OFF THE WIRE
California: City Retreats From Red Light Camera
Referendum Riverside, California to vote on backing out of referendum on red
light camera use.
City leaders in Riverside, California are backing off the
promise made last November to allow residents to make the call about whether to
keep or eliminate red light cameras. The city council votes later today on a
staff recommendation to pull the plug on the public vote.
The city has already postponed the ballot measure that was to
be considered in June. The city council cited litigation filed by American
Traffic Solutions (ATS) to overturn the results of last November's election in
Murrieta, where 57 percent favored shutting off the cameras. ATS succeeded in
finding an activist judge, Riverside County Superior Court Judge Daniel A.
Ottolia, willing to block the public from voting on the issue, but the Court of
Appeal intervened, said Judge Ottolia was wrong and ordered the vote to proceed.
Despite being chastised by the appellate court, Judge Ottolia
returned in April to declare the public's will invalid after the vote had taken
place and Murrieta politicians received the message loud and clear. Because the
anti-camera activists had their victory -- Murrieta's city council voted
unanimously to take down the cameras in May -- they did not file an expensive
second challenge to the ruling. ATS pushed for the Murrieta case in the hopes of
securing a precedent that could be used against other cities. Riverside fell in
line with the camera company's strategy.
"The trial court's decision is well-reasoned and it is our
opinion that the decision would have been upheld by the Court of Appeal had the
ballot measure proponents elected to appeal the judgment," Riverside City
Attorney Gregory P. Priamos wrote in a memo to the council. "The judgment is
consistent with the well-settled principle that the state has plenary power and
has preempted the entire field of traffic control. Unless expressly authorized
by the legislature, a city, whether charter or general law, has no police power
over vehicular traffic control."
Photo enforcement companies have developed this legal argument
to keep the public from having any say in the use of automated ticketing because
when given a chance to vote on the issue, the public says no nine out of ten
timed (view list of public votes). The results of public votes are the same in
big cities and small towns, regardless of whether the residents tend to be
liberal or conservative.
7/23/2013 California: City Retreats From Red Light Camera
Referendum Riverside, California to vote on backing out of referendum on red
light camera use.
City leaders in Riverside, California are backing off the
promise made last November to allow residents to make the call about whether to
keep or eliminate red light cameras. The city council votes later today on a
staff recommendation to pull the plug on the public vote.
The city has already postponed the ballot measure that was to
be considered in June. The city council cited litigation filed by American
Traffic Solutions (ATS) to overturn the results of last November's election in
Murrieta, where 57 percent favored shutting off the cameras. ATS succeeded in
finding an activist judge, Riverside County Superior Court Judge Daniel A.
Ottolia, willing to block the public from voting on the issue, but the Court of
Appeal intervened, said Judge Ottolia was wrong and ordered the vote to proceed.
Despite being chastised by the appellate court, Judge Ottolia
returned in April to declare the public's will invalid after the vote had taken
place and Murrieta politicians received the message loud and clear. Because the
anti-camera activists had their victory -- Murrieta's city council voted
unanimously to take down the cameras in May -- they did not file an expensive
second challenge to the ruling. ATS pushed for the Murrieta case in the hopes of
securing a precedent that could be used against other cities. Riverside fell in
line with the camera company's strategy.
"The trial court's decision is well-reasoned and it is our
opinion that the decision would have been upheld by the Court of Appeal had the
ballot measure proponents elected to appeal the judgment," Riverside City
Attorney Gregory P. Priamos wrote in a memo to the council. "The judgment is
consistent with the well-settled principle that the state has plenary power and
has preempted the entire field of traffic control. Unless expressly authorized
by the legislature, a city, whether charter or general law, has no police power
over vehicular traffic control."
Photo enforcement companies have developed this legal argument
to keep the public from having any say in the use of automated ticketing because
when given a chance to vote on the issue, the public says no nine out of ten
timed (view list of public votes). The results of public votes are the same in
big cities and small towns, regardless of whether the residents tend to be
liberal or conservative.
