Loading...
2008-3621 OrdinanceORDINANCE 2008-3621 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, CREATING ARTICLE XI, TO BE ENTITLED "DANGEROUS INTERSECTION SAFETY," OF CHAPTER 106, ENTITLED "TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES," OF THE MIAMI BEACH CITY CODE, BY CREATING SECTIONS 106 - 480 THROUGH 106 - 494 PROVIDING FOR INTENT AND DEFINITIONS; ESTABLISHING AN ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM WITHIN THE CITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO PERMIT AND IMPLEMENT THE USE OF UNMANNED CAMERAS/MONITORING DEVICES FOR RED LIGHT VIOLATIONS; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS, INCLUDING NOTICE, VIOLATIONS, VEHICLE OWNER RESPONSIBILITIES, APPEAL HEARINGS, PENALTIES, THE IMPOSITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES, FINES, AND LIENS, AND THE COLLECTION THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR EXCEPTIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY; REPEALER; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the running of red lights at intersections causes a safety hazard affecting every citizen and visitor in the City of Miami Beach ("City"); and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission are concerned with the inability to sufficiently enforce provisions in the Florida Statutes prohibiting the running of red lights due to the requirement that enforcement of the State statutory provisions require the personal observation of police officers; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission wish to reduce the running of red lights in the City by creating an additional code enforcement procedure therefor; and, WHEREAS, local governments in different parts of the state and country have demonstrated the enhancement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety attributable to the integration of automated image capture technologies with traditional traffic law enforcement methodology; and WHEREAS, § 316.008 of the Florida Statutes grants municipalities, with respect to streets and highways under their jurisdiction and within the reasonable exercise of their police power, the authority to regulate and monitor traffic by means of police officers and security devices; and WHEREAS, the City of Miami Beach has home rule authority pursuant to Article VII, Section 2 of the Florida Constitution and Chapter 166, Florida Statutes, to enact an ordinance making the failure to stop for a red light signal a violation of the City Code, and to provide for enforcement of such violations of the City Code through the use of the City's Special Masters; and WHEREAS, Florida Attorney General Opinion 2005-41, dated July 12, 2005, provides authority for the City to enact an ordinance making the failure to stop at a red light signal a violation of the City Code, to use unmanned cameras to monitor intersections in the City for such violations of the City's Code, and to record the license tag numbers of vehicles involved in such violations; and WHEREAS, the Florida Attorney General has opined that cities may not issue traffic citations under the State Statutes to drivers for violations observed by the use of unmanned cameras and not otherwise observed by police officers; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach find that the implementation of the code enforcement program for red light violations, as set forth herein, will promote, protect, and improve the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens, consistent with the authority granted to and the limitations on municipalities pursuant to the Florida Constitution and the Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That Article XI, to be entitled "Dangerous Intersection Safety," of Chapter 106 of the Miami Beach City Code, entitled "Traffic and Vehicles," is hereby created as follows: 2 CHAPTER 106 TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES Article XI. Dangerous Intersection Safety. Sec. 106 - 480. Intent. The purpose of this Article is to authorize the use of an unmanned cameras/monitoring system to promote compliance with red light signal directives as proscribed this Article, and to adopt a civil enforcement system for red light signal violations. This Article will also supplement law enforcement personnel in the enforcement of red light signal violations and shall not prohibit law enforcement officers from issuing a citation for a red light signal violation in accordance with statutory traffic enforcement techniques. Sec. 106 - 481. Use of image capture technologies. The City shall utilize image capture technologies as a supplemental means of monitoring compliance with laws related to traffic control signals, while assisting law enforcement personnel in the enforcement of such laws, which are designed to protect and improve public health, safety and welfare. This Article shall not supersede infringe, curtail, or impinge upon state laws related to red light signal violations or conflict with such laws. The City shall utilize image capture technologies as an ancillary deterrent to traffic control signal violations to reduce accidents and injuries associated with such violations. Notices of infractions issued pursuant to this Article shall be enforced using the city's special masters and not uniform traffic citations or county courts. Sec. 106 - 482. Definitions. .The following definitions shall apply to this Article: ~ Intersection shall mean the area embraced within the prolongation or connection of the lateral curb line; or, if none, then the lateral boundary lines of the roadways of two roads which loin or intersect one another at, or approximately at, right angles; or the area within which vehicles traveling upon different roads joining at any other angle may come in conflict. Motor vehicle shall mean any self-propelled vehicle not operated upon rails or guideway, but not including any bicycle, motorized scooter, motorized device used_ by disabled persons, electric personal assisted mobility device, or moped. ~ Notice of Infraction shall mean a city code citation issued for a red zone infraction. Owner/Vehicle Owner shall mean the person or entity identified by the Florida Department of Motor Vehicles, or other state vehicle registration office, as the registered owner of a vehicle. Such term shall also mean a lessee of a motor vehicle pursuant to a lease of six months or more. ~ Recorded Images shall mean images recorded by a traffic control signal monitoring svstem/device: 1. On: Two or more photographs, or Two or more electronic images; or Two or more digital images, or Digital or video movies; or Any other medium that can display a violation; and 2. Showing the rear of a motor vehicle and, on at least one image, clearly identifying the license plate number of the motor vehicle. ~f Red Zone Infraction shall mean a city code violation whereby a traffic control signal monitoring svstem established that a motor vehicle