Sebastopol, which glories in its well-deserved reputation for strict traffic enforcement, is launching a public relations program asking drivers to slow down when going through town.

Police issue more speeding tickets in Sebastopol than any other city of its size in Sonoma County. But that hasn’t stopped residents from complaining about traffic scofflaws.

“The No. 1 complaint is regarding traffic, mostly speeding cars, usually on neighborhood streets,” said police Chief Jeff Weaver. “If I was to add up all the complaints I get about thefts, drug use, gangs or violent crime, it would not equal traffic complaints.”

Since the department doesn’t have the staff to station police officers in the neighborhoods, the next best thing is to post signs asking people to drive slowly, Weaver said.

“The staffing is the same as in 1986. I still have 14 police officers. We don’t have the time to devote to traffic as we once did,” Weaver said. “If this helps fill the gap, great.”

As part of the program, expected to cost $640, signs and banners proclaiming “Slow Down Sebastopol,” with the city seal and police department shield, will be posted at the entrances to the city, on some civic buildings and in some neighborhoods.

In addition, Weaver said the city will install permanent electronic signs that read a vehicle’s speed in the eastbound lanes of Bodega Avenue in west Sebastopol, and a third portable reader will be available to put at areas where speed or collisions are a problem.

There will not be an increase in enforcement, but Sebastopol already writes more tickets than other small departments.

In 2009, the department made 7,144 traffic stops, many related to the burgeoning downtown tavern scene, compared to 6,004 in 2008, Weaver said.

Officers issued 334 speeding tickets, compared to 641 in 2008.

In comparison, in the city of Healdsburg, which has a similarly-sized department, officers made 2,982 traffic stops and wrote 45 speeding tickets in 2009.

In Cloverdale, officers made 1,933 traffic stops and wrote 67 speeding tickets in 2009.

Sebastopol has a reputation for aggressively enforcing speed limits, dating back to 1974, when the department hired an officer with traffic safety funds, Weaver said.

“For a long time, the Sebastopol police had a ruthless reputation for speed enforcement,” Weaver said. “I grew up in Santa Rosa and I knew that when you got to the Sebastopol city limits, you slowed down.”

That officer gave Weaver’s sister a speeding ticket when she was hurrying to church to play the piano, and he also gave the department’s current dispatcher a ticket, Weaver said.

“I love it,” Weaver said. “I am comfortable with the strict enforcement of the traffic laws because it saves lives.”

There will be a one-month grace period, during which offenders will get off with a warning. After that, violations are Class C misdemeanors that could result in a $500 fine. Here are some answers to questions about the law.

How will the ban be enforced?

With difficulty. Officers will make stops based primarily on erratic driving, said Austin Assistant Police Chief Al Eells. Beyond that, police will have to catch a driver in the act to make a traffic stop. Because dialing a cell phone can look like texting, an officer will need to watch a driver for a “prolonged” period of time to make sure he’s actually texting, said Cmdr. Stephen Baker, who heads up Austin Police Department’s highway enforcement command.

Moreover, since the violation must also occur while the vehicle is moving, the observing officer essentially will have to be driving alongside a potential offender. Thus, for safety reasons, the opportunity to view driving-and-texting scofflaws will occur mainly in slower, city driving. “It’s going to be a lot of officer discretion,” Baker said.

What about the surfing/scrolling/e-mailing part of the ban: How will that be enforced?

Lightly. It will be difficult to distinguish whether a driver is, say, looking up a contact to dial (legal) or reading e-mail (illegal). “If a person is just holding a cell phone up in front of his face and reading it, we don’t make that stop,” Baker said. “There’s no way we’re going to be taking those to court.”

Will police take my cell phone and read my texts?

While prosecutors say such searches would be legal, Baker said Austin police won’t search anyone’s phone.

What if I’m from out of town and haven’t heard about the law?

Driver beware. Eells said the city will place informational brochures at places such as the airport and convention center. “Will that capture the guy traveling through Austin on I-35? Probably not,” he said.

Will anyone be arrested?

Not unless the driver refuses to sign a citation. A texting violation won’t go on the driver’s record, either.

How big is the problem locally?

Austin police report that since the beginning of the year, there have been 129 serious collisions in which cell phones have been implicated and 12 involving texting while driving.

Why is texting banned and not cell phones?

We’re not ready to give up driving and dialing. This year the Texas Legislature considered more than a dozen bills to restrict driving while chatting, but settled on only one: no cell phone usage in school zones.
“Our cars are different in Texas,” Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso, told The Dallas Morning News in April. “We want to be able to carry guns, spit, chew, call on our cell phones or sharpen our knives while driving.”

Why have any bans?

