As Bleeding Heartland has discussed before, I’ve long felt that Governor Terry Branstad’s disregard for local government authority is one of the most under-reported Iowa political stories of the last few years. The Iowa Department of Transportation’s new rules restricting cities’ use of traffic cameras is one of many examples. Bills seeking to ban local governments from using traffic cameras for law enforcement stalled during the 2012 and 2013 legislative sessions. The Iowa DOT’s new rules went into effect last month; they do not prohibit all use of traffic cameras but require annual reviews to show the cameras are improving safety and not just serving as a revenue source for local government.
Sioux City is one of many Iowa municipalities that have installed traffic cameras on some major roads and intersections. The Iowa DOT gave Sioux City officials “until May 1 to justify the use of two speed cameras and seven of its 11 red-light cameras.” Now the city government has filed a lawsuit claiming the state department exceeded its authority.
Assistant City attorney, Justin Vondrak, filed the judicial review action in Woodbury County District Court and says the DOT regulations make it almost impossible for the city to use speed cameras along Interstate 29 within the city limits. “What we’re asking for is a review of the rules and to eventually have the rules determined to be unconstitutional based on the city’s home rule authority, as well as other Iowa code sections which grant the city joint jurisdiction with the DOT for traffic enforcement upon the primary roadways within the city’s jurisdiction,” according to Vondrak.
More details on the lawsuit are after the jump.
Whatever the District Court rules, I expect the losing side to appeal and would not be surprised to see the Iowa Supreme Court eventually decide this matter. The case raises interesting questions about local and state government powers. On a related note, I still think some municipality should have challenged Governor Branstad’s executive order on project labor agreements in court.
Grant Rodgers reported on Sioux City’s lawsuit for the Des Moines Register.
Legislators have failed in past sessions to pass a law regulating the cameras, the lawsuit said. Without direction from the Legislature, the DOT, which is an administrative agency, shouldn’t have the authority to set the policy, the lawsuit alleges.
“I’m not aware of anytime in the 30-some years that I’ve worked here where law enforcement needed the DOT’s permission to enforce laws that we’re empowered by the Legislature to enforce,” Sioux City police Capt. Melvin Williams said. “What the DOT’s rules in effect do is say we have to enforce the laws in the method that the DOT believes is acceptable.” […]
Don Bauermeister, an attorney with the city of Council Bluffs who oversees that city’s red-light camera program, said that he agrees with Sioux City officials’ concerns that the DOT overstepped its bounds. Further, a 2008 Iowa Supreme Court case ruling that allowed the city of Davenport to use the cameras suggests that the DOT may be fighting a losing battle without Legislation to back up its new rules, he said.
“They may mean well … but I sure think that the city has a good argument,” he said.
The lawsuit, however, drew criticism from lawmakers who supported the DOT-crafted rules and said it suggests cities aren’t willing to part with the revenue from the cameras. A Des Moines Register review published Monday found that Iowa cities generated $19.7 million from the cameras during the fiscal year that ended June 30; Sioux City’s red-light and speed cameras generated over $5 million during that period, the review found.
LATE UPDATE: From an unsigned editorial in the March 17 Des Moines Register:
The city said cameras have clearly improved public safety. “Before the deployment of ATEs [automated cameras] on the interstate, 38 percent of motorists were traveling in excess of 11 miles over the speed limit,” the city said in court documents. “After two years of enforcement using ATEs, less than 1 percent of motorists are now traveling in excess of 11 miles above the posted speed limit.” […]
Sioux City’s lawsuit also raises a novel issue: The DOT’s rules are so broadly written, city lawyers argue, the city may be prohibited from using standard radar equipment that is common in police cars.
The city’s patrol cars are equipped with “integrated radar and video cameras which record the speed and images of an individual violating traffic or speed laws,” the city said. “Unfortunately, these well-equipped manned police vehicles now fall under the rules’ definition of an ‘automated traffic enforcement system.’ ”
The automated camera rules go well beyond the Iowa Department of Transportation’s mission of building and maintaining public roads and bridges. Cities and counties are primarily responsible for enforcing the traffic laws within their jurisdictions, and the DOT has no reason to prescribe exactly how local governments do that job.