Opponents are accusing Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown of a "money grab." Proponents say the mayor is simply trying to make the city safer.

Regardless of which side you're on, the mayor's latest proposal to install so-called "red light cameras" at select intersections in the city is getting passionate reaction.

The cameras, which snap photos as cars run red lights, generating tickets - and revenue - are nothing new. Cities across America have been using them with mixed results for years. Our neighbor to the east, Rochester, installed its first cameras late last year.

Since then, according to various published reports, the City of Rochester has doled out 5,000 such tickets at 50 bucks a pop. My fuzzy math tells me the city brought in $250,000 since the first camera debuted six months ago. Factor in the plans for additional cameras, with the goal of reaching 50, and I can see the argument that this is nothing but a money grab.

Sure, there are the people who won't pay the tickets and those that may get tickets dismissed (opponents argue a large number of the tickets issued are for "right on red" infractions), but it's still a lot of cash coming in. I don't have the space here to get into the fleecing of cities by the companies that sell and operate the cameras but suffice to say, the politicians who claim it isn't about the money may be right in one sense: Preliminary data suggests the money flows out of the pocket of the average citizen into the coffers of the city, and right back out to pay the camera companies. Regardless of who gets the money, one thing is for sure: Every red light infraction takes $50 out of the bank accounts of citizens who no longer have that money to put back into the local economy.

But according to Brown and others, this isn't about money, remember? It's about safety. If drivers think big brother is watching, they are going to hit the brakes when they see yellow, rather than stomp the gas and buzz the intersection. Or will they?

Let's take the pols at their word and assume for a moment this isn't about money (adding to the ick factor, Mayor Brown said he would use the revenues to support the arts - a shameless attempt to advance his agenda on the collective backs of the beleaguered arts community). If it is truly about safety, here's a crazy idea: increase the time of the yellow light. In the interest of full disclosure, this isn't an original idea, but doesn't it make sense? If the concern is that people are racing the yellow, why not tack a few extra seconds onto the light, allowing intersection to clear?

It has been done elsewhere in the country, with a reported decrease in intersection crashes by as much as 30 percent. No cost for expensive cameras and monitoring. No cost to have every incident reviewed, something they call the "human element," before a ticket is issued. No cost for the appeal of tickets and the potential to clog the courts. Just added safety to the citizens. That's what it's all about, isn't it, mayor?

At a news conference announcing his plan, Brown said the cameras had the potential to generate $2.5 million annually. Of that, $300,000 could go to fund the arts. So, after expenses, where does the rest of the cash end up? Your guess is as good as mine. But I keep forgetting, he wants us to stop focusing on the money and remember safety. Ignore that little 'ol $2.5 million over there - well, except for the $300K we might give to the arts - and focus on the safety factor.

The mayor also said he felt the majority of citizens were in favor of the cameras. Unfortunately, as is the case in the political world, he offered no evidence to bolster such a claim. In a society where there is increasing push for less government - and particularly, less big brother-style government - I find it nearly impossible to believe that a majority of Buffalonians want these cameras.

If Mayor Brown is genuine in saying this is about the safety of the citizens, take a pass on the red light cameras and opt to extend the yellow light time. Give it six months, see what happens and then re-evaluate the need for cameras.

This will never happen, by the way. For Brown and Co. to table the idea for six months, and potentially take another six months to evaluate and ultimately implement the cameras, would leave $2.5 million in the pockets of the taxpayers. And face it, that's the last place the government wants to see your money.

Matt Chandler: mchandler@bizjournals.com