Spokane Valley council advances school-zone speed camera ordinance after lengthy debate

Spokane Valley city leaders voted Nov. 18 to advance an ordinance that would establish an automated traffic safety camera program focused on school zones.

Traffic Engineering Manager Jeremy Clark and City Services Administrator Gloria Mance presented the ordinance (25‑018) and a pilot analysis, saying the cameras—authorized under House Bill 2384—use vehicle sensors and cameras to identify speeding and issue non‑moving infractions. Clark said the technology ‘‘is a very effective way to counter measure speeding,’’ and stressed that the cameras are designed to capture only vehicle images and license plates, not drivers, and that the program’s infractions ‘‘are not part of the long term driving record.’’

Clark outlined the vendor model: private providers install and operate equipment, receive a fixed monthly fee per location and submit images and data to city staff for review before any citation is mailed. He said typical vendor processing costs observed in outreach range from about $6,000 to $9,500 per camera location per month, and the city is considering adding a 1.0 FTE in the 2026 budget to process citations and run the program.

Council members pressed staff on the program’s fiscal sustainability, equity, privacy and liability. Councilmember Padden asked what happens if citations decline to a point that locations stop generating revenue; Clark replied vendors may relocate cameras and the city can remove cameras at non‑viable sites. Councilmember Merkel and others asked whether the vendor or the city would bear liability for equipment malfunctions; Clark said citations would not be issued until reviewed by trained city staff, and legal counsel and procurement staff said contract terms would carry indemnity provisions.

Members of the public spoke for and against the proposal. Kendra Rojas and Manny Rojas emphasized safety for children during school arrival and dismissal times; Al Schrock and Mike Kelly expressed concerns about fairness and the city taking on perceived financial obligations. Chelsea Mance (city staff) and legal counsel explained that the ordinance includes state‑required provisions for reduced penalties in hardship cases and that photographs related to infractions are exempt from public records release under state law.

After more than an hour of discussion and public comments, the council voted to advance the ordinance to a second reading. Advancing the ordinance does not by itself implement cameras; next steps include adopting final code language at second reading, issuing an RFP to select a vendor, identifying candidate locations, coordinating with district court and police for processing, and, if adopted, a typical six‑month timeline to initiate a system.

The council set the matter for further consideration at the ordinance’s second reading and directed staff to refine operational details and contract language before final adoption.