Camera ban would usurp cities’ power

The Gazette Editorial Board

----

An outright ban or constitutional amendment outlawing local governments' rights to use traffic cameras? Legislators and the governor can't be serious.

Apparently they are, as evidenced by a House Transportation subcommittee's approval this week of a bill that would ban red light and speed cameras and require cameras already in use to be removed by July 1.

The bill now goes to the entire Transportation Committee on its way to consideration by the full House. Let's hope it doesn't get that far.

The state should decide policy for state roads, but unless they can show compelling reason to interfere with local control, they should leave locally approved traffic enforcement cameras alone.

Speed or red-light cameras are used now in cities like Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Muscatine, Sioux City, Ankeny and Clive. Many more towns, including Iowa City, are considering them.

But the future of those camera systems is far from certain. In addition to the House bill, similar legislation has been introduced in the Senate.

Gov. Terry Branstad said he'd sign a bill banning the hated devices.

One state representative has even introduced a constitutional amendment to stop their use - even though the Iowa Supreme Court in 2008 found the cameras' use is not a violation of the constitution.

If legislators or opponents can show compelling evidence that municipalities are abusing the cameras and the use of ticket revenue, then some uniform guidelines for their use may be in order.

Failing that, traffic cameras should not be the state's concern.

Police say cameras allow them to consistently enforce traffic laws in problematic areas without expending a large amount of limited resources to do so.

In Cedar Rapids, for example, injury accidents have dropped 75 percent on a dangerous stretch of Interstate 380 since cameras were installed there in 2010. Other cities can show compelling statistics.

Opponents say the cameras aren't effective and violate car owners' civil liberties. Some complain that it creates unequal punishment under the law since tickets generated by traffic enforcement cameras are civil, not criminal, citations. Others worry about excessive “Big Brother” monitoring of drivers by local governments and say the temptation for cities to use enforcement cameras as cash cows is just too great.

So far, we've seen little evidence that Iowa cities are abusing peoples' rights or issuing excessively high fines.

We're more concerned about the possibility of big government stepping in and wresting control from cities on this issue.

Bottom line: It should be up to local municipalities and voters to decide whether enforcement cameras are the right call.

n Comments: thegazette.com/category/opinion/editorial or editorial@sourcemedia.net