear mongering about speeding because you know the potential revenue from making people believe you are making the roads safer. Which you are not. Edmonton police are failing horribly at their job. You can’t drive more than 1 block without seeing someone on their phone while driving. This is the number 1 safety concern on our roads. And number 2 is school zone speeding. You were elected by us, and we are begging you to put these photo radars in school zones not on the Hendry. But I’m sure you know that Wil cut into your revenue, which is why you don’t do it. Totally lame mayor who doesn’t listen to the people that voted him in.

194. Donny, you think you are so smart by talking down to your tax payers?
     Remember it well during the next elections.
     What happened with a 47Mil budget overrun with the speeding cameras?
     You’ve just started and now we all wish you would go away.
     Keep up a good job, maybe we will team up and throw you away from your chair.

195. Stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes. I wouldn’t trust any study that was funded by the COE that proves an increase in safety and a decrease in speeding (at least not from the behavior I see on the roads). If this wasn’t a cash grab, then why are enforcement vehicles almost ALWAYS unmarked, and hiding behind bushes. If you were honest about this, you would take the UK model, where photo radar does exist, but by LAW, the enforcement officers MUST announce that they are on the road ahead through signage stating that they are checking for speeders. Which would still get you to slow down, and save you the ticket. AND all automated cameras are CLEARLY marked AT THEIR LOCATION in BIG YELLOW SIGNS. ALL speed change notices have HUGE signs to indicate the change. Not the tiny signs that Edmonton likes to use, and camouflage them amongst 30 other signs in the same location (ever try reading multiple small signs at normal speed? Impossible). I for one have driven for 20 years, and until I moved to this city, had NEVER received a speeding ticket. Why? Because I drive sensibly to my capability. I don’t rage down the highway doing 130 in an 80, but I do drive over the deliberately low speed limit. And most of that time, I am going with THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. I would be a hindrance to other drivers and a potential hazard if I did not follow the FLOW OF TRAFFIC. Scrap it, or change it to at least give people the opportunity to correct their speed before giving them a ticket. In this case, you are making it GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT. And the fact of the matter is, you are ticketing people who may not even be driving their vehicle, which I do believe in constitutional terms, charging someone with a crime (speeding), trying them without due process, and giving them a fine before proving BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were the one in the vehicle, is saying they are guilty until proven innocent. I will fight every ticket, and waste a ton of court time (I’m on salary, I can take the time off), the officer’s time (if they even bother to show up), and your time and taxpayer money just to spite you, and I will win every time, because I cannot be found guilty and be forced to pay a fine without due process and irrefutable evidence that I am the perpetrator of the violation, and not just my VEHICLE. You sir, are a moron.

196. Furthermore, you are trying to say that photo enforcement has caused a reduction in the number of speed related collisions since 2007? Shame on you. The reality is that the data is SEVEN YEARS OLD, and advancements in vehicle safety could just as easily be attributed with the decrease in these collisions. Stop being a door knob and think about what you’re saying!

197. don’t like photo radar? don’t speed. I got a ticket doing 42 km/h in a 40 km/h zone. Do the crime – pay the fine. It sucks a bit but it’s not like I am not given the opportunity to understand the rules of the road before I get in my car.

     Driving is a privilege, not an inalienable right.

     The bigger problems are distracted drivers and people speeding excessively through school and playground zones (while texting!)

198. What will eventually happen is this is going to end up costing the city more money. Go ahead start fining motorists for going a few km over the speed limit under the guise of traffic safety. The court system will eventually be bogged down and the system will backfire on itself. Keep on talking about zero tolerance and let’s see where it goes. No sane reasonable person is going to buy this garbage about zero tolerance because it disregards inaccuracies about speedometers and may end cause more issues as drivers will now be paying more attention to their speedometers than actually driving. How much pressure does it take on a gas pedal to increase your speed to 51 from 50? Let’s do it let’s start by issuing tickets for going say half a km over the speed limit. Bring it on I want to see where this leads.

199. Mr. Iveson,

     If photo radar is really ‘all about the safety’ where is the evidence that the roadways are more dangerous in British Columbia, where photo radar systems are not used?

     Doesn’t that same study you refer to also conclude that a large digital sign posting drivers’ speeds as they pass is just as effective, if not moreso, as hidden photo radar traps?

     If it really is ‘all about the safety’ that is…

     Sincerely,
     Sean Grice

200. Mr.Iveson,

     If, on the other hand, photo radar is ‘all about the enforcement’ of the letter of our laws, then why not employ the tracking technologies currently available in car/telecommunication devices to fully automate the process of charging perpetrators?

