www.FairfaxCountyPrivacyCouncil.org

========================================
FCPC ALERT #2007-6: Looking to Governor Kaine for sanity on red light cameras; AG McDonnell asks for help from activist judges
Originally Published on 6 March 2007
========================================

This message is intended for members of the Fairfax County Privacy Council, and anyone else who might be interested in advancing privacy in Virginia. Maximum dissemination of this message is encouraged!

Privacy Notice: All communication from the Fairfax Privacy Council is sent using blind carbon copy ("BCC") format for your security and privacy.

ALERT ITEM SUMMARY:
1. Time to ask Governor Kaine for sanity on red light cameras!
2.  Virginia’s privacy “WATCHDOG” impacting other states, VA General Assembly stalls reforms
3.  FCPC activist’s lawsuit moves forward for review by VA Supreme Court!
4.  AG seeks activist federal court action to overturn will of the General Assembly!
5.  Take Action to ensure Congress repeals the REAL ID Act
6.  Take Action to wake up the phone companies re complicity will illegal spying on Americans
7.  2007 FCPC bill tracker still chuggin’

***************************
1.  Time to ask Governor Kaine for sanity on red light cameras!
***************************
The National Motorists Association (NMA) has long warned about the creep of nanny state devices like Red Light Cameras (“RLCs”) as a threat to road safety, as evidenced by the fact that the 2005 VDOT study confirmed that that red light “cameras are contributing to a definite increase in rear-end crashes . . .[and these] findings are consistent with those in the majority of the literature surveyed. . . . [red light] cameras are correlated with an increase in total crashes, rear-end crashes, and total injury crashes  .”  See “FINAL REPORT:  AN EVALUATION OF RED LIGHT CAMERA (PHOTO-RED) ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS IN VIRGINIA: A REPORT IN RESPONSE TO A REQUEST BY VIRGINIA’S SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION,” JAN 05, at http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/05-vdot.pdf.

And recently we saw how deadly rear ending crashes encouraged by RLCs can be.

See “North Carolina: Rear End Collision Kills Three,” The Newspaper.com, 29 DEC 06 at http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/15/1523.asp (reporting that “[w]hen a car slams into a vehicle that has stopped for a red light, the consequences can be devastating as happened in a Fayetteville, North Carolina tragedy. A rear end collision in Fayetteville, North Carolina took the lives of three people last week. Army Sergeant Clayton Morgan, 25, faces involuntary manslaughter charges for slamming his Nissan Pathfinder into a Honda Accord that had stopped for a red light at Fillyaw and North Reilly Road.  Most proponents of the automated red light enforcement used in Fayetville downplay the significance of rear end collisions, calling them "fender benders." Studies have shown that the devices can cause rear enders when individuals stop unexpectedly in order to avoid a ticket. The December 18 incident shows just how devastating such accidents can be”).

And the ACLU of VA’s Executive Director Kent Willis warns at http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1149193448649, “[t]]here are also broader concerns raised by civil-liberties experts. "Our first concern is the general erosion of privacy rights in a society that's becoming increasingly camera-friendly," said Kent Willis, director of the Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. "Between cameras in retail stores and banks, and on sidewalks and in public parks, and now at stoplights, we move closer to a Big Brother society, where the eye of the government is on us all the time."  Willis also said the red-light systems present problems of due process because the owner of the car caught running a red light is issued the ticket, even if another person is behind the wheel.

And as Senator Mark Obenshain (R - Harrisonburg) at http://www.dnronline.com/news_details.php?AID=8931&CHID=2 reminds us, “[n]ot only do injury-related accidents increase once cameras are installed, Obenshain said, but local governments sometimes use the cameras as a way to issue more tickets to raise more money.”

And most localities never asked for RLCs to be jammed down the throats of their motorists!

