WILMINGTON—Wilmington’s SafeLight program is part of statewide and nationwide controversy over several aspects of the red-light camera system. The latest involves an investigation by the state’s engineering board, which is looking into allegations American Traffic Solutions illegally installed its cameras in Wilmington.
Related story: Wilmington red-light camera lawsuit joins nationwide effort against ‘fifty-year-old error’
The North Carolina Board of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors (NCBELS) is currently investigating a complaint that Wilmington’s red-light cameras were never properly certified by a licensed North Carolina engineer.
That’s more than an oversight: North Carolina general statute 89C-23 makes it illegal to practice engineering without a license.
Some of the specifics of the complaint are confidential; under state law, only those making sworn testimony can file a complaint, but details are not made public until a finding is made by the board. NCBELS Executive Director Andrew Ritter confirmed that the complaint alleges Wilmington’s cameras were never certified.
American Traffic Solutions
Wilmington’s original red-light cameras were installed in 2000 by TraffiPax, but in 2009 the company agreed to hand over its contract to American Traffic Solutions, which built new cameras at 13 locations, starting in 2010.
Of the 13 camera installation plans, 12 list American Traffic Solutions (ATS) in the engineering block. Only one lists a professional engineer, Robert B. Zaitooni, who was employed by ATS from 2009 to 2014. Although Zaitooni is listed as the engineer, the plan isn’t sealed, that is, it doesn’t have the official seal of a licensed engineer.
The plan also doesn’t include Zaitooni’s North Carolina engineering license number–- because he didn’t have one.
Ritter confirmed that neither Zaitooni or ATS are, or ever have been, licensed to practice engineering in North Carolina. It’s worth noting that Zaitooni did have a license to practice in Texas, where he was reprimanded by the state engineering board in 2016 for misconduct, including failing to seal plans.
So, are ATS and Zaitooni guilty of practicing engineering without a license?
That’s complicated.
Investigating Wilmington’s red-light camera system
Not every project requires a licensed engineer, according to Ritter. The current complaint will hinge in part on whether the city of Wilmington considered the red-light cameras to require engineering, although NCBELS will have the final say.
“We’ll ask the city for what, specifically, it was asking for in its (request for proposals) when it began the program, whether it considered engineering services to be one of the things offered,” Ritter said. “But, having said that, we make the final decision. The Board may decide, ‘I don’t care what you say, engineering is engineering, and that’s what this was.’”
NCBELS won’t make a final decision until it’s spoken with Wilmington and ATS. However, Ritter said Zaitooni’s name on a plan would force the board to take a much closer look.
“It’s definitely a red flag, putting his name on there as the engineer of record implies–to someone reading it-that there was engineering being done,” Ritter said.
State law explicitly forbids offering engineering services, to a public or private client, without a state license. That would include putting your name with the initials “P.E.” on an engineering plan if you weren’t licensed.
The statues go so far as to forbid anyone from “using or employing the words ‘engineer’ or ‘engineering’ or ‘professional engineer’ or ‘professional engineering’ . . . in its name or form of business or activity.”
The statute also requires the state and all its subdivisions to prosecute those who violate these laws. In addition to criminal charges, NCBELS has the authority to strip engineers of their licenses and, in the case of a project like Wilmington’s SafeLight program, issue a cease and desist.
Wilmington: plans don’t require engineer’s approval
Wilmington Traffic Engineer Don Bennett said the plans don’t fall under the definition of engineering.
Bennett said that the plans were not signed or sealed because they weren’t required to be. According to him, the installation of the cameras was approved by the NCDOT. Bennett said that only traffic control devices need to be certified by an engineer.
That’s slightly misleading, as according to NCDOT spokesman Brian Rick, every municipality or county decides for itself what projects require engineering certification.
In Raleigh, camera plans are certified. In Greensville, where red-light cameras were recently approved, the plans appeared to be certified but are redacted. Fayetteville declined to release plans for its cameras, claiming they were proprietary information.
Further, Bennett’s claim that only “traffic control” devices need to be certified may be true, but it is at odds with comments he has made repeatedly about red-light cameras’ ability to control traffic.
When Greenville launched its red-light camera program last year–and immediately faced a lawsuit for it–Bennett told a WITN reporter, “If you can change the drivers’ behavior by modifying it at a couple of locations, then that becomes a systemwide benefit.”
Around the same time, Bennett said in an interview: “We want to keep the speed limits where they are to keep traffic moving smoothly, so instead of reducing speeds, we’re drawing people’s attention to the cameras. Without giving any citations, just knowing they’re there, that controls traffic.”
Similarly, Wilmington’s contract with ATS describes the purpose of the red-light cameras as improving safety on public streets. The City of Wilmington has since published a video in support of the red-light cameras ability to control traffic and reduce accidents.
https://youtu.be/-duiL4nf-A0
Also, North Carolina law considers red-light cameras to be part of a “traffic control system.”
ATS breaks its silence
Port City Daily has published several articles on Wilmington’s red-light cameras over the last year, and has reached out to American Traffic Solutions each time for comment. The company has consistently refused to comment.
That may be in part because Wilmington’s contract with ATS contains a gag-order, which reads in part:
“The contractor shall not speak to or provide information to the media, either on or off the record, unless authorized by the City.”
Under the assumption that this gag order could only legally apply to ATS’ work in Wilmington, Rebecca Collins, ATS’s general counsel, was asked about the state-level complaint against ATS and the company’s policy on having their camera systems certified by licensed engineers.
Senior Vice President of Sales Charles Territo responded with the following statement:
“ATS has responded to the North Carolina Board of Examiners’ recent inquiry and is confident that we are acting in full compliance with all North Carolina laws. We look forward to answering any remaining questions from the BOE and resolving any outstanding concerns. We appreciate our partnership with the City of Wilmington and are committed to continuing our efforts to enhance safety in the Port City.”
NCBELS’ investigation is ongoing. Port City Daily will update this story when the board reaches a decision.
City of Wilmington Contract with TraffiPax / American Traffic Solutions (2009) by Ben Schachtman on Scribd
Send comments and tips to Benjamin Schachtman at ben@localvoicemedia.com, @pcdben on Twitter, and (910) 538-2001
