RSS
|
Mobile
|
Daily Emails
|
We Twitter
| Make us your home page
The College Station City Council on Monday voted unanimously to have the city's nine red light cameras taken down as soon as legally possible.
The vote comes after a petition with more than 840 signatures put the measure on a ballot earlier this month. The city had hoped to keep the cameras up, but once the final vote -- 4,081 in favor of removing them to 3,809 opposed -- was tallied, officials began efforts to carry through on the promise to residents.
Meanwhile, an Austin attorney representing two College Station residents filed a lawsuit against the city and was successful in getting a visiting district judge to temporarily stop the city from taking the equipment down. A formal hearing on their request to rule that the election was invalid and never should have taken place is scheduled for Friday.
Even so, Mayor Ben White said the cameras will be removed at the earliest time allowed by a contract with the company running the program.
"Even though many of the council people supported the red light camera project, the majority of those people -- those citizens that came out and voted -- were not in support of that project and we're listening to the voters," White said after the meeting. "The city will do everything, everything possible to notify everyone in our city limits, when the cameras will discontinue. Until then, I would encourage our drivers to continue to operate their vehicles with the thought that the cameras are operational."
Had the lawsuit not been filed, the cameras would have been shut off last week on the same day the council canvassed votes from the election.
Roger Gordon, who represents Gary Ives and John Hemrick, said in an e-mail that they will continue to pursue the lawsuit, if for no other reason than to seek clarity regarding the city accepting an "untimely referendum petition."
"Should the court uphold the election results, residents of the city of College Station will have the ability to render every tool available to the College Station police -- including speed limits and other traffic safety regulations -- unenforceable through the submission of an untimely petition," Gordon said. "My clients respect the council's decision in this matter, even if they disagree with it. After the election contest is determined, those law-abiding residents of the city can rest easy knowing that a citizens group will not be able to repeal the traffic laws in the city of College Station without going through their elected officials at the council level."
Jim Ash, who started the movement to get the issue on the ballot, said he just wants the city to defend the lawsuit.
"To have citizens come in and cloud the issue like that is not in the best interest of this whole process," he said of Gordon's suit.
Jim Maness, who wrote the petition to get the matter on the ballot, said he gave a letter to the city requesting that City Attorney Harvey Cargill be removed from the upcoming hearing in court. The council was briefed about the letter during executive session Monday.
Ash and Maness said Cargill appears to be overtly attempting to disregard the wishes of the voters by not giving much of a defense in court.
The Eagle learned late Monday that Bob Heath, with the Austin law firm of Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta LLP, has been hired by Cargill on behalf of the city to represent College Station and the voters in court.
Also Monday, the City Council decided to continue researching whether to charge for-profit entities for operating at city parks and whether to create a difference in fees charged to residents and non-residents, as well as how much that difference should be.
The council members decided they needed more information before making decisions on both park issues. A special joint meeting was held with the parks and recreation advisory board due, in part, to the increase in personal trainers using parks for "fitness boot camps," as well as private tennis lessons, swim lessons, dog training and other classes.
A public hearing for the fees will be Monday and the council will consider adopting a new fee structure Dec. 10 with implementation on Jan. 1, 2010. A public hearing has not been scheduled yet for the for-profit charges.
David Schmitz, assistant director of parks and recreation, said the new charge would call for the city to receive consideration from businesses and/or individuals that utilize publicly funded and maintained parks and recreation facilities. He said they have received some complaints regarding a conflict of use of the same space and noise to surrounding neighborhoods. He said they were not sure what impact boot camps and other for-profit entities have had on the city parks.