entered an intersection controlled by a duly erected traffic control device at a time when the traffic control signal for such vehicle's direction of travel was emitting a steady or flashing red I ig ht. ~ Special Master shall mean the City's Special Masters. Traffic Control Signal shall mean a device exhibiting different colored lights or colored lighted arrows successively. one at a time, or in combination, using only the colors green, yellow, and red which indicate and apply to drivers of motor vehicles as provided in Florida Statutes ~ 316.075. Traffic Control Signal Monitoring System/Device shall mean a svstem consisting of one or more vehicle sensors, working in conjunction with a traffic control signal, still camera and video recording device, to capture and produce recorded images of motor vehicles entering an intersection against a steady or flashing red light signal. Sec. 106 - 483. Adherence to red light traffic control signals. Motor vehicle traffic facing a traffic control signal's steady or flashing red light indication shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side- of an intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until a green light indication is shown on the traffic control signal or, in the case of a flashing red light signal, coming to a complete stop before groceeding.~# However the driver of a vehicle which is stopped at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side the intersection or, if none, then at the point nearest the intersecting roadway where the driver has a view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roadway before entering the intersection in obedience of a steady or flashing red light indication from a traffic control signal, may make a right turn (unless such turn is otherwise prohibited by posted sign or other traffic control device), but shall yield right-of-way to pedestrians and other traffic proceeding as directed by the traffic control signal at the intersection. Sec. 106- 484. Violation/red zone infraction. A violation of this Article known as a red zone infraction shall occur when a vehicle does not comply with the requirement of Sec. 106 - 483. Violations shall be enforced as provided in this Article. Sec. 106 - 485. Review of recorded images. ~ The owner of the vehicle which is observed by recorded images committing a red zone infraction, shall be issued a notice of infraction. The recorded image shall be sufficient grounds to issue a City notice of infraction. The City shall designate a traffic control infraction review officer, who shall meet the qualifications set forth in &316.640(5)(a), Florida Statutes, or any other relevant statute. The traffic control infraction review officer shall review recorded images prior to the issuance of a notice of infraction to ensure accuracy and the integrity of the recorded images. The traffic control infraction officer shall also verify that the traffic control monitoring system/devices which captured the recorded images were functioning properly at the time the recorded images were captured. Once the traffic control infraction review officer has verified the accuracy of the recorded Images and functionality of the traffic control monitoring system/devices, he or she shall complete a report, and a notice of infraction shall be sent to the vehicle owner at the address on record with the Florida Department of Hiahwav Safety and Motor Vehicles. Sec. 106 - 486. Notice of infraction. The Notice of Infraction shall include: ~ The name and address of the vehicle owner; ,~ The license plate number and registration number of the vehicle; ~ The make, model, and year of the vehicle; Notice that the red zone infraction charged is pursuant to this Article; ~ The location of the intersection where the red zone infraction occurred; ~f The date and time of the red zone infraction: ~ Notice that the recorded images relating to the vehicle and a statement that the recorded images are evidence of a red zone infraction; The civil penalty imposed; ,~ Images depicting the red zone infraction; The procedures for payment of the civil penalty and contesting the notice of infraction; A signed statement by the traffic control infraction officer that, based on inspection of recorded images, the vehicle was involved in a red zone infraction; Information advising the person alleged to be liable under this Article, the manner and time in which liability as alleged in the notice of infraction may be appealed and warning that failure to pay the civil penalty or to contest liability in a timely manner is an admission of liability. Sec. 106 - 487. Vehicle owner responsibilities. A vehicle owner receiving a notice of infraction shall, within twenty (20) days of the date of the notice of infraction: ~ Pay the assessed civil penalty pursuant to instructions on the notice of infraction; or Request an appeal pursuant with procedures as outlined in this Article. The failure to comply with the provisions of this section within twenty (20) days from the date of the notice of infraction shall constitute a waiver of the right to contest the notice of infraction and will be considered an admission of quilt. Sec. 106 - 488. Appeal to special master. The City's special masters are authorized to consider appeals under this Article if such appeal is filed within twenty (20) days of the date of the notice of infraction. The vehicle owner may file an appeal with the city pursuant to the directions in the notice of infraction. A hearing on the appeal shall be scheduled for all appeals except those in which the vehicle owner affirms under penalty of periury that the vehicle was not under his or her care, custody or control, or the care, custody or control of someone with the vehicle owner's consent. ~ U_pon receipt of the appeal, the city shall schedule a hearing before the special master. A notice of hearing shall be provided to the vehicle owner no less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing, and shall be provided by certified and U.S. mail to the same address to which the notice of infraction was sent. ,~ The following shall be permissible grounds for an appeal: At the time of the infraction, the vehicle was not under the care, custody, or control of the vehicle owner or an individual with the vehicle owner's consent. as established pursuant to an affidavit as provided section 106 - 489; ii The motor vehicle driver was issued a citation by a law enforcement officer. which was separate and distinct from the citation issued under this Article. for violating the steady or flashing red light from a traffic control signal; iii The motor vehicle driver was reauired to violate the steady or flashing red light from a traffic control signal in order to comply with other governing laws; iv The motor vehicle driver was reauired to violate the steady or flashing red light from a traffic control signal in order to reasonably protect the property or person of