I actually skimmed the document you posted from Louisiana. Sorry I’m not oblique enough to tie it to Cargill. It would be interesting to know the results of the suit as opposed to the allegations.

That said, there are many differences between the La. suit and the way things are done in California and Fremont.

We do not use cameras for catching speeders, they did.

We do not delegate the enforcement to Redflex, they simply supply the pictures to the PD who review them and actually issue the tickets.

We do not issue tickets unless the photo of the driver is clear and we know the registered owner of the car is the person driving (from Driver’s License photo.)

There are probably more differences, but the Thanksgiving meal became more important than remembering them.

Gus M and post #7

So, is it fair to conclude the following ?-

Where max leniency is granted we also return max value to the immediate community but which occurs in the form of community services and minimum ($0 ?) “expenses” paid to RedFlex

Conversely, in those instances where the max $ fine is levied we return minimum value to the community and maximize the expenses paid to the 3rd party service provider

If true and when combined with the other facts reported throughout this thread, it seems that -

1.) Porter and his relative “leniency” are more common than the unilateral approach taken by Lonsdale.

2.) Porter is likely returning far greater value to the offended community than is Lonsdale.

3.) Porter is not appreciated by RedFlex shareholders. Lonsdale would be seen as a a reliable contributor to their bottom line.

4.) In both cases, the most significant deterrent from the perspective of the “criminal” is the time consumed to appear and plea your case.

Hey Moderator, if possible, post the edited & combined version of #10 & #11 that I just posted today at 10:30 friday 11/25. It should be here somewhere, but I don’t see it. If you do, please use it and scuttle #10 #11 and do what you want with this Buzzkill Redstape B.S.

That is if my words are allowed to be posted.

Thanks for giving gobble, GoooOble, Gobbekl, Goebbles,

The above comments, read from first to last, exemplify what a succinct, intelligent discussion and/or debate looks and sounds like. What I so rarely see, the primary reason for what some call, my “bizzaro, nut-job” posts. If I lived in a world in which there was increasingly more discourse such as this instead of less, I have little doubt that my blood pressure would be at a much more reasonable level and I could hope that my large but rapidly diminishing reservoir of sanity might be restored.

Though I added nothing to the discussion above or know any of the writers personally, I’m not embarrassed to say that I feel strangely contented.

I believe, and know it’s true, that I helped make this, and however much or microscopically unconsciously little I did influence any of the writers above, for that amount I’m responsible I am proud.

I understand that my compliment here may seem excessive to some, unwarranted or too pretentious for an unpretentious blog such as OURS here. Some will say I’m insincere.
I’m not.
I’m not being (my) a bit.

Because now comrades, let me tell you what for ME was the best part about the, admittedly, unsuspecting discussion above… ..what I saw…

THE MEATPUPPET WAS JUKED! YES!
MEATPUPPETRY WAS DEFEATED!!

And once again, thank you Charlie C. for the juicy primary document. Maybe someday we’ll have the pleasure of sitting down together and watching that classic film that ends so poignantly with the unforgettable last lines being screamed to no one in particular, to anyone who might be listening, into the air, by that Legendary Conservative Hero, “Soly-”- NO Marty, NOT Ronald Reagan!-

“..is people!! We’re eating PEOPLE!”

Occupy phase II begins now. Tomorrow we will all
Fart in the Bank. That’s right. FART INSIDE THE BANK.

THE MEATPUPPET WAS DEFEATED! YES!

MEATPUPPETRY WAS DEFEATED!!

Once again, thank you Charlie C. for the juicy primary document. Maybe someday we’ll have the pleasure of sitting down together and watching that classic film that ends so poignantly with the unforgettable last lines being screamed into the air, to no one in particular, to anyone who might be listening, screamed at the top of his lungs up into the night sky, by that Legendary Conservative Hero, “Soly-”- NO Marty, NOT Ronald Reagan!-

“..is people!! We’re eating PEOPLE!”

Occupy phase II begins now. Tommorrow we will all
Fart in the Bank. That’s right. FART INSIDE THE BANK.

The above comments, read from first to last, exemplify what a succint, intelligent dissussion and/or debate looks and sounds like. What I so rarely see, the primary reason for what some call, my “bizzaro, nut-job” posts. If I lived in a world in which there was increasingly more discourse such as this instead of less, I have little doubt that my blood pressure would be at a much more reasonable level and I could hope that my large but rapidly diminishing reseviour of sanity might be restored.

Though I added nothing to the discussion above or know any of the writers personally, I’m not embarrassed to say that I feel strangely contented.

I believe, and know it’s true, that I helped make this, and however much or microscopically unconsciously little I did influence any of the writers above, for that amount I’m responsible I am proud.

I understand that my compliment here may seem excessive to some, unwarrented or too pretentious for an unpretentious blog such as OURS here. Some will say I’m insincere.
I’m not.
I’m not being (my) a bit.

Because now comrades, let me tell you what for ME was the

max leniency = max value returned to COF but, in the form of community service and minimum ($0 ?) “expenses” paid to RedFlex

Max $ fine levied = minimum value returned to COF and maximum “expenses” paid to the service provider

The city share of the fine is less than 50%, with the balance taken by a variety of agencies and programs. The city essentially makes no profit from the program and it is intended to be a safety program. There are no other effective programs to catch red light runners because a cop would have to follow the offender through the red light, compounding the safety situation. We were told the courts would have to have clear evidence that the driver had run the light and that the light was actually red when he ran it. Difficult to do.

As for what happens to Redflex when fines are reduced to community service is awarded in lieu of a fine? I believe their remuneration is based on the actual amount of money collected from the fine by the city. Community service equals no money to Redflex.