Loading...
Minutes 02-22-18 MINUTES OF THE RED LIGHT CAMERA HEARINGS HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BLVD. BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2018, AT 9 A.M. James Stokes, Special Magistrate Anthony Petriello, Traffic Infraction Enforcement Officer Anthony Verrigni, Traffic Infraction Enforcement Officer 1. Call to order by Local Hearing Officer, James D. Stokes Mr. Stokes called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. and explained he is a Special Magistrate appointed by the City Commission under a Statute to hear these cases. He is a neutral, third party and he serves as an arbitrator, mediator and magistrate all over the State. He is not an employee. He is paid an hourly rate and has no relationship with the City. Mr. Stokes announced he knows nothing about the cases and will review everything at the hearing. He explained he is a Magistrate and his authority is limited. He makes a determination based on the evidence whether the vehicle was before or over the limit line while the light was red. He cannot rule if the program is legal. If someone wants to challenge the constitutionality of the program, they can make their cases on the record at this hearing and appeal. He noted there is a Supreme Court case pending and advised the constitutionality of the program has been challenged by other cities; however, Boynton Beach has always operated the Red Light Camera program differently than others. The City of Boynton Beach temporarily suspended the program some time ago, while other cities challenged the program, but Boynton resumed the program. The company that has the software for the Red Light Camera program, ATS, was present when it resumed and was under cross-examination about how the program operates, of which Mr. Stokes took judicial notice. To his satisfaction based on the law, the program is still legal. Per Statute, violators will have 30 days to pay if found guilty. Payment could also be made at the cashier. If not paid within 30 days, per Statute, a hold will be placed on the vehicle's registration. The owner's license will not be suspended. The infraction is a civil violation against the vehicle because the vehicle was charged with running the red light. If found guilty, insurance rates will not be impacted; no warrants will be issued, nor will the driver's license be suspended because the owner is not on trial: the vehicle is. He offered some people change their plea when they learn this. One defense often used is it is the owner's car, but the owner was not driving, and they did not know who was. Mr. Simon clarified the law says the owner is responsible for the vehicle. If they know who was driving and have sufficient information to redirect the notice to the actual driver, they will. If the driver is not known, Mr. Stokes sets aside the driver issue and decides if the car ran the red light. If so, the owner is responsible. Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 He advised there is misconception drivers can make U-turns on a red light, but it is not legal to do so in Florida, even if not entering the intersection. Mr. Stokes explained the Statute sets the fine amount for the Initial notice at $158. If an administrative review takes place, it adds $50 to the initial fine bringing the total to $208 which is what all who are in attendance would pay. Once the hearing starts, a court cost of up to $250 can be imposed. The court costs are meant to compensate the City for the cost of the hearings, which averages to about $35 per case, which Mr. Stokes follows. If the violation is upheld, the total fine is $243. The further into the process, the higher the cost. Mr. Stokes requested anyone wanting to change their plea come to the front of the Chamber. Mr. Stokes added one can also appeal within 30 days and if so, they should obtain the transcript of the hearing, take it to the courthouse and file an appeal. There is a filing fee to appeal and it is a hard 30-day jurisdictional time limit. An order for all cases will be mailed, unless specifically requested and they will print an order at the hearing. Mr. Stokes noted there is one amendment to the agenda adding Case N.14., George McDermott. Officer Petriello explained the violator has two cases and he requested adding the second case to the docket as 1.27. Mr. Stokes amended the docket. Mr. McDermott was present and requested both cases be heard on March 8th. Mr. Stokes tabled both cases to the March 8th hearing. Mr. Stokes explained the Officers control the video and still photographs, which are on Mr. Stokes' computer and the big screen which all will see for the first time. He recessed the hearing at 9:17 a.m., to allow attendees to see their video before deciding to move forward. Mr. Stokes reconvened the meeting at 9:46 a.m. The Clerk administered an oath to all those intending to testify. Mr. Stokes explained the evidence pack contained everything related to the case: the notice of violation and the identification they used resulting