The MRCA loves to characterize drivers who are slapped with $175 fines for slowly rolling through intentionally misplaced stop signs as dangerous scofflaws who “blow through stop signs”. But as this video of an actual violation caught on the illegal stop sign cameras in Franklin Canyon park shows, drivers are not blowing through stop signs, nor are they likely to injure anyone. Watch the video. You’ll see how the driver slows down and rolls up to the intersection where he actually pauses for a moment before continuing.
That person got a $175 ticket. Did he deserve it? Technically, he violated the stop sign. But is it really a violation when the stop sign is placed so far in front of the intersection that drivers can not possibly see any cross traffic if they stop right at the sign? In addition, the markings on the pavement that are supposed to indicate where to stop are so worn away they can’t clearly be seen, especially with the mixture of sunlight and shadow cast across the roadway.
This picture was taken as I was stand directly over the markings and you still can’t see them well. So how can drivers be expected to see them?
Plus, the stop sign serves no purpose where it is placed. In the picture below, you can see The fencing on the right and the concrete wall on the left prevents this from being a pedestrian crossing. So why place the sign there?
It’s no wonder the L.A. Weekly reported that 70,000 tickets generating over $2.4 million in fines were given out at these tricky stop sign camera locations.
Now here’s the driver’s view when stopped at the sign in the video.
There’s no way you can see if there’s any cross traffic approaching (there actually can’t be any cross traffic because the roadway that intersects just ahead is a one way street heading in the opposite direction away from the intersection) so you have to roll up a few feet to see if it’s safe to proceed. But instead of placing the stop sign a few feet further up and painting a clear stop line on the pavement, the MRCA is content to create a situation where drivers are encouraged to roll past the stop sign to where they can actually see the cross street. The only possible explanation is that the MRCA wants lots of violators so they can generate lots of fines.
And it’s not just the stop sign depicted above that’s placed in an unusual and confusing location. See my post about the stop sign cameras in Marvin Braude Mulholland Gateway Park at the top of Reseda Blvd in Tarzana.
And look at this other location in Franklin Canyon Park.
It’s another location where the stop sign and camera are placed well before the intersection, encouraging drivers to slowly roll past so they can see if anyone is approaching from their left. Clearly these are not isolated incidents but a concerted effort on the part of the MRCA to shakedown visitors to their parks.
The MRCA isn’t interested in safety. If they were, they’d make sure the stop signs were located directly at the intersections and that the pavement markings were clearly visible. But they’re not interested in safety. It’s all a big con job. They’re interested in generating as much income from unsuspecting park visitors as they can.
Anyone who is involved in or facilitates this scam should be ashamed of themselves. I often wonder how they can sleep at night or look their family members in the eyes when they describe what they are a part of. It’s unfortunate that some people have no conscience at all.
These stop sign cameras were obviously a revenue scam from day 1, NOT a safety program. The entire scam is predatory.
Hmm if only there was a way for the common person to avoid these “scams?”
1. Learn to REad
2. Follow the signs directions – especially when it has another sign that says PHOTO ENFORCED!
This is called self inflicted stupidity, here is YOUR sign
************
* STUPID *
************
I’ve left this post up here so others can see how shills for the MRCA go around posting to comment boards without identifying themselves. No reasonable person could read my post and make a comment like this unless they had an agenda or they are incapable of understanding what I wrote or what they are seeing in the video. Since I assume that the person who posted the above comment was at least able to find their way here, then they must be able to read. The only conclusion I can come up with is that they work for the MRCA, Redflex, or maybe it’s Joe Edmiston himself. Regardless, nasty posts speak to the kind of person that posts them and don’t contribute to the conversation.
Although I have never even been to the SM mountains I received a notice that I must pay $100 or my credit will be ruined . I share joint vehicle registration as a cosigner on a loan but the notice was sent to me solely. They took two accepted concepts from our traffic laws: fines for stop sign violations on public highways and registered owner as responsible for parking tickets (such as those left on windshields), but then declared that this not a traffic violation but an “administrative” one, and that their roads are not actually highways but unique roads in a special exempt area, and that they are not a legal authority but an “agency”. I almost admire them- millions of dollars a year shared between the lawyers, collection agency, and MRCA all through this elaborate scheme to ticket people outside of our traffic laws and due process. It’s an abuse of power and an example of the worse our government. We all lose when people like me who have done nothing wrong are extorted by these “agency” officials and law firms.
Before you pay anything, make sure you read the previous post entitled “Do You Have to Pay Your $175 MRCA Stop Sign Camera Ticket?”
I just got this ticket and I will not be paying it. This is absolute extortion. If I have to start a class action lawsuit to fight it, then I will.
Hi my name is Cat Walshak. I am not affiliated with any organization listed in this or the LA Weekly article regarding this issue. I have read the articles and comments and am confused and curious. Obviously, the signs clearly read “STOP” as well as “photo enforced”. It appears to me that drivers are assuming, for whatever reason, that they do not have to stop, and then becoming furious when they receive a ticket for this decision. If they did not violate the sign, wouldn’t they simply not be issued a ticket?
