The SAU Buzz

Issue date: 2/8/07 Section: Features

Media Credit: Bill Dabovich The ethics of Davenport speed cameras are under debate between citizens and law enforcement.

"Policemen are supposed to enforce the law, not make the law" plaintiff's attorney Richard Davidson said, in response to the ruling last month by district court judge Gary McKenrick. He ruled in favor of plaintiffs Monique Rhoden of Rock Island and Curt Canfield of Davenport that the city's red light and speed cameras are in conflict with Iowa's motor vehicle laws.

The city is appealing the decision to higher courts as well as offering to come into compliance with the state's department of transportation in hopes of continuing the automated enforcement.

"It's frustrating for us when one judge's opinion can stop the cameras when dozen's of other judge's opinions across the state, have been otherwise," said lieutenant Michael Venema.

The problem for the Davenport Police Department is the fact that previous judges, who have dismissed other speed camera cases, have been part-time magistrates; whose judgments don't hold nearly as strong of as that of a district judge like McKenrick.

According to Davidson, the city violated Chapter 321 of Iowa code by installing the program without taking proper legal procedure.

The code clearly states that all motor vehicle codes are to be uniform throughout the state, and that cities may not adopt ordinances in conflict.

Simply put: the state code says that the operator is criminally responsible for instances of red light runs and speeding; however, Davenport's ordinance says that the owner of the vehicle is civilly responsible.

A second hearing is set on Feb. 22, that will ask the state of Iowa for certification of a class action lawsuit that would result in refunding an estimated 14,000 people through Iowa and the United States that received the tickets through the automated system.

Davidson also added that they would be requesting an injunction, to permanently stop the use of the speed cameras in the future to avoid such inconsistencies.

"The city is protected by case law, which prevents cities from repaying in such events," said Venema.

Davidson disagrees.

"The city must pay back, case law only applies to paying a tax that has later been determined invalid, this is not a tax," he said.

Continued...

Page 1 of 2 next >

Article Tools