CPD reports the red light cameras are FINALLY working

For the first two weeks, violators will receive warnings

By Will Collette

After a two and a half year delay, Charlestown's two sets of red-light enforcement cameras finally started operating Tuesday morning at 10 AM.

Charlestown Police Chief Jeffrey Allen says that “Tony Ruscito [contractor Sensys America rep] informed me that the red light cameras are up and running.  As per the original program the first two weeks will be a warning period.” That warning period will run until the 20^th of January.

These are two sets of cameras that will film cars running red lights while going either north or south on Route One at the intersections with East Beach Road and West Beach Road. During the warning period, vehicles caught on camera will get a warning. After that, violators will receive $85 tickets.

For over two years since Charlestown signed the contract with Sensys to set up and run the system at no cost to the town, we’ve been promised almost a dozen different start-up dates that have all had to be pushed back by the contractor for various reasons.

Starting last fall, Sensys appeared to finally be serious about getting the system on line, evidenced by their actions to actually install them in October. 

The launch was supposed to be October 24, but that got pushed back because Sensys didn’t seem to realize that its cameras, which are not equipped with x-rays, were obscured by tree branches.

The hard launch date was moved to November 9 and was publicized by CPD, the town on the official website and in “Poopline,” the town newsletter. Even the CCA Party publicized November 9 as the start date. But November 9 came and went. Chief Allen said he was told by Sensys that there were some technical glitches.

But now the system is up. Finally. And we only had to wait two and a half years since the town signed Sensys on as the contractor. More on that below, but for your information, here is how the system is intended to work:

There are small signs posted warning about the cameras, but they are
easy to miss. The cameras themselves are hard to spot, as you can see
in this photo I took of the camera covering the southbound lanes of
Route One at West Beach Road.

If the Sensys equipment detects a vehicle about to enter the intersections at East and West Beach Roads against the red light, the camera is triggered to take both still photos and video of the vehicle. 

The images are reviewed by a member of the CPD who must confirm that there is indeed a violation. Sensys is supposed to mail out the ticket to the vehicle owner only after it has been reviewed and approved by CPD.

The cost of the ticket is $85. No points will be charged against the vehicle owner.

Some vehicle owners are likely to contest the ticket and some percentage of tickets will be dismissed if contested. Charlestown’s new state Representative Flip Filippi is an attorney who seems to specialize in representing people who think they have the Constitutional right to break the law, so if you want to contest the ticket, you may want to contact Flip.

Flip was sworn in today, presumably by someone authorized to do so.

Sensys told Chief Allen to anticipate 10 to 12 “events” per unit per day. 

Even taking into account that not every “event” will result in a ticket issued, and that some tickets will either be ignored or voided on appeal, that’s a lot of tickets. Enough tickets to cover Sensys’s costs perhaps and even generate some revenue for the town, although the point of the system is to stop red-light running and save lives. 

If the system fails to meet Sensys’s costs, the contract specifies that they must eat that loss and not pass it on to the town. If Sensys doesn't like the results, their only recourse will be to pull out the system when the contract is up for renewal.

I’m glad the cameras are now operating. From the start of this debate in Charlestown in 2012, I have cited my own experience with seeing how they curbed red-light running in the DC metro area where Cathy and I lived for 25 years before returning home to Rhode Island in 2002.

I know that other people oppose red-light cameras, often on privacy grounds, although using your driver’s license to operate a vehicle on a public highway doesn’t seem to create an expectation of privacy, especially if you are breaking the law. 

Many CCA Party followers wrote anonymous comments published on the CCA website attacking red-light cameras, some even calling it a form of creeping socialism.

The success or failure of this new system will hinge on the quality of the work of the contractor, Sensys America. I believe that is the weak link, certainly after the long delay and lame excuses. Charlestown contracted with Sensys after what I believe was a lack of proper due diligence by Town Council Boss Tom Gentz (CCA Party) who favored Sensys based on clearly false information.

The Town Council held a special meeting on May 9, 2012 to look at the two bids the town had received for red-light camera systems, one from Sensys and the other from Redflex.

Only three Council members attended – Boss Tom Gentz and Deputy Dan Slattery of the CCA Party, and independent Republican Gregg Avedisian. Both Slattery and Avedisian are now off the Council.

Redflex went first and made a slick presentation showing off all the bells and whistles of its system. There was a bit of a delay before the Councilors could hear from Sensys because Sensys rep Brian Haskell got lost trying to find Charlestown.

Then he couldn’t get his power-point presentation to work.

In his awkward way, Haskell muddled through his presentation. He displayed little understanding of Charlestown’s needs. He thought Route One was an eight-lane highway like I-95. He had never heard of the tragic death of Colin Foote, killed by a red-light runner at East Beach Road on May 16, 2010 which gave rise to Charlestown’s interest in red light cameras.

Despite his cluelessness about Charlestown, Haskell described Sensys as an all-American company based in Rhode Island.

All of this set off alarm bells in my head and led to research that produced disturbing findings. But Boss Gentz pushed for the town to give the contract to Sensys saying he was swayed by Haskell’s statements that were actually false.

I probably would have leaned against Sensys and toward Redflex simply because the Redflex representative:

(a) knew how to find Charlestown and showed up on time; 

(b) could get his power point to work, whereas Haskell could not. If you're selling a  technology-based product, you should demonstrate some proficiency; 

(c) had a very good working knowledge of Charlestown’s roads and 

(d) was well aware of the Colin Foote tragedy. 

Finally, the Redsys guy didn’t lie.

Haskell, on the other hand, did. 

Sensys is not an All-American, Rhode Island-based company. It is a Swedish company. And its US subsidiary, Sensys America, is not based in Rhode Island, but in Miami. 

Brian Haskell and his ex-company Nestor, Inc. was based in Providence. In Sensys’s proposal package, they refer to Nestor, which was bought by Sensys, as a fine and successful business. But in fact, Nestor crashed and burned and was “de-listed” on the stock exchanges before Sensys bought what was left and apparently got Haskell as part of the deal.

I put my research together showing all this and sent it on to Town Hall for the Council members to review before they took the vote. Either Gentz and Slattery didn’t read the research or decided they would ignore anything that came from me and pushed the contract toward Sensys on June 12, 2012.

I can understand that Gentz and his CCA Party colleagues don't like me - they pinned the "hate blog" label on Progressive Charlestown in the last two elections. But to ignore my research because it comes from me does a disservice to the town they claim to love. Besides, it would have only taken them five minutes of internet research to debunk Haskell's "all-American, Rhode Island-based" claim that Gentz and Slattery said were their reasons for going with Sensys over Redflex. 

When over a year had gone by and the system was not operational, I asked Town Hall what the hold up was. It turned out that there were several distinct delays due to problems Sensys had in working out issues like Scenic Highway approval and broken sensors in the road. Sensys said they didn't anticipate these problems with DOT, which of course figures since they are not the "Rhode Island-based" company that Boss Gentz thought they were.

After two and a half years of delays where Sensys used just about every lame excuse except “my dog ate my software,” the cameras are up. If it works, fine, though belated. If the system doesn’t work, then remember the history of how we ended up picking Sensys.

As I understand the contract, it runs for three years. That means that it should be up for renewal this June. Sensys doesn’t seem to have a whole lot of time to prove itself and, so far, it has not covered itself in glory.