Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
The agenda packet for the Nov. 14, 2023 special meeting of the Edmonds City Council is out. The poor practice of publishing a misleading, incomplete agenda packet is on exhibit, once again.
Following is the entirety of the Red Light Camera Presentation Agenda item:
Edmonds City Council has never voted to request a presentation about the “purposed” Red Light Camera Project. Why is this false representation in an agenda packet?
Also, there is no “project.” Why are city officials acting as if there is a “project”?
Please note the statement that the presentation will be sent to council prior to the meeting. Why would the presentation not also be sent to the public prior to the meeting? Why is the public disrespected in this fashion, as if the public is an afterthought?
Staff’s recommendation to approve the Red-Light Camera Project as proposed, is nonsensical. Again, there is no “project.” If there was a “project,” why would the staff’s recommendation be to approve that project prior to city council adopting an ordinance allowing for the initial use of red-light cameras in Edmonds? Is it really this hard to do simple things, right?
Why isn’t the staff’s recommendation to simply review historical data about the impact of red-light cameras on safety within intersections?
Research has been provided to city officials that argues red-light Cameras do not improve safety. Why isn’t the data already provided to city officials included in the agenda packet for the Nov. 14, 2023 special meeting of city council?
The state law that allows for consideration of red-light cameras is RCW 46.63.170. RCW 46.63.170 is titled automated traffic safety cameras. RCW 46.63.170 is not titled automated traffic revenue cameras.
As this was a total surprise to both the public and the city council, the public and the city council are now burdened with having to respond to this latest conduct by the mayor and his administration. Why does the city council accept surprise burdens like this without putting up more of a fight on behalf of the council’s constituents?
Please encourage City Council President Neil Tibbott to remove this misleading, incomplete agenda packet item from the No.14, 2023 special meeting agenda packet at once. Don’t we have plenty of budget challenges to deal with without muddying the picture up further with this latest surprise idea promoted by the city’s chief executive and administrative officer, the mayor?
Please encourage Edmonds City Council to focus its budget deliberations on items that are already legal in Edmonds and not spend any more time on an item that requires significant legislative action before related revenues and expenses can be included in an Edmonds budget.
– By Ken Reidy
Author Ken Reidy lives in Edmonds.
Ken,
Thank you for bringing this serious oversight by Council President Tibbott and by Mayor Nelson’s administration to our attention.
You said, “Research has been provided to city officials that argues red-light Cameras do not improve safety. Why isn’t the data already provided to city officials included in the agenda packet for the Nov. 14, 2023 special meeting of city council?”
Here is a link to your previous Reader View that references the data you have provided to Council:
https://myedmondsnews.com/2023/11/reader-view-council-vote-to-end-discussion-of-red-light-camera-purchases-and-revenue-for-2024-budget/
I will be writing to CP Tibbott, and to Council, requesting that “this misleading, incomplete agenda packet item from the Nov. 14, 2023 special meeting” be removed from their agenda. I hope others will join me:
Neil.Tibbott@edmondswa.gov
Council@edmondswa.gov
This has become common practice as of late to not include the presentation material in the agenda packet. They don’t want to provide advance insight so as to limit the discussion and questions. It puts the Council in a completely reactionary mode and the public unable to provide public comment during the meeting when we haven’t seen the presentation. Our CP needs to step up and correct this. But as usual, the administration will win by running out the clock leaving no time for informed decision making.
Yes. Materials should be provided well in advance to allow for review. Ideally, presentations would be recorded and also provided in advance so that Council meeting time is available for council questions and deliberations.
Nick, a great idea for presentations to be recorded and provided in advance to the council and public.
Ha ha, it’s easy, no detailed agenda on red light cameras because… they ONLY listened to; ALL the money they are going to collect!! wow just like Lynnwood. They are already spending it, and the high cost of it in all the different ways, immaterial, can worry about that part later. Seems like nothing changes just the participants and they are easily convinced of the asset side NOT the liability side . RCW factor, minor technicality the City attorney can probably find a way to skirt that. Would be entertaining watching some of these moves except that I live here and resent the way things are done, or NOT done. Makes no sense.
Thanks Ken. Another example of the Mayor and his administration putting the cart in front of the horse, and playing fast and loose with the rules that govern the Administration and the Council.
Trying to balance a budget on red light camera revenue is just lazy and lame. Do it properly, please, with actual revenue.
