Page 96
Page 97
THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARSHALL AND REDFLEX TRAFFIC SYSTEMS, INC. FOR PHOTO RED LIGHT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM This Third Amendment (“Third Amendment”) to the Agreement between the City of Marshall and Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. for Photo Red Light Enforcement Program is made by and between Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. (“Redflex”) and the City of Marshall, Texas (“the Customer”) (individually the “Party” and collectively referred to as the “Parties”). The effective date of this Third Amendment is September 1, 2017 (the “Effective Date”). RECITALS A. The Parties executed the Agreement between the City of Marshall and Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. for Photo Red Light Enforcement Program on January 11, 2007 (the “Original Agreement”); B. The Original Agreement was renewed on August 26 2010 (the “First Amendment”) and the Initial Term outlined in Paragraph 2 of the Original Agreement was extended on October 5, 2011 in mutually executed Amendment (collectively the “Agreement”). NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual covenants contained herein, and for other valuable consideration received, the Parties amend the Agreement as follows: TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Extended Term. As of the Effective Date, the Term of the Agreement, specifically outlined in October 5, 2011 Amendment, shall be extended through September 1, 2024 commencing on the Effective Date of this Third Amendment (“Extended Term”). Thereafter, the Agreement shall automatically renew for up to three (3) additional and consecutive one (1) year terms (each a “Renewal Term”). The Customer may exercise the right to refuse and reject any Renewal Term by providing written notice to Redflex not less than thirty (30) days prior to the last day of the current Extended Term or Renewal Term, as the case may be 2. Upgrades. Redflex shall, at its sole expense, upgrade the current detection equipment utilized in the Redflex Systems to other preferred detection devises, as mutually agreed to by both Parties in writing, in accordance with a schedule mutually agreed to by Redflex and the Project Manager, for the following Designated Intersection Approaches: • • •
MAS-59KA-01 MAS-59PI-01 MAS-59KA-02
US 59 and Karnack Hwy (NB) US 59 and Travis St (SB) US 59 and Karnack Hwy (SB)
3. Exhibit “D” entitled “Compensation & Pricing” is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following language: Commencing on the expiration of the Warning Period for each Designated Intersection Approach, Customer shall be obligated to pay Redflex a fixed fee of $4,870.00 per month
Page 98
for each Designated Intersection Approach ("Fixed Fee") as full remuneration for performing all of the services contemplated in this Agreement. 4. Road Repairs and Construction Projects. The Term shall be temporarily suspended as a result of any City or Texas Department of Transportation approved road repairs, street improvements or stop work order that interrupt, impede, obstruct or interfere with the successful performance of Redflex System at any Designated Intersection Approach for a period of fourteen (14) or more calendar days. The length of the Term suspension shall be equal to the time of the interruption in performance. If the Redflex System at the impacted Designated Intersection Approach can be relocated to a mutually agreeable alternative location, Redflex shall be responsible for the related costs. Once the road repair or construction project has been completed, Redflex shall, at Redflex’s sole expense, re-survey the prior Designated Intersection Approach to determine if a new Redflex System should be reinstalled at that location. 5. Termination for Convenience. 5.1.The City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement without cause after September 1, 2020 with ninety (90) days written notice. If the City exercises its right to terminate this Agreement in accordance with this paragraph, the City shall be obligated to pay Redflex for all services satisfactorily performed in accordance with this Agreement, through and including the initial of termination date, but not to exceed the payment according to the rates specified in Exhibit D and shall pay Redflex the amount of Equitable Cost Recovery, if any, to which Redflex is entitled as set forth below. 5.2.Redflex reserves the right to terminate this Agreement without cause with ninety (90) days written notice to the City. In the event Redflex terminates this Agreement under this subsection, Redflex shall not be entitled to Equitable Cost Recovery. 5.3.Equitable Cost Recovery: In the event the City exercises its right to terminate the Agreement for convenience under Section 5.1 of this Third Amendment, Redflex shall be entitled to a cancellation fee for each new or relocated Designated Intersection Approach installed after the Effective Date which reflects reimbursement of the direct labor costs and direct material costs (not including Equipment costs and salvageable material costs) associated with the installation of the Redflex’s System at Designated Intersection Approaches where such system(s) have been installed prior to the effective date of Termination (the "Reimbursable Costs”). Redflex shall provide an itemization of the Reimbursable Costs, with supporting invoices and labor expense documentation, to the City within thirty (30) days of the completion of installation of the Redflex System at each new or relocated Designated Intersection Approach. Said Reimbursable Costs are currently estimated to equal approximately $20,000 to $40,000 per Designated Intersection Approach but, in no event, shall said amount exceed $40,000 per Designated Intersection Approach. The Reimbursable Costs will be amortized over a period of seven (7) years, to commence on the “Go Live” date for each Designated Intersection Approach, in accordance with the Amortization Schedule attached as Exhibit A to this Third Amendment. Any amount owed to Redflex as Reimbursable Costs shall be deducted from all net revenues generated by the Program for twelve (12) months after the termination date (“Recoupment
Page 99
Period”). The City will not be charged for any Reimbursable Costs after the Recoupment Period. 6. Ownership of Non-Violator Data. The Parties agree that Redflex shall have exclusive ownership of all Non-Violator Data generated as a result of the Program. “Non-Violator Data” shall include incident data, infraction rates, average speeds and other categories of data as mutually agreed by Redflex and the City. Non-Violator Data shall not include any data identifying the registered owner or the violator, or relating in any way to the registered owner’s identity or the violator’s identity. During the term of this Agreement, the City shall have a non-exclusive royalty free license to use the Non-Violator Data. This license shall terminate upon termination or expiration of this Agreement. 7. Enforceability of Non-Amended Terms and Conditions. Except as expressly amended in this Third Amendment, the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. To the extent that this Third Amendment conflicts with the terms of the Agreement, this Third Amendment shall control.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Third Amendment as set forth below.
