Van-cam law near repeal
By Lynda Arakawa
Advertiser Capitol Bureau
In a surprising reversal, the state House last night voted to repeal the traffic camera enforcement program. The photo enforcement vans could be off the roads by the end of the month.
In a unanimous voice vote, House members approved a bill previously passed by the Senate. The bill, Senate Bill 2077, is expected to be sent to the governor following a final House vote tomorrow, which is viewed as a formality.
The action is a significant departure from the House's earlier position to modify the program in an attempt to make it more palatable to drivers angered by the traffic cameras. House Democrats tabled the repeal measure Friday after Republicans pulled it out of the Transportation Committee, where it was bottled up.
But last night the House voted in favor of supporting the repeal. The House passed the bill on second reading and will take a final vote on the measure tomorrow.
The bill would take effect upon approval by Gov. Ben Cayetano, who has supported the program.
Cayetano is returning Friday from a personal trip to the Mainland, spokeswoman Kim Murakawa said.
Last night's action came on the eve of an expected court ruling today on whether the traffic camera program is on solid legal ground. Opponents have asked a judge to dismiss citations because the state can't prove that a vehicle's registered owner was operating it.
House Transportation Committee Chairman Joe Souki, one of the staunchest supporters of the program, said the House had tried to salvage the program because he believed it had merit, but that recent legal events have "devolved" the issue.
"The latest occurrence where the judge is beginning to question, and ready to rule on, the legality of the (program) and the continual public outrage that we have has led me to believe that the program at this point cannot be salvaged," said Souki, D-8th (Waiehu, Ma'alaea, Napili). "And therefore, in deference to the public, who has shown a great distaste for this program, I am willing to provide before this body that we repeal this program."
The House had previously passed a bill to eliminate the current program and replace it with a modified system.
The changes had included prohibiting insurance companies from increasing premiums because of speeding tickets, requiring camera citations to include a picture of the driver, and requiring the contractor that runs the program to be paid a flat rate instead of a payment for each citation.
But Souki said last night it was clear that wasn't enough.
House Republicans, who have pushed for the repeal, applauded the Democrats for supporting the bill.
"It's quite clear the people have won tonight," said House Minority Floor Leader Charles Djou, R-47th (Kahalu'u, Kane'ohe). "We are getting rid of a much hated system and returning the power to the people."
House Majority Leader Marcus Oshiro, D-40th (Wahiawa, Whitmore), said the Senate's 25-0 vote to repeal the bill sent a "very strong message" that senators were not interested in discussing fixing the program in conference committee negotiations.
He acknowledged the legal problems contributed to the House's reversal and that it was not difficult to convince members to support the repeal.
"At this point in time I think the tide had switched over to repealing a program that couldn't really be fixed," Oshiro said.
Transportation Committee Vice-Chairman Willie Espero said he has heard from many constituents, both for a repeal and for a modification of the program. He said a positive byproduct of the program was the public discussion and awareness about traffic safety.
The traffic camera program began issuing tickets on Jan. 2. Crews in vans parked along state highways catch speeders on camera, and citations are mailed to the vehicle's registered owner.
A ruling on a pivotal legal challenge may be issued today. On Monday, defense lawyers Michael Kam and Katherine Kealoha argued that the state can't identify the drivers in its traffic camera citation cases and must rely instead on a faulty "presumption" that the registered owner was operating the vehicle.
Because of the lack of evidence, a judge should dismiss charges against three vehicle owners whose upcoming trials have been consolidated and designated a test case for the traffic enforcement program, the attorneys said.
