Effort to Repeal Iowa City Red-Light Camera Ordinance Hits Another Road Block

By Vanessa Miller, Reporter

A Gatso USA systems engineer makes adjustments to the red light camera aimed at the northbound lanes at the intersection of Edgewood Rd. NE and 42nd St. NE on Thursday, April 8, 2010, in northeast Cedar Rapids. (Jim Slosiarek/The Gazette)

Tools

By Liz Blood

Story Created: Aug 23, 2012 at 6:01 PM CDT

Story Updated: Aug 23, 2012 at 6:01 PM CDT

IOWA CITY, Iowa - A pair of Iowa City residents’ efforts to repeal an ordinance allowing the use of red-light cameras has hit another road block after the city attorney this week issued a finding that the issue, as it has been presented, couldn’t go back before the City Council or voters for two years.

Aleksey Gurtovoy and Martha Hampel, who began their efforts on June 22 to repeal the city’s Automated Traffic Enforcement ordinance that allows the use of red light cameras, told The Gazette on Thursday that they disagree with the city attorney’s findings and don’t plan to stop pushing to repeal the ordinance.

“We think she’s wrong, and we are definitely going to keep going with this,” Gurtovoy said.

After the pair filed their first affidavit to start an initiative in June, City Attorney Eleanor Dilkes issued a finding that the affidavit’s wording made it a referendum rather than an initiative.

An initiative proposes a measure for the City Council’s consideration. A referendum requires the council to reconsider an existing measure. A referendum petition must be filed within 60 days of the final adoption of the measure or more than two years after adoption.

In both an initiative and a referendum, if the council doesn’t take the requested action, the proposal goes to a public vote.

Because the deadline for seeking a referendum on the red-light cameras had passed, Dilkes said, citizens would have to wait two years after the ordinance’s adoption in February to file a petition to put the issue back before city councilors or to a vote.

The couple revised their initial affidavit and resubmitted it on July 27 with different language, but Dilkes this week issued a finding that, according to the City Code, the pair still is seeking a referendum. She said, based on the deadlines outlined in the City Code, the soonest an affidavit could be filed seeking a referendum is Aug. 22 2013.

Gurtovoy said he and Hampel had a private attorney review the case, and the attorney agreed that the affidavit was requesting an initiative. Therefore, Gurtovoy said, he has no intention of giving up on the issue because he doesn’t want to set a precedent that would prohibit future citizens from starting grass-roots initiatives like the one he has helped launch.

“We do not want traffic surveillance in our city, and her interpretation of the City Code sets a dangerous precedent of what citizens can do,” Gurtovoy said.

The City Council still needs to approve a contract with a camera vendor, but the cameras could be up by this fall.

Next Article Authorities Investigating Possible Connection Between Abduction Cases

Conversation Guidelines

Be Kind

Don't use abusive, offensive, threatening, racist, vulgar or sexually-oriented language.
Don't attack someone personally. Keep it civil and be responsible.

Share Knowledge

Be truthful. Share what you know and what you are passionate about.
What more do you want to learn? Keep it simple.

Stay focused

Promote lively and healthy debate. Stay on topic. Ask questions and give feedback on the story's topic.

Report Trouble

Help us maintain a quality comment section by reporting comments that are offensive. If you see a comment that is offensive, or you feel violates our guidelines, simply click on the "x" to the far right of the comment to report it.

read the full guidelines here »

Commenting will be disabled on stories dealing with the following subject matter: Crime, sexual abuse, property fires, automobile accidents, Amber Alerts, Operation Quickfinds and suicides.