Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2019-07-22 Item 3A - Ordinances - Automated Traffic Safety Cameras: Signalized Intersection and School ZonesCOUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS - - ------------- - - - - - ---- ----- - -- -------------- ----- Meetibg Dare Prepared by Mayor's review Co aril eriew 07/ 22/19 ph8/05/19 0 ph ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 3.A. S'F\i'F SPONSOR: BRUCE LINTON ORIGINAL AG kNI), \ D vt 17: AGLND \ I i 1, m T "11.1, Automated Safety Camera Pilot Cameras) (Red Light Cameras and School Speed Zone CX1 I GORY U Dn CliJ uon 07/22/9 Motion Date 08/05/19 Ej ReJolution Mg Date 0 Orcliname El Buil Amard A li:g Date • Public. Hear* Ili Other Mtg Date Mfg Date Alts III4gDate 07/22/19 Mg Date SPONSOR Couna/ ayor •I-TR DCD Finance Fire 'I'S 0 P&R Police EPIV ECourt SP ONSoR's Increase public safety on the City roadways through enforcement and education using SUMMARY automated red light cameras and school speed zone cameras. The Council is being asked to consider and approve the proposal of the three-year pilot program for the cameras with the corresponding ordinances at the 7/22/19 COW meeting and 8/5/19 Regular meeting Rkvii,..wt d) liv • C.O.W. Mtg. CDN Comm Arts Comm. 0 Finance Comm 0 Parks Comm. DENNIS Public Safety Comm. E Trans &Infrastructure DATE: 7/15/19 0 Planning Comm. ROBERTSON commirIEE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/AI)MIN. CONIMI Police Department I'll ,F, Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPI,NDITURI% REQUIRUD AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $480,000 $ $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 07/22/19 08/05/19 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 07/22/19 info memo dated 7 0 9 Po erpoint with supplemental information to the info memo Public Safety Committee meeting minutes 12/3/18 Tukwila School District and school board communication PD communications and frequently asked questions Red light camera ordiance and school speed zone camera ordinance and RCW 46.63.170 08/05/19 1 2 TO: FROM: BY: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Public Safety Committee Bruce Linton, Chief of Police Bill Devlin, Sergeant Traffic Division CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: 07/10/2019 SUBJECT: Automated Safety Camera Pilot Project Presentation ISSUE Increase public safety on the city roadways through enforcement and education using automated red-light cameras. BACKGROUND The most prevalent complaint from our residents is speeding on our arterials, neighborhoods and school zones. Our small traffic unit has a difficult time keeping up with the increased calls for enforcement. Using automated safety cameras can increase efficiencies in the areas of traffic enforcement, education and the overall traffic and pedestrian safety within our city. Studies have shown that red light and speed zone cameras will make the city streets safer by reducing red light running and school speed -zone violations. Automated safety cameras are currently used in King, Pierce, Snohomish, Spokane, and Chelan counties. In King County, there are programs in Bellevue, Des Moines, Federal Way, Issaquah, Kent, Lake Forrest Park, Mercer Island, Renton, and Seattle. ANALYSIS Red Light Cameras: Red light running nationally causes hundreds of deaths, tens of thousands of injuries and billions of dollars in property damage. A driver runs a red light about every 20 minutes and more frequently during peak times. Studies show that automated safety cameras have reduced red Tight running, which in turn reduces the potential serious injury right angle collisions. They educate the public and that education has a spillover effect to the non - camera intersections. They will assist with increased traffic flow and increase the safety of police officers. The camera systems will assist with better tracking of intersection statistics such as traffic flows, number of vehicles, peak hours of the days, number of collisions, and tickets issued in these intersections. They will provide more efficient service with no immediate additional FTE's. The police, prosecutor, city attorney, public works, the Tukwila municipal court and the Tukwila school board support the program. Studies show that nationally a high percentage of the public is in favor of automated red-light cameras and the Tukwila Police Department has reached out at community meetings and through social media to garner support in our area: • Public Safety Committee • Tukwila School Board • Community Oriented Police Citizens Advisory Board • Tukwila International Boulevard Action Committee • Tukwila Reporter Newspaper • Hazelnut Publication • City of Tukwila Website linked to Police Department Website 3 