Texas City Works With Traffic Camera Company to Nullify Anti-Camera Vote

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper
texas city works with traffic camera company to nullify anti camera vote

A red light camera company and officials in the city of Baytown, Texas are conspiring to nullify the results of an election. In November, 58 percent of voters approved a ballot measure prohibiting the use of red light cameras unless a police officer is present to witness any alleged offense. American Traffic Solutions (ATS) filed suit in February to overturn the result of this vote, and city officials on September 22 asked Harris County Judge Michael D. Miller to sign off on a settlement of this suit that was prepared by ATS.

“The court, after considering the agreed statement of facts and applicable law, is of the opinion that the contested election held on November 2, 2010 for the approval or rejection of a proposed initiative, related to Baytown’s automated photographic traffic signal enforcement program, was an election on an untimely referendum and, therefore, void,” stated the proposed judgment drafted by ATS attorney Andy Taylor and signed by Baytown City Attorney Ignacio Ramirez. “It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the results of the special election are hereby declared void and without any legal effect for all purposes.”

Judge Miller has yet to indicate whether he will accept the settlement struck between ATS and Baytown. Byron Schirmbeck, author of the initiative petition as director of saferbaytown.com, is hoping he does not. Schirmbeck points out that unlike other anti-camera ballot measures, the one approved by Baytown voters was clearly not a referendum. Baytown’s red light camera ordinance was not repealed, and the city is free to use automated ticketing machines — so long as a police officer witnesses each alleged offense. Baytown dropped the program rather than incur the cost involved in complying with the terms of the ballot measure.

“Baytown city council has no right to sell our election to a corrupt corporation to protect them against further actions of the people,” Schirmbeck told TheNewspaper. “This is a slap in the face to the people’s right to self govern.”

ATS had been so desperate to nullify the election that it spent over $140,000 to block it at various stages. The Arizona company went so far as to file court briefs citing the 1965 Voting Rights Act to charge photo enforcement program opponents as anti-black racists, even though analysis of precinct voting patterns in Houston showed that black neighborhoods were more opposed to cameras than white neighborhoods.

Judge Miller, a Democrat, won his election in 2008 with just 51 percent of the vote. He is up for re-election next year.

[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]

Join the conversation
  • VanillaDude VanillaDude on Oct 03, 2011

    Unbelievable. So, if this guy loses reelection next year, will he just nullify that election and keep wearing his robe? Exactly what is the point here? At what point do these people respect citizen's wishes on this issue? Who is policing whom here? ATS seems to be more in control over this juridiction than the people living there. Why is ATS forcing themselves onto the citizens of Baytown? Who is being a good citizen here? When ATS took a legal route they exposed themselves as indifferent to what they represented. You cannot be in favor of serving communities, and suing them at the same time. This is a warning to any town considering ATS as a company with which to do any business. They will not be your friend if you do not do what they demand. As to the judge, it seems that he is unable to judge what is best for his neighbors, friends and community. His decision and the means taken to get his approval, is exposing him as too willing to find ways to undermine those he is in office to serve - by silencing them.

    • See 1 previous
    • Redav Redav on Oct 04, 2011

      Ah, yes, let's have mob rule because the 'rule of the people' always works out better than constituional rule where everyone--people and govt--have to follow the rules. It's kind of strange that you think you know more/better than a judge as to what is best for his neighbors, yet I'd be willing to bet he's more qualified than you.

  • CarPerson CarPerson on Oct 03, 2011

    Notice the Baytown city attorney signed off on it... ATS also ravaged the City of Longview, WA mayor, city council, and city attorney, all of which are still convinced they can bluff their way through it by screwing around with everything they can touch. In a nice revenge of the negative karma, ILWU union thugs are currently working them over pretty good. What goes around, comes around...

  • Tassos Government cheese for millionaires, while idiot Joe biden adds trillions to the debt.What a country (IT ONCE WAS!)
  • Tassos screw the fat cat incompetents. Let them rot. No deal.
  • MaintenanceCosts I think if there's one thing we can be sure of given Toyota's recent decisions it's that the strongest version of the next Camry will be a hybrid. Sadly, the buttery V6 is toast.A Camry with the Highlander/Sienna PSD powertrain would be basically competitive in the sedan market, with the slow death of V6 and big-turbo options. But for whatever reason it seems like that powertrain is capacity challenged. Not sure why, as there's nothing exotic in it.A Camry with the Hybrid Max powertrain would be bonkers, easily the fastest thing in segment. It would likewise be easy to build; again, there's nothing exotic in the Hybrid Max powertrain. (And Hybrid Max products don't seem to be all that constrained, so far.)
  • Analoggrotto The readers of TTAC deserve better than a bunch of Kia shills posing as journalists.
  • Lou_BC How do they work covered in snow, ice, mud, dust and water? Vibration?