Cameras and Road Safety

Times are tough. Everywhere you look, companies are shedding payroll or just treading water, waiting for the "recovery" to take hold.

But not at American Traffic Solutions ("ATS"), which is the leading provider of traffic intersection safety cameras and digital radar speed cameras in North America.

Business is booming at ATS as cash-strapped municipalities, counties and states look for ways to do more with less, opting for digital safety cameras that promise reduced law enforcement costs, improved driver and pedestrian safety and enhanced enforcement revenues.

According to George J. Hittner, the General Counsel, Corporate Secretary & V.P. for Governmental Relations at ATS, the company has been adding approximately 100 new clients for every five that it loses in the past few years. The once fledgling, Arizona-based company has also undertaken three acquisitions in recent years, and now has nearly 900 employees and close to 3,000 safety cameras in action, serving 21 states, the District of Columbia and two Canadian provinces.

"These systems are gaining acceptance because they work and they save lives," says Hittner, who further states that the cameras "retrain drivers that red really means stop and yellow means slow down." He also cites a number of statistics and studies to support his claim, including the following:

• On average, it takes just 18 months after system installments to see a 50 percent reduction in roadway violations.
• In Seattle, Washington, a 50 percent reduction in red light violations was accompanied by a reduced rate of crashes and injuries, and more than $1 million in fines collected during a period of "driver retraining."
• In New York City, there are 175 intersection safety cameras in use, and Mayor Bloomberg has praised their use in the busy metropolis, noting that "people get killed crossing the street when [drivers] run through red lights."
• In Apopka, Florida, crashes at two major intersections decreased by 72 and 64 percent, respectively, after system installments.
• In Gallatin, Tennessee, fatalities were reduced by 50 percent, intersection crashes by 19 percent, and total vehicle crashes by more than 20 percent.

"These camera intersections are like school zones. They become safer for pedestrians, as well as drivers, so people come to accept them once they are installed," Hittner says.

He points to other collateral benefits as well, noting that footage from the high-resolution digital cameras has been used to solve crimes, such as murders, car-jackings and assaults. Arizona cameras were even checked for evidence relating to the shooting of U.S. Representative Gabrielle "Gabby" Giffords earlier this year.

"One of the great features for our clients is that they incur no costs to install the systems, which are valued at more than $100,000 per installation," Hittner says. In most cities, "We get paid a flat rate per camera per month, and that flat rate includes ticket printing, mailing, call center administration and other administrative costs as well," he explains.

Hittner says there are "many common misconceptions about the technology and legalities of these systems," noting that roadway camera systems have been in use for decades in Europe (the first cameras were used in the Netherlands in the 1960s).

He points out that the high resolution digital technology is good enough to produce a "facial image" of the driver when required by law, as is the case in Arizona, California and Colorado.

But most states simply impose liability by statute on the registered owner of the car, much like they do for parking tickets; and at least two federal appellate courts have issued a decision validating this practice, stating that owners should exercise caution in loaning out their cars.

"Court decisions have proven these systems to be constitutional," says Hittner, who cites a 2009 opinion written by Judge Easterbrook of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in the case of Idris v. City of Chicago.

Hittner also points to a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit in the case of Mendenhall v. U.S. "The courts have made it clear that there is no fundamental right to run a red light and no fundamental right to privacy in your car on a public roadway," he says.

The validity of the systems has also been repeatedly upheld in attempted class actions, and ATS has yet to suffer a class-action defeat in court on the merits, according to Hittner.

Interest in road safety camera programs continues to grow. Cities like New York are looking to expand their current program while states like Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey and Pennsylvania are all looking at ways to broaden the use of road safety cameras to school zones, work zones and even on school buses.

The increasing acceptance of these systems and the increasing legal work associated with that acceptance have kept Hittner busy in recent years, growing his law and government relations department from one person in October 2008 to eight people currently.

Deputy General Counsel Amy L. Rasor affirms that the department has its hands full handling new contracts, lawsuits, subpoenas for camera videos, payment and collection issues, garnishments, and even patent portfolios associated with the technology.

That is one reason ATS values the support of outside counsel Scott H. Moskol at Burns & Levinson, who has a background in general corporate work, acquisitions and financing.

"Scott Moskol and the other attorneys at Burns & Levinson understand the nature of our business and strive to meet the evolving needs of ATS in both litigation and corporate matters. They provided invaluable services during ATS' first acquisition in 2009, and continue to serve as both our advisors and advocates," says Hittner.