The second initiative in city history is bound for the November ballot after the Mukilteo City Council voted 5-1 to let voters decide whether Mukilteo should have traffic cameras capture the license plates of drivers who either run red lights or exceed 20 mph in school zones.

“I agree very strongly with the initiative process,” Councilmember Kevin Stoltz said. “Really, when we have this many people sign the petition, it’s the responsibility of the council to put it on the ballot.”

Stoltz said he doesn’t want to be like Lynnwood, the only city in Snohomish County that uses the cameras.

“We need to understand exactly what this is telling us,” Linda Grafer said of voting against placing it on the ballot. “I have zero tolerance for speeding in school zones; I don’t care how we stop it.”

Grafer said she wanted the council to follow through with its plan to let its own safety and transportation committees study the data before putting the initiative on the ballot.

Council President Randy Lord said he supports the initiative process, but opposes the cameras for a number of reasons.

“This really ties our hands,” he said, adding that he will campaign against the initiative in coming months.

“I believe people who signed the petitions weren’t correctly educated,” he said. “The fear of the unknown confused people.”

Reports of the technology being misused aren’t reason to ban it, he said.

“We’re throwing the baby out with the wash here.”

Richard Emery was absent for Wednesday’s meeting.

In January, the council contracted with Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions to conduct speed studies around town.

In May, the council passed an ordinance to allow the cameras, then approved a contract with ATS to install them at Harbour Pointe Boulevard North and SR-525 (for red light runners), and in front of Olympic View Middle School (for school zone violators).

That got the attention of Nick Sherwood of Bancams.org, Alex Rion of Washington’s Campaign for Liberty, and initiative writer Tim Eyman, who circulated petitions to put the matter before voters, and to limit any fines from those caught by camera to $20, the cheapest parking ticket in the city’s code.

“We would expect, and we would ask, that the City Council and mayor give short shrift to debating whether or not to break the law,” Sherwood said.

However, city administrator Joe Hannan put initiative supporters on alert by informing the council that this matter is not required to be subject to initiative. He said city attorney Angela Belbeck could confirm that.

Citizens, from inside and outside the city, testified against the cameras at Wednesday’s special meeting, citing studies and other information about safety and violation of privacy.

Mukilteo resident Charlie Pancerzewksi said he is neither for nor against the cameras themselves, but questioned why anyone who doesn’t violate the law would outright oppose them.

“They’re only raising revenue if you break the law,” he said.

“I probably shouldn’t have walked up here. I didn’t really know I was in the presence of, like, royalty,” Mukilteo resident Michael Young said.

“People can sit there and have a lawyer come across to me and be like a voice piece (sic) for me. I don’t approve of him for my opinion.”
“I mean, you go into a lawyer, you go to a judge, you go in for a crime I don’t sit there and say take the prosecution as my witness, I don’t take them as my voice piece (sic).

Other residents suggested looking at different alternatives, such as speed bumps, to slow down those traveling too fast in school zones.

Those can bring the law of unintended consequences, Councilmember Tony Tinsley pointed out, such as impeding ambulance and fire trucks in emergencies, and wreaking havoc on snowplows during the occasional winter storm.

Tinsley also corrected some misinformation that he’s heard around town, such as that ATS decides who receives a ticket. A Mukilteo police officer would review each photo and make that determination, he said.

Also, Tinsley said, a driver who enters an intersection on yellow is considered safe, even if that car doesn’t clear the intersection before the light turns red. Those who receive tickets entered the intersection after the light changed, he said.

“We’re not after the little guy; we’re after the lawbreakers that run red lights,” he said.

Tinsley drew laughter from all sides when he thanked Young for referring to the council as “royalty,” and pointed out that, “Our president already thinks he’s the Lord.”

Eyman collected around 1,800 signatures originally, of which 400-plus were determined to be invalid.

He came back with more than 1,000 additional ones, which passed the county auditor’s office verification process. The issue will go on the November ballot.