in how they got the violator's name off the license plate registration record, and the calibration of the light. All lights with Red Light Cameras are calibrated every night, which is also included. Transdev North America Inc. Notice No. 1851700047173 Indolecio Lopez, an employee of Transdev North America, Inc., was present. Anthony Petriello, Traffic Infraction Enforcement Officer, advised the defendant requested to reset the case, which he had no objection too. Mr. Lopez advised he went through the red light to respond to the accident on Atlantic Boulevard. He works for the 2 Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 railroad and has a federal document that gives him a waiver to go through red lights when responding to accident scenes. Decision Mr. Stokes tabled the case to March 8th It was noted the company will get a new hearing notice and Mr. Lopez should take note he should be present for the March 8th hearing. Richard Baron Notice No. 1851700072353 Officer Petriello commented on November 13, 2017, 5:52 p.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling southbound on NW 8th Street at W Boynton Beach Boulevard in the number two lane. After a review of the electronic evidence and photographs, Officer Petriello issued a notice of violation on December 7, 2017. He submitted an evidence pack with a CD containing all videos and still images and a digital copy of all evidence for all cases on the docket. Messrs. Stokes and Baron viewed the electronic evidence. Officer Petriello noted a vehicle was travelling behind him, but they were not going that fast and the vehicle behind him stopped. Mr. Baron had no intention to run the light and he pointed out two or three other cars went across at the same time. He thought it was unsafe and the car is 34 years old. Sometimes drivers have to make a quick decision if they are going fast enough to stop or to proceed through. He noted there were other cars in front, next to and behind him that all travelled through at the same time. He did not intentionally run the red light. Mr. Stokes reviewed the video and commented a block of cars travelled through the light and the car next to him went through. The car behind him was on a wet road, but a yellow light is to signal the driver to prepare to stop. The red lights look quick, but it was a full four-second yellow light and that was the opportunity to stop, especially on a rainy conditions. The vehicle behind him was not that close. He appreciated the testimony and knew it was not intentional; however, he was behind the line when the light turned red. Decision Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine, giving 30 days to pay. The fine was $243 and an order will be sent in the mail. Mr. Baron requested the order be printed so he could pay on his way out. 3 Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 Michael Adam Lerman Notice No. 1851700096477 Officer Petriello mentioned on December 7, 2017, at 6:32 a.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling northbound on S. Federal Highway at SE 23rd Avenue in the number three lane. After a review of the electronic evidence and photographs, Officer Petriello determined the vehicle ran a red light and issued a notice of violation on January 2, 2018. He submitted the evidence pack to Mr. Stokes and had a video and still images to play. Messrs. Stokes and Lerman viewed the electronic evidence. Michael Lerman admitted he went through the light and as he was driving, he saw flashing lights behind him. He did not have time to properly stop at the light and he continued through as he thought it was the safest approach. Mr. Stokes reviewed the evidence again all the way through to the end. Mr. Stokes noticed he did not seem to be reacting to an emergency vehicle and he did not see Mr. Lerman pull over to the right. He saw another driver pull out from the side and thought if an emergency vehicle was approaching, they would not pull out. Mr. Lerman explained he was travelling in the right lane. He used his brakes and proceeded cautiously, doing what he thought was best for the situation. Mr. Stokes did not see anyone else pulling to the right, nor did he see another vehicle behind him. It did not appear to be close enough to cause a reaction. Decision Based on the testimony and evidence Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of$243. Mr. Lerman contested. Mr. Stokes understood Mr. Lerman saw an emergency vehicle behind him, but clarified there was another vehicle in the left lane that did not react and a car that pulled out from a side street. If there was an emergency vehicle, the vehicle would not have pulled out. Mr. Stokes pointed out Mr. Lerman's vehicle went through the intersection and continued to drive, but by law, the vehicle is to pull over to the right and did not. Had Mr. Stokes viewed Mr. Lerman pull to the right, he would have been impressed, but while an emergency vehicle may have been behind him, it was not close enough to necessitate it being a full second