The Weekly mentioned a few weeks ago that the marquee issue of this year’s city election could the initiative to ban those traffic cameras that bust speeders and drivers who run red lights—if it made the ballot.
It’s a good thing we qualified the story—because city officials today rejected the initiative because it does not enough signatures to make the November ballot.
Former state lawmaker John Kromko needed 12,730 valid signatures to qualify for the ballot and he turned in more 22,000 signatures.
But a legally required random check of 5 percent of the signatures by the Pima County Recorder’s Office showed that only 55 percent of the signatures were valid. Based on that rate, Kromko had only 11,124 valid signatures, according to City Clerk Roger Randolph.
“I just issued a certificate of insufficiency to the Mayor and Council and to John,” Randolph told The Weekly this afternoon.
Pima County Voter Registrar Chris Roads told The Range that of the 1,032 signatures the office checked, only 569 were registered Tucson voters.
Roads said that 220 of the bad signatures came from people who were not registered to vote (at least in Pima County), while another 181 came from outside Tucson’s city limits. The remainder were rejected for various technical reasons.
Kromko told The Range today that he was still looking into why the signatures were rejected, but he expected it would be hard to reverse the decision to toss his petitions.
“It looks like we didn’t make it,” Kromko said. “It looks like I can’t challenge this. What killed us was people not registered. It’s hard to fight that one.”
Kromko has had some luck getting initiatives on the ballot in the past, such as an unsuccessful effort to get voters to repeal the city’s trash-collection fee and block delivery of treated effluent to households.
But his signature-collection efforts have often been troubled; a 2008 run for the Arizona Legislature resulted in Kromko facing criminal charges over signatures on his nominating petitions and Kromko eventually pled guilty to forgery charges rather than risk going to trial and spending the rest of his life behind bars.
Kromko said he was mad that he didn’t have enough signatures but took pride in his all-volunteer effort.
“It’s been many years since I’ve been able to get anything on the ballot without paying at least some people,” Kromko said.
This article appears in Jul 18-24, 2013.
This is not a city jurisdiction issue. The cameras in question are installed in the county as well as the city. The signatures of those residents living in Pima county should be counted as well because they have every bit as much right to representation to vote on the cameras mounted in county public spaces. Where is the check and balance here?
-Support Kromko Petitions
Here here. I live in Bakersfield, but I occasionally drive through Tucson. I ought to be able to participate in its elections. Also, I own several vehicles. Shouldn’t that mean I get to sign the petition several times?
I rather like traffic light cameras… the seem to have reduced accidents at most major intersections where installed. This is good!
Huge John Kromko/Ron Paul Fan, are you registered to vote in Bakersfield and every other town you occasionally drive through? The issue here is that residents who pay the taxes for the public property where the cameras are mounted don’t even get a say if they want the cameras or not. There is currently no public representation with respect to these cameras and someone at the voter registrar is helping things to stay that way.
The public deserves some control and accountability, they are paying for it.
-Support Kromko Petitions
Just another reason why the public should have nothing to do with public policy.
Another group of people who don’t want the responsibilities of living in a jurisdiction, but surely want the benefits. Get tired of it!
This really sucks!!! I was so looking forward to eliminating those awful entrapment cameras that can and do snag good drivers in the course of normal driving.
I could’ve guaranteed this wouldn’t have made the ballot. Last thing our city council wants is us citizens getting in the way of their vision.
I used to feel safer on the road with the police actually on patrol instead of photo enforcement. Seems as tho the police are largely relegated to task forces instead of patrol.
I feel sorry for the people who get flashed at the intersections as they will be getting a financially crippling bill for being milliseconds or inches past an unknowable line.
What a bunch of babies the people of Tucson are being! The cameras, as obnoxious as they are, have no doubt saved lives and prevented injuries. Don’t attempt to run red lights and the cameras won’t bother you. And what’s this about people who “occasionally drive through” wanting a say in Tucson? I live and drive in this town every single day, and if the cameras make me and anyone else the least bit more safe, I say that is a fair trade off. It’s a few seconds, people. Wait at the light and stop whining.
To ‘Hungry in Vail’ and ‘H’ ; Let’s put it to a public vote and let the public decide the answer to the camera question…
-Support Kromko Petitions
Who doesn’t hate red-light cameras that wait patiently to trap you zipping through an “orange” light? The law-enforcement aids snap a photo of you and your plate, generating a ticket from The Man. However, lots of people believe that they are not about keeping the roads any better. Rather, some believe, their adoption has much more to do with raising additional revenue for a municipality. However, two different products have recently been invented that render red-light camera pictures useless. One of them is still seeking cash to get on the market. The other, though pricey, is accessible now. Source: https://personalmoneynetwork.com