Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council rejects fixed speed‑camera program, supports more mobile radar signs and local data collection
Summary
After a presentation on school‑ and park‑zone speed cameras, councilors declined to pursue fixed automated enforcement cameras and asked staff to expand mobile radar signs, collect localized speed data and return with implementation options.
Gig Harbor — Police Chief Kelly Busey gave a high‑level briefing Feb. 28 on state rules for automated speed enforcement in park and school zones and on the business model used by private vendors. Chief Busey described legal limitations (enforceable hours tied to park or school hours), fine amounts set by state law, vendor models that install cameras at no up‑front municipal cost, and the requirement that each alleged infraction be human‑reviewed before a citation is issued.
Council members raised several objections: the modest net revenue that would reach the city after state and vendor shares, privacy and collection‑use concerns, the administrative and court workload created by automated citations, and the loss of opportunities for officer‑citizen engagement during traffic stops. Several councilors said fixed automated cameras can change driver behavior locally but worry they shift enforcement away from engineering and targeted, visible police deterrence.
Council consensus and direction
The council signaled majority opposition to installing fixed, ticketing speed cameras. Instead members favored an expanded program of portable, radar‑display “speed feedback” signs (the council referred to ‘‘smiley‑face’’ signs), increased targeted patrols where staff resources allow, and a low‑cost data‑collection pilot in several trouble spots. Staff were directed to:
- Bring back a near‑term plan to acquire additional movable radar feedback signs and to rotate them among identified hotspots. - Run short pilot speed counts at a selected set of locations and return to council with the data and recommended engineering or enforcement responses. - Continue coordination between police and public works on low‑cost, physical traffic‑calming measures and on any future consideration of cameras.
Why it matters
Speeding and traffic safety generated the most public complaints to the police chief; councilors said they want visible deterrence, evidence to identify problem corridors and engineering changes where feasible. The council emphasized avoiding a program that appeared primarily revenue‑driven and preferred options that prioritized safety oversight and local control.
Ending
Staff will report back with a proposal for additional radar signs, a pilot data‑collection plan and an estimate of costs and staffing impacts. Councilors asked that any future policy discussion clearly separate revenue considerations from safety objectives.