Perhaps I am not reading this accurately, but it does not seem as though they are issuing tickets to people who do not run or roll through these stop signs (aside from the one man who alleges a bicycle set off the camera).
So is the real issue that the MCRA is claiming it is for safety? And, if so, isn’t slowing traffic – especially close to blind intersections – safer? Or is the real issue that drivers are getting tickets that they feel they don’t deserve? Maybe it is a combination of both.
I welcome your comments.
Well Cat first thanks for visiting and commenting but I’m a bit confused by your question. The post that you commented on laid out the problem fairly specifically: The signs are placed where you wouldn’t normally need to stop so drivers are confused and roll past the sign and up to the actual intersection. Also, the pavement markings are very hard to see so you can easily be past the limit line without noticing. If you read the other posts on this subject you’ll see other examples of stop signs placed where they don’t belong or in confusing places. That encourages disrespect for stop signs and other traffic devices. It’s like the boy who cried wolf, eventually drivers disregard the signs because they know they are being used incorrectly. And when I say disregard, I mean they slowly roll past them. These are very minor technical violations akin to driving a mile or two over the speed limit. Is it illegal to drive 67 in a 65 mph zone? Sure. Are you causing a dangerous situation if you drive 67 mph? No. Would you want to live in a society where the government watches your every move just waiting for you to step out of line so they can ticket you? I don’t. And when the government creates a situation that encourages you to make these technical violations just so it can issue a ticket and not for any other reason (although they’ll never admit that) then it is doubly troublesome. There are engineering protocols in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Devices that dictate where and how stop signs should be used and placed and the MRCA doesn’t follow those protocols. On top of that, the MRCA has failed to provide any evidence whatsoever that a safety problem existed that needed to be fixed with this oppressive program. People roll stop signs all time or often stop just past the limit line. I’m guessing you have even done that or some other minor technical violation. And you likely didn’t put anyone in danger when you did it.
Regarding your question about slowing traffic, that is a common misconception. Stop signs are not supposed to be used to slow traffic; the MUTCD specifically says so. And the drivers I’ve observed in these parks for the most part drive fairly slowly. I’ve observed for hours and can’t remember seeing any dangerous situations caused by speeding drivers or those that roll slowly past a stop sign. Of course the very rare driver who does drive at an outrageously dangerous speed should be penalized. But that’s a speed issue, not a stop sign issue.
I realize there are some out there who can’t bear the thought that someone might be “getting away with something”, but those people don’t realize that, being human, they also break a bunch of technical rules all the time. Those same people won’t like it when the government comes after them with a revenue enhancement scheme.
For Cat Walshak: I agree with everything Jay said above in his response. I would add something.
The USA grossly over-uses STOP signs where YIELD signs would be the correct control device. My wife is from England and I have driven there extensively since 1987. Almost everything in England is a GIVE WAY (YIELD) protocol. This is true both at roundabouts and at surface intersections where minor roads meet major ones. We kept track for three visits in a row where we drove 1,000 – 1,200 miles per visit. We encountered a STOP sign once in every 800 miles. STOP signs were ONLY used where the sight lines absolutely prevented seeing the areas of possible cross traffic until you were right up to the cross lanes, such as where a building at the intersection was right at the curb – or was actually the curb.
This approach has many advantages including – less pollution, less noise, less wear on vehicles, less wasted time, and smoother traffic flow with greater throughput capacity without building more lanes.
In my view, punishing safe drivers who do not cause safety issues is simply wrong and leads to a disrespect for traffic laws and police officers in general. The ONLY justification for traffic enforcement is safety and STOP sign cameras violate that rule almost every time.
James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
When people feel that they have been treated unfairly, they are unlikely to be sympathetic or generous with the parties that have treated them so. Because it is ever more important to preserve and maintain the natural landscape, it is plain folly to alienate voters and contributors to local environmental organizations. Enough public relations damage has already been done by the recent revelatons of state park system surplus when we were being told there wasn’t enough money to keep half of the parks open. Treat the public fairly and honestly, and it will act with greater compliance and generosity..
Putting a stop sign too far back to allow a clear view of traffic you are trying to enter is more dangerous than “rolling” up to a place where you can actually see the traffic. I received one of these “tickets” from the park authority at Topanga canyon lookout. I wondered when I pulled in why they weren’t charging for parking like normal parks do. Now I know why….why bother getting $8 per car when you can scam $100 per car going out because the sign creates an unsafe traffic situation! Needless to say this is my first visit to the area and will be my last! Ever!
Anyone who thinks these stop sign cameras are about safety rather than revenue might be a good candidate to sucker into buying some lush tropical island property located in the Arctic ocean about 500 miles north of the oil fields on the north slope of Alaska.
James C. Walker, National Motorists Association