late on a red light. Mr. Lerman contended he was in the right lane. Mr. Stokes explained the law does not mandate moving into the right lane. It requires the driver to pull over to the right side curb and stop. Mr. Lerman explained he had to stop in time, and he had his brake lights on stopping. Mr. Stokes understood Mr. Lerman's position and commented he had the right to appeal, but based on what he sees, Mr. Lerman ran a red light and he did not see any emergency vehicle or any action that would indicate there was an emergency vehicle close enough to justify going through a red light. Mr. Lerman asked if there was a foot distance stated when they are supposed to stop when they see or do not see an 4 Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 emergency vehicle. Mr. Stokes explained if a vehicle is approaching, the driver pulls to the right and stops. What Mr. Lerman was indicating it was so close it necessitated running a red light, but it was not so close that he did not have to pull to the right and stop. If Mr. Lerman had cleared the intersection and stopped, Mr. Stokes would have been satisfied. But seeing the other two vehicles did not react at all, there was nothing in the Statute that says a driver is justified to run a red light when emergency vehicles are approaching. Drivers have to get out of the way pulling to the right and stopping, but that is not what Mr. Stokes viewed in the video and that was why he was upholding the violation. If Mr. Lerman wants to appeal, he should file with the South County Courthouse within 30-days. Arthur Stuart Middleton Notice No. 1851700063204 Officer Petriello commented on November 3, 2017, at 12:14 a.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling southbound on NW 8th Street at W Boynton Beach Boulevard in the number two lane. After a review of the electronic evidence, Officer Petriello determined the drive ran the steady red light and issued a notice of violation on November 29, 2017. He submitted an evidence pack to Mr. Stokes with videos and still images. Messrs. Stokes and Middleton viewed the electronic evidence. Mr. Middleton explained he read an article, a month ago, in the Palm Beach Post that said there was about a 9,000 increase in red light violations in one month and the City Commission said the cameras were not working properly and how the violations issued were not proper. He suggested there was a mistake and asked how the general public knows this and that the synchronization was correct. The article advised the Commissioners admitted there was a mistake in the cameras. Mr. Stokes was unfamiliar with the article or any statements made and if the synchronization were off, it would capture images, but he relies on his eyes alone. He sees Mr. Middleton's car, the light, which is what he bases his decision on. When Mr. Stokes viewed the video, he saw the car and Mr. Middleton entering the intersection based on what the light is. The package shows the calibration of every light, which are tested at least once, if not twice per day. Beyond that, the video is all he can rely on. He had visual evidence, whereas with an article, it is conjecture. Mr. Middleton explained the article indicates the Commissioners admitted there was a violation, and he again submitted to Mr. Stokes there was a mistake. The Commissioners indicated there were too many violations issued and there is a problem with the red lights. Mr. Stokes explained the City Commission put the Red Light Camera program on hold mid-last year and was off for six months and they resumed the program. He did not know when the statements were made or the context of the statements nor did he know if it was a view point of one Commissioner. Mr. Stokes further did not know what they relied on or what they used for evidence. Mr. Stokes explained he cannot consider it as evidence. If a Commissioner was present to testify he could listen, otherwise he assumes the 5 Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 cameras are working. He advised the Commissioner has a political end, but Mr. Stokes can only consider the evidence in front of him and not the newspaper. Mr. Stokes thought if there was a problem with the cameras, Mr. Middleton could explore more and contact the traffic division or if there is an official report he could obtain. He cannot treat a newspaper article or a statement as evidence. It is triple hearsay. Mr. Stokes did not doubt the article exists and did not know what investigative means were used for the article, who they interviewed, in what context and if a Commissioner made the statement, what they relied on for evidence of a problem. Mr. Stokes commented he does not follow the papers closely but did not think it was a unanimous consideration of the Boynton Beach City Commission that the red light cameras are a good program. There have been 3-2 votes on the program and they are not in love with it. He did not doubt a Commissioner might have said something about the program, but the majority of the City Commission