Traffic Enforcement

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby MNdible » November 18th, 2015, 4:16 pm

I'm sure you know this, but the courts have ruled that MN statute would have to be changed to allow issuing traffic citations based on cameras. Which could happen, but there's been no interest shown at the legislature thus far.

Yes, we certainly could hire more officers, but if they're going to be revenue neutral, they'd need to write a lot of citations to cover $100,000+ worth of salary and benefits, not to mention equipment costs, overhead, etc.

User avatar
Sacrelicio
Union Depot
Posts: 364
Joined: November 11th, 2015, 6:38 pm
Location: Field

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby Sacrelicio » November 18th, 2015, 4:21 pm

As I was crossing over a new marked crosswalk in North loop a month ago, the cars began to slow to a stop for me, but then some maniac swerve around them driving in the bike lane and nearly missing me by a foot or two. I've seen it happen before on 4th St SE and on University. That's the kind of stuff I want to see stopped.
On that same crosswalk, a car stopped for me, and then a large delivery truck behind the car slammed on its brakes, skidded, and almost hit the stopped car!

And people oftentimes don't stop at all in either direction, which defeats the point of a crosswalk.

User avatar
Sacrelicio
Union Depot
Posts: 364
Joined: November 11th, 2015, 6:38 pm
Location: Field

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby Sacrelicio » November 18th, 2015, 4:30 pm

I'm sure you know this, but the courts have ruled that MN statute would have to be changed to allow issuing traffic citations based on cameras. Which could happen, but there's been no interest shown at the legislature thus far.

Yes, we certainly could hire more officers, but if they're going to be revenue neutral, they'd need to write a lot of citations to cover $100,000+ worth of salary and benefits, not to mention equipment costs, overhead, etc.
Pardon my French, but I don't give a flying pig's ass if more cops to keep us all safe are "revenue neutral" or not.

User avatar
Sacrelicio
Union Depot
Posts: 364
Joined: November 11th, 2015, 6:38 pm
Location: Field

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby Sacrelicio » November 18th, 2015, 4:35 pm

As I was crossing over a new marked crosswalk in North loop a month ago, the cars began to slow to a stop for me, but then some maniac swerve around them driving in the bike lane and nearly missing me by a foot or two. I've seen it happen before on 4th St SE and on University. That's the kind of stuff I want to see stopped.
100%

I wrote about something similar happening a couple months ago. It's happened a couple times since. Absolutely terrifying every time.
I got chills reading that. And I'm sure the driver was pissed at you for almost getting killed.

HiawathaGuy
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1636
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 12:03 pm

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby HiawathaGuy » November 18th, 2015, 4:38 pm

I'm sure you know this, but the courts have ruled that MN statute would have to be changed to allow issuing traffic citations based on cameras. Which could happen, but there's been no interest shown at the legislature thus far.

Yes, we certainly could hire more officers, but if they're going to be revenue neutral, they'd need to write a lot of citations to cover $100,000+ worth of salary and benefits, not to mention equipment costs, overhead, etc.
Pardon my French, but I don't give a flying pig's ass if more cops to keep us all safe are "revenue neutral" or not.
Fine, you may not. But I assure you, the vast majority of Minneapolitans, do! And like it or not, this is a democracy. I am all for funding more police - and for increasing traffic enforcement, I want that to be clear. I just think that it's a bit unrealistic, given the current headlines, that there's much appetite.

User avatar
Sacrelicio
Union Depot
Posts: 364
Joined: November 11th, 2015, 6:38 pm
Location: Field

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby Sacrelicio » November 18th, 2015, 4:50 pm

I'm sure you know this, but the courts have ruled that MN statute would have to be changed to allow issuing traffic citations based on cameras. Which could happen, but there's been no interest shown at the legislature thus far.

Yes, we certainly could hire more officers, but if they're going to be revenue neutral, they'd need to write a lot of citations to cover $100,000+ worth of salary and benefits, not to mention equipment costs, overhead, etc.
Pardon my French, but I don't give a flying pig's ass if more cops to keep us all safe are "revenue neutral" or not.
Fine, you may not. But I assure you, the vast majority of Minneapolitans, do! And like it or not, this is a democracy. I am all for funding more police - and for increasing traffic enforcement, I want that to be clear. I just think that it's a bit unrealistic, given the current headlines, that there's much appetite.
Democracy? Do the citizens of Minneapolis directly decide if more cops are hired or not? And how can you "assure" me that most people who live in the city want "revenue neutral" police? Not sure I've ever seen the results of that particular poll.

And I'm not sure I buy the idea that people don't want more cops hired for traffic enforcement because there have been some negative headlines lately.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby MNdible » November 18th, 2015, 4:53 pm

Pardon my French, but I don't give a flying pig's ass if more cops to keep us all safe are "revenue neutral" or not.
You're pardoned. If we, as a city, want to hire new cops and dedicate them to traffic enforcement, that's fine. Earlier, it was suggested that this would be a revenue neutral proposition (and hence, easier to achieve). I'm just suggesting this may not be the case.

User avatar
Sacrelicio
Union Depot
Posts: 364
Joined: November 11th, 2015, 6:38 pm
Location: Field

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby Sacrelicio » November 18th, 2015, 4:57 pm

Pardon my French, but I don't give a flying pig's ass if more cops to keep us all safe are "revenue neutral" or not.
You're pardoned. If we, as a city, want to hire new cops and dedicate them to traffic enforcement, that's fine. Earlier, it was suggested that this would be a revenue neutral proposition (and hence, easier to achieve). I'm just suggesting this may not be the case.
Fair enough, and I appreciate the clarification. I thought this was another one of those "public services should pay for themselves" arguments, like you often see with anti-transit.

trigonalmayhem

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby trigonalmayhem » November 19th, 2015, 10:01 am

I'm sure we can find a few cops who are sitting on their asses doing very little (I've seen them, they very much exist) or reassign some whose job currently seems to be harassing minorities. They should bring some of that roid-rage machismo to reminding impatient commuters that they're not special.

User avatar
Sacrelicio
Union Depot
Posts: 364
Joined: November 11th, 2015, 6:38 pm
Location: Field

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby Sacrelicio » November 27th, 2015, 5:58 pm

I don't know if there has been any discussion of vehicle noise on these forums. I live in an area that gets a lot of traffic from both loud motorcycles and cars with extremely loud subwoofers. I've complained to anyone who will listen but if anyone can point to discussion or possible action I would love it.

UrsusUrbanicus
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 127
Joined: February 13th, 2014, 2:08 pm

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby UrsusUrbanicus » November 28th, 2015, 6:01 pm

If we do add / re-prioritize officers toward traffic enforcement, we'll also have to ensure that they truly focus on people driving dangerously... rather than using their newfound ubiquity to selectively harass racial minorities over minor violations.

trigonalmayhem

Re: Traffic Enforcement

Postby trigonalmayhem » November 29th, 2015, 11:12 pm

Well they seem to already be doing that judging by that article about the one cop that wrote the most tickets. So maybe if they reassign him to areas frequented by suburban commuters during rush hour his skills will be put to better use.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests