Rude. Very rude.

That’s how I view the Mayor and City Council’s installation of camera surveillance to impose fines on Mukilteo’s citizens with automated ticketing machines. They’re huge mega-million money-makers for governments throughout the nation (as well as the Arizona company that sells them and shares in the profits from them) and so they’re spreading like wildfire in Washington’s big cities like Seattle, Tacoma, Bellevue, and Lynnwood. 

But come on, this is Mukilteo. 

Our small town is a very polite bedroom community – everyone is super nice to one another. The people who live here, including me, my wife and three young kids, do so because we like Mukilteo’s small town feel. Slapping up cameras and treating citizens and visitors like ATMs takes that away – it hurts our community. That kind of impersonal, disrespectful treatment may be OK in big cities, but it’s not how we treat each other in Mukilteo.

So last Monday, we delivered a very civil letter to the Mayor and City Council notifying them that we are proceeding with Mukilteo Initiative 2 which lets the people decide on red light cameras in Mukilteo.

To qualify, we need to collect signatures from 1,804 Mukilteo voters. We’re targeting the Aug. 17 primary ballot. Signing our petition doesn’t mean you’re for or against the automatic ticketing cameras – it means you want the people to decide (here are 17 reasons why they’re a really bad idea: www.BanCams.com/17reasons).

The Mukilteo Beacon’s news story (Lights, camera - tickets!) highlighted several disturbing aspects of the council’s vote:

·      There was no independent traffic study conducted – instead the camera ticketing company vying for the contract did a “free” analysis which was “more a sales pitch than a safety presentation.”

·      The company’s “free” analysis lasted a single day (actually just 16 hours) and it showed zero red-light violations (a councilmember said he was “underwhelmed at the data” – talk about an understatement).

·      The council vote was taken on a day when a councilmember opposed to the policy was out of town (what a coincidence), resulting in a split-vote (3-3) with the Mayor’s “yes” vote breaking the tie.

We firmly believe that Mukilteo’s citizens oppose this Big Brother, profit-making policy and oppose the process by which it was adopted. Our initiative reverses the council’s split vote, thus repealing Ordinance 1246 allowing camera surveillance to impose fines, requires city government to get voter approval if they try again, removes the profit motive by limiting fines to the amount set in state law, and guarantees a public vote on the issue.

Mukilteo Initiative 2 gives the citizens of this community the chance to decide. And if camera ticketing ATMs are ultimately rejected by the people, then the government can implement more effective (albeit less-profitable) strategies like more public outreach and education, posted signs, flashing warning lights, speed indicator signs, etc. Those approaches are much more in line with the way we do things in Mukilteo.

The neat part about the initiative process – the collection of voter signatures and the campaign – is it gives everyone the opportunity to discuss and debate the issue, learn more about the pros and cons, and have a voice in the final decision. It engages and empowers the citizenry and provides elected officials with invaluable feedback from the people they represent. Measures like Mukilteo Initiative 2 provide the citizens with a critical check on government power.

Having the government conduct camera surveillance on its citizens to impose fines is obnoxious and violates fundamental constitutional rights like due process. Come on, this is Mukilteo. Please help us let the people decide this: 425-493-9127, BanCams@gmail.com, www.BanCams.com

#“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Benjamin Franklin