another: ,~ The steady or flashing red light from a traffic control signal was inoperable or malfunctioning; or ~ The traffic control infraction review officer, vehicle owner, and/or responsible party may testify and present evidence at the appeal hearing. All testimony shall be under oath and shall be recorded. Formal rules of evidence shall not apply, but fundamental due process shall be observed and shall govern all proceedings. Recorded images indicating a red zone infraction, verified by the traffic control infraction review officer, are admissible in any proceeding before the City's special master to enforce the provisions of this Article, and shall constitute prima facie evidence of the violation. ~ Unless an affidavit is provided pursuant to Section 106 - 489, it is presumed that the person registered as the vehicle owner with the Florida Department of Motor Vehicles, or any other state vehicle registration office, or an individual having the owner's consent, was operating the vehicle at the time of a red zone infraction. Sec. 106-489. Vehicle owner affidavit of non-responsibility. In order to for the vehicle owner to establish that the motor vehicle was. at the time of the red zone infraction, in the care, custody, or control of another person without the consent of the registered owner, the vehicle owner is reauired, within twenty (20) days from the date listed on the notice of infraction. to furnish to the City, an affidavit setting forth the circumstances demonstrating that the motor vehicle was not in the vehicle owner's care custody or control, or that of a person with vehicle owner's consent. The affidavit must be executed in the presence of a notary, and include: ~ If known to the vehicle owner, the name, address, and the driver's license number of the person who leased, rented or otherwise had care, custody or control of the motor vehicle at the time of the alleged red zone infraction; or If the vehicle was stolen, the police report indicating the vehicle was stolen at the time of the alleged red zone infraction. ~ The following language immediately above the signature line: "Under penalties of periury, I declare that I have read the foregoing affidavit and that the facts stated in it are true." Upon receipt of an affidavit pursuant to this section, any prosecution of the notice of infraction issued to the vehicle owner shall be terminated. Sec. 106 - 490. Penalties. A violation of this Article shall be deemed anon-criminal, non-moving violation for which the following civil penalties shall be assessed: First violation ...................................................... $125.00 Second violation ................................................. $250.00 Third, or subseauent violations ............................... $500.00. A violation of this Article is not a violation of the State Statutes; therefore, no points as provided in ~ 322.27, Florida Statutes, shall be recorded on the driving record of the vehicle owner or responsible party. Sec. 106 - 491. Administrative charges. In addition to the penalties set forth in section 106 - 490, administrative charges may be assessed in the event of an appeal or the necessity to institute collection procedures. Sec. 106 - 492. Collection of fines; unpaid fines to constitute a lien. ~ The City may establish procedures for the collection of civil fines and administrative charges imposed herein, and may institute proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction to compel payment of civil fines. A certified copy of an order imposing a civil fine may be recorded in the public records and thereafter shall constitute a lien upon any real or personal property owned by the violator; and it may be enforced in the same manner as a court iudgment by the sheriffs of this state, including levy against the personal property, but shall not be deemed to be a court iudgment except for enforcement purposes. After two months from the filing of any such lien remaining unpaid, the city may foreclose or otherwise execute upon the lien. Sec. 106 - 493. Failure to pay or appeal notice of code violations. Failure to pay the civil fee or file an appeal within twenty (20) days after the notice of infraction is mailed to, or personally served upon, the motor vehicle owner shall result in the motor vehicle owner paving the costs and attorney's fees required to collect the civil fee in addition to any other fees and charges. If the motor vehicle owner files an appeal and is unsuccessful, the motor vehicle owner shall be responsible for paving the costs and attorney's fees required to collect the fee, including costs associated with the appeal, in addition to any other fees and costs. Sec. 106 - 494. Exceptions. This Article shall not apply to red zone infractions involving vehicle collisions or to any authorized emergency vehicle responding to a bona fide emergency: nor shall a notice of infraction be issued in any case where the operator of the vehicle was issued a citation for violating the state statute regarding the failure to stop at a steady or flashing red light from a traffic control signal. SECTION 3. Repealer. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no way affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. SECTION 5. Codification. It is the intention of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of the City of Miami Beach, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or other appropriate word. SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect the 20th day of December , 2008. PASSED and ADOPTED this 10th day of December , 2008. ATTEST: ~~+. ~ ~. Robert Parcher City Clerk a ti errera Bo er Mayor A-P'~'RC~IED AS'~'~ F~~tl & i.Aid"~UAC3E 8 ~4R E~t3T10~1 I Z 3 DY F:\atto\TURN\ORDINANC\Red Light -Intersection Safety.doc 9 COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY Condensed Title: An Ordinance authorizing the City to permit and implement the use of unmanned cameras/monitoring devices for red li ht violations. Ke Intended Outcome Su orted: Increase resident ratin s of ublic safet services and enhance mobili throu hout the Ci Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): N/A Issue: Shall the Mayor and City Commission approve the Ordinance? Item Summa /Recommendation: SECOND READING PUBLIC HEARING. The model enacted by many other communities, and which is suggested for the City, creates in the City's traffic and vehicles Code an article which specifically deals with dangerous intersections and enforcement of red light violations therein. The Ordinance would provide for the use of image capture technology (cameras) as a supplemental means to monitor compliance with laws related to the traffic control signals. Use of the technology is intended to help protect the public health, safety and welfare and as a deterrent to traffic control signal violations that would enable the reduction of accidents and injuries associated with such violations. Key