Red-light cameras not up for vote

OLYMPIA – City laws allowing for red-light traffic cameras are not subject to repeal by voters, Washington’s Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

In a 5-4 decision, the court said a 2010 ballot measure in Mukilteo was not valid because the Legislature has given the power of enacting red-light camera laws to local governing bodies, not to voters.

“The court ruled on everything we wanted: This is an issue that our state Legislature has reserved for local city councils,” said Vanessa Power, an attorney for a group that opposed Mukilteo’s initiative.

Mukilteo’s ballot measure was pushed by anti-tax activist Tim Eyman and would have forbidden the city to allow red-light cameras unless approved by two-thirds of the city’s voters. Seventy percent of voters approved the measure.

Even though the high court said it was worded as a binding initiative, the city council treated the results as advisory and then did away with the cameras Mukilteo already had.

Eyman has since expanded his anti-red-light-camera campaign to other cities, calling the cameras “taxation by citation.” In several other cities that have done away with the cameras, including Bellingham and Longview, votes have been advisory, not binding – and thus would not have been prohibited under Thursday’s ruling.

“We may have lost this battle, but we’re winning the war,” Eyman said. “The advisory votes seem to have as much political impact as binding votes do, and voters are just overwhelmingly on our side.”

The four justices in the minority said the vote in Mukilteo was advisory, so there was no reason to rule on whether red-light-camera ordinances are subject to local initiatives.

“The city council has repealed the ordinance allowing the use of red-light cameras in Mukilteo,” Justice Jim Johnson wrote. “The matter was appropriately and constitutionally resolved through the political process.”