Lessons learned from red-light camera debate

A year after approving a pilot project to test whether red-light cameras would make several well-trafficked Redmond intersections safer, the City of Redmond appears poised to pull the plug on the cameras and end the pilot project – while possibly continuing to operate a speed camera near Einstein Elementary during school hours.

A year after approving a pilot project to test whether red-light cameras would make several well-trafficked Redmond intersections safer, the City of Redmond appears poised to pull the plug on the cameras and end the pilot project – while possibly continuing to operate a speed camera near Einstein Elementary during school hours.

Data from the pilot project, discussed at a recent city council study session, did not conclusively demonstrate that the cameras made the intersections where they were installed safer. As a result, the city is likely to opt not to extend its contract with American Traffic Solutions (ATS), the vendor of the camera systems the city has been using.

The study session occurred on the same day that a King County Superior Court judge tossed out an ungrounded lawsuit filed by perennial initiative salesman Tim Eyman against Redmond. Eyman, whose past statewide initiatives have caused great harm to Redmond’s people and public services, decided to sue the city after Mayor John Marchione and the city council concluded that a city initiative intended to force a public vote on the red light cameras did not fall within the scope of the local initiative power. Eyman and Scott Harlan (the Union Hill resident who orchestrated the initiative) had demanded that the city turn over its petitions to King County Elections for processing and validation. City leaders, citing a recent court ruling concerning a similar measure in Bellingham, argued the measure concerned a matter not subject to initiative, and pointed out that a public vote would cost city taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars. Judge Laura Inveen agreed.

Redmond Mayor John Marchione described the ruling as “a strong affirmation of the City of Redmond’s action to fulfill its responsibilities and not abdicate its role to ‘government-by-initiative’. The City’s actions are guided by law that the decision to use traffic camera enforcement is reserved for the City Council only,” the mayor said shortly after the decision was announced. “While repeated court rulings on Eyman initiatives have made this clear, some continue to create a false expectation. Instead of perpetuating this myth, the City Council and I chose to state the truth.”

Eyman, of course, was not pleased. “It’s an appalling ruling … I’m disgusted by it, and I think the City of Redmond just kicked a hornet’s nest,” he told reporters outside of the courtroom.

Amusingly, that’s along the lines of what Eyman has said every time he has lost in court. And he has lost many times. Three of his statewide initiatives have been thrown out as unconstitutional.

So, after many months of discussion and debate, it looks like red light cameras are on their way out of Redmond. Perhaps that’s for the best. Installing the cameras did not address the root cause of traffic safety problems (why people run red lights in the first place, or cut it close when they shouldn’t). Nor did the cameras improve the city’s image.

As pointed out by some camera critics, the city has signs posted at many of the roads leading into Redmond which ominously declare, “Redmond is a photo-enforcement city.” The message? You better watch it, ‘cause we’re watching you.

Is that how we want to welcome visitors to Redmond? It would be nice if we could take those signs down. It’s bad enough that our civil liberties have been eroded at the federal level by the likes of the National Security Agency, which has been happily spying on American citizens for years.

Camera critics did a good job pointing out the disadvantages and ramifications of red light cameras in Redmond. But they went overboard by trying to force a public vote on the issue before the mayor and city council had even come to a conclusion about the effectiveness of the pilot project.

The purpose of the initiative and referendum process is to allow citizens to get something done if the legislative process fails. Direct democracy is not supposed to replace or supplant representative democracy. Thankfully, we’ve got a mayor and City Council who care about their responsibilities and are committed to making sure that Redmond has a government that listens to and works for its people.

Andrew Villeneuve, a 2005 Redmond High graduate, is the founder and executive director of the Northwest Progressive Institute, a Redmond-based grassroots organization. Villeneuve can be reached at andrew@nwprogressive.org.