points of the Ordinance include: -When a traffic control signal monitoring system/device records two or more photographs of an infraction with one photo at least that clearly identifies the license plate number of the motor vehicle, it would constitute a violation of Code. -Before issuance of a violation, recorded images of the infraction must be reviewed by a certified traffic control infraction review officer. The officer is to assure that the photos are accurate and that the system was functioning normally at the time of the infraction. -The Ordinance establishes a schedule of penalties for violations of the Ordinance as follows: First violation - $125.00; Second violation - $250.00; Third, or subsequent violations - $500.00. Utilizing unmanned cameras for red light violation enforcement can also provide a benefit to the Police Department for use in resolving crimes that may be committed in the City. The unmanned cameras used for red light violations will also capture a continuous photo record of the subject intersection thereby allowing the Police Department an opportunity to review the photo record in order to identify a vehicle which might have been utilized in the commission of a crime in the City. While there may be some deterrent as a result of having the photo record, the benefit to the Police Department is principally in resolving a crime after the fact. Use of unmanned cameras to assist the Police Department with red light violations at the busiest intersections within the City, can be a useful tool to reduce accidents and provide for a safer driving environment for residents and visitors to Miami Beach. Selected use of photo images can further assist the Police Department in resolving crimes which may have been committed within the City of Miami Beach. As red light enforcement programs typically generate a positive revenue stream for the specific municipality there is no reduction in resources currently available to the City as a result of implementing this program. One amendment based on the City of Aventura experience is suggested and included in the ordinance. Current language did not recognize a flashing red signal, which might be encountered in the City as an infraction. As such, it is recommended that the Mayor and City Commissioners approve on Second Reading an Ordinance which amends the City Code to provide for City enforcement of red light violations in those intersections designated b the Ci Commission. Board Recommendation: Financial Information: Fiscal Impact: Exact revenue projections are difficult to predict as each City and each intersection within a City will differ. Experience generally is that a positive revenue flow is to be expected. City costs of implementation are limited to 75,000 or less. Depending on the negotiated revenue share and number of cameras potential revenues to the City could exceed 2 million dollars annually. Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin Robert C. Middau h, Assistant Ci Mana er Sign-Offs: Department Director As nt City Manager City Manager JMG T:\AGENDA\2008\December 10\Regular\Redli raOrd2ndReadingSum.doc AGENDA ITEM ' ~~ ~+~- ~ ~~ ~ DATE m MIAMIBEACH City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, vrww.miamibeachA.gov COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager SECOND READING DATE: December 10, 2008 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR D CI COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, CREATING ARTICLE XI, TO BE ENTITLED "DANGEROUS INTERSECTION SAFETY," OF CHAPTER 106, ENTITLED "TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES," OF THE MIAMI BEACH CITY CODE, BY CREATING SECTIONS 106 - 480 THROUGH 106 - 494 PROVIDING FOR INTENT AND DEFINITIONS; ESTABLISHING AN ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM WITHIN THE CITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO PERMIT AND IMPLEMENT THE USE OF UNMANNED CAMERAS/MONITORING DEVICES FOR RED LIGHT VIOLATIONS; PROVIDING ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS, INCLUDING NOTICE, VIOLATIONS, VEHICLE OWNER RESPONSIBILITIES, APPEAL HEARINGS, PENALTIES, THE IMPOSITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES, FINES, AND LIENS, AND THE COLLECTION THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR EXCEPTIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY; REPEALER; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION Approve the Ordinance. Fiscal Impact Exact revenue projections are difficult to predict as each City that has implemented a program is different and with different traffic patterns and each intersection within a City will also differ. Experience for communities that have implemented red light programs is generally that a positive revenue flow is to be expected. City costs of implementation are limited to $75,000 or less (assumes a staff person and a dedicated computer). Depending on the negotiated revenue share and number of cameras potential revenues to the City could exceed 2 million dollars annually. The City of Aventura in the first six weeks of their program has averaged gross revenue (before non-collectables and vendor share of approximately $6,000 weekly revenue per camera. ANALYSIS For several years the City has monitored the enforcement of red light violations at intersections through the use of automated image capture technology (camera enforcement). The enforcement of red light violations at intersections by cameras was first discussed by the Neighborhoods/Community Affairs Committee at their meeting on March 26, 2007. At that time, the Committee recommended to defer continued discussion until several key questions were addressed and/or resolved. At that time, it was anticipated that the State legislature might enact provisions that made red light enforcement by cameras easier and there was also no track record as to the legal challenges that might be associated with such an enforcement program. The State legislature did not enact any additional provisions relative to red light violation enforcement by camera beyond those which already existed. The State law and guidance provided by then Attorney General Charlie Crist essentially precluded a municipalityfrom using a photographic record of a red light violation to issue a citation under the State Statute that prohibits red light infractions. The Attorney General Opinion which is attached for reference is one of the key driving points in the approach that is suggested in the attached Ordinance relative to enforcement of red light violations. As the Attorney General has opined that Cities may not issue citations under the Uniform Traffic Control Law, most other communities and notably the City of Pembroke Pines created an Ordinance to provide for municipal enforcement of red light infractions at intersections through the use of cameras as a municipal code violation rather than a violation of the existing State Statute. The significance of