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Proposed Intersections: The proposed intersections for the pilot project were analyzed using collision data, projected violations, layout and potential design difficulty for the cameras system placement. The following proposed intersections are as follows: Boeing Access at Martin Luther King Jr (Southbound and Eastbound - WSDOT), Southcenter Parkway at Strander Blvd (Northbound and Westbound), and Grady at Interurban Ave South (Eastbound and Westbound - WSDOT). Companies such as ATS and Sensys have worked with WSDOT in coordinating installation at intersections. The Red -Light vendors will do the installations, which is the normal business model. Signage is required by the RCW and the City will install and maintain them at their expense (vendors will provide the technical assistance with the recommending placement). The cameras have a minimal power draw and will utilize existing power. If power is not available, the vendor will bring power in and that power will then be available for other city users. These requirements are all part of the contractual agreement. The proposed Red -Light Safety Camera intersection collision statistics 2014-2016 • Boeing Access Road at MLK Jr Way S. O 21 collisions O 0 fatalities O 2 right-angle collisions with no injuries reported O 5 sideswipes O 13 rear -end collisions O 1 collision with a fixed object 4 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 • Southcenter Parkway at Strander Blvd O 34 collisions O 0 fatalities O 5 right-angle collisions with 2 injuries O 15 sideswipes O 9 rear -end collisions O 5 collisions with fixed objects 5 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 • Grady and Interurban Ave S. O 24 collisions O 1 fatality O 5 right-angle collisions with 5 injuries O 9 rear -end collisions O 10 collisions with fixed objects 6 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 The Need for School Speed Zone Cameras: In Washington State, school zones are posted at 20 mph, recognizing the high volume of juvenile pedestrian traffic and inherent congestion and conflicts in the vicinity of our schools. Despite mitigation efforts between Public Works and the Police Department, individual drivers continue to speed through our school zones, creating concerns among citizens. As a result of these concerns, additional measures in the form of automated enforcement is recommended to remind drivers of the increased presence of school - aged children during school hours. The speed limit signs, flashing (radar) speed measuring signs, crosswalks and other warning signs/controls themselves have been ineffective. School Zone Info: • Reports show that crashes including pedestrians are eight times more likely to result in death than those not involving pedestrians. • That likelihood is greatly impacted by the speed at which the car is traveling. • Someone under the age of 30 years old only has a 3% chance of being killed by a vehicle traveling 20 mph and that risk increases to 13% at 30 mph. • The risk increases rapidly from, reaching about 52% when the vehicle speed is 45 mph. • Slower vehicle speeds mean a pedestrian has a greater chance of survival if hit, which is the benefit of a school speed zone. Proposed School Speed -Zone Camera Location: The data presented below is the basis for the location of the school speed -zone camera pilot program on South 144th Street in the vicinity of Foster High School and Showalter Middle School. The two cameras (Westbound and Eastbound) would be located between the 4200 and 4600 blocks of the school zone (see the attached diagram). The police department in coordination with public works, conducted an updated study of speeds during school hours in the area of Foster High School and Showalter Middle School. The updated speed analysis over a three-week period shows compelling data to support the recommended automated enforcement. )O1 MINNEIN Proposed School Zane Speed Cameras 7 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 6 All data was collected during the times when children were present considering the off -set times of arrival and departures between Showalter Middle School and Foster High School: • Arrival - 7:30AM to 9:OOAM • Departure - 2:OOPM - 3:30PM During the week of March 25, 2019 to March 29, 2019, we looked at violator speeds between 25-45 mph during this time period. As a reminder, the posted speed limit is 20mph. A breakdown of the numbers eastbound and westbound are depicted below: Radar Speed Measuring Device - Without Flashing Speed Notification Direction of Travel on S. 144th Travel Times - Children Present Total Number of Vehicles Violators Speeds 25 - 45 mph Eastbound 7:30AM - 9:30AM 1,397 320 Westbound 7:30AM - 9:30AM 1,576 477 Eastbound 