Approved as to form, content and legality: CITY OF MARSHALL, TEXAS
REDFLEX TRAFFIC SYSTEMS, INC.
By: Name: Title: Date:
By: Name: Michael Finn Title: CEO and President Date:
Page 100
EXHIBIT “A” Intersection Approach 7 Year Amortization Schedule "Go-Live" Number of Date Months Used xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
Months Remaining 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 58 49 48 47 46 45 44 46 42
Sum of Cap of $40K Depreciation $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
40,000.00 39,523.81 39,047.62 38,571.43 38,095.24 37,619.05 37,142.86 36,666.67 36,190.48 35,714.29 35,238.10 34,761.90 34,285.71 33,809.52 33,333.33 32,857.14 32,380.95 31,904.76 31,428.57 30,952.38 30,476.19 30,000.00 29,523.81 29,047.62 28,571.43 28,095.24 27,619.05 27,142.86 26,666.67 26,190.48 25,714.29 25,238.10 24,761.90 24,285.71 23,809.52 23,333.33 22,857.14 22,380.95 21,904.76 21,428.57 20,952.38 20,476.19 20,000.00
Intersection Approach 7 Year Amortization Schedule "Go-Live" Date
Number of Months Used
xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx xx/xx/20xx
43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 86 84
Months Remaining 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Sum of Depreciation
Cap of $40K
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19 476.19
19,523.81 19,047.62 18,571.43 18,095.24 17,619.05 17,142.86 16,666.67 16,190.48 15,714.29 15,238.10 14,761.90 14,285.71 13,809.52 13,333.33 12,857.14 12,380.95 11,904.76 11,428.57 10,952.38 10,476.19 10,000.00 9,523.81 9,047.62 8,571.43 8,095.24 7,619.05 7,142.86 6,666.67 6,190.48 5,714.29 5,238.10 4,761.90 4,285.71 3,809.52 3,333.33 2,857.14 2,380.95 1,904.76 1,428.57 952.38 476.19 (0.00)
Page 101
Comparison between current RLC Agreement vs. proposed RLC Agreement: Term: • Under the current Agreement the Term was two years commencing on September 12, 2012 with an expiration date of September 1, 2014. The Agreement included three automatic and consecutive one year extensions and end on September 1, 2017. • Under the proposed Agreement the Term is seven years commencing on September 1, 2017 with an expiration date of September 1, 2024. The Agreement includes three additional and consecutive one year extensions. Compensation and Pricing: • Under the current Agreement the compensation and pricing includes an operational cost concession of $300.00 per enabled approach. The operational cost concession was included at the time to allow the City to cover their cost to administer the Photo Enforcement program because the it was not revenue positive for the City. • Under the proposed Agreement the operational cost concession is eliminated because the program has been revenue positive since September 2012. Road Repairs & Construction projects: • Under the current Agreement there were no provision addressing road repairs and construction projects. • Under the proposed Agreement language is being added allowing the Term to be temporarily suspended as the result of any City or TxDOT approved road repairs for a period of 14 or more calendar days. The length of the Term suspension shall be equal to the time of interruption in performance. Upgrades: • Under the current Agreement there were no upgrades to Designated Intersection Approaches. • Under the proposed Agreement, Redflex at its sole expense, will upgrade the current detection equipment at the following Designated Intersection Approaches: o MAS-59KA-01 US 59 and Karnack Hwy (NB) o MAS-59PI-01 US 59 and Travis St (SB) o MAS-59KA-02 US 59 and Karnack Hwy (SB) The advantage of the upgraded detection system for the City is NO roadway intrusions at the Designated Intersection Approaches. Termination for Convenience: • Under the current Agreement there were no provision addressing Termination for Convenience. • Under the proposed Agreement the City has the right to terminate the Agreement without cause after September 1, 2020 with 90-days written notice. • Equitable Cost Recovery. In the event the City exercises its right to terminate Redflex shall be reimbursed for each new or relocated Designated Intersection Approach the direct labor and material costs, excluding equipment costs and salvageable material costs, not to exceed $40,000.00.
