Newport council votes to remove Ruggles speed camera, order community meeting and require council sign‑off for future cameras

The Newport City Council on Monday directed the city administration to remove a speed camera on Ruggles Avenue, hold a community meeting for residents in the southern part of the city and require that the council explicitly approve any future installation of speed cameras, red‑light cameras or license‑plate‑tracking technology.

The resolution, presented by Councilor David Carlin, passed after more than an hour of debate about where cameras had been placed and whether the police or the council had final say on locations. “With the knowledge regarding the installation of the speed cameras in the southern end of the city, there is a division in opinions held by third‑ward residents,” Carlin said, arguing the device had been installed without a full public process for that location.

Why it matters: The vote followed months of traffic studies and mobile speed monitoring in the Third Ward and came after residents complained about safety, noise and the process for siting cameras. Supporters said the cameras and other technologies are tools the police have used after years of enforcement and data collection; opponents said the placement lacked adequate council input and public notice.

Chief Ryan Duffy of the Newport Police Department told the council the department has conducted trailer‑based traffic studies in the Carroll, Ruggles and adjacent neighborhoods and found speeding problems. “Do we have a problem with speeding and traffic violations? Yes. Yes, we do,” Duffy said. He said the Ruggles camera is currently in a data‑collection phase; the device is testing speeds and photographing vehicles but is not yet issuing warnings or citations.

Resident Olivia Nagle, who lives near Bellevue Avenue, told the council she had stopped walking along Ruggles because of speeding and supported the police’s work to collect data: “I stopped walking on Ruggles because it’s so dangerous and because there’s so much speeding,” she said.

Council discussion focused on procedure as much as safety. City Manager Kenny Kennedy acknowledged the camera placement grew out of a 2023 council resolution that authorized cameras in certain areas, and from subsequent operational decisions by police and staff. He said the administration had entered a contract for cameras in February 2024 and that a choice had been made, in consultation with the police and councilor Carlin, to locate a camera in the Third Ward after traffic analysis.

Costs and logistics: Manager Kennedy said removing or relocating the unit could cost roughly $90,000 if it must be moved and reinstalled; removal without replacement could cost less. Chief Duffy said the Ruggles location qualified for automated enforcement because it sits within a quarter‑mile of school property — a state requirement for placement.

What the council ordered: In addition to directing removal of the Ruggles device, the resolution asks the administration to convene a neighborhood meeting, to notify residents through multiple channels, and to require explicit council approval for future installations of automated traffic‑enforcement technology.

Next steps: The council asked the city to report back on removal costs and timing and to schedule the community meeting; members said they expect further debate once data from the camera and the police are available.