     Eg. if your smartfone or car’s GPS is detected traveling at an illegal speed on a public roadway (where the contention maintained is that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy of any kind) a ticket could be instantly issued via email, and automatically deducted from a credit card?

     Sure, it may sound ridiculous today, but note that this method could be used not just against drivers breaking the law, but to automatically fine j-walkers, pedestrians who begin crossing an intersection after the flashing hand appears, residents with over-shaggy lawns or trees that partially obstruct sidewalks, cyclists not fully stopping at stop signs, people picking their noses in public, etc.

     I mean can’t you just imagine how much ‘safer’ we will all feel!

     Sean Grice

201. Mayor Iveson,

     I was going to post my comments regarding your stance on photo radar, but have found that others have covered the issue. In particular, I agree with Thomas Simpson (posted Oct. 6, 2014).

     Here are some additional personal statistics for you: I drive approximately 70,000 km per year, all work-related; I have had my license for 29 years; I have never had an at-fault accident. I HAVE had photo radar tickets; 2 this year – one where I was merging into high-speed traffic (clocked at 62km/h in a 50 zone) and trying to prevent being rear-ended and forcing drivers to maneuver around me, and one on the Whitemud where I was clocked at exactly 100km/h (while driving exactly at the speed of traffic flow).

     Both tickets arrived in the mail of course, well after they would have any immediate effect on my behavior. In fact, I would argue that slamming on your brakes in flowing traffic is far more hazardous than driving 10-12km/h over the posted limit.

     What will have an effect on my behavior is the ‘bill’ I received for these – namely, I will not be voting for you based only on this single specific issue, and I will be providing support (financial and otherwise) for your opponents.

     Wendell

202. Right on Wendell, the “biil” is in the mail. The “bill” for defensive driving and observing drivers on all sides; a safe distance.

203. When are we going to see Alberta Transportation enforce Traffic Safety Act, Regulation
     AR 304/2002 on Anthony Henday drive? As per the act ” Under heavy traffic conditions, where the potential for weaving is higher and lane change maneuvers are frequent, signs may be used to advise slower drivers to use the outside lanes.” The criteria in the act applies to the Anthony Henday, being a provincially owned roadway, yet I fail to see one posted sign.

     The inconsistent flow rates on this road are the real problem, you have just as many individuals not safely meeting the posted speed limit as you do individuals breaking it. How about we enforce both ends of the spectrum to make our roads safer, rather than focusing on the easy revenue of speeders. The city should focus on driving a positive behavior change for all drivers, not just the ones breaking the upper limits. I believe in following the safe flow of traffic, and if that flow is faster than the set maximum then its best to stream line the flow into two lanes for everyone’s safety.

     TS

204. Mr Iverson does not read any of the comments nor does he listen to his councilors, i can attest to this because this and many issues discussed to his office including the minister of justice, and the minister of transportation do not take any responsibility for the unjustified use of this legislation. you may feel that it is simply don’t speed and you wont get a ticket, however you are ignoring the abuse of power, the lack of insight to address the issues through initiatives and imagination. there is simply no place for the ruthless attack on drivers in alberta

205. Remember that petition on change.org that collected 20,000 signatures about cash grab that your government has created. That’s 20,000 signatures that you will not receive in the next election on this issue alone. I wish a young and supposedly liberal person like yourself would hear the citizens of your city. Instead you are distancing yourself from an average folk and enforcing actions of the big mean government machine which cares about nothing but dollar signs. Keep going. We all hope, we vote better next time as your term as a mayor is timing out.

206. There are a number of proven things which improve safety: Larger diameter traffic signal lights (red, orange, green), Larger posted speed signage and more of them, Real time radar speed signs; however, a few times I’ve seen people speed-up to see how much over the sign flashes red.

     Meanwhile people are snoozing in anonymous trucks at 11 pm along Whyte avenue waiting for the speed alarm to go off in the cab so they can document the photo.

207. I can’t count how many times I’ve seen someone almost rear-end the photo-radar vehicle that regularly sits in front of my house on 101 st, at night, with no lights on. It’s going to happen eventually. Yeah, that really increases everyone’s safety. Then again, I guess now that the city is addicted to that fat revenue stream, it will only get worse, as they find more and more ways to waste our money. $13 million bicycle lane, which NOBODY WILL EVER USE, anyone?

208. Photo radar is a vicious predatory money grab scam. Greater safety would be obtained by posting 85th percentile speed limits on all the main roads. Unfortunately, Edmonton officials prefer highway robbery of mostly safe drivers with photo enforcement of artificially low posted limits to actually improving public safety with 85th percentile limits.

     Edmonton residents need to revolt, throw out every public official who supports the predatory money grab enforcement scams, and replace them with honorable officials who support using traffic safety engineering principles to improve safety without robbing mostly safe drivers with photo radar scameras.