this distinction is that as a municipal code violation, any violations written for red light infractions at intersections through the use of unmanned cameras is considered a civil violation and as the violation is not written under the Uniform Traffic Control Law, does not represent a violation of the traffic code and therefore does not attach to the drivers record. The other principal concern at the City's last consideration was the experience of other municipalities and whether or not legal challenges would be successful with the approach being pursued for red light violation enforcement. Since the 2007 consideration, a number of communities have proceeded to enact a red light violation enforcement mechanism at the local level and have successfully used those models for over one (1) year. Cities which have successfully used the local enforcement for red light violations include the Cities of Pembroke Pines, Apopka, Doral, Gulf Breeze and Aventura. No successful legal challenges are known at this time. The model enacted by most other communities, and which is suggested for the City, creates in the City's traffic and vehicles Code an article which specifically deals with dangerous intersections and enforcement of red light violations therein. The Ordinance would provide for the use of image capture technology (cameras) as a supplemental means to monitor compliance with laws related to the traffic control signals. Use of the technology is intended to help protect the public health, safety and welfare and as a deterrent to traffic control signal violations that would enable the reduction of accidents and injuries associated with such violations. Key points of the Ordinance dealing with dangerous intersections and the use of cameras to enforce violations at designated intersections includes: When a traffic control signal monitoring system/device records two or more photographs of an infraction with one photo at least that clearly identifies the license plate number of the motor vehicle, it would constitute a violation of Code. Before issuance of a violation, recorded images of the infraction must be reviewed by a certified traffic control infraction review officer. The officer is to assure that the photos are accurate and that the system was functioning normally at the time of the infraction. The Ordinance establishes a schedule of penalties for violations of the Ordinance as follows: First violation $125.00 Second violation $250.00 Third, or subsequent violations $500.00 2 The Ordinance provides a due process mechanism for individuals who wish to challenge any violations issued, through the Office of the Special Master and defines the permissible grounds for an Appeal. The Ordinance establishes that the City may enforce its imposition of civil fines in a court of competent jurisdiction and further that the City may record a lien on any real or personal property owned by the violator. The Ordinance does not specify the intersections for which the supplemental camera enforcement would be necessary or appropriate. Those intersections would be specified as part of a vendor contract to supply camera technologies and support services. An RFP to solicit proposals for red light violation cameras was approved by the Mayor and City Commission at the October 7, 2008 City Commission meeting. To date the intersections identified by the Miami Beach Police Department as potential candidates are included in Attachment B and C. The lists are based solely on accident data and indicate the10 intersections in the City with the highest number of accidents for 2007 and 2008. The two lists are not identical as would be expected from year to year. Amore detailed analysis as to the potential impacts and deterrent value of specific intersections is needed before a final list of sites can be identified. A breakdown of the accident history by cause of accident is also included as Exhibit D. In reviewing accident causes, the Commission will note that only a few accidents are listed as caused by a red light infraction or disregard for a traffic signal. As Police Officers generally arrive at an accident site after the event, very often the cause of the accident is attributed to some other category, such as careless driving or improper turn, even if a red light violation may have been contributory. The Officer typically has no direct knowledge of a red light violation at an accident scene and it is easier to establish other infractions based on the site evidence. Beyond accident data, intersections might also receive consideration for traffic volumes, speed or level of service. While of the intersections on Exhibit B and C are among the busiest in the City, these other traffic elements might also be considered if cameras are to be implemented in the City. As part of the recently approved Transportation Element update for the City Comprehensive Plan, up to date traffic flow data is now being gathered that will be available to the City Commission when a potential vendor for cameras is considered for approval and intersections need to be identified for a program. While the principal reason for implementing a red light violation enforcement program with the use of unmanned cameras is to protect the public health, safety and welfare and to deter accidents, there is generally a positive revenue stream that results from the implementation of these programs. Actual revenues will depend upon the number of cameras which are utilized for enforcement and the location of said cameras. Prior to the issuance of the Request of Proposals for a camera vendor, one vendor projected that with the implementation of ten (10) enforcement cameras in the City as projected on the Police list of intersections an average revenue stream over five (5) years in excess of $2 million dollars per year for the City. Utilizing unmanned cameras for red light violation enforcement can also provide a benefit to the Police Department for use in resolving crimes that maybe committed in the City. The unmanned cameras used for red light violations will also capture a continuous photo record of the subject intersection thereby allowing the Police Department an opportunity to review the photo record in order to identify a vehicle which might have been utilized in the commission of a crime in the City. While there may be some deterrent as a result of having the photo record, the benefit to the Police Department is principally in resolving a crime after the fact. 3 One consideration that is related to Police use of images from unmanned cameras is that the images should only be utilized by Police Department personnel. In the event the Mayor and City Commission choose a vendor to supply cameras for red light violation enforcement, the access and security protocol associated with those images should be included in the Agreement with the vendor. Per Commission approval, an RFP for vendors to provide services anticipated in the