has the program running and he has to presume that all is running properly. Mr. Middleton asked if Mr. Stokes was aware there was a problem at one time because the Commissioner indicated there was a problem at one time with the violations being issued and the cameras made a mistake. Mr. Stokes was unaware of a problem in Boynton Beach, but was aware there were problems with other cities. Officer Petriello explained he was present at the meeting referenced by Mr. Middleton and a Commissioner commented there were too many violations occurring. It was explained that the violations were occurring by drivers with the mindset there are no cameras. Now that the cameras were operational, the drivers did not know how to proceed. Officer Petriello advised there was a malfunction of a light at Gateway and Seacrest, but there is no red light camera there. One person complained they had a problem with the light trying to make a left turn from Seacrest onto Gateway to access I- 95. That intersection signal was malfunctioning, but it was not a Red Light Camera intersection. Since too many violations were occurring, a Commissioner was trying to educate residents and drivers about the red light traffic laws. Mr. Middleton asked about the process if he finds the article or if he should pay the fine or schedule another hearing. Mr. Stokes advised he could table the case to March 8 and he would make a finding, or he could make a finding and Mr. Middleton could appeal it to the County Court with a copy of the transcript. Mr. Middleton opted to investigate the matter further. Decision Mr. Stokes tabled the case to the March 8th hearing. Oksana Baiditcheva Notice No. 1851700064418 Officer Petriello conveyed on November 4, 2017, at 12:13 p.m., a vehicle registered to the Ean Holdings LLC was travelling eastbound on W Boynton Beach Boulevard at N Seacrest Boulevard in the number three lane. After a review of the electronic evidence 6 Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 and photographs, Officer Petriello issued a Notice of Violation on November 29, 2017, On December 1, 2017, an affidavit from EAN Holdings naming the defendant as the driver and renter. The affidavit was processed and a notice of violation was reprocessed and sent to the defendant in January 2018. He submitted an evidence pack to Mr. Stokes and had a video and still images to play. Mr. Stokes and Ms. Baiditcheva viewed the video and still images. Ms. Baiditcheva explained on October 3, 2017, she was in a bad car accident. Her car was totaled and she was in the hospital with injuries. Her friend came to help her out, they rented the car in her name and she went to many doctors. Her intention with attending the hearing was to see if she was driving or her friend was driving. She listened to Mr. Stokes explain the procedure if the owner did not know who was driving and understand it was her car. She noted regardless of who was driving, the light was still yellow and with the speed they were driving, they could not stop. She hoped the picture would be taken from the front. Mr. Stokes explained some states photograph the front and back of the vehicle, but those states also make the infraction a moving violation, which impacts insurance and imposes points on the driver's driving record. The Florida Legislature opted to take a picture of the back of the vehicle so the infraction would not be a moving violation. Mr. Stokes explained she was a full car length back and this light had a four-second yellow light. She said there was no way to stop. Mr. Stokes disagreed and advised there was a yellow light for four seconds, no one behind her and she was doing the speed limit, which was 35 mph. She could have stopped. Decision Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and gave 30 days to pay. The fine was $243. The following individuals changed their plea to guilty: Judah Lamar Barnes Notice No. 1851700053809 Anthony Diesu Notice No. 1851800012275 Joseph Giangreco Notice No. 1851800005220 Ernest Jerry Notice No. 1851700086726 Gern Michelman Notice No. 1851700086957 Lauren Eunice Porter Notice No. 1851700062768 Michele A. Ranucci Notice No. 1851700060150 Mildred Nejeily Sammour Notice No. 1851800003233 Cynthia Schneider Notice No. 1851700054757 Betty Servius Notice No. 1851700074086 Harold F. Stewart Notice No. 1851700008398 The following individuals requested their case be tabled to March 8, 2017: 7 Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 Arthur Stuart Middleton Notice No. 1851700063204 George Gordon McDermott Notice No. 1851700089050 Indglecio Lopez Notice No. 1851700047173 The following violators were not present but had requested a hearing: Steven Bialakis Notice No. 1851700082733 Officer Petriello explained on November 24, 2017, at 8:43 a.