By next spring, Seattle will have five to 10 automated cameras at intersections to catch drivers running red lights. Despite the cameras' troubled history, and the city's lack of solid evidence that people are actually running red lights in large numbers ["Red Eyes," Aug 8], the city is racing full speed ahead.

Two weeks ago, after reviewing applications from eight cities across the state, Washington legislators gave the okay to four cities--Seattle, Spokane, Vancouver, and Lakewood--to start the project. (Approval was needed to issue tickets through the mail.) With $220,000 in funding set aside last year through Mayor Schell's Maintenance and Mobility Initiative, Seattle is focusing on six intersections for automated enforcement. The trouble spots are First Avenue South and Spokane Street, and MLK Jr. Way and South Othello Street in South Seattle; Fifth Avenue and Mercer Street, by Tower Records; and three locations downtown at Fifth and Spring, Fifth and Union, and First and Seneca. The city has no hard data on the number of accidents caused by people running red lights.

As The Stranger reported a few months ago, automated enforcement is problematic for several reasons: there is little human oversight; the steep fine from camera tickets motivates a profit incentive for companies who run the cameras; and, most importantly, there is a lack of hard data about red-light running.

Fortunately, Seattle (unlike like other cities that have automated cameras--San Diego and Los Angeles, for example) has made small but important changes in the way it will conduct automated enforcement. First, because the city, not a private company, will be maintaining and operating the cameras, a potentially dangerous profit incentive has been removed. Some cities complained that private companies, which get a percentage of the camera ticket fines, rigged the cameras to photograph indiscriminately. (Of course, Seattle could also rig the cameras--shortening the time a light stays yellow, for example--but the likelihood of a regulated city agency doing this seems less likely. Call me naive.) Second, the cost of Seattle's citations, $86, will be fairly low compared to other cities, which charge $200 and up. This also minimizes the profit incentive; it's less likely that Seattle will rig the cameras for low ticket fines. Third, Seattle is not buying the cameras, priced at $60,000 to $100,000, but is leasing them at $1,500 a month. This will not only save money, but will keep the city free of commitments to the cameras, in case a public backlash erupts. Finally, camera tickets will be like parking tickets, not speeding tickets, and so won't appear on driving records. These are important changes, but the City of Seattle has still not answered an obvious question: How many people are running red lights?

pat@thestranger.com