Cameras need cost certainty

Just two weeks ago, we told you to admit it. As much as you might

hate them, you have to agree that red-light cameras work. They deter

gunning the engine and racing through an intersection when the light

is really yellow because you might just get caught. On film. Breaking

the law.

We know you feel that way because we feel the same. Three hundred

plus dollars is a lot of money to pay for getting 30 seconds or a

minute faster down the road. So we hit the brakes and sit with

everyone else at the light. We sit there with you.

Well, just last week our hunch received some grand confirmation.

The Orange County Grand Jury found that cameras perched at

intersections -- there are four intersections in Costa Mesa with the

cameras, though two are in limbo because of lawsuits -- can decrease

the number of accidents.

The grand jury also found, however, that there isn’t a good

accounting system at the Orange County Superior Court to determine

which tickets are issued via the cameras and which are handed out by

officers on the streets. And that means there’s no reliable way to

figure out how much money cities are getting, or losing, from using

the cameras, which cost $6,000 or so a month.

Now, everyone agrees that the cameras are not meant to be a

moneymaking venture. But, especially in these tough economic times,

dollars just can’t be thrown at a problem with no checks or balances.

Cities simply must be able to figure out if they’re recouping their

costs, and it is up to the Superior Court to figure out a way -- and

surely distinguishing between tickets linked to cameras and those

written face-to-face cannot be hard -- to provide this crucial piece

of missing information.

Once that information is in cities’ hands, it may show that more

of the cameras are feasible. And, judging by the grand jury’s report,

that should make our streets a little bit safer.