Become a digitalPLUS subscriber. 99¢ for 4 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

Questions surround city's handling of speed camera contract [Letter]

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.

Bruce Poulos

-
To respond to this letter, send an email to talkback@baltimoresun.com. Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Cameras and corruption
    Cameras and corruption

    I have followed The Sun's investigation of Baltimore's speed and red light cameras from the beginning and believe a desire for a back door tax is what is driving Baltimore's concern and not protecting the poor innocent school children they claim when defending the constitutionality of such laws...

  • Get a move on: Local speed limits are too low [Letter]
    Get a move on: Local speed limits are too low [Letter]

    Congratulations to Howard County for trying to figure out sensible speed limits ("Are Howard County's speed limits too low?" Aug. 5).

  • Smaller is better
    Smaller is better

    A Baltimore City Council investigative committee looking into the city's problem-plagued speed- and red light-camera program has discovered what should have been obvious all along: That the now suspended system was far too big to be managed efficiently, that it was set up too quickly by the...

  • The surreal comedy of Baltimore's speed cameras [Letter]
    The surreal comedy of Baltimore's speed cameras [Letter]

    I really wish I was in the speed camera consulting business in Baltimore right now, as I could make a killing ("City takes step toward new speed camera program Feb. 5). Why is this whole speed camera debacle turning into such a surreal comedy? One answer might be that there is such a total...

  • City speed camera saga gets stranger by the day [Letter]
    City speed camera saga gets stranger by the day [Letter]

    A national firm is not qualified to complete a simple engineering study of the city's speed cameras ("Mayor says audit firm was 'not sufficiently qualified,'" Jan. 29).

  • Failure all around
    Failure all around
  • Comedy Central at City Hall [Letter]
    Comedy Central at City Hall [Letter]

    Baltimore's mayor hides a report highly critical of the city's red-light and speed camera program, claiming that the vendor, whom she hired yet again, was somehow incompetent ("Mayor says audit firm was 'not sufficiently qualified,'" Jan. 29).

  • Why rehire the unqualified? [Letter]
    Why rehire the unqualified? [Letter]

    Regarding the URS Corp.'s red light and speed camera audit and their subsequent rehiring, "somebody's got some 'splaining to do" ("Mayor says audit firm was 'not sufficiently qualified,'" Jan. 29).

Comments
Loading