Page 102
Research Evidence on Automated Enforcement Photo enforcement summit Grand Prairie, TX May 11, 2016 Wen Hu, Ph.D. iihs.org
Page 103
IIHS is an independent, nonprofit scientific and
educational organization dedicated to reducing the losses — deaths, injuries and property damage — from crashes on the nation’s roads.
HLDI shares this mission by analyzing insurance
data representing human and economic losses from crashes and other events related to vehicle ownership. Both organizations are wholly supported by auto insurers.
Page 104
'Where are we? 1
.,W as hington, DC
Arlington,VA
Ruckersville, VA
Page 105
Why red light camera enforcement?
Page 106
In 2014 on US roads, about 171,000 redlight-running crashes caused about 126,000 injuries and 709 deaths.
Page 107
709 deaths in red light running crashes in 2014 Distribution by type of road user pedestrian, bicyclist, other 6%
red light running driver 38% occupants of vehicles that didn’t run light 46%
10% passengers in red light running vehicles
Page 108
Gender and age of drivers in red light running fatal crashes Violators vs. nonviolators, 2014 percent of violators
percent of nonviolators
male
75
61
female
24
39
< 20
6
5
20-29
33
19
30-59
42
54
60-69
7
11
70+
11
11
gender
age
Page 109
Speeding and driving without valid license Violators vs. nonviolators, 2014 30% violators nonviolators 20%
10%
0%
speeding
suspended, invalid, or no license
Page 110
Reductions in red light violations at intersections with signal lights With and without cameras, per 10,000 vehicles (IIHS, 1999a, 1999b) 0%
-20%
-40% with cameras without cameras
-60%
Fairfax, VA
Oxnard, CA
Page 111
Rates of red light violations per 10,000 vehicles at camera intersections by seconds into red phase During warning period and 1 year after ticketing began (IIHS, 2014) 12 warning period
10
1 year after ticketing
8 6 4 2 0
≥ 0.5 sec
≥ 1 sec
≥ 1.5 sec
Page 112
Citywide crash reductions at intersections with signal lights after camera enforcement Oxnard, California (IIHS, 2002) 0%
-20%
-40%
-60%
-80%
overall
injury
right angle
right angle with injury
Page 113
Percent difference in actual fatal crash rates during 2004-08 in cities with red light cameras vs. expected rates without cameras IIHS, 2011 0
-10
-20
-30
red light running fatal crashes
fatal crashes at intersections with signal lights
Page 114
Review of 10 international research shows that red light camera enforcement reduces injury and fatal crashes Aeron-Thomas and Hess, 2005
13-29% reduction in all types of injury and fatal crashes 24% reduction in right-angle injury and fatal crashes No statistically significant change in rear-end injury and fatal crashes
Page 115
Changes in crashes attributed to red light cameras 7-city study (Federal Highway Administration, 2005)
Opponents point out that red light cameras can increase rear-end crashes. However, a study by the Federal Highway Administration found that an increase in rear-end crashes was more than offset by a large decrease in more severe angle crashes.
20% 10% 0% -10% -20% -30%
right angle
rear end
Page 116
Reductions in red light violations per 10,000 vehicles from longer yellow signal timing and red light cameras In Philadelphia, longer yellow signal timing reduced red light violations by 36%, but the addition of red light cameras further reduced violations by 96% beyond levels achieved by the yellow signal timing.
0% -20% -40% -60% -80%
-100%
yellow timing
yellow signal timing plus red light cameras
Page 117
Percent who favor using red light cameras IIHS telephone survey in 14 cities with red light cameras, 2011 100
80
60
40
20
0
Page 118
Favor or oppose red light camera enforcement 14 cities with red light cameras
don’t know/ refuse 7%
strongly oppose 18%
strongly favor 42%
somewhat oppose 10% somewhat favor 24%
Page 119
www.iihs.org
Page 120
Favor or oppose red light camera enforcement IIHS telephone survey in Houston, 2011 don’t know/ refuse 6%
strongly oppose 28%
somewhat oppose somewhat 9% favor 11%
strongly favor 45%
Page 121
Favor or oppose red light camera enforcement 14 cities with red light cameras vs. Houston don’t know/ refuse 7% strongly oppose 18%
don’t know/ refuse 6%
strongly favor 42%
somewhat oppose 10% somewhat favor 24%
14-cities with cameras
strongly oppose 28%
strongly favor 45%
somewhat oppose somewhat 9% favor 11%
Houston
Page 122
Summary Red light running is a frequent traffic violation Red light runners cause hundreds of deaths and tens of thousands of injuries each year Supplementing limited police resources with highly visible red light camera programs can significantly reduce red light running behavior and prevent the most serious crashes
Page 123
More information and links to our YouTube channel and Twitter feed at iihs.org Wen Hu, Ph.D. Senior Research Transportation Engineer
[email protected] iihs.org
