3:00 PM EST, December 23, 2013
Now that city officials have held Maryland-based Brekford hostage by not turning on the camera system and forced the company to terminate its contract with the city, one has to wonder how deep this rabbit hole goes ("What's next for Baltimore speed cameras," Dec. 18)?
If, as city officials say, the cameras did not work, then why on earth would they spend $2.2 million on them? Did they test them? If there was a problem with some cameras, why did the city shut the whole system down instead of fixing the problem camera(s)? Brekford's cameras are working in many other municipalities throughout the state without all the errors that Baltimore is claiming.
The agreement was for neither side to disparage the other, yet your stories are filled with quotes from officials about how bad a job Brekford was to have done. All the while Brekford has remained silent, keeping their end of the agreement while city officials point the finger. Your paper with its bias toward cameras has put some nails into Brekford's coffin by not asking any questions that might implicate some wrongdoing by the city.
Didn't Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake rent a beach home back in the summer from a lobbyist from Xerox, the company that held the camera contract prior to Brekford taking over? This was done while the ink was drying on the contract with Brekford. Xerox's failures were the reason for having a new company come in and salvage the system. Now that Brekford has installed new cameras, how convenient it would be if an old friend came back in to right the ship.
I would love to see The Sun put aside its prejudices against cameras (they are here to stay) and ask some tough questions to city officials and maybe stop trying to put a Maryland-based company out of business.
Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun