Longview leaders, Eyman clash over red-light camera revenues
Wednesday, September 10, 2008 11:32 PM PDT
By Amy M.E. Fischer
Printable version
E-mail this articlePolitical activist Tim Eyman e-mailed 20 cities recently about his proposed initiative to ease traffic congestion statewide using revenues from traffic-safety cameras, but only two cities took the bait.
Longview was one of them.
“We got an earful from Longview. That’s a good thing,” Eyman said Tuesday.
Longview’s mayor and city manager duked it out electronically this week with the conservative, anti-tax Eyman, who taunted city officials with accusations that red-light cameras were about generating ticket revenue, not safety. City officials, in turn, voiced doubts that the local area would get a dime of the state’s pot of traffic congestion relief money.
Eyman’s Initiative 985 would open carpool lanes during non-peak hours, require cities to synchronize traffic lights and increase funding for emergency roadside assistance. To help pay for the initiative’s mandates, cities would be required to deposit all fines generated by traffic-safety camera infractions into the state’s “Reduce Traffic Congestion Account.”
The Longview City Council had planned to hold an informational workshop Oct. 2 to learn more about the traffic-safety cameras, which include cameras that photograph speeders in school zones and red-light runners. Council members Dennis Weber and Mary Jane Melink had raised the issue, arguing that the cameras would make the town’s roads safer and free up police to investigate more crimes.
Last week, the city cancelled the workshop until after voters decide the fate of I-985 in November’s election.
Tuesday, Eyman said his initiative’s funding source was to send a political message and expose cities’ motives for using traffic-safety cameras.
“Voters have always been told by elected officials red-light cameras have nothing to do with money, it’s all about safety,” he said. “We wanted to challenge that and say we believe it is about the money, and we can prove it.”
Red-light camera contracts can cost cities hundreds of thousands a year. Longview officials say if the revenue from the $124 tickets went to Olympia rather than into the city’s general fund the program would be unaffordable.
But Eyman said, as with any other program, cities must prioritize their spending and decide which programs get funded and which don’t. Red-light cameras shouldn’t be the exception, and cities ought to decide if the benefit of the cameras is worth the money, he said.
If the cameras truly are for safety, “put up all the cameras you want,” he said.
That black-and-white viewpoint chafes Longview city officials.
“I agree with you that this is all about safety,” City Manager Bob Gregory wrote Monday in an e-mail to Eyman. “What our local newspaper and your initiative ignores is that this is a new program that we would like to consider, but unfortunately, we cannot afford to add any more new programs, as we will not be able to recover any of this expense with the anticipated revenue that this technology would have provided. ... This program cannot move forward without reducing programs somewhere else in the community.”
A Daily News’ editorial Sept. 5 said the city should erect red-light cameras sooner than later, regardless of whether I-985 passes, because they would reduce red-light running accidents and “T-bone” collisions.
Tuesday, Mayor Kurt Anagnostou reminded the Daily News the city’s No. 1 goal was to bring down its crime rate, and that red-light cameras were one strategy in that overall package.
“He’s just taking it away,” Anagnostou said of Eyman. “What they want us to do is fund a very expensive system, and any fees that are generated from that go to Seattle to pay for their traffic congestion problems. Yeah, that makes sense.”
Tuesday, Eyman said most of the money would go toward synchronizing traffic lights in all cities statewide, which the initiative would mandate and fully fund. (Gregory countered it was unrealistic to assume there would be enough money to cover that goal and the others in the initiative).
Also, Eyman cited a 2007 transportation report, compiled at the state auditor’s request, that claimed easing traffic congestion would boost the economy statewide by $3 billion a year.
In an e-mail Saturday to Eyman, Anagnostou questioned the logic of I-985’s funding source.
“Your initiative is designed to take an effective tool of traffic enforcement and public safety away from cities and require the much more expensive alternative of police manpower that can better be used fighting crime and responding to emergencies. Why would you want to do that?” Anagnostou wrote.
In his response Sunday, Eyman ignored Anagnostou’s questions. Instead, he wrote, “So you’re saying that if voters approve I-985, which removes the profit motive for red light cameras, that you won’t put them up — you seem to admit that in your e-mail, is that correct?”
Anagnostou said Eyman doesn’t seem to understand that most people in government strive hard to stretch tax dollars and provide services responsibly.
“I’d like to see him get in and try to manage any city budget,” he said.
Related articles:
Council should stop stalling and vote on red-light cameras (Sept. 5 editorial)
Eyman measure could jeopardize red-light camera plan (Sept. 4)
Council needs update on cameras (Aug. 30 Letter to the Editor from Longview Mayor Kurt Anagnostou)
Council delays decision on red-light cameras (Aug. 15)
loudly wrote on Sep 11, 2008 12:06 AM:
crowsfeet wrote on Sep 11, 2008 7:40 AM:
cynic954 wrote on Sep 11, 2008 8:09 AM:
longview citizen wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:00 AM:
Rural Citizen wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:28 AM:
The world is not DISNEYLAND, where behind the scenes actors direct a good time for all.
Citizens actually DO have the BRAINS to maneuver the streets of Longview without being killed and we don't NEED and we don't WANT another EXPENDITURE of OUR money to babysit us. Face it. Anyone who would run a red light is not paying attention to their driving, for whatever reason. None of those reasons can be mitigated with a camera and fine... except for the very few who purposely do it. What's that number? One in 10,000? Can you even prove that?
I signed the petition. I think this is the single good petition the guy ever did. By the way, don't give him any ideas about running for office or he will actually do it. I wouldn't want him going that far okay? I don't really even like the guy, and I MET him when I signed his petition. However this issue needs to go away. Drivers need to drive defensively, keeping an eye out for the occasional red light runner. "
pangborn wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:51 AM:
The lights will not solve the problem. They are not for safety. The lights are to generate money.
If the lights are not to generate money the tickets should be informational and free. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:59 AM:
ClearCut wrote on Sep 11, 2008 10:54 AM:
2. http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-06242004-230619/unrestricted/Thesis_3.pdf Fig. 4.1 on p 67
3. http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/04-alternatives.pdf Fig 2-8 on p 2-20
4. http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/05-simulator.pdf at p 69
5. http://www.highwayrobbery.net/redlightcamsdocsMesaMain.html "
Absolutist wrote on Sep 11, 2008 11:36 AM:
Great! Cut the programs! Trim all the fat possible . . . and by "possible" I mean fat that probably won't be seen as a feasible option.
This whole idea of cameras is baloney. It's about money and government intrusion. When is enough intrusiveness enough? Get the government out of my life to the extent that it is . . . I'm so sick of leaders who either can't or won't consider alternative explanations to studies and stats they believe support their views, it's exasperating.
Geez. "
CorrupSean wrote on Sep 11, 2008 12:40 PM:
cheney119 wrote on Sep 11, 2008 3:19 PM:
cheney119 wrote on Sep 11, 2008 3:24 PM:
* "
msfans wrote on Sep 11, 2008 5:01 PM:
tazer baby wrote on Sep 11, 2008 6:41 PM:
tazer baby wrote on Sep 11, 2008 6:44 PM:
Tacoma, WA - September 11, 2008
Traffic officers have investigated six deadly traffic accidents so far this year, compared to nine through the end of August 2007. The number of calls for more serious accidents also is down from 50 through August 2007 to 27 so far this year. "
tazer baby wrote on Sep 11, 2008 6:46 PM:
Red light running is the leading cause of urban crashes according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. In 2006, almost 900 people were killed and an estimated 144,000 were injured in crashes that involved red light running. "
tazer baby wrote on Sep 11, 2008 6:49 PM:
Each year, red light runners cause as many as 218,000 traffic collisions in the United States. On average, more than 180,000 people are injured and nearly 900 people are killed in these crashes. These injuries and deaths cost the public some $14 billion annually, according to the Federal Highway Administration. Texas has the fourth highest number of red light running fatalities per capita in the nation. "
tazer baby wrote on Sep 11, 2008 6:51 PM:
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/redlights/downloads/ISU%202007%20study.pdf "
msfans wrote on Sep 11, 2008 8:56 PM:
turkeyhunterman wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:05 PM:
DW wrote on Sep 12, 2008 10:22 AM:
Past Month's Most Commented Stories