By on June 29, 2011

The battle over the Houston, Texas red light camera program returned to the legal spotlight Monday. A majority of voters agreed with Francis M. Kubosh and Randall Kubosh in November that the automated ticketing machines should be removed, but a federal judge intervened earlier this month and overturned the election (view ruling). The Kuboshes filed a reply brief with the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Monday seeking to restore the result of the public vote.

“The issues are important to the electorate of the nation’s fourth largest city, Houston, where a 52.8 percent majority voted ‘No’ to a ballot proposition hand-crafted by the city attorney, approved by the mayor, and ratified by all but one member of the city council,” wrote David Allen Furlow, attorney for the Kuboshes. “The outcome of this case will affect the complex web of relationships among municipal governments, their citizens, and private contractors throughout Texas and the nation.”

The Kuboshes argue that US District Judge Lynn N. Hughes erred as a matter of law by agreeing to the pretense of having the city of Houston, which supports cameras, sue American Traffic Solutions (ATS), which operates cameras, as if there were an actual dispute between the two. Hughes, who has served on the bench for 25 years with Judge David Hittner, agreed within 48 hours to hear a request for a restraining order to keep the ATS cameras up filed on behalf of Judge Hittner’s son, ATS General Counsel George Hittner. Hughes set a hearing on the matter for the day after Thanksgiving in a lightning move designed to exclude the initiative sponsors, who were never notified. During the proceedings, Hughes did not hide his true feelings.

“So, the essence of the popular revolt was people in Houston want to run red lights,” Judge Hughes said on November 26, according to the record. “I mean, the highway department has cameras up and down the freeways and on some side streets.”

Hughes accordingly denied a motion by the Kuboshes requesting to intervene in the case, the order which the Kuboshes now appeal. Hughes only allowed the Kuboshes to file amicus briefs in the case, denying them the right to object to evidence and make arguments and motions without the leave of the court. Under Texas law, courts must permit the intervention of a qualified voter to defend a measure election in an election contest.

“Here, the city has lost a case it purports, falsely, to ‘zealously defend,’ enabling it to continue pocketing $10 million in annual red light camera revenues its mayor does not want to lose,” Furlow wrote. “Because the city waived the statutory and constitutional defenses appellants preserved, no one but appellants can defend the Proposition 3 election they petitioned for, organized, funded with $200,000 of their family’s money, and won at the polls. Only appellants can protect their and their fellow citizens’ constitutional and statutory right to reform city government through charter amendment elections.”

ATS and Houston’s city attorney are now arguing together that the case that invalidated the election was merely a contract dispute to which the Kuboshes were not a party.

[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

One Comment on “Decision Overturning Houston Anti-Camera Referendum Appealed...”



Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

  • Re: Arrested for DUI, Woman’s Probation Becomes Nightmare

    DenverMike - Exactly. Do not get cheap when it comes to your lawyers. We’re not talking plumbers here. Go to the most respected,...
  • Re: Ask Bark: Should I Lease a Jetta?

    FreedMike - This. Putting money down on a leased car is like making home improvements to an apartment. Zero financial upside.
  • Re: Ask Bark: Should I Lease a Jetta?

    FreedMike - Lots of good choices to lease for zero out of pocket…I know it’s bigger than you were thinking of but check out the Honda Accord.
  • Re: Chapter One: The Repo Man and the Lexus

    05lgt - Eagerly awaiting the next installment. That A100 pic hurt to look at. Thanks to all involved in writing and editing this.
  • Re: Junkyard Find: 1998 Audi A8

    mypoint02 - A sad ending for such a sophisticated machine. In a few months this one’s gonna be someone’s beer can.
  • Re: K40 RLS2 Radar Detector Review

    JimC2 - Agree about Waze and watching the traffic up ahead for its behavior (and the guilty conscience brake lights). I’m quite happy to move over for faster traffic...
  • Re: K40 RLS2 Radar Detector Review

    05lgt - Not 100% I was pulled over with a visible detector and another suction mount in the footwell. LEO says “I see you hid your detector when you saw me.” I...
  • Re: 2015 Subaru Legacy 2.5i Premium Review (with Video)

    dal20402 - Because you can get transverse-like interior packaging with a longitudinal AWD system. Does it really matter anymore now that there are some...
  • Re: K40 RLS2 Radar Detector Review

    05lgt - Consider a mirror stem mount. The suction cups don’t work all that well with the new one either. Going cord free by tapping into a powered mirrors 12v is...
  • Re: QOTD: What’s the Stupidest Automotive Feature?

    Wheatridger - I’d love to have that feature. Don’t you ever drive at night across open, dark country? The last thing you want is bright dash...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, United States
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States