Resident tells Edgewood council camera infraction notices can't reliably identify drivers

Michael Stanzel used the council's public comment time on Jan. 28 to challenge the city's use of traffic-safety camera infractions and to urge council members to require fuller evidence before finding a driver liable.

Stanzel told the council he distributed a questionnaire and an article by a law professor and asked members to review the notice of infraction before answering his questions. He argued that a license-plate photo does not identify the driver and stressed due-process concerns.

"A picture of a license plate doesn't identify a person," Stanzel said. He added that "the government doesn't get to accuse anyone of anything without evidence," and that deputy documents he reviewed showed the deputy stated only that the vehicle was owned by the registered owner; the deputy did not itself accuse the owner of driving.

Stanzel also cited a Minnesota State Supreme Court ruling he said was unanimous and provided statistical examples to show ownership is not proof of who was driving. "If there were 5,868,000 licensed drivers in Washington and 2,832,000 registered vehicles, statistically, there is only a 48% chance the owner is driving," he told the council, and he noted other scenarios where owners could not have been the driver.

The mayor noted the city had received one email that week about traffic-safety cameras and that the email had been forwarded to council members. The council did not take action on Stanzel's remarks during the meeting and no staff response or referral was recorded in the meeting transcript.

Stanzel concluded his three-minute public comment and the council moved on to other agenda items.