“The General Assembly passed a bill allowing localities to install cameras on red traffic lights, but do not expect them here [Winchester] any time soon. Charles T. Gaynor, president of the Winchester City Council, said the city discussed the issue a few years ago but decided against it.  Area officials don’t anticipate adding red-light cameras at busy traffic signals  . . .[because] “I know there will be a discussion about this, but there are other ways to deal with it,” he said. Frederick County has not discussed the issue, said Richard C. Shickle Sr., chairman of the county’s Board of Supervisors.  “It has never come up and we didn’t ask the Legislature to do this,” he said. Frederick County does not know how much it would cost to install the cameras and there is no funding in the upcoming budget to do so, he said. To his knowledge, Shickle said, the cameras would not be in the county anytime soon and the other supervisors have not addressed the subject before. Clarke County also is not planning to install the cameras, said John Staelin, chairman of the county’s Board of Supervisors. “We have bigger issues to deal with, like building a new high school,” he said. Staelin said the county only has five stoplights and he would like to see how much the camera systems would cost before even discussing whether Clarke County needs them. The county has a bigger problem with motorists speeding in the county than running red lights, he said. “The [Clarke County] Sheriff’s Office has not indicated to me that there is a need [for the cameras],” Staelin said. He said there have not been many complaints or accidents that would warrant the county putting in the cameras. “Unless someone tells me that this is a burning issue, it is not going to happen this year,” Staelin said. The bill passed the House 63-35 and the Senate 30-10. As of Sunday, it still awaited the governor’s signature before becoming law." See “Red-light cameras not a local priority,” The Winchester Star, 5 March 2007, By Mark R. Dorolek at http://www.winchesterstar.com/TheWinchesterStar/070305/Area_light.asp.

But despite all this, the General Assembly has inexplicably voted to authorize RLCs throughout VA, without any sunset provision or requirement for further VDOT study.

So, it’s time to contact Governor Kaine and ask him to provide some sanity and veto the RLC legislation.

TAKE ACTION:  Copy and paste the message below (feel free to customize) into this web page:

http://www.governor.virginia.gov/AboutTheGovernor/contactGovernor.cfm

Sample Message:
--------------------------
Subject:  Please veto the Red Light Camera legislation!

Dear Governor Kaine:

Please veto the Red Light Camera legislation.

It’s not just the fact that red light cameras shortchange due process and privacy rights.  Red light cameras are dangerous.

In 2005 the Virginia Department of Transportation concluded a thorough study of a ten year Red Light Camera (“RLC”) experiment in Virginia and concluded that red light “cameras are contributing to a definite increase in rear-end crashes . . .[and these] findings are consistent with those in the majority of the literature surveyed. . . . [red light] cameras are correlated with an increase in total crashes, rear-end crashes, and total injury crashes.”  See “FINAL REPORT:  AN EVALUATION OF RED LIGHT CAMERA (PHOTO-RED) ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS IN VIRGINIA: A REPORT IN RESPONSE TO A REQUEST BY VIRGINIA’S SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION,” JAN 05, at http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/05-vdot.pdf.

And recently we saw how deadly rear ending crashes encouraged by RLCs can be.

See “North Carolina: Rear End Collision Kills Three,” The Newspaper.com, 29 DEC 06 at http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/15/1523.asp (reporting that “[w]hen a car slams into a vehicle that has stopped for a red light, the consequences can be devastating as happened in a Fayetteville, North Carolina tragedy. A rear end collision in Fayetteville, North Carolina took the lives of three people last week. ArmySergeant Clayton Morgan, 25, faces involuntary manslaughter charges for slamming his Nissan Pathfinder into a Honda Accord that had stopped for a red light at Fillyaw and North Reilly Road.  Most proponents of the automated red light enforcement used in Fayetville downplay the significance of rear end collisions, calling them "fender benders." Studies have shown that the devices can cause rear enders when individuals stop unexpectedly in order to avoid a ticket. The December 18 incident shows just how devastating such accidents can be”).

So we know that red light cameras cause a net increase in accidents, especially those deadly rear ending accidents that might hurt or kill me and my family.

The red light camera legislation headed your way therefore makes no sense, and does not even require further VDOT study or include a sunset provision.

Please let me know what you are going to do.

***************************
2.  Virginia’s privacy “WATCHDOG” impacting other states; meanwhile, VA General Assembly stalls reforms
***************************
“It should come as little surprise that Social Security numbers are posted on the Internet. But, says Betty Ostergren, a former insurance
claims supervisor in suburban Richmond, Va., who has spent years trolling for them, “people are always astounded” to learn that theirs is
one of them. Her Web site may be cluttered with so many typefaces that it resembles a ransom note, but she seems to be having an impact. In the last month she found a pressure point: farmers. Mrs. Ostergren, 57, has made a name for herself as a gadfly as she took on a lonely and
sometimes frustrating mission to draw attention to the situation. With addresses, dates of birth and maiden names often associated with Social
Security numbers, she said, they are a gift to data thieves. But in the last few weeks, Mrs. Ostergren’s Web site, The Virginia Watchdog — with
the help of America’s farm bureaus — is having an effect. One by one, states and counties have started removing images of documents that
contain Social Security numbers, or they are blocking out the numbers. Four states, including New York, have removed links to images of public
documents containing Social Security numbers.”  See  “Think Your Social Security Number Is Secure? Think Again,” The New York Times,
by Damon Darling, February 24, 2007, at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/24/business/24money.html?_r=1&oref=slogin.

Learn more about THE VIRGINIA WATCHDOG at www.thevirginiawatchdog.com.

NOTE:  This session, the VA General Assembly killed all 6 bills which would have provided for an SSN exemption in the VA Freedom of Information Act.  Want the SSNs of your neighbors?  Just FOIA VA state or local government agencies for their records!

And strange but true, the VA General Assembly voted to FORCE all Clerks of Court to put SSN laden records (like divorce records and the deeds to your house) online by 2008 even though the deadline for SSN redaction in online records is 2010.  See HB 824 patroned by Delegate Jeannemarie Devolites Davis (R- Vienna) at http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?071+ful+SB824S1.

***************************
3.  FCPC activist’s lawsuit moves forward for review by VA Supreme Court!
***************************
Fairfax County Privacy Council member John Fenter, from VA Beach, is not quitting - see http://www.courts.state.va.us/scv/appeals/062563.html.

At issue is Norfolk Airport’s claim that airport employees can search vehicles without warrant or probable cause, and, the Airport Authority is not subject to the VA Freedom of Information Act in regard to this claim.

Related previous article:   “Judge: Airport's refusal to explain signs OK,” The Virginia Pilot, by Debbie Messina, 24 August 2006, at
http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=109754&ran=159231.

Formal FOIA Council Counsel's Opinion holding against the Norfolk Airport:   http://dls.state.va.us/groups/foiacouncil/ops/06/AO_05_06.htm.

***************************
4.  AG McDonnell seeks activist federal court action to overturn will of the General Assembly!
***************************
A few months ago, VA AG Bob McDonnell (R) went to GMU and spoke at “an event coordinated by the College Republicans and Students 4 Marriage . . . [and] McDonnell explained that he believes in the proposed Marshall/Newman amendment because “activist judges” could decide on laws that Virginians do not agree with.”  See “VA Attorney General Speaks At Mason: McDonnell Addresses Students on Marriage Amendment, The Broadside, by Eric Moreno, at http://www.broadsideonline.com/article.php?date=11-06-2006&section=news&article=attorneygeneral.txt.

Since then, McDonnell, frustrated by the General Assembly’s 3d rejection since 2002 of “citizen round up bills” designed to give police unchecked power to custodially arrest persons they accuse of committing one of VA’s thousands of often vague and bizarre misdemeanors, has now turned to activist judges outside Virginia to overturn the General Assembly and the Unanimous Virginia Supreme Court.  The case the AG is appealing is Moore v. Commonwealth (2006).