Driving distractions have always been a problem, said John Lee, who literally helped write the book on the subject: “Driver Distraction: Theory, Effects and Mitigation.” He recently attended a conference where a presenter showed a video of a trucker talking on two cell phones and smoking while steering through a work zone with his knees. The current problem, said Lee, a University of Wisconsin professor, began when cell phones turned into computers. Unlike time-honored distractions such as adjusting the radio or screaming at the kids, texting and surfing mix cognitive, visual and physical demands that make it difficult to drive responsibly at the same time. “On the face of it, I can’t imagine why anyone would try to drive while doing it,” he said. Plenty of people do, though. On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Transportation unveiled a Web site on to the issue: www.distraction.gov. Starting Wednesday, federal employees will be prohibited from texting while driving government vehicles. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have banned texting and driving. Four of those bans also include prohibitions on Internet browsing and GPS navigation.

Is texting really dangerous?

Most likely. Stories abound of drivers jabbing at cell phones while drifting in and out of their lane – what police call “pinballing.” Some of the most avid texters – teenagers – are statistically horrible drivers anyway.
That’s why, in addition to the 18 states with outright bans, eight others – including Texas – prohibit young drivers from texting while behind the wheel. In July, a Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study that placed cameras in long-haul truckers’ cabs pegged the risk of texting while driving at 23 times greater than when not texting. A couple of weeks ago, a University of Utah study found that teenagers driving a laboratory simulator had a six-fold risk of crashing when they texted.

Still, “there’s a whole lot we still don’t know yet,” said Anne Fleming, a spokeswoman for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research organization funded by insurance companies. For example, she said, though studies show that texting while driving increases risky behavior, that doesn’t necessarily mean more crashes.

She points out similar gaps in cell phone research. Federal statistics show that at any given time, 11 percent of drivers are using phones. The Insurance Institute studied crash records and found a four-fold risk of serious crashes among drivers using phones. Taken together, those findings would suggest a big rise in overall accidents. But, said Fleming, such stats haven’t shown up yet.

Am I part of the problem?

Not according to you. A 2008 American Automobile Association report revealed that 82 percent of motorists rated distracted driving as a serious problem. But more than half also admitted to talking on a cell phone while driving; 14 percent said they texted behind the wheel. Translation: “I’m a perfectly fine driver. The problem is with all the other nuts out there,” said Bernie Fette, public affairs officer for Texas A&M University’s Texas Transportation Institute.

Are other types of drivers prohibited from texting?

Under an emergency order issued in 2008 by the Federal Railroad Administration following several high-profile rail crashes, locomotive engineers cannot text while on duty. “We don’t have a steering wheel in locomotives,” said Connie English, state legislative director of the United Transportation Union of Texas. “But you still have to be observant.”

Don’t other activities distract drivers, too?

Sure. A Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study found 80 percent of all crashes could be linked to driver inattention, which includes distraction and fatigue. The institute has produced a continuum of distractions, from less risky to more, such as: checking your speedometer, talking on your CB radio, reading a book, personal grooming, looking at a paper map and using a calculator.

What about eating?

Potentially hazardous, depending on the comestible. In 2002, Hagerty Classic Insurance, which insures owners of classic and collectible automobiles, analyzed the issue after it kept hearing that “police reported seeing pizza or hamburger splattered all over the cars and accident scenes,” said McKeel Hagerty, the Michigan company’s CEO and founder. Its findings, based on statistics and interviews with law enforcement officials: Foods that spilled easily were more perilous because drivers reflexively try to clean up – particularly owners of collectible cars. No. 1 on the list was coffee. But the top 10 also included barbecue, chili and cream-filled doughnuts. No. 2? Hot soup. “Go figure,” said Hagerty.

How about talking with other passengers?

Distracting, at least for the young and chatty. Virginia Tech’s continuum showed talking to be low-risk. But when Texas A&M’s Texas Transportation Institute used a driving simulator to measure how teenagers drove while using cell phones or chatting with passengers, it found the latter to be more distracting. Why? “The driver was physically turning to talk to the other guys,” Fette said.

Dogs?

Possibly distracting, politically untouchable. In 2008 the California Legislature passed a bill prohibiting drivers from keeping pets on their laps, however, the so-called Paris Hilton bill was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Do laws restricting the use of distractible devices work?

Possibly. An October 2009 study by the Insurance Institute concluded that states with cell phone bans showed marked and sustained declines in the rate of use among drivers. That said, many drivers continued to use their phones illegally and others simply might have switched to hands-free devices – which research shows are nearly as dangerous.

Are there better solutions?

Rather than targeting a handful of the endless focus-diverting activities, Lee and others are working to develop in-vehicle sensors which, by tracking head or eye movements, activate an alarm whenever a driver is distracted.

Under Austin’s new law, can I use my fabulous new iPhone app to read the Statesman while driving to work?

Not legally.

