Trending
Dear Editor:
I have followed your coverage of the recent traffic camera consideration and approval by East Liverpool's City Council with great interest. I found two aspects of this process to be very instructive: first that the city is going to go forward with the cameras without any input from the voters because city council member Fred Rayl has decided that speeding is a problem. Secondly, that no one is looking out for the interests of the city's residents, taxpayers and businesses.
Despite the assurances provided by law director Charles Payne, there is good reason to believe that this form of policing is unconstitutional. While we wait for the courts to decide if this is legal, it is clearly unethical to police in this manner. Through the City's association with Blue Line Solutions, they have streamlined the ticket writing process to maximize revenue generated at the expense of the due process and civil rights of those who receive tickets generated by the cameras.
Service Safety Director Brian Allen has said that the motivation behind the traffic cameras is safety and not revenue, saying "it's to increase safety." Blue Line Solutions CEO and former police officer Mark Hutchison was more transparent when he said "while there is money in this, it's truly about safety." It is telling that the tickets generated by this arrangement will not result in points on a driver's license or raise their insurance rates. Police Chief John Lane was also surprisingly candid when he stated "anything the city can do to benefit financially we have to do it."
Obviously our elected representatives and city functionaries are representing the interests of the city government at the expense of the residents and taxpayers. If there truly was/is an epidemic of speeding, where is the groundswell of community support for this decision? Police Chief John Lane has said this is a win/win for the city and they are wrong. The City Council thinks they can generate the revenue they were not able to raise through their recently failed income tax increase with extra traffic tickets and they are only right in the short-term. What they do not consider is the long-term effect on the already fragile tax and residency base as they send 40 percent of the ticket revenue on purpose to Tennessee, never to return to the local economy. This is money that will not be spent at L&B Donuts, Smith Oil, Sparkle Market and Vizun'z Lunch Box. I respectfully request the City Council to reconsider their priorities in favor of creating a hospitable business environment, not a hostile one.
If there truly is broad support in the community for these traffic cameras, the City Council would have presented a ballot initiative and let the voters demonstrate this support. That they did not is telling and poses the question: Will voters support city council members Fred Rayl and Ray Perorazio and Mayor Ryan Stovall next election?
Chris Alverson
East Liverpool