Brenda,
Thank you. I appreciate your succinct comments and included your comment to Ken Reidy’s last Reader View https://myedmondsnews.com/2023/11/reader-view-council-vote-to-end-discussion-of-red-light-camera-purchases-and-revenue-for-2024-budget/ in my email to CP Tibbott and Council. Here is the last paragraph of my email:
The administration’s presentation of red light cameras as a revenue generating option during budget deliberations, and failure to follow RCW 46.63.170(1)(a) regarding red light cameras, is highly disturbing. In one commenter’s words (Reader View above):
“Balancing our budget on a maybe revenue seems lazy and irresponsible.”
I am disappointed that the City doesn’t put in traffic lights or stop signs in the necessary areas of risk. The ticket machines don’t provide safety. Additionally, if one doesn’t pay the ticket fines what is the consequence for the driver? A driver with a suspended license, due to neglect to pay tickets, is no longer punishable with the Nelson’s new traffic law. So what is the point?
Well, if this isn’t a bit of a “sticky wicket.” We have our police chief presenting a proposal in favor of “the Red Light Camera Project,” that is nothing more than a proposed category in an as yet to be a approved budget, prepared and endorsed by what looks like a lame duck Mayor. Yep, this is definitely an “Edmonds Kind of Government” action. All Mr. Rosen will have to do to be Edmonds best Mayor ever is stop unilaterally proposing anything and just have his staff do their jobs as written in the job descriptions. Pretty simple.
Also on CP Tibbott’s agenda is “Public Hearing on Installation of Red Light Cameras.”If CP Tibbott fails to remove this from the agenda, there will be a Public Hearing following the presentation.
Included in my email to Council:
“Also remove the next agenda item, Public Hearing on Installation of Red light Cameras (p.76), from your agenda. Citizens can not be expected to provide informed public comments in a Public Hearing when NO information is provided in the packet upon which they can base their comments.”
Again, I encourage everyone who has concerns about this process to write to CP Tibbott (Neil.Tibbott@edmondswa.gov) and Council (council@edmondswa.gov)
Just a note, one of the links provided the aforementioned previous reader view is for dats collected in 2011. Imho, that data is too old to be relevant.
Disregarding of traffic laws and safety escalated during the pandemic and has not gotten better (my perception). WSDOT has recently given interviews on this topic, and they have data.
Whether red light cameras or something else is part of the answer remains to be studied and decided by the council, but I personally support all efforts to tame the crazy on our roads
Thanks to all who have made comments. It is alarming that our close neighbor Lynnwood has seen accidents increase steadily in their Red-Light Camera intersections.
I have not heard whether Council President Neil Tibbott will remove this misleading, incomplete item from the Agenda Packet for Tuesday’s Special Meeting of City Council. I hope he will do so. Same for the separate agenda item for a Public Hearing. Why have a Public Hearing for something not yet legal in Edmonds and do so prior to the initiation of the related legislative process?
Edmonds City Code 1.02.031(B)(2) states that the City Council President shall formulate and prepare the agenda for City Council meetings.
When provided an incomplete agenda item, all the Council President need do is reject it and tell the party who has prepared the item to bring it back when it is complete and accurate. This seems like a small ask and something that should be easy enough to do on behalf of the citizens that City Council represents.
Great idea Nick. Recorded presentations provided to all in advance would be very helpful.
Jim, thanks for the reminder that it has become common practice as of late to not include the presentation material in the agenda packet. This is not a good practice. We should be able to do much better than that.
This misleading, incomplete item is still in the Agenda Packet for Tuesday’s Special Meeting of City Council. The Presentation has not been provided to citizens. I have no way of knowing if the Presentation has been sent to Edmonds City Council.
Why are Edmonds citizens disrespected in this fashion? How are citizens supposed to prepare for a Public Hearing without this information? Many citizens have a busy day ahead that will prevent them from considering the Presentation should it be released between now and the 6:00 pm start of tonight’s Council meeting.
Another misleading, incomplete Agenda item was found in the October 10th Agenda Packet. Council discussed Decision Package 7 that evening even though that DP was not included in the Agenda Packet.
DP 7 includes the following:
“Verra Mobility will examine the intersections selected and determine the approximate number of cars that commit red light running at each intersection, which would inform the decision as to the locations ultimately chosen.”
Say what? When will this entity be contracted with to do this study?
DP 7 says each red light camera lease is approximately $5,000 per camera per month and the DP assumes at least six red light cameras will be running for about eight months in 2024. $5,000 times six times eight is $240,000 yet DP 7 claims Total Operating Expenses will be $180,000.