Mayor Jeremy Ferguson of Milwaukie published an open letter to area citizens expressing his thought on Photo Radar.

I would say he has put a lot of thought into this matter and is genuinely concerned about Milwaukie’s safety and the image of the city. Here’s the letter as it appears in the Clackamas Review:

Dear community members,

Many of you have sent in comments regarding photo radar. In fact, about 35 of you have sent me emails. Many have been in support of photo radar, many in opposition and a few have just made observations. I want to thank everyone for their opinion and feedback.

I noticed that most folks didn’t take the time to ask me exactly what my opinion was; they simply told me that they’re either for or against the radar van as if that was the only option.

Many have said that the photo radar van saves lives and slows down traffic. I believe that statement to be wrong. Since February, the radar van has been sitting idle. Not a single ticket has been issued from the van. So, it’s not the van, but the people that make our community safe. Someone needs to get behind the wheel of that van and get it out to the problem areas in the community.

I don’t support photo radar as the only means of controlling speed in our community. I have been struggling with how I can convey my feelings on the topic accurately.

There are many things I like about photo radar and many things I don’t like about photo radar. Sometimes the things I like outweigh the things I don’t, and that brings me to supporting the program. Other times, the things I don’t like about the program weigh heavy on me, and I lean towards not supporting the program.

Last week, I was thinking heavily about the elements I don’t like about the program and allowed that to guide my thought process. I asked Councilor Greg Chaimov if he needed a recess, but really I should have taken one, as I was beginning to formulate some alternatives to simply approving or rejecting photo radar.

I’ll be sharing my proposal with City Council at the next meeting and will ask for the opportunity to have staff look it over as well to see if it is reasonable.

My first issue is that Milwaukie is perceived as a money-hungry speed trap. I know Milwaukie only receives 48 percent of the revenue, and of that we must pay officers, court costs, equipment upkeep, etc. It’s the perception I have a problem with.

I receive call after call, email after email when the van is located in a couple specific spots which cause concern for me and other leaders in the community. My plan would include an approach to placement which is easy to defend. It is difficult to defend a photo radar van when it is parked just a few hundred feet shy of a speed increase sign or while blocking ADA access.

My next issue is public education. We use “traffic laws photo enforced” signs as our public education. There are so many nonprofit organizations we could partner with to provide a community safety outreach campaign. We generate revenue with this photo radar van; why not dedicate some of the money to community outreach to educate people in a positive way? My plan will address this concern at length.

All-day traffic calming cannot be obtained with a photo radar van. We can only use the van in one location for up to four hours per day. We already know where we have problem areas in the community. We should take a proactive approach by deploying solar powered LED speed display signs. These signs cannot be placed everywhere, but we have control over local street placement. These signs can advise drivers even when the van is not out. I would like to work with ODOT on obtaining permission to place these LED signs on highways.

Included in the annual review of photo radar, I’d like to see a report of where the van is used throughout the city. Not by specific location, but where is the van used in the city: neighborhoods, school zones, highways. Last year the van was used 24 percent of the time in neighborhoods. Is that enough?

Some questions I have which will guide the proposal:

What control does the city have on the fees charges for photo radar?

Can the city raise our portion of all Milwaukie issues Uniform Traffic Citations to help support the proposed fee structure?

If extra funds are raised, can a percentage of those funds go to the Walk Safely Milwaukie program?

If the van will be one of several tools as well as the funding source for community education, then the van should be deployed as frequently as possible in as many areas as possible. State law requires an officer to occupy the van during deployment. Can we have two shifts daily working the van in order to have it on the street and active more than 12 hours of the day?

Council should meet with Municipal Judge Ron Gray to encourage him to convey the message of safety in court. Perhaps there’s an opportunity to have a postcard-size handout that explains where the money goes and why we have such a program, as well as explain all the ways in which we try to deter speeding.

So in short, I do not support photo radar as the only means of slowing traffic down. I also do not support generating revenue by busting people for bad behavior when we have no plan for the money or no safety education plan. It gives the appearance that we just want to deploy the van and make money, not commit ourselves to educating the public about the safety reasons for traffic laws. I would support a fully integrated plan that has photo radar as an element to our safety and livability plan.

If we want a safe and livable community, we should promote and build a safe and livable community, not just rely on policing a community with warning signs.

Jeremy Ferguson

Mayor, city of Milwaukie

Link to Article in Clackamas Review