2:00PM - 3:30PM 1,625 568 Westbound 2:00PM - 3:30PM 1,729 776 Total 6,327 2,141 Here is what we saw when we analyzed driving behaviors from April 1, 2019 to April 5, 2019 when we activated the flashing speed notifications on the speed measuring devices. There was a significant reduction of violators between 25-40 mph Radar Speed Measuring Device - With Flashing Speed Notification Activated Direction of Travel on S. 144th Travel Times - Children Present Total Number of Vehicles Violators Speeds 25 - 40 mph Eastbound 7:30AM - 9:30AM 1,422 341 Westbound 7:30AM - 9:30AM 1,417 344 Eastbound 2:OOPM - 3:30PM 1,713 500 Westbound 2:OOPM - 3:30PM 1,634 566 Total 6,186 1,751 Here is what we saw when we analyzed driving behaviors between April 22, 2019 to April 26, 2019, several weeks after the radar speed devices were continuously notifying drivers of their speed. The violations increased over time. Radar Speed Measuring Device - With Flashing Speed Notification Direction of Travel on S. 144th Travel Times - Children Present Total Number of Vehicles Violators Speeds 25 - 40 mph Eastbound 7:30AM - 9:30AM 1,422 376 Westbound 7:30AM - 9:30AM 1,487 385 Eastbound 2:OOPM - 3:30PM 1,713 564 Westbound 2:OOPM - 3:30PM 1,642 587 Total 6,264 1,912 8 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 7 PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS AND RETENTION Public records requests are forwarded to the City and the City can request needed information from the selected vendor. Images must be retained and accessible up through the exhaustion of the appeals process and then destroyed. The police department does not have a specific policy related to the retention of automated traffic safety cameras or notice of infractions issued since the Washington State law enforcement records retention schedule dictates our retention schedule. The activity of enforcing laws and ordinances and citing violations (including traffic, non -traffic and vessel or vehicle -related violations). DISPOSITION AUTHORITY NUMBER (DAN) DESCRIPTION OF RECORDS RETENTION AND DISPOSITION ACTION DESIGNATION LE2010-052 Rev. 0 Automated Traffic Safety Cameras —Citation or Notice of Infraction Issued Images captured by automated traffic safety cameras which have resulted in the issuance of a citation or notice of infraction. Retain until exhaustion of appeals process then Destroy. NON -ARCHIVAL NON -ESSENTIAL OPR LE2010-053 Rev. 0 Automated Traffic Safety Cameras —Citation or Notice of Infraction Not Issued Images captured by automated traffic safety cameras which have not resulted in the issuance of a citation or notice of infraction. Retain until verification that no infraction has been captured then Destroy. NON -ARCHIVAL NON -ESSENTIAL OPR LE2010-054 Rev. 0 Automatic License Plate Recognition Images — Case - Specific Images of vehicle license plates captured by automatic license plate imaging equipment and which do contain images significant to case investigations or court proceedings. Retain until exhaustion of appeals process then Destroy. NON -ARCHIVAL NON -ESSENTIAL OPR LE2010-055 Rev. 0 Automatic License Plate Recognition Images — Not Case - Specific Images of vehicle license plates captured by automatic license plate imaging equipment and which do not contain images significant to case investigations or court proceedings. Retain until verification that a significant image has not been captured then Destroy. NON -ARCHIVAL NON -ESSENTIAL OPR 9 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 8 VENDOR SELECTION The police department has drafted an RFP to select a suitable vender. The review and selection process will incorporate criteria based on experience and a broad level of service focused on past successes in other jurisdictions. FINANCIAL IMPACT Considering normal red light and school zone cameras vendor business models, there is no upfront cost. The equipment is leased from the vendor, and the per camera, per -month charge quoted is estimated at $4,500.00 to $5,000.00. These programs are self -funding (two citations per day per camera will mitigate the lease costs) and vendors normally require a three to five- year contract to actualize their return on investment. The per year contractual cost would be approximately $480,000.00. RECOMMENDATION Forward to Council for consideration and approval of the proposal of the three-year pilot program proposal for the red light cameras and the school speed zone cameras with the corresponding ordinances at the July 22, 2019 Committee of The Whole Meeting and subsequent August 5, 2019 Regular Meeting. Further, I recommend a phased process for the implementation which affords the Council an opportunity to off ramp at various junctures prior to an actual contract being signed. This affords the department to work through the multiple steps required to ensure a successful program implementation. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REQUESTED At the end of the October 22, 2018 meeting, the council requested additional information/responses to several questions. Responses to the inquiries are outlined below: 1. Pictorial representations of the three intersections showing the approximate locations of the cameras are included in the memo. 2. Per the RCW 46.63.170 (d), Cameras can only take a picture of the vehicle plate and not the driver or the interior of the violating vehicle. 3. Use of revenue after program costs for cameras and other equipment, are normally used for traffic safety programs or initiatives. 4. Photos and video are maintained in the vendor cloud and regulated by The Tukwila Police Department based on our requirements. This is no different from In -Car Camera or Body - Camera video maintained by Axon Evidence.com. Images and video are available through the PDR process facilitated by the police department. 5. Retention policies associated with video and photo enforcement are regulated by the WA State Retention Schedule for Law Enforcement. 6. The police department will set a minimum time of 90 days for general retention not associated with an appeals process or case investigations or proceedings. The latter will abide by the WA State retention policy. 10 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 9 7. Additional information requested regarding school speed zone cameras show the following: • They measure violators speed during designated school or school activity hours • They are treated the same as red light cameras as far as retention and processing • The fines can be higher based on the violators speed measured over the posted limit ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS POSTED The traffic camera proposal and ordinance were sent back to committee and at the December 3, 2018 Committee Meeting, and Chair Hougardy asked several questions. The questions with answers are listed below: What is fine in school zones? If a traffic officer writes you a ticket (RCW 46.61.440 it would be the following schedule: * 0-5 MPH $214.00 * 6-10 MPH $234.00 * 11-15 MPH $296.00 * 16-20 MPH $378.00 * 21-25 MPH $480.00 * 26-30 MPH $583.00 * 31-35 MPH $685.00 * 36+ MPH $808.00 Photo Enforcement * School zone speed camera violation * 0-10 MPH $210.00 * 11+ MPH $240.00 * Red light camera violation $139.00 * Fines set by RCW 46.63.170, RCW 46.63.110 What times will the cameras be operational? * Usually an hour before and two hours after school to include special school events when children are present. The times can be changed; however, these changes are supported by proper signage and flashing lights advising driver's that the cameras are in operation. The police department will collaborate with the school district to publish and establish times of operation for the flashing signs. 11 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 10 At what Speed limits would the fines be enforced? Can these be changed? If so, who makes the decision and how are others notified? * RCW dictates, police have discretion. The police department recommended threshold is 26 miles per hour. Where would the cameras be placed? * Between Foster High School and Showalter Middle School When was the study in the referenced presentation conducted? We work closely with public works and are constantly gathering data, we just bought additional 8 speed/data gathering signs. The latest study/information gathered in the school zone (east and west bound S 144th Street between FHS and Showalter) was collected between March 25 through April 26, 2019. Will the tickets be reported to insurance companies? * No, automated enforcement tickets are treated like parking tickets and are not reportable and do not accumulate points. What other types of mitigation are available and are they being considered? * Public Works have added crosswalk signs in the middle of the roadway in the 4600 block of S. 144th Street, speed data/notification signs will remain in place, other speed notification and the required speed zone enforcement notification signs will be in place. There are no other traffic calming plans at this time, because plans such as pinch points, traffic circles, traffic islands, and/or speed bumps would require major construction and additional funds. What other cities have school speed zone cameras, and have they been removed and why? * The surrounding jurisdictions have school zone cameras and are only increasing their programs as they are quite effective to reduce speeding in the school zones. Seattle has 120 school zone cameras, Renton, Tacoma, and Des Moines all have school speed zone cameras