Can I continue to read the indispensable print version while commuting?

Yes.

Source: Austin American Statesman

.

.

.

Per my lawyer’s suggestion, any posts that pertain to my encounters/dealings with Lakeway or the Lakeway Police, have been temporarily suspended until further notice.

Please feel free to email me directly if you have any comments or questions.

In the meantime, read on for other informative, funny, and otherwise interesting stuff.

.

.

.

.

.

I work in Austin, TX near Metric and Braker. During one of my breaks from work, I made a quick trip to purchase an air compressor from a Craigslist seller. He lived near Lamar and North Loop. On my way back, I was going north on N. Lamar approaching Hwy 183. At the stop light at Morrow street, I was in the left lane. Intending to turn north on 183, I realized that I needed to be in the right lane (the green arrow on the map). So, when the light turned green, I pulled through the intersection, used my turn signal, and smoothly moved over two lanes. There was only one vehicle, several car lengths to the right-rear of me; and, I was never close enough to him to be in any way reckless.

Anyway, in my move to get to the right lane, I drove over the solid white line that delineates the regular lanes from the “exit” lane (where the little red arrow points). I continued on, through the next couple of lights, turning onto the northbound access road. Then, flashing red & blue lights caught my attention. I was being pulled over by an Austin cop. But, for what?! I thought maybe I had clipped through a yellow light at one of the signals or something.

I pulled into the Capital Metro Park-n-Ride, turned off the ignition, turned ON the interior light, rolled my window down, put my keys on top of the cab, and my hands on the steering wheel. When the officer approached, he asked if I knew why I had been pulled over. I said that I did not. “You crossed over the white line back there,” he said. I said, “Huh? Where?” I thought he was talking about a stop limit line at a stop light; but, I never go past those thick white bars. He explained what he was referring to, then told me to sit tight until he came back. While he was gone, I was thinking, “there weren’t any prohibitive white markings back there!” The satellite picture above is a little outdated. Below is a more current view, showing only a single white line, and no chevrons in the wider part where it splits.

So, the cop came back with a citation for “crossed solid white line”. He said he could give me a ticket for “unsafe lane change”, but he was giving me this one because it’d “be a little cheaper”. I thought, “That’s good, because ‘unsafe lane change’ is a legitimate charge. ‘Crossed solid white line’ is NOT!” So, I accepted my ticket for something that isn’t even illegal and went on back to work.

Now here’s a little explanation of what all the different lane markings mean:

The official meaning of lane markings in Texas is not detailed in the Transportation Code. Instead, section 544.001 of the Transportation Code requires that the state adopt a manual that details all the specifics of signs, signals, and markings. The manual that has been adopted is the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Texas MUTCD); and, this manual is the “law” when it comes to all traffic control devices, including lane markings. The meaning of the various devices described in the MUTCD is enforceable.

Many people aren’t sure exactly what particular lane markings mean. Heck, some people don’t even know why some lines are white and some yellow! So, here’s a little guide, showing what the lines/markings mean.

So, I’ve plead “not guilty” on my ticket, and am waiting to hear from the court regarding an arraignment date. We’ll see how it goes; and, I’ll keep you updated.

Comments? Post away!

Join the forum discussion on this post - (5) Posts

In a typical year, the state of Texas has more than 1,000 highway projects under contract. As a result, drivers are likely to encounter a variety of work zone conditions, including uneven pavement, narrow lanes, concrete barriers, slow moving equipment, and loose gravel.

About 100 people, most of them motorists, are killed in work zones across Texas each year.

If you’re traveling in Texas, here’s the law regarding driving in work zones:

Texas law requires you to obey all signs in work zones. Fines for moving violations can be as much as $400 in construction or maintenance work zones marked with signs indicating that fines double when workers are present. You should always see a “Begin . . .” sign at the start of such zones. Enforcement of rules while in the ‘zone’ ends when you see the “End . . .” sign. (Note: I have noticed that the wording on ‘zone’ signs sometimes varies. For instance, the ‘end’ sign may say, “End Road Work”, or “End Work Zone”. Regardless, you should look for and pay particular attention to where a construction or work zone begins and ends.)

TRAVEL TIPS:

• Plan ahead by checking the web at www.dot.state.tx.us for state construction sites where travel may be delayed.
• Allow extra travel time, and be patient. Reducing your speed from 60 miles per hour to 45 miles per hour in a two-mile work zone delays your journey by only ONE minute!
• Observe all work zone warning signs; and, pay attention to flaggers in orange vests directing traffic.
• Merge at the first notice of a lane closure or change.
• Keep a safe distance between your vehicle, other vehicles, traffic barriers, construction workers, and equipment. Extra caution is required when driving in an active work zone at night!
• Avoid distractions! Don’t use your cell phone or send text messages. Don’t fiddle with the radio controls or your MP3 player.

