Current NASCOP Contract Available Download
03/18/2007 04:43 PM | Permalink
As I stated on 3/11/07, I received a photo copy of the
current NASCOP contract which was mailed to me by the
city's clerk. I just finished scanning each and every
page for your consumption. I thought if I was going to
point out problems with the contract, I had better make
it available to the public. If the city makes these
documents available to those that ask for them but must
photo copy for each request that needs a hard copy to
take away from the clerk's office, why not just make
each and every document available online and force
everyone to get it using that method (we have access to
the public library and the clerk's office could make a
few computers available to the general public for all
of those that don't have a computer nor access to the
Internet)? This idea seems to help reduce costs for the
city. Perhaps there are not-so obvious road blocks.
Its available here for download as well as on the site's documents page. Feel free to leave comments to this blog posting (click the comments link at the bottom of this posting) after you have read it. I'll give my opinion / interpretation of it shortly. Enjoy.
Its available here for download as well as on the site's documents page. Feel free to leave comments to this blog posting (click the comments link at the bottom of this posting) after you have read it. I'll give my opinion / interpretation of it shortly. Enjoy.
|
3/6/07 Council Meeting Notes
03/18/2007 03:43 PM | Permalink
San Jose's City Council had a scheduled meeting on
March 6, 2007 and one of the items on the agenda was to
decide on accepting or rejecting a recommendation that
states "Direct the Department of Transportation to work
with the City Manager’s Office and City Attorney’s
Office to explore options to retain or reinstate the
NASCOP program for the purpose of photo radar
enforcement on local streets.", among other things. In
addition, the it was recommended to the council to at
some point in time to make the NASCOP program a warning
based system.
The council went on to add a few other interesting directives to the city's DOT and they are as follows:
(1) Immediately cease issuing tickets and assessing fines for speed violations
detected by NASCOP system, until the legality of such sanctions can be
clarified.
(2) Explore the use of measures other than fines for speed violations, including
warnings. The Department of Transportation should specifically consider the
use of neighborhood based forms of advocacy, such as letters issued by local
neighborhood associations, and/or direct communications by sworn Staff.
Staff to return with alternatives for the Police Department’s direct
involvement.
(3) Report to Council within 6 months of the implementation of the measures
described in (2) to determine whether these measures have any impact in
suppressing the incidence of speeding, so that Council can assess whether to
continue the program as modified.
(4) Direct the Office of Intergovernmental Relations to partner with other
interested cities, including but not limited to Los Angeles and Beverly Hills
and the League of California Cities to advocate for legislation in Sacramento
authorizing the use of NASCOP for speed enforcement.
(5) Department of Motor Vehicle personal information about residents to
remain strictly confidential.
Read the full synopsis of that meeting here.
Although the city has decided to make the program a warning only system, it is only intended to be temporary. The most alarming of the directives is item 4. I see not directive to the DOT concerning exploring natural speed reducing alternatives such as the very alternatives given by the city's DOT itself at View Traffic Calming Toolkit in PDF format nor was there any directive to refund all collected money as a result of convictions of this program and the associated DMV points.
The council went on to add a few other interesting directives to the city's DOT and they are as follows:
(1) Immediately cease issuing tickets and assessing fines for speed violations
detected by NASCOP system, until the legality of such sanctions can be
clarified.
(2) Explore the use of measures other than fines for speed violations, including
warnings. The Department of Transportation should specifically consider the
use of neighborhood based forms of advocacy, such as letters issued by local
neighborhood associations, and/or direct communications by sworn Staff.
Staff to return with alternatives for the Police Department’s direct
involvement.
(3) Report to Council within 6 months of the implementation of the measures
described in (2) to determine whether these measures have any impact in
suppressing the incidence of speeding, so that Council can assess whether to
continue the program as modified.
(4) Direct the Office of Intergovernmental Relations to partner with other
interested cities, including but not limited to Los Angeles and Beverly Hills
and the League of California Cities to advocate for legislation in Sacramento
authorizing the use of NASCOP for speed enforcement.
(5) Department of Motor Vehicle personal information about residents to
remain strictly confidential.
Read the full synopsis of that meeting here.
Although the city has decided to make the program a warning only system, it is only intended to be temporary. The most alarming of the directives is item 4. I see not directive to the DOT concerning exploring natural speed reducing alternatives such as the very alternatives given by the city's DOT itself at View Traffic Calming Toolkit in PDF format nor was there any directive to refund all collected money as a result of convictions of this program and the associated DMV points.
Received San Jose/Redflex contract
03/11/2007 02:40 PM | Permalink
Yesterday, I received a copy of the San Jose / Redflex
contract from the city in the mail. I'm very surprised
it came so quickly as I mailed in the request in on
Tuesday or Wednesday of last week. I was expecting to
receive it around 10-14 weeks.
Later this week I'll post scans of the contract here.
Later this week I'll post scans of the contract here.
council meeting
03/07/2007 11:08 PM | Permalink
I did attend the city council meeting yesterday. But
after an hour of waiting during the meeting, I decided
to go home. The council's agenda pertaining to NASCOP
only consisted of deciding to accept a recommendation
to convert NASCOP to a warning system and continue to
discover legal options to continue the current
operation of issuing actual citations. I personally
would like them to stop the program entirely and refund
all fines and DMV points of all those convicted as a
result of NASCOP's use of photo radar. Since the
council wasn't going to discuss this, what's the point
of being there.
I am glad I went, even for just an hour, just for the experience. The meeting was incredibly boring. Roughly half an hour was devoted to ceremonial items that really has little if any thing to do with the council.
The notes written during that meeting should be posted on SJ's web site soon.
I am glad I went, even for just an hour, just for the experience. The meeting was incredibly boring. Roughly half an hour was devoted to ceremonial items that really has little if any thing to do with the council.
The notes written during that meeting should be posted on SJ's web site soon.