Camera emails concerning, unsurprising

We wish we could use the word surprising when describing email exchanges between Iowa city leaders and representatives of Gatso USA, the company that operates automated traffic camera programs in Cedar Rapids, Des Moines and Muscatine.

Unfortunately, we find the situation unsurprising, given the amount of money at stake.

According to research by Gazette reporter B.A. Morelli, Gatso has garnered more than $11 million since 2010, mostly from cameras in Cedar Rapids. Since tickets from the cameras, paid by local motorists, are typically split close to 60-40 between local jurisdictions and the company, the Iowa municipalities also have gathered revenues around $16 million during the same time period.

That's a lot of coin and a big incentive for the cities, and especially the company, to lobby state lawmakers and leaders to produce policies and laws favorable for the cameras.

No wonder company representatives believed they'd find a sympathetic audience when they asked local officials to make noise regarding then-proposed Iowa Department of Transportation traffic camera policies.

The email trail, the collusion, also dredges up the biggest criticism leveraged against the cameras - that they target municipalities' bottom lines more than safety statistics.

The specter of safety has been the key focus of our board and where we've hinged our continued, if tentative, support for the devices. But it is getting more difficult to keep safety at the forefront when so much city energy is expended on behalf of revenues.

As such, we renew our call for transparency by the City of Cedar Rapids. Make revenues from the traffic camera program more prominent within the budget, and clearly denote where they are expended.

When contacted for a comment regarding the email exchanges, a spokesperson for Cedar Rapids Police Chief Wayne Jerman said, 'I don't believe any vendor has a role or should have a role in determining how a [police department] drafts policy.”

We'd like to remind Jerman and other city leaders that similar sentiments should be extended to state transportation boards and legislative committees.

No vendor should have a role in determining state, regional or city policies because vendors are first and foremost working for their own interests, not those of the public.

l Comments: editorial@thegazette.com; (319) 398-8262.