CINCINNATI, OHIO (AP) – A coalition that includes the NAACP, environmentalists and the Libertarian Party wants to make the city one of the biggest in the U.S. to ban the use of traffic cameras to catch drivers who run red lights.
The group, which succeed last year in helping urge voters to defeat a sales tax increase to build a new jail, has started a petition drive to ask voters in November to amend the city’s charter preventing City Council from using the technology. The cameras are used in about 300 U.S. cities, including Columbus.
Opponents need to collect about 8,000 valid signatures in the next two months to place the issue on the ballot, and they believe a successful campaign would encourage citizen uprisings against the cameras elsewhere.
Mostly, they object to what they consider an intrusion on privacy and personal liberties. Supporters, who include some prominent City Council members, say the cameras improve red-light enforcement and increase traffic safety.
Josh Weitzman, head of the Libertarian Party of Southwest Ohio and co-chairman of a group called We Demand A Vote, said putting citizens under government surveillance smacks of the Big Brother mentality of George Orwell’s “1984.” He expects to get twice the number of signatures necessary to put the charter amendment to a vote.
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled in January that cities have the power to use traffic cameras to catch drivers breaking traffic laws.
Courts in other states have dismissed numerous challenges, according to the nonprofit Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in Arlington, Va. But cameras have been rejected by voters in some cities.
Voters in Steubenville forced the city to suspend its program when they overwhelmingly rejected red light cameras in 2006, and Anchorage, Alaska, had to abandon its program after a vote by residents.
Insurance Institute spokesman Russ Rader said the group doesn’t have data on the number of times traffic cameras have been rejected, but he decried the Cincinnati petition drive.
“Unfortunately, they’re taking a step that will make streets less safe,” he said.
Opponents say safety isn’t the real issue on the minds of City Council — it’s money.
“They said they intend to get $1 million revenue from red light cameras,” said Christopher Smitherman, president of the Cincinnati Chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. “That scares and concerns our members that this is not about safety but about driving revenue.”
The City Council approved a budget in December that anticipates $1 million from tickets issued by the cameras. Members have not yet voted to buy the cameras, and the city manager has said it’s not likely any could be operational until fall.
Staff members plan to review proposals from two vendors, including Redflex Traffic Systems of Scottsdale, Ariz., the industry leader with about 46 percent of the U.S. business.
If opponents succeed in getting the issue on the ballot, Smitherman expects vendors to pour money into a counter campaign.
“We have never engaged in a lobbying campaign to overturn a ballot initiative,” said Cris Weekes, vice president of marketing for Redflex. “What we have assisted our jurisdictions with is education and public outreach.”
Redflex has contracts with 204 cities in 20 states, Weekes said.
“The U.S. is pretty far behind the rest of the world,” she said. “Automated traffic monitoring is pretty much the standard across central and western Europe.”
The City Council tried to install red light cameras once before. In June 2005, then-Mayor Charlie Luken vetoed a camera ordinance, saying he didn’t believe the motive behind the measure.
“I appreciate the comments about safety, but let’s be honest with the public,” Luken said then. “We didn’t think about this until we came up with a budget problem.”
Vice-mayor David Crowley was a backer of red light cameras then and now.
“It’s a public safety issue,” said his chief of staff, Rocky Merz. “The cameras are shown in every study we’ve seen to reduce traffic fatalities.”
Article from Associated Press News