Ordinance was issued. RFP responses are due back on December 15, 2008. First Reading approval of the Ordinance was given by the City Commission at the November 5, 2008 meeting. During the discussion at first reading, the City Commission asked about the ability of the City to use the technology for the red light ordinance to enforce other traffic violations, such as block the box violations. While the technology associated with the red light program appears to be able to be adapted to other violations, pursuing other violations in the current red light ordinance is not recommended for inclusion in the red light violation ordinance. The City will not know what the exact capabilities of the proposed technologywill be until afterthe RFP responses have been received and a vendor selected. It is very possible that the protocol for red light enforcement may have to be modified to fit the technical capacity of a selected vendor. Further, significant amendments to the current ordinance would be required such that it would constitute a major change in the ordinance, delaying the red light program. The Administration is also concerned that not enough is known about the details of implementation to draft adequate language for other violations such as block the box. If the City Commission wishes to pursue other violations using the to be proposed technology, it is suggested that a separate ordinance be drafted to do so and that sufficient time is devoted to developing clear and enforceable language. Subsequent to the first reading, the Administration was made aware of a change that the City of Aventura might make in their red light program ordinance. Both the Aventura and Miami Beach ordinances contain no reference to a flashing red light signal, which might be encountered. This reference has been added to the ordinance submitted to the City Commission for second reading. Conclusion Use of unmanned cameras to assist the Police Department with red light violations at the busiest intersections within the City, can be a useful tool to reduce accidents and provide for a safer driving environment for residents and visitors to Miami Beach. Selected use of photo images can further assist the Police Department in resolving crimes which may have been committed within the City of Miami Beach. As red light enforcement programs typically generate a positive revenue stream for the specific municipality there is no reduction in resources currently available to the City as a result of implementing this program. As such, it is recommended that the Mayor and City Commissioners approve on Second Reading Ordinance which amends the City Code to provide for City enforcement of red light violations in those intersections designated by the City Commission. JMG\RCM\sam T:\AGENDA\2008\December 10\Regutar\RedlightCameraOrd2ndReadingcommemo.doc Attachments 4 • -r Print Version Number: GO 2005-41 ~ Date: Juy '''~ Subject: Traffic, use of unmanned cameras Mr. Samuel S. Goren City of Pembroke Pines Attorney 3099 East Commercial Boulevard Suite 200 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308 RE: MUNICIPALITIES - UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL LAW - ORDINANCES - CAMERAS - use of unmanned cameras to monitor traffic violations. Ch. 166, Fla. Stat., and s. 316.075, Fla. Stat. Dear Mr. Goren: On behalf of the Pembroke Pines City Commission you have asked for my opinion on easenti~lly the following questions: 1. May the City of Pembroke Pines enact an ordinance authorizing the city to monitor violations of traffic signals within the city? 2. If the answer to Question One is "yes," may the city use unmanned cameras to monitor intersections and document traffic violations? If the answers to Questions One and Two are both "yes," may the city use the 3 . photographic evidence from the unmanned cameras to advise a car owner of a violation? If the answers to Questions One and Two are "yes," may the city use its code 4 . enforcement special magistrate, and enforcement procedures provided in Chapter 162, Florida Statutes, to enforce violations of traffic signals? If the answers to Questions One and Two are "yes," is the city authorized to 5 . install the unmanned cameras at intersections for state and/or county roads as long as all authorities with jurisdiction over such roads consent and use the photographic evidence in the same manner as the city for violations documented at intersections involving only city streets? According to your letter, the City of Pembroke Pines seeks to enhance public safety the t i o ng within the city by attempting to reduce dangerous driving behavior relat failure to obey red light indications on traffic signal devices, a laudable goal. The city commission desires to enact an ordinance authorizing the city to monitor traffic signals within the city. The city would install unmanned cameras at intersections within the city to record vehicles that fail to stop for red lights. The photographic evidence from the unmanned cameras would be used to advise the vehicle's owner of the violation. d T wo Questions One an Chapter 316, Florida Statutes, is the "Florida Uniform Traffic Control Law." Section 316.002, Florida Statutes, expresses the legislative intent for adopting this law, stating: ~'It is the legislative intent in the adoption of this chapter to make uniform traffic laws to apply throughout the state and its several counties and uniform .~~. ~,,.,,,~,.,..r,.,...,-.r~~ Agenda Item ~~ - , ,. , , „~..~...~.,,,,,. Date /'~ ~ /~j ~ p e,~.,:~.,r., i onai Aninien -AGO 2005-41 __ Graff is ordinances to apply in all municipalities. The Legislature recognizes that there are conditions which require municipalities to pass certain other traffic ordinances in regulation of municipal traffic that are not required to regulate the movement of traffic outside of such municipalities. Section 316.00 enumerates the area within which municipalities may control certain traffic movement or parking in their respective jurisdictions. This section shall be supplemental to the other laws or ordinances of this chapter and not in conflict therewith. It is unlawful ~ an ordinance in conflict for any Zocal authority to a wi visions o this chapter." (e•s•) The Legislature clearly recognized the authority of municipalities to adopt certain local legislation to control traffic and parking within municipalities. In section 316.008, Florida Statutes, the traffic control law enumerates several areas that local authorities are authorized to address, including, "[r]egulating, restricting, or monitoring traffic by security devices or personnel In psbthis streets and highways, whether by public or private parties •'[ ~ office concluded in Attorney General's Opinion 97-06, the use of an unmanned camera to record vehicles that do not remain stopped and standing at a steady red light as required by section 316.075(3)(a), Florida Statutes, would appear to fall within the scope of this authority. Thus, it is my opinion that the City of Pembroke Pines is authorized by the terms of section 316.002 and 316.008, Florida Statutes, to enact an ordinance authorizing the city to monitor violations of traffic signals within the city and to use . unmanned cameras to monitor intersections and record traffic violations. Question Three As discussed above, it is my opinion that the City of Pembroke Pines is authorized to monitor violations of traffic signals within the city and to use unmanned cameras to record the license tag numbers of cars involved in such violations. It is a rule of statutory construction that an express power duly conferred may include the implied authority to use the means necessary to make the express power effective, although such implied authority may not warrant the exercise of a substantive power not conferred.