NOTE:  Since 1974, VA law has required police to issue a summons to accused misdemeanants unless one of 5 common sense exceptions applies (e.g., subject appears intoxicated, won’t sign the ticket, won’t stop the allegedly unlawful conduct, etc.).  When police blatantly disregard this law, the Virginia courts, like all other state courts with similar statutes, naturally refuse to allow evidence obtained in the unconstitutional searches that occur when you are unlawfully arrested. That’s what happened in Moore.

And then Delegate Jackson Miller’s (R – Manassas) HB 2943 crashed and burned in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee, thanks to FCPC and other groups’ emails and phone calls, and especially thanks to Senator Stolle’s (R – Virginia Beach) refusal to accept the bill’s supporters’ tall tales that the VA Supreme Court ruled incorrectly in Moore.

Deadpanned Stolle to the police-state enthusiasts lining up to speak to the bill: “Don’t tell me about practice – tell me what the law is . . . I learned the law that way at the police Academy & I taught the law that way as a Police Academy Instructor . . . [and I followed the law] when I arrested criminals as a police officer.”

But now AG McDonnell seeks help from activist judges to in essence re-decide a proposed bill that the elected General Assembly did not agree with.

Looks like much has changed for McDonnell since that day at GMU.

Read more about Moore in:

“Portsmouth drug case may alter police work statewide, The Virginia Pilot, by Tim McGlone, 9 November 2006 at http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/print.cfm?story=114090&ran=186672

“Va. Supreme Court Overturns Ruling: Police Search Illegal,” The Richmond Style Weekly, by Amy Biegelsenat, 22 November 2006 at http://www.styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=13407.

“Police Arrest Powers Under Fire,” The Richmond Style Weekly, by Amy Biegelsen, 7 February 2007,

“Attorney General Inviting Police Abuse of Power,” The Richmond Style Weekly, 14 February 2007 at http://www.styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=13836.

NOTE:  FCPC has read the VA AG's brief to the US Supreme Court re Moore - the brief's theme is that there is a clear "split of authority" with the VA Supreme Court's lonely view joined only by the "Ninth Circus." We checked the AG's cited cases, and checked some more cases not cited . . . as best we can tell, all the high courts of states with arrest laws like VA side with the view of the VA Supreme Court since 1999, as re-affirmed in Moore.

But stand by for more - we'll see what those activist judges in Washington DC say next.

***************************
5.  Take Action to ensure Congress repeals the REAL ID Act !
***************************
FTY: http://www.realnightmare.org.

Take Action:  http://action.downsizedc.org/wyc.php?cid=30.

***************************
6.  Take Action to wake up the phone companies re complicity with illegal spying on Americans
***************************
Take Action: http://action.aclu.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ATT_Verizon_initial_page&JServSessionIdr001=nrwi3haxf2.app20a

***************************
7.  2007 FCPC bill tracker still chuggin’
***************************
See http://www.netxprtva.info/FCPC/GA2007.html and pass it to your friends & recruit more FCPC alert list members!

NOTE: SB 1039, a bill to prohibit “provisional drivers” (i.e., VA licensed drivers under 18) from using cell phones while driving, and patroned by Senator Jay O’Brien (R- Fairfax County), was deleted from the FCPC tracker’s OPPOSE list because the bill was amended by the House of Delegates to conform the proposed restriction to be a “secondary offense” as are all the other VA provisional driver restrictions.  A secondary offense is a traffic infraction for which police may not lawfully conduct a traffic stop even pursuant to reasonable suspicion that the secondary offense is being committed in their presence.  FCPC is neutral on VA’s “provisional drivers” restrictions as long as the restrictions remain secondary offenses which largely preclude privacy invasive police stops on suspicion of looking young (a well known national obsession).

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Questions, or to be added/deleted from future Alerts?  Contact Mike Stollenwerk atFCPCChairman@cox.net