The mayor of Warren, Michigan says a warning wasn’t enough after he was stopped for speeding. So he asked for a ticket instead — and got it. Warren Mayor Jim Fouts was pulled over Monday on the way to City Hall for going 45 mph in a 40 mph zone. The officer told him to watch it next time.

Fouts says he was uncomfortable the entire day with just a warning, thinking it might be construed as favoritism. So he called the deputy police commissioner and demanded the ticket.

Police delivered it to Fouts’ office and Fouts paid the $100 fine.

Fouts told The Detroit News that he “had to set an example.”

He had to “set an example”?! An example of what? How to be a numb nut? He was doing 5 mph over the limit. A warning is what was appropriate; and, he demanded a ticket. The cop probably didn’t even know he was the mayor.

Pew! Pew! Pew!

Pretty soon, these cameras will be turning and twisting around, tracking our movements. These traffic cameras, and security cameras and the like, are everywhere! Seems that there’s no place where you aren’t visible by one somewhere.

The Clark Howard Show – December 15, 2008

Arizona Rakes in the Dough with Speed Cameras

Clark gets worried whenever state or local officials say they want to protect us by putting in cameras to monitor our speed while driving. The real purpose of such cameras is to make money.

The Detroit News reports that Arizona will make $175 million this year from speed cameras. They have an Australian contractor who handles everything: installation, ticketing and collections. The contractor gets $30 from every ticket with the remainder going to the state.

In fact, Arizona decided it wasn’t making enough revenue from the cameras, so they lowered the speed limit in the state to get more money! These tickets don’t come with any points on your license; they’re strictly against the car itself and just a form of tax.

Illinois and other states now want to install similar speed cameras. But don’t believe the political hype about these cameras being used to reduce the rate of highway fatalities. They’re simply designed to stock the coffers so politicians can get re-elected.

And get this — The Detroit News reports Arizona only puts the cameras on roads that are heavily driven by out-of-state motorists. So the revenue comes from non-voters because the politicians don’t want to alienate their constituents!

Clark doesn’t deny that speeding is dangerous and also necessitates longer stopping distances in the event of a panic stop. But these cameras are only about the dough. If they were really intended to make you a safer driver, the tickets would be against the driver, not against the car. So get ready to smile — you may be on candid camera!

Here’s a link to the shownotes page for that episode of The Clark Howard Show.

There ARE quite a few references to this issue on other sites; but, I thought I’d submit my perspective on the subject. Ever since I was a little kid, I can remember my dad flashing his lights at other cars for some reason or another. It’s a great communication tool, whether it’s to signal “I’m about to pass you”, “You’re clear”, “Thanks”, “Dim your lights”, or “Danger ahead”. My Granddad did it. My father did it. I do it! I think it’s just a natural way to communicate non-verbally. However, it seems to be more common lately for people to worry about whether they’re gonna get into trouble for warning others in this manner.

There is not any law in any state, that I am aware of, that proscribes telling other motorists about the presence of a police officer, whether it is one performing traffic enforcement duties, or any other officer for that matter. Drivers have always used one method or another to warn of upcoming trouble. Cell phones, CB radios, waves out the window, and flashing of the headlights are just a few of the ways one can warn motorists of something on the road ahead — including “speed traps”.

In some states, however, there ARE laws that prohibit flashing your lights or, more specifically, for failing to dim your high beams for oncoming traffic. The Texas Drivers Handbook recommends dimming your headlights when approaching traffic gets within 500 feet. So, technically, if you “flash your lights” when another vehicle is within 500 feet, you’re breaking the law. (Texas Transportation Code, Sec. 547.333, (c)(1)(A))

There is NO mention of, or regulation concerning, the use of fog lights. So, I would guess, flashing your fog lights wouldn’t be an issue.

If you WERE to flash your lights, and an officer saw it, he’d probably be annoyed because he knows the real reason you’re doing it. He may even pull you over and issue you a ticket for… well… something. Just why, though, should law enforcement dislike this kind of thing? It only enforces what the officers are trying to do in the first place — slow traffic and promote safety (even if they don’t get that revenue by issuing a ticket). Sometimes, when I see a driver who is obviously driving erratically and being an idiot, I’ll flash my lights, even when there’s no officer around, just to get them to slow down! Am I going to get in trouble for THAT?

The other side of this whole discussion is: “Why should I flash my lights at ANYone? They deserve to get a ticket!” Well, in my opinion, there’s really nothing wrong with that philosophy. Heck, if you think that way, you might want to invent a signal for “SPEED UP!”, just to assure that they get what they deserve?

The reality is: Flashing your lights usually gets people to slow down — whether there are police or not.

So, why not flash your lights at every driver you see.

The WHOLE WORLD will slow down — or not!