[2] The City of Pembroke Pines is granted the authority to regulate and monitored~a~olencompasacthelauthority toeadvpsesthoseein to regulate and monitor would app violation of local ordinances that their actions had been recorded by traffic cameras installed to detect such violations. i see no impediment to the city taking such steps in a public safety effort to reduce dangerous driving behavior relating to the failure to obey red light indications on traffic signal devices. Therefore, it is my opinion that the City of Pembroke Pines may use the photographic evidence from unmanned cameras to advise a car owner that hie or her license tag number has been recorded in a violation of the traffic laws. Question Four and Five in a 1997 Attorney General Opinion requested by Palm Beach County, this office considered whether a county could enact an ordinance sOSeoQfzissuing citatf for unmanned cameras at traffic intersections for the pure violations of section 316.075, Florida Statutes.. Attorney General Opinion 97-0 concluded that the use of unmanned cameras to detect vehicles that do not remain stopped and standing at a steady red light as required by section 316.075(3)(a), Florida Statutes, would appear to come within the scope of statutory provisions authorizing local governments to monitor traffic by security devices on public streets and highways. The problem identified in the opinion was whether unmanned "electronic traffic infraction detectors" may independently be used as the basis for issuing citations for violations of these traffic laws. The provisions of the Uniform Traffic Code require that citations be issued when an officer "observe traffic infraction(.]"(3) (e.s.) Thus, in order for citations for violations of tra is control laws to be issued, the statutes appear to require that an officer enforcing the traffic law personally observe or have personal knowledge of the , non ni^^innir r.~r~ (•In I/1Tn1TT^/~'~r/~rr • ^nn~^~nn.. r. ^^'^^ "„..^~' ,..._.,,_.. n i ~ fa vt+...... .. -.~--.-~ ..~- -.. ...~__ particular infraction that serves as the basis for issuing the citation. The opinion concluded that nothing precludes the use of unmanned cameras to record violations of section 316.075, Florida Statutes, but a photographic record of a vehicle violatin traffic control laws may not be used as the basis for issuing a citation for such violations. Thie of ice has su eared that le ig s ative_am@n_men s would be ne es ar to a .from unmanned cameras monitoring intersections to be used as the sole basis for issuing citations. Chapter 316, Florida Statutes, contains provisions regulating traffic control signal devices and mandating a vehicular stop at a red light. Section 316.075, Florida Statutes, designates the colors to be used for traffic control signal lights used to control traffic, including municipal traffic, and requires that "the lights shall indicate and apply to drivers of vehicles and pedestrians" as described the rein. (4] Pursuant to section 316.075(1)(c)1., Florida Statutes: "Vehicular traffic facing a steady red signal shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection and shall remain standing until a green indication is shown . The statute recognizes that municipal and county authorities may take certain actions to regulate traffic turning on a steady red signal. [5] The statute makes a violation of section 316.075, Florida Statutes, a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable pursuant to Chapter 318 as a moving violation. (6] Thus, Chapter 316, Florida Statutes, contains enforcement and penalty provisions for violations of traffic control signal lights. In light of the proscription contained in section 316.007, Florida Statutes, that "no local authority shall enact or enforce any ordinance on a matter covered by this chapter unless expressly authorized," this office continues to be of the opinion expressed in Attorney General Opinion 97-06 that legislative changes are necessary before local governments may issue traffic citations and penalize drivers who fail to obey red light indications on traffic signal devices. Sincerely, Charlie Crist Attorney General CC/tgh [1] Section 316.008(1){w), Fla. Star. [2) See, e.g., MoIwin Investment Company v. Turner, 167 So. 33 (Fla. 1936); Lessner v. Del-Air Corp., 17 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 1944); cf. Thayer v. State, 335 So. 2d 815, 817 (Fla. 1976); Dobbs v. Sea Isle Hotel, 56 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 1952); Ideal Farms Drainage District v. Certain Lands, 19 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 1944). [3] Section 316.640(5)(a), Fla. Star. [4] See s. 316.075(1)(a), indicating the actions to be taken when a green indication is given; s. 316.075(1)(b), Fla. Star., providing direction when a steady yellow indication is presented; and s. 316.075(1)(c), Fla. Star., relating to a steady red indication. [5] See 316.075(1)(c)l.a. and b., Fla. Star., allowing counties and municipalities to prohibit right turns against a steady red signal at any intersection and to prohibit a left turn onto a one-way street intersecting another one-way street at a steady red signal.. (6] See 316.075(4), Fla. Star. 1... ._ „_.._.!1_.',t t t . nrr~rin.. innir+r. mot-.. r.n.i-.nn•r.r+.........-. r..-.... .. .. ~.. ...... .. ... ..-...-.--__ MIAMIBEACH ~'CGII)~NT L I ~ E INt~`~ST~GATI4N UNIT QR;ANDUM TO: Division Chief W. Riley Via Chain of Co~nand FROM: Sergeant D. Porter DATE: January 18, 2008 SUBJECT: Top 10 Accident Intersections for 2007 Sir, The top 10 accident intersections for 2007 are listed below. These are intersections where the accident occurred in the intersection. 1. 17th Street and Alton Road 14 Accidents 2. 41St Street and Pinetree Drive 18 Accidents 3. 5th Street and Washington Avenue 14 Accidents 4. 5th Street and Alton Road 13 Accidents 5. 74th Street and, Harding Avenue 13 Accidents 6. 17th Street and Collins Avenue 12 Accidents 7. 12th Street and Collins Avenue 11 Accidents 8. 15th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue 11 Accidents 9. 