Cleveland, Maple Heights voters to decide fate of city traffic light cameras at polls on November 4, Cleveland has a disproportionate number of them in the Black community, Ohio Supreme Court ordered Maple Heights to put measure before voters after city council refused, East Cleveland residents voted to keep their traffic cameras in 2011, Cleveland's red light-traffic cameras were deemed unconstitutional by a state appellate court earlier this year
CLEVELAND, Ohio- Voters in the majority Black
cities of Cleveland and Maple Heights will decide at the polls on tomorrow, Nov 4, if the red light and speed cameras that take the place of police officers to ticket people for traffic infractions will be eliminated by charter amendments. The Cleveland initiative is dubbed Issue 35 on the ballot and a vote of yes would eliminate the controversial traffic cameras, while a vote of no would keep them, at least for now.
Residents in both cities presented necessary signatures to the respective city councils' to have the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections subsequently place the controversial issue on the November 4 ballot. But it did not come without a fight from some elected officials and policy makers in the two cities that fear that the dismantling of the traffic programs will result in a huge loss of revenue.
Cleveland City Council reluctantly passed a city ordinance to place the measure before voters, even after residents collected over 13,000 signatures, more than twice the amount needed, and the Ohio Supreme Court, by a unanimous vote, had to order Maple Heights City Council to do the same after city council tried to skate the issue.
The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals deemed the Cleveland traffic cameras unconstitutional in January of this year in the case of Sam Jodka vs The City of Cleveland, saying that the administrative procedure to challenge the tickets cannot take the place of municipal court judges. The eighth district decision is binding on the city of Cleveland and all traffic camera programs like it in cities, townships and villages across Cuyahoga County, the state's largest of some 88 counties, and of which is 29 percent Black.
The city has appealed and awaits a decision on whether the Ohio Supreme Court will hear the case.
Cleveland's 64 cameras generate roughly $6 million annually, most of them situated on the predominantly Black east side, compliments of lobbying by Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson, who is Black, and Black east side councilpersons, including Jeff Johnson, Zack Reed and Kevin Conwell.
West side Cleveland Councilman Brian Cummins, who is usually at odds with the mayor, is leading the charge to try to convince voters that safety is at issue and that the traffic cameras are meaningful. Most city residents, however, in both Cleveland and Maple Heights, resent them, some saying that the Black community is unfairly targeted , others complaining that they have been erroneously ticketed, and some saying that the cameras are a money scheme that should not take the place of police officers doing their jobs.
Also at issue is the absence of an opportunity to confront an accuser since the traffic cameras act in place of police officers that would normally issue the traffic tickets.
Community activists oppose the cameras that are situated in various locations in cities of Cuyahoga County, including the largely Black city of East Cleveland where voters, led by East Cleveland Mayor Gary Norton, rejected a proposed charter amendment in 2011 that would have outlawed them.
"Council did not go to residents for their response to a speed cameras program," said Elaine Stone, a Maple Heights resident and community activist who opposes the cameras in her and other cities nationally, and who says that public input was arrogantly denied by Maple Heights City Council prior to implementation.
Cleveland is roughly 58 percent Black and Maple Heights, a Cleveland suburb, is about 68 percent Black.
The Ohio Supreme Court is hearing a claim of unconstitutionality of the cameras in a Toledo case that mirrors Cleveland and the state legislature will likely determine the issue relative to a bill pending
that seeks to ban the cameras altogether. (www.clevelandurbannews.com) / (www.kathywraycolemanonlinenewsblog.com)
.jpeg)
Comments