     James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association

209. Taxation through extortion equals suspicion, a mistrust of government and even worse law enforcement.

     New Years day 4pm driving East along Yellowhead doing a whopping 113 km/h (I thought it was 110 km/h) at 215 St/Winterburn Rd. overpass it drops to 100 km/h. No other vehicles travelling East, on one merging with excellent conditions. After-all it’s everything to do with safety even though the 85th percentile free-flow operating speed has been proven all over the free-world.

     From now on regarding this stretch I’ll definately speed making sure the plate-bumper on my truck is covered with snow and/or dirt., with the alarm in the photo-truck beeping away for a photo-shoot . . .

210. Getting a ticket for going 6 or 7 over the speed limit is completely uncalled for. The new policies are punishing law-abiding citizens, not the guys speeding through school zones.

211. There is no way you can convince anyone in the city that issuing tickets to unsuspecting drivers yields improved safety. I feel sorry for all the Ft. Mac evacuees who are now subject to our insane cash grab photo radar scam.

     I’d like to see a study done in B.C. where photo radar is eliminated. I have family who live there and visit frequently. The roads appear just as safe as Alberta yet we have the most sophisticated LIDAR system in Canada? Get rid of it! #yegphotoradar

212. Very often, just the presence of a law enforcement officer is a prohibiter to speeding, let alone excessive speeding. It boggles my mind how the overwhelming majority of Yellowhead commuters in and out of the COE from the western ‘burbs (Stony Plain/Spruce Grove) drive AT LEAST 130km. Couple of years ago, I speculate that it was around 120 or less, but it appears to me to keep rising every year. Then you have some morons who fly into Edmonton going 140-160. I have absolutely no doubt that a big reason for this is because they know they can get away with it. When do you EVER see a police cruiser on the Yellowhead on that stretch of highway? Answer? NEVER! Maybe, if you have them patrol periodically and on a regular basis, drivers would take heed and slow down. And I’m talking during early morning and mid-afternoon rush hour periods too! Especially during those time zones! Not having enough law enforcement personnel as an excuse is a crock. The savings to our society by the resulting reduction in collisions tying up traffic, causing gridlock and major delays, the personnel needed to attend to the accidents, etc. would more than offset the cost of additional officers in patrol cars. I am convinced of this. But let’s not forget the best reason of all… a reduction in lives frivolously lost. I have not conducted any study and my conclusions come only from one thing and one thing only – I am an active participant in this every single weekday. And I see firsthand what has been going on on this major highway for the past 10 years and I can tell you this…it is getting worse, I see a tremendous amount of speeding and a definite increase in severely excessive speeding AND I never see a police vehicle. NEVER! I’m guessing, but the last time I saw a cruiser on the highway (aside from attending to an accident) was probably a year ago – or more.

213. Don, I respect the idea of safe roads and being safe, that being said, how does photo radar prevent the accident if the person today is speeding and hurts or kills someone when the ticket hasn’t been processed yet that they get in the mail in 1-2 weeks? I think this is why people feel its a cash grab as it doesn’t slow the person down immediately to prevent the fatality or injury, perhaps we need more bylaw enforcers, try down 102A Ave and 101 Street, all the people making illegal left turns or going thru transit bus only, city will make lots of money in that corner.. Photo radar doesn’t deter people driving under the influence either, why police should be out enforcing more, more 1 on 1 interaction to look for no insurance, dui and speeding, on EPS our first snow storm in the city reported 10 hit and runs.. Another idea is that there are too many cars on the roads not designed for so much traffic, and everyone is in a hurry, perhaps rolling back all speed limits and enforce not only in school zones, but 50km to 40, 60 to 50, 70 to 60. Everyone is in a hurry to get from 1 red light to the next street as fast as they can…

214. I always use to get one two speeding tickets per year . This year I got five . Why ? Well , I think city is short of money and I consider this as additional tax . All this BS about safety reasons doesn’t have any sense when I see guys catching people in school zone at seven am on Sunday . Of course we shouldn’t expect any stat for road accident from city since photo radar was introduced . Well Donny boy , my family can’t you , we will vote against you next time .

215. Lots of “talking heads” here and the people behind the military brains that run the cameras love the talking heads. You see, people get mad as hell and then the talking heads come in to address better ways to implement the photo radar. Then after a few short years the scamming ramps up and it all starts again. Why does this happen?..because you’re all too dumb to understand that freedom is not the same thing as a nanny state. You’re being scammed by a few evil people at the top and a lot of stupid people running the cameras. Put on your big boy pants and stop letting them scam you with “order out of chaos” or say good bye to the dream of freedom and watch it get a whole lot worse!

Comments are closed.