Snoqualmie committee backs ordinance to authorize school‑zone speed cameras, sends AB 26‑004 to full council

The Snoqualmie Public Safety Committee on Feb. 17 voted without objection to send agenda bill AB 26‑004 to the full City Council, clearing the way for the city to adopt an ordinance that would authorize the use of automated traffic safety cameras in school zones.

The move capped more than an hour of public comment and a presentation from the police chief, who summarized a three‑day speed study and enforcement data from multiple school‑zone locations. Chief Haracy said the study recorded 1,729 potential violations in front of the high school over three days, and that most of those (1,615) occurred during school‑zone hours. Describing the camera technology under consideration, Haracy said: "When it detects the violation ... it'll take 2 photos of the rear of the vehicle and a 12 second video of the actual violation." He said the system the department examined uploads encrypted files to a vendor server and that the vendor transfers evidence to the city and the municipal court for review.

Why it matters: Residents told the committee they are seeing persistent high speeds in school zones and called for immediate action. Several commenters who live near Park Street and Meadowbrook Way urged the committee to adopt cameras as a scalable tool that would allow officers to focus on community policing rather than spend hours on traffic stops. "I'm asking the committee to vote yes on AB 26‑004 tonight," said resident Caitlin Wissink, who cited an earlier speed study and urged simultaneous exploration of non‑camera infrastructure such as the Swedish ActiveBump system.

Council debate and staff next steps: Council Member Holloway pressed staff and the vendor claims on data control, saying, "To say that we own the data is a marketing statement, not fact," and asked the administration to present comparative vendor options, costs and contract terms before final procurement. Chief Haracy and Mayor James Mayhew responded that the ordinance before the committee authorizes the use of automated cameras but does not approve any vendor contract. Mayor Mayhew said the city intends to return with two to three vendor proposals and the related cost analyses. Mayhew also clarified operations under state law: "Only our officers can issue infractions," he said, adding that officers review photos and video and determine whether to issue a citation.

Legal and program constraints: Staff and the city attorney noted the draft ordinance is written with state law (RCW) constraints in mind. Committee members confirmed the ordinance language explicitly prohibits a per‑infraction vendor pay model; Holloway requested that the forthcoming vendor comparison include detailed pricing and whether vendor staff would provide expert testimony in court if needed.

Public data, privacy and enforcement: The chief emphasized that the cameras under consideration are not automated license‑plate‑reader systems that continuously search law‑enforcement databases; instead, the cameras capture rear‑plate photos and short videos of apparent violations. Haracy described a phased implementation that would include a warning period, increased signage and a controlled number of daily citations to keep the program revenue‑neutral in its initial configuration.

What happened next: With no objection, Chair Rob Watton moved AB 26‑004 to the full City Council for consideration. Committee members and staff said the next steps will be vendor comparisons, contracts, and a separate presentation on budget and operational details. The committee adjourned at 5:54 p.m.

Sources: Committee meeting transcript, Feb. 17, 2026. Direct quotes and numerical figures in this article are drawn from speakers' statements at the meeting and are attributed where provided in the transcript.