| Author | Message | ||
     witness Citizen Username: Witness Post Number: 9 Registered: 9-2003 |
Well said, Squeeks. It would seem appropriate for the town council to demand an explanation and a plan for improvement from the police chief. I'd also like to see a breakdown of those plummeting moving violations. It would be important to track how many of them were for speeding, how many for running stop signs, etc. Signs at the edges of town warn "speed enforced by radar." But I think Dick Cheney has a better chance of finding a chemical warhead in Sadam's beard than we do of seeing a Maplewood cop using a radar gun. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 2836 Registered: 9-2001 |
Thanks Squeeks, I'll look forward to the list coming out. I think I'll check my neighborhood as well. BTW, no national politics here Witness...  | ||
| Phil Citizen Username: Barleyrooty Post Number: 829 Registered: 5-2001  |
Since tickets seem to be a significant source of revenues for other areas (or is this only highways?), I'm surprised that the income from speeding tickets couldn't be used to at least pay for the police to enforce. Ridgewood Road seems especially bad to me. (admittedly I live right near it.) Are there state limits on how high the tickets could be set. Make it $100, or $200! That will slow them down. | ||
| Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 3885 Registered: 1-2003  |
My understanding is that the likelihood of being caught is a much greater deterrent than the severity of the penalty. If that's true, then there is no need to raise the fines. The speed limit on Prospect St is 25. When you're in your car, you want to go at least 35, but given that there are lots of crosswalks, 25 is actually reasonable. It's quite uncommon, though, and I'd like to see enforcement there. And of course, I live right near Prospect. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 3139 Registered: 9-2001 |
Phil, it's interesting that you brought back this thread, which was the forerunner to the thread, “List sidewalks needing repairs...”, why?. BTW, I wonder what happened to Squeeks who started all this stuff about speeding and sidewalks, and was going to be our man on the street? | ||
| Joan Citizen Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 3929 Registered: 5-2001 |
The traffic-calming/safety issue is far more important to me than any revenue the town might receive from issuing moving traffic violations to speeding motorists. My educated guess is that such a program would end up costing the town money. The amount of revenue generated by the issuance of such tickets would be far less than the combined costs of officers' salaries + equipment + plus court costs + miscellaneous expenses such as paper and ink + officer down time that might be better utilized in other programs. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 3145 Registered: 9-2001 |
"...officer down time that might be better utilized in other programs." I don't know Joan, enforcement of MV infractions has several very important advantages. First ask someone who got a speeding ticket, paid the fine and received the points, gets an increase in auto insurance, and/or a loss of their driving license for 30 days or more... Ask them if they'll speed again in a hurry along any of our local streets. Our police have the ability and the responsibility to slow down the traffic and make our streets safer for everyone. Personally, I've also noticed an increase in speeding and aggressive drivers in parts of our town. As such, I can't think of any other program our police can do that would better utilize their time, help offset their pay, and send a strong message that Maplewood enforces their traffic laws... BTW, the additional benefits from strong MV enforcement will often result in more arrests for drunk driving, and for locating criminals with arrest warrants, than any other function I can think of... Criminals tend to stay clear of areas known for strong police enforcement, and that could result in less crime in our community. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 3146 Registered: 9-2001 |
... I'm waiting for you Witness. Where are you? | ||
| Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 3912 Registered: 1-2003 |
Joan may be right. Enforcement of traffic laws may not yield a net positive in money. It may just be a matter of quality of life that the police would defend if they were to improve enforcement. If other programs suffered, what would they be? (That's a moot question.) Or, put it another way, if we increased equipment and people-power, how much would that cost? We might be willing to pay for it. I particularly like the idea of enforcement that gives the town a reputation. And while we're at it, I hope we can encourage South Orange to do the same. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 3148 Registered: 9-2001 |
"If other programs suffered, what would they be?" Tom, why do any other programs have to suffer? Or, why do we need to increase equipment and people-power? I agree with you that it's a good idea of having strong enforcement that gives the town a positive reputation. However, this doesn't mean we necessarily need more people and equipment. Listen, we're already paying for the police service; it's just not what Squeeks and a few others are requesting. Their problem is not difficult or expensive to fix. Several of the trouble areas have already been identified. All that really has to happen is that the officers on the street need to be given slightly different instructions. I don’t believe that will happen on line, but I'm sure the TC and others responsible for traffic control in town will respond to residents willing to come before them and publicly request assistance... | ||