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling westbound on W Woolbright Road at S Congress Avenue in the number one lane. After a review of the electronic evidence and photographs, Officer Petriello issued a notice of violation on December 18, 2017. He submitted the evidence pack to Mr. Stokes who viewed the video and still images. Decision Based on the testimony and evidence, Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of$258. Ekundaya Azikwe Brennen Notice No. 1851800001690 Officer Petriello conveyed on December 8, 2017, at 10:54 a.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling eastbound on W Boynton Beach Boulevard at N Seacrest Boulevard in the number two lane. After a review of the electronic evidence and photographs, Officer Petriello issued a Notice of Violation on January 3, 2018. He submitted the evidence pack to Mr. Stokes who viewed the video and still images. Decision Based on the evidence, Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of $258. Brandon Jon Douglas Notice No.1851700064707 Officer Verrigini, Traffic Infraction Enforcement Officer indicated on November 4, 2017, at 4:24 p.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling southbound on Congress Avenue at W. Woolbright Road in the number three straight lane. After a review of the electronic evidence, Officer Verrigini issued a Notice of Violation on November 29, 2017. He noted there was a 1.1 second red light time He submitted the evidence pack to Mr.. Stokes who viewed the video and still images. Decision Based on the evidence, Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of$258 8 Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 Jill Elizabeth Ellis Notice No. 1851800011988 Officer Verrigini recounted on December 18, 2017, at 4:19 p.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling eastbound on Woolbright at S. Congress Avenue in the number one lane. After a review of the electronic evidence and photographs, Officer Petriello issued a Notice of Violation on January 11, 2018. The light was red 4.6 seconds. The evidence pack was submitted to the court, which Mr. Stokes viewed. Decision Based on the evidence, Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of$258. Altaneisha Preshae Gatlin Notice No. 1851700062602 Officer Verrigini stated on November 2, 2017, at 6:16 p.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling eastbound on Boynton Beach Boulevard at Seacrest Boulevard in the number one left turn lane. After a review of the electronic evidence, Officer Verrigini issued a Notice of Violation on November 29 2017. The red light time was 1.6 seconds. The evidence pack was submitted to the court, which Mr. Stokes viewed. Decision Based on the evidence, Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of $258 Willie Lee Jones Notice No. 1851700095594 Officer Verrigini summarized on December 6, 2017, 11:41 a.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling northbound on Federal Highway at SE 23rd Avenue in the number two straight lane. After a review of the electronic evidence and photographs, Officer Verrigini issued a Notice of Violation on December 29, 2017. Officer Verrigini submitted the evidence pack to the court. Mr. Stokes viewed the video and still images. Decision Based on the evidence, Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of$258. Margaret N. McFadden Notice No. 1851700080802 Officer Verrigini advised November 22, 2017, at 9:29 a.m. a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling southbound on NW 8t" Street at W Boynton Beach Boulevard in the number two left turn lane. After a review of the electronic evidence, Officer Verrigini issued a Notice of Violation December 15, 2017. The red light time was 1.3 seconds. The evidence pack was submitted to the court, which Mr. Stokes viewed. 9 Hearing Minutes Red Light Camera Hearings Boynton Beach, Florida February 22, 2018 Decision Based on the evidence, Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of$253. Kimberly Ann Nord Notice No. 1851700047033 Officer Verrigini on October 16, 2017, at 6:53 a.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling eastbound on Woolbright Road at SW 8t" Street in the number two lane. After a review of the electronic evidence and photographs, Officer Verrigini issued a Notice of Violation on November 15, 2017. He submitted an evidence pack to Mr. Stokes who viewed the video and still images. Decision Based on the evidence Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of $258. James Michael Perry Notice No. 1851800021623 Officer Petriello advised on December 26, 2017, at 11:14 a.m., a vehicle registered to the violator was travelling eastbound on W Boynton Beach Boulevard at N. Congress Avenue in the number three lane. After a review of the electronic evidence, Officer Petriello issued a Notice of Violation on January 19, 2018. An evidence pack was submitted to the court, which Mr. Stokes viewed. Decision Based on the evidence, Mr. Stokes upheld the violation and assessed a fine of$258. 6. Other business 7. City requests and reports 8. Local hearing officer requests and reports 9. Adjournment There being no further business to discuss, Mr. Stokes adjourned the hearings at 10:40 a.m. Catherine Cherry Minutes Specialist 10