63rd Street and Indian Creek Drive 11 Accidents 10. 67th Street and Collins Avenue 11 Accidents MIAtw11BEACH ACCIDENT` IP ~3 L I ~E INV`~~TIC~-TI4N UNIT ~4RAN,DUM TO: Mike Gruen FROM: Sgt. D. Porter DATE: October 24, 2008 SUBJECT: Top 10 Accident Intersections for 2008 to Date 1. 17th Street and Alton Road 12 2. 5th Street and Washington Avenue 12 3. 13th Street and Collins Avenue 13 4. 41st Street and Pinetree Road 9 5. 41st Street and Alton Road 9 6. 7181 Street and Abbott Avenue 9 7. 12th Street and Collins Avenue 7 8. MacArthur Causeway and Fountain Street 7 9. 4191 Street and Indian Creek Drive 6 10. 67th Stree t and Collins Avenue 6 -~X i-1-t ~3 I"j- C:. 2007 17 Street and Alton Road 14 Accidents Cazeless Drivin 7 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 2 Im ro er Lane Chan e 1 All Other 4 41 Street and Pinetree Drive 18 Accidents Careless Driving $ Failed to Yield Right of Way 3 Im ro er Backin 1 ro er Turn 3 Disre azd Traffic Si al 2 Failed to Maintain ui ment 1 Im ro er Passin 1 All Other 1 5 Street and Washington Avenue 14 Accidents Cazeless Drivin 3 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 4 Improper Twin 1 Followed Too Close 1 Disre azd Traffic Si al 2 All Other 3 5 Street and Alton Road 13 Accidents Careless Drivin 6 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 1 Im ro er Lane Chan e 1 Followed Too Close 1 All Other 4 We are commt»ed to providing excellent public service and safey to ail who live, work, and pkry rn our vibrant, tropical, hisbric community. 74 Street and Harding Avenue 13 Accidents Careless Drivin 4 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 1 Im ro er Lane Chan e 2 Improper Turn 3 All Other 3. 17 Street and Collins Avenue 12 Accidents Careless Drivin 2 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 4 Im ro er Lane Chan e 1 Followed Too Close 2 All Other 3 12 Street and Collins Avenue 11 Accidents Cazeless Drivin 2 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 5 Im ro er Lane Chan e ~ Disre azd Sto Si I Obstructin Traffic I All Other 1 15 Street and Pennsylvania Avenue 11 Accidents Careless Drivin 3 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 4 Disre azd Sto Si 1 All Other 3 We are committed to providing excellent public sen rce and safety ro aN who live, work, and pay rn our vibrant, tropical, historic cammumty. 63 Street and Indian Creek Drive 11 Accidents Careless Drivin 4 Disre and Traffic Si al 2 Followed Too Close 1 Failed to Maintain E ui ment 1 All Other 3 67 Street and Collins Avenue 11 Accidents Careless Drivin 2 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 3 Im ro er Lane Chan e 2 Disre and Traffic Si al 1 Disre and Sto Si 1 Improper Turn - 1 All Other 2 2000 17 Street and Alton Road 12 Accidents Careless Drivin 4 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 2 Itn ro er Lane Chan e 1 Disre and Traffic Si al 2 All Other 3 5 Street and Washington Avenue 12 Accidents Careless Drivin 6 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 1 Im ro er Lane Chan e 1 Im ro er Turn 1 All Other 3 13 Street and Collins Avenue 13 Accidents Cazeless Drivin 2 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 7 All Other 4 41 Street and Pinetree Drive 9 Accidents Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 4 Iin ro er Turn 3 All Other 2 41 Street and Alton Road 9 Accidents Careless Drivin 6 Im o er Turn 1 Disre azd Traffic Si al 2 71 Street and Abbott Avenue 9 Accidents Careless Drivin 3 Im ro er Lane Chan e 3 Im ro er Turn 1 Disre azd Traffic Si al 1 Followed Too Close 1 12 Street and Collins Avenue 7 Accidents Careless Drivin 1 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 4 Im ro er Turn 1 All Other 1 MacArthur Causeway and Fountain Street 7 Accidents Careless Drivin 3 Alcohol Under the Influence 1 Followed Too Close 1 Disre and Traffic Si al 1 All Other 1 41 Street and Indian Creek Drive 6 Accidents Careless Drivin 2 Failed to Yield Ri t of Wa 1 Disre d Traffic Si al 1 All Other 2 67 Street and Collins Avenue 6 Accidents Failed to Yield Ri t of Way 2 Im ro er Turn 1 Followed Too Close 1 Disre and Traffic Si al 1 All Other 1 o ~ 0 1 N 1 n :'n{ u m E. i o I Z-e r i 3 ~' x 3i q l ~~~~ ~ _.. { ~ . a,= s o ~ . ~ ' m © s W Y6 J~= J `N 1 m ~. 3 , ~CIT~( OF ~IIIAM1 B~~-CH ~. ~.. a ,~ '~TI!CE ~~ P~LlC ~HEARI~G - _ • , NQTICE ~5 1(~.~ that ,a secoiid reading and public hearing vNtl'-be held -by the City Commission of the ~' of Miami.Beach,an the Commission ' "'~~loor, CRy'Fiall, 1700 Conve~tion,,.C~p~@X Dnye~M2~rtI. Beach, Florida, on 1Nednesday, Decemtaer a0, 2008 at 10:fib A.M„ hi ~ itler ~ Ordinance Creating Article Xt, To l~ Efititied "Dangerous Intersec'~fibn"~,".~f i/haPter'IflS, C-rititled "~r~ffic Rtd Vehicles," Of The Miami Beach City Code, By Creating Sectiori~ 1Q&, 480 Through ~O6 -49A Providing or Intent And [3efihitions; Establishing An ~ntoreernent'Program-Within The`Ctty;Avthori~ii3g`f?ie~ nrt,Rnirrtpfetner~~"he Use t}# j.firr+anned Car~eraslMoni#oring ices For Reti f_jgh#,ifflfations; Providing":For ErlforcemerstProcedu r ; ~iegula,Mpns,',It~c'i~'dit~q'€ice~la'trnns, Vehicle i3avnerRespoC'is-bliities, Appeal_FJearings„Penalties, The Imposition Of ,Qd~inistratiye ~rges ~u~s;~iknd L~eRS ~d~~ er~o~t,~ti©n Thereof; Providing For 6cceptioii5: Inquiries maytf~cted to#hePu~tic Works Department at ~7,~`~:0,80. ~ °- ti _ .. _ .. r _ - ~' -~~"~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - . .., _ .. INTERESTED PART'1ES are invited to appear at this meeting; , eserrted.byart ager,,~,,,o~.#o ~s'gaeir views in writing addressed to the ': City Commission, c/o~the>/ity Clerk, i706Conver#tion•Cert#er 1=#oor:G*~`y`t~aH;.}iECGatrrr8ii~lorid~ 33139. Copies,of3hesevrdinances are available for public inspection during normal busines~hauts~n die City Clerk ~ Office, 1700 Convention~~enter Dnve, 1st Floor, City+faq; and Miam ~ 'd!a 33't3 ,~`hi~'r,0eetang~~ cp,rt~i ~' su~h~t7m °~ additional legal notice would~not be provided. ~. ear '+'~loTt ~ ~<'..!'~.~,~'~~r~ S k Y ~' -. E ~ ~_ e,. _ ._. ' ~,. ~`~ ~~~ ,~~~~ =~ ~ '~ <~~.~, " p ^~'' - ~tobertE. Karcher, ~~ity,Clerk . .. ~ -r ~ Clty Of;:•Mk1fF11:~B9aCh ,' - . - Pursuant ~ ign" 28~~'#05 ~a ~~ ~ ~~~_'~e ,ppl~iic t~rat~, if•~ person decides tm appeal any decision anade by ~Ehe ~: City Comrr~s_with respect to any matter considered 2~f'its-meeting orfts:heanng, such person must ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record, fr~ludes the testtmorty_and,evid_ence upon. which-the, appeal is to be traded. This notice does not constitute _ consent by the City,#er,1he intwductrg0.grradra{a,,of tease lraadmissityleor,irrslearar#f.evidence, nor digs it suthori~e challenges or appeals not'otherovise allowedi;+y Fav+1. °: , ~ - „ r , , _ ._ To rey{uest ,this ma#erial ,u1 aceess-bke ;'fc~r~nat,_'si„gq,languag~ ~:u~terpreters, information on access fat, persons with disabilities, and/or x cj~,~pc~sorflr~ ,p ~Se contact (305) 604~~88 fvoice), 2 ~ r$lnay ~Lso cal! 7>~~: Service). . _ -