Monroe, Washington Anti-Camera Referendum Advances

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper
monroe washington anti camera referendum advances

Residents of Monroe, Washington are one step closer to having the opportunity to vote in November on whether or not they wish to continue using red light cameras and speed cameras. Monroe city officials this week handed over stacks of petitions to the Snohomish County auditor who will determine whether 999 valid signatures have been gathered out of the 2120 names turned in by Seeds of Liberty‘s Ty Balascio.

Last month the group handed in the first batch of 1250 signatures, but the count came up short of the goal by 375. A total of 635 signatures came from voters just outside the city limits, and 48 from validly registered residents who had accidentally signed the petition twice — under state law, both signatures are invalidated in the case of duplicates. On June 9, anti-camera activists supplemented the total with another 870 names, which they believe will be more than enough to qualify for the ballot.

“An outpouring of support from across the community enabled the success we achieved today,” Balascio wrote in a message to supporters. “Concerned citizens with no history in activism volunteered time to knock on doors all across town. Businesses supported our efforts to collect signatures in front of their stores. Many businesses placed our initiative on their countertops to collect signatures directly! Over 200 of you took time to sign the initiative, gather signatures from your neighbors, and return your results through the mail. We have it on record that over 2000 people in this community care greatly about the issue of automatic ticket cameras in Monroe. With this achievement, there is no doubt that the voters in Monroe demand a say in this decision.”

The initiative also repeals the existing ordinance authorizing cameras and sets the cost of a citation to that of the least expensive parking ticket. Cameras could not be installed in the future unless approved by a vote of the people. That assent is unlikely, as voters have never approved of the use of photo ticketing. Last year, 71 percent of voters banned cameras in Mukilteo. Cameras were also banned in Houston, Texas; Baytown, Texas; Anaheim, California; and Garfield Heights, Ohio. Photo enforcement has never survived when the question is put directly to voters. Last year, 61 percent of Sykesville, Maryland voters overturned a speed camera ordinance. In 2009, eighty-six percent of Sulphur, Louisiana rejected speed cameras, 72 percent said no in Chillicothe, Ohio; Heath, Ohio and College Station, Texas also rejected cameras. In 2008, residents in Cincinnati, Ohio rejected red light cameras. Seventy-six percent of Steubenville, Ohio voters rejected photo radar in 2006. 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.


Join the conversation
 1 comment
  • CarPerson CarPerson on Jun 16, 2011

    No pro-camera vote has ever been passed by the general public. No pro-camera study has ever survived a professional third-party review.

  • Inside Looking Out This is actually the answer to the question I asked not that long ago.
  • Inside Looking Out Regarding "narrow windows" - the trend is that windows will eventually be replaced by big OLED screens displaying some exotic place or may even other planet.
  • Robert I have had 4th gen 1996 model for many years and enjoy driving as much now as when I first purchased it - has 190 hp variant with just the right amount of power for most all driving situations!
  • ToolGuy Meanwhile in Germany...
  • Donald More stuff to break god I love having a nanny in my truck... find a good tuner and you can remove most of the stupid stuff they add like this and auto park when the doors open stupid stuff like that