Community input session on speed cameras in Lansing corrects misconceptions, answers residents’ questions
by Julie Berg-Raymond
In an effort to both correct misconceptions held by members of the Lansing community about the purpose and function of speed cameras in traffic enforcement and to offer those same community members - and others - an opportunity to voice concerns and ask questions about the cameras’ efficacy and purpose, Lansing/New Albin Chief of Police Conrad Rosendahl and Officer Troy Riehm held a community input session on speed cameras Monday, December 4, in Lansing City Hall.
About 30 people attended the input session, which immediately preceded that evening’s regular meeting of the Lansing City Council.
“Public safety falls under my job title,” Chief Rosendahl told the community members in attendance. “There are always lots of complaints about speeding from both towns (Lansing and New Albin).”
Even with the presence of electronic speed monitors and posted speed limit signs, he added, “we still have a large amount of people who are going well over 10 miles over the limit. How do we address this problem cost-effectively?”
He told attendees that, with this question in mind, he approached the police chief in Postville. He was given the name of a company that installs speed cameras to help local law enforcement with traffic safety - Altumint, based in Maryland.
HOW THE CAMERA WORKS
October 16 of this year, Kinon O’Neil, regional sales manager in Waterloo for Altumint, attended a regular meeting of the Lansing City Council and explained to the council how the speed camera works: If the system registers a vehicle in violation, a picture is taken of the back of the vehicle (no pictures are taken of faces) and appropriate citations are sent through the mail.
O’Neil noted, though, that Chief Rosendahl would see those citations on a report and would have an opportunity to evaluate them - to “vet” the citations where, for example, emergency vehicles are involved. Violators are given 30-day warning notices (they can be brought up to 60-day notices), and the City decides the speed at which cameras will register violations.
The suggested “grace” is 11 mph over the posted speed limit; but Chief Rosendahl said he would be open to setting it at 13 mph over the limit. In other words: With the cameras set to register a violation at 13 mph over the limit, a car moving at 37 mph in a 25-mph zone would not receive a citation.
There would also be signs posted - alerting drivers to the speed limit and to the fact that the area is a photo-enforced speed zone. “You will have ample opportunities to slow your vehicle down,” he said.
SPEED STUDY
O’Neil conducted a speed study at three locations in Lansing, this past summer. For the speed study, three locations were monitored: South Front Street by the ball diamond; the entrance into/exit from town by D&J Expresso; and the entrance into/exit from town north of the Black Hawk Bridge. The study monitored vehicles going in both directions, and the systems were set to recognize vehicles going 10 mph over the posted speed limit.
At the community input session Monday, December 4, Officer Riehm described the results of that study. Over a seven-day period, 21,168 vehicles were analyzed at the entrance to/exit from town by D&J Expresso, where the posted speed limit is 25 mph. The total enforceable violations - where vehicles were going faster than 35 mph - registered at that location over that seven-day period was 2,567, or 12 percent. The average speed registered was 30 mph. The fastest speed registered was 93 mph.
At the entrance into/exit from town north of the Black Hawk Bridge, where the posted speed limit is 45 mph, 14,973 vehicles were analyzed over the seven-day period; 1,340 enforceable violations were registered, or nine percent. The average speed was 47 mph; the fastest speed was 73 mph.
At the entrance to/exit from town by the ball diamond, where the posted speed limit is 25 mph, 22,205 vehicles were analyzed - 176, or one percent, of which were enforceable violations. The average speed was 25 mph. The highest speed was 73 mph.
CASH-GRAB OR PUBLIC SAFETY?
During his presentation to the city council October 16, O’Neil noted that 70 percent of fines on violations go back into the community, and he emphasized the importance of “being transparent” about the purpose and function of the technology. “It’s not a ‘gotcha,’” he said.
Education through the use of flyers and social media, he added, will help “make people aware - ‘hey, these traffic violations are going back into my community.’” He did, however, caution the City not to “budget on this,” noting that the use of this technology is “very effective” in reducing speeding violations - and, therefore, revenue from fines.
At the December 4 community input session, Chief Rosendahl and Officer Riehm both said the reality is that some people continue to speed, regardless of posted signs, electronic metering devices, or speed cameras.
“Let’s be honest with each other,” Chief Rosendahl said. “Will this generate revenue? Yes, it will. Why not let the speeders pay for new streetlights?”
Officer Riehm told attendees about an occasion when two squad cars were parked by the hill near Expresso and said “it was shocking” - how many drivers, seeing two squad cars, still sped past them.
DIFFERING OPINIONS
The community input session revealed a wide range of opinions among community members - from complaints that speed cameras would compromise “the little, small-town feel here,” assertions like “this is a really dumb, bone-headed idea - we’re going the complete wrong direction here” and “I’ve talked to a lot of residents, and they’re all against it”; to testimony from a local firefighter of 15 years.
“I’ve been present on at least 10 auto extrications,” that firefighter said, in areas he referred to as speed transition zones. “If we can slow people down in those zones,” he added, “and if we can reduce the amount of traffic accidents we have, I’m all for (a speed camera).”
Another attendee spoke about having “watched my kid about get run over” by a car speeding, in violation of the law. Another said, “If it helps even one person (to have a speed camera), I don’t think it’s a bad idea - even though I’m not 100 percent in favor of them.”
Some attendees expressed concern that speed cameras would give Lansing a reputation for being an “unfriendly” town, and would deter people - tourists and shoppers, for example, from visiting. “Chances are,” Chief Rosendahl responded, “if they’re coming through town at 13 or more mph over the limit, they’re probably not going to stop here and shop.”
One attendee wanted to know if anyone could tell him when the last time was that someone was hurt or killed in an auto accident - to which Chief Rosendahl replied, “RAGBRAI (2023) - a person was injured when a speeding car hit him.” He also asked the attendee - and everyone in the room - to think about how they would feel if someone was killed by a speeding car and they’d passed on the opportunity to install speed cameras, which have demonstrably reduced speeding in towns throughout the country.
Officer Riehm said he’d spoken with the West Union police chief - who told him that people in his community had the same complaints and didn’t like the speed cameras at first. “They settled down,” the chief told him. “And the speeding went down considerably,” he added. What revenue the speed cameras do generate from violators is put back into the community, Officer Riehm was told - “to the fire department, and so forth.”
Chief Rosendahl and all attendees did agree on one issue, in particular - the importance of (police) presence for deterrence. But, he said, “In any given 10-hour shift, one officer is out. And only four hours out of 10 are spent in New Albin.” In other words, he said, three police officers cannot cover both towns, 24 hours per day, and continue to take calls and otherwise do their jobs. “I can’t be everywhere at once, monitoring three different problem areas,” Officer Riehm said.
FINAL THOUGHTS
At the end of the community input session, an attendee presented the council with a petition signed by 176 people - “some citizens, some people who work in Lansing and some who shop in Lansing” - opposing the installation of speed cameras in town.
“Why not try a camera in one location?” Chief Rosendahl asked the attendees. “If, in six months, a speed study shows they’re not working, we can stop using them. I’m just looking for a solution to a problem that won’t cost the City money,” he said. “If someone has a better solution that doesn’t cost any money, I’m all ears.”
The Lansing City Council was then scheduled to make a decision on speed camera installation at its regularly scheduled meeting directly following the December 4 public input session. See Page 7 of the Wednesday, December 13, 2023 edition of the Standard for the council’s decision and additional coverage of that meeting.
Pick up this week's print edition or subscribe to our e-edition by clicking here.
