Arizona Traffic Photo Enforcement Referendum (2008)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Not on Ballot
Proposed allot measures that were not on a ballot
This measure did not or
will not appear on a ballot

The Traffic Photo Enforcement Referendum or Senate Concurrent Resolution 1033 was a veto referendum proposed by the Arizona Senate to require that a traffic study be conducted on all state roads. After the study the only traffic violations that can be issued by cameras must be when a car is going 85 percent faster than the average speed of traffic.

The referendum was referred to the Rules Committee on 02/12/08. No further action was taken.[1]

Background

The Governor of Arizona, Janet Napolitano had proposed a bill that would take speed camera technology statewide. Under the proposal there would be as many at 170 moble, stationary, and red-light cameras installed over the next five years.

The measure would have applied only to state roads. Currently the state is expecting an increase of more than 1 million citations. This would net the state $90 million in fiscal 2009 with it increasing yearly.

The proposal had met considerable resistance. The Arizona Republic gathered 30 emails with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Of these emails there were contentions that this was purely a source of revenue and not a questions of safety. Other referred to the plan as "communist" and still over from outside of the state swore never to vacation in Arizona again if the cameras were installed. Only one email supported the plan.[2]

Support

Governor Napolitano would support approval of the speed cameras statewide installation, as do many other democrats.

Lt. Robert Ticer, a lobbyist for the Arizona Department of Safety, is working to promote the measure. He insists that cameras will allow for patrol officers to spend more time catching dangerous criminals, like drunk drivers, if they do not have to concentrate on speeding.

Opposition

Members of the Arizona state Senate Transportation Committee, especially Chairman Sen. Ron Gould (Lake Havasu City-R), are sponsoring the veto referenda hoping to thwart the governor's plan.[3]

Other Republicans 3-2 are also supporting the bill. "It's just a revenue generator," said Sen. Robert Blendu, "If it's safety we're worried about, I want a patrol officer - a real one."

See also

External links

References