Ohio: Voters In Two More Cities Poised To Ban Traffic Cameras

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper
ohio voters in two more cities poised to ban traffic cameras

A pair of Cuyahoga County, Ohio cities are likely to have a public vote on banning red light cameras and speed cameras in November. A sufficient number of residents in Garfield Heights and South Euclid signed a referendum petition that organizers expect to turn in this week, as early as today. Once approved, these municipalities will join Anaheim, California; Baytown and Houston, Texas; and Mukilteo, Washington in voting on the future of cameras on November 2.

Cuyahoga County for Liberty (CC4L) coordinated the signature gathering effort in conjunction with the Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes (COAST) which successfully built a coalition to defeat Cincinnati’s red light cameras in 2008. CC4L Chairman Grant McCallum explained the reason his group decided to fight the cameras in South Euclid.

“It’s clearly an overreach of government, as far as I’m concerned,” McCallum told TheNewspaper. “It’s a way for local governments to extract money from their citizens. It has nothing to do with safety.”

City leaders hope to deploy speed cameras and mount cameras on school buses to issue expensive citations. McCallum says he has more than 500 signatures in hand — double the 251 required to force the vote. His most successful tactic has been to direct traffic into a drive-thru petition signing area in parking lots that allow supporters to quickly and conveniently register. McCallum says the support has been tremendous.

“Everyone sees this as just a money-grab — a scam,” McCallum said. “Some people are concerned about Big Brother and electronic surveillance, but the majority of people understand it’s just another way for the city to make money…. The support is across all the political spectrum.”

Garfield Heights has also lined up more than enough signatures. So far, 2300 have said that they want a vote to end cameras, even though only 875 signatures are needed. Once on the ballot, Ohio voters have always approved bans on cameras. Last November Chillicothe and Heath voted to ban them — with 72 percent of voters in the latter city rejecting automated ticketing. In 2008, residents in Cincinnati, Ohio rejected red light cameras. Seventy-six percent of Steubenville, Ohio voters rejected photo radar in 2006.

Elsewhere, 61 percent of Sykesville, Maryland voters overturned a speed camera ordinance earlier this year. In 2009, eighty-six percent of Sulphur, Louisiana rejected speed cameras. College Station, Texas also rejected cameras. In the mid-1990s, speed cameras lost by a two-to-one margin in Peoria, Arizona and Batavia, Illinois. In 1997, voters in Anchorage, Alaska banned cameras even after the local authorities had removed them.

[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]

Join the conversation
  • Tparkit Tparkit on Jul 19, 2010

    Perhaps there's an important theme developing here, one that goes beyond red light cameras. As this sort of campaign spreads, people will figure out that they really can use direct political involvement to stop government's thuggary and piracy. If so, grassroots action can snowball to the point where it threatens even Washington's apparently limitless ability to wrest power from the citizenry and the states.

  • JK43123 JK43123 on Jul 19, 2010

    Here in Columbus, Ohio, there was a story on the news last night that if you try to fight one of the city's red light tickets, you have to admit guilt and pay the fine, and then they'll look at it and might decide to give you a refund. Whatever happened to innocent before proven guilty? John

  • Tassos I know some would want to own a collectible Mustang. (sure as hell not me. This crappy 'secretary's car' (that was exactly its intended buying demo) was as sophisticated (transl. : CRUDE) as the FLintstone's mobile. Solid Real Axle? Are you effing kidding me?There is a huge number of these around, so they are neither expensive nor valuable.WHen it came out, it was $2,000 or so new. A colleague bought a recent one with the stupid Ecoboost which also promised good fuel economy. He drives a hard bargain and spends time shopping and I remember he paid $37k ( the fool only bought domestic crap, but luckily he is good with his hands and can fix lots of stuff on them).He told me that the alleged fuel economy is obtained only if you drive it like a VERY old lady. WHich defeats the purpose, of course, you might as well buy a used Toyota Yaris (not even a Corolla).
  • MRF 95 T-Bird Back when the Corolla consisted of a wide range of body styles. This wagon, both four door and two door sedans, a shooting brake like three door hatch as well as a sports coupe hatchback. All of which were on the popular cars on the road where I resided.
  • Wjtinfwb Jeez... I've got 3 Ford's and have been a defender due to my overall good experiences but this is getting hard to defend. Thinking the product durability testing that used to take months to rack up 100k miles or more is being replaced with computer simulations that just aren't causing these real-world issues to pop up. More time at the proving ground please...
  • Wjtinfwb Looks like Mazda put more effort into sprucing up a moribund product than Chevy did with the soon to be euthanized '24 Camaro.
  • Wjtinfwb I've seen worse on the highways around Atlanta, usually with a refrigerator or washer wedged into the trunk and secured with recycled twine...