| Joan Citizen Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 3946 Registered: 5-2001 |
Art: Tom is right. I am not opposed to increased moving traffic violation enforcement, just pointing out that it is not likely to produce additional revenue for the township. What existing policing programs will have to be reduced and/or eliminated to provide manpower for such a program, assuming our present level of patrol staffing? This is a question for the Police Chief to answer. What I do know from having served on CBAC Public Safety Committee last year is that our police officers are spread pretty thin and kept pretty busy now. Unless we willing to provide additional officers and equipment, something would have to give if we wanted a dedicated unit or two concentrating primarily on enforcing moving traffic laws and ordinanaces in our town. | ||
| Taylor M Citizen Username: Anotherusername Post Number: 38 Registered: 8-2004 |
Tom- Don't worry. South Orange already does it. Especially the bogus speed trap on Ridgewood Road!!! | ||
| Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 3915 Registered: 1-2003 |
Taylor M, where is that speed trap in South Orange? Art, I will call you to talk about this. Being unemployed, I might have some free time for a bit of local activism. Sorry for my cynicism, but I tend to suspect that we don't have the resources to do what we want to do (without sacrificing something else), but I'd be happy to learn I'm wrong. And I'm willing to do what it takes to find out. Something good could come of it. | ||
| Taylor M Citizen Username: Anotherusername Post Number: 40 Registered: 8-2004 |
The police love to hide either on the side streets or driveways between Mountainhouse and Montrose. When you have a dozen people in South Orange Court all in 1 court session who plead down and all insist they weren't doing the speed accused of, that says something. I know, I was 1 of them and there was NO WAY I was going 46. (I was doing a little over 30 though). If I had been going any slower I would have been plowed into by the SUV behind me, who turned up Glenside. Was radar used? Who knows. None of us were shown a radar print out, and some people asked. But were given the choice of pleading, or being shown the 'radar print out' and risking not being able to plea. I seriously doubt all these people were fighting tickets they 'deserved.' And many of them were relaying stories of others they knew who got tickets in the same area. | ||
| Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 3918 Registered: 1-2003 |
Taylor M, I will not claim you were going too fast, because I wasn't there, but fear of being plowed from behind is never a justification for choosing your speed, whatever that speed is. In rear-end collisions, the fault is with the person in the back. | ||
| Taylor M Citizen Username: Anotherusername Post Number: 44 Registered: 8-2004 |
Well Tom, considering I was almost killed when an SUV plowed into me a few years ago, I wasn't taking any chances. I wouldn't have cared about the ticket IF it had been written for 30, the speed I was most likely doing. I would have deserved that. BUT as I said, there was NO WAY I was doing 46!!! But come to think of it, weren't you complaining about a ticket you got within the past few months you felt you didn't deserve. | ||
| Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 3919 Registered: 1-2003 |
I can't comment on your ticket. I trust you're telling the truth and that you were driving reasonably. I'm just saying that if I have to slow down, I do, and I don't let the guy behind me or his behavior affect my decision. If he hits me, it's his fault, no matter how fast I slow down or stop. I deserved that parking ticket I got. I knew I was violating the law when I parked my car. My complaints were about the clarity of the ticket. It didn't list my violation or the fine. I called for clarification on the day I got the ticket, and I paid that day, too. With my payment, I enclosed a letter complaining about the clarity of the ticket. | ||
| Taylor M Citizen Username: Anotherusername Post Number: 45 Registered: 8-2004 |
Sorry then about my comment. That should have been one of my complaints with the ticket I got. NONE of our tickets stated radar was used! And even while discussing the tickets with the officer involved and the prosecutor, none of us were shown a radar print out. While you'd have no problem getting whacked from behind by an SUV, I do. And I'm sure others here would agree. I had already forced myself to stay at slightly over 30. The ticket should have been written for that, not 46. Like I said, I was almost killed getting hit from behind by an SUV. If the police are going to wrtie tickets, write them for the correct speed. And inform the driver it's supposedly on radar so we have the option to sk to see the print out. | ||
| Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 3921 Registered: 1-2003 |
Are you saying you were speeding because someone was tailgating you? | ||
| NORA Citizen Username: Norav Post Number: 46 Registered: 6-2004 |
"so we have the option to ask to see the print out" Did I read this wrong? Just wondering how do you get a print out of the radar. |
