Dear Editor

Re: The Culver City Red Light Camera Contract - Has It Been Signed Yet? Save $$$

Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers:

I wrote you the attached letter a few days before the May 12 meeting during which you voted to continue the City's red light camera program and re-elect Redflex as the vendor. Then after the meeting I sent City Manager Nachbar the May 19 letter included in the thread below.

Early last month I used the Public Records Act to obtain some City documents, and those showed that as of mid-August, the new contract still had not yet been signed. Just in case the contract remains unsigned as of today, I am taking this opportunity to update some of the information I provided in my May 9 letter.

Updating paragraph 1 of my May 9 letter: The first thing I discussed in that letter was the amount of the rent. At the time I wrote the May letters I didn't have a copy of it, but here is the rent schedule which Redflex and the City of Elk Grove agreed to in the contract they signed on April 14. (This table is found in Exh. D of their contract.)

If this Elk Grove schedule was applied to the Culver City system, the City would pay $1500 per month for eight of its cameras and $2000 per month for the remaining ten, versus the $3211 (for each of the 18 cameras) proposed in May. Culver City's rent - using the Elk Grove schedule - would be 45% less than was proposed in May, saving the City $928,800. of rent over the three years. If it does not get the lower rent, Culver City will need to issue an extra 9288 tickets to cover the extra rent (based upon the City getting about $100 of revenue from each ticket issued).

Updating paragraph 4 of my May 9 letter: On July 8 the Riverside city council voted to close their 17 cameras.

Regards,

Jim Lissner

Culver City