and red light cameras, just to name a few. Tacoma has the only state's speed zone camera as of this writing. What kind of public outreach, if any, is planned before consideration of passing the ordinance? * Social media, community meetings (COPCAB, TIBAC). What kind of outreach to the school board and school district, if any, is planned before consideration of passing the ordinance? * Chief Linton and Sergeant Devlin met with the Tukwila School District Superintendent on January 7, 2019 and discussed the upcoming proposal. Chief Linton met and briefed the school board on Jan 8, 2019 and is working with the School District Communications Officer for dissemination throughout the district to include parents and student drivers. In June 2019, Tukwila public information officer, in collaboration with the 12 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 11 Tukwila School District launched an information campaign via social media to school district employees, students and parents regarding the proposed school zone cameras. On July 9, 2019 Chief Linton updated the Tukwila School Board on the results of the updated speed analysis in the vicinity of Foster High School and Showalter Middle School and garnered support for the pilot program. How will the fines associated with school speed -zone cameras impact citizen ability to pay the associated fines? Judge Walden spoke to the ability of individuals to mitigate fines associated with automated enforcement. She spoke to the possibility of reduction of fines based on the ability to pay and other alternatives such as community service. It should be noted that the level of mitigation associated with automated enforcement is not available for violations witnessed by an officer. ATTACHMENTS Original PowerPoint with supplemental information to the info memo Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes, Dec 3, 2018. Tukwila School District & School Board Communication Police Department Communications and Frequently Asked Questions Shared with the Public Red Light Camera Ordinance School Speed Zone Camera Ordinance RCW 46.63.170 13 14 Automated Safety Cameras - Agenda Background • Analysis - Red Light Cameras • Proposed Red Light Camera Locations Analysis - School Speed -Zone Cameras • Proposed - School Speed Zone Camera Locations • Retention • Vendor Selection • Financial Impact • RCW 46.63.170 • Strategic Communications (Frequently Asked Questions) • Proposed Timeline • Associated Ordinances Automated Safety Cameras • Background • Analysis - Red Light Cameras • Proposed Red Light Camera Locations • Analysis - School Speed -Zone Cameras • Proposed - School Speed Zone Camera Locations • Retention • Vendor Selection • Financial Impact • RCW 46.63.170 • Strategic Communications (Frequently Asked Questions) • Proposed Timeline • Associated Ordinances Automated Safety Cameras • Background • The most prevalent complaint from our residents is speeding on our arterials, neighborhoods and school zones. • Our small traffic unit has a difficult time keeping up with the increased call for enforcement. • Using automated safety cameras can increase efficiencies in the areas of traffic enforcement, education and the overall traffic and pedestrian safety within our city. Studies have shown that red light and speed zone cameras will make the city streets safer by reducing red light running and school speed -zone violations. • Automated Safety Cameras are currently used in King, Pierce, Snohomish, Spokane, and Chelan counties. Here in King County, there are programs in Bellevue, Des Moines, Federal Way, Issaquah, Kent, Lake Forrest Park, Mercer Island, Renton, and Seattle. Red -Light Cameras -Analysis • Red Tight running nationally causes hundreds of deaths, tens of thousands of injuries and billions of dollars in property damage. • A driver runs a red Tight about every 20 minutes and more frequently during peak times. • Studies show that automated safety cameras have reduced red light running, which in turn reduces the potential serious injury right angle collisions. • They educate the public and that education has a spillover effect to the non -camera intersections. • They will assist with increased traffic flow and increase the safety of police officers. unity utreach • Portions of the general public remain skeptical regarding the overall purpose of Automated Enforcement as evident from some of our feedback . . • A significant portion of Tukwila residents impacted by the speeding in city have been supportive • Nationally, studies show that a high percentage of the public is in favor of automated red-light cameras and the • Tukwila Police Department has reached out at community meetings and through social media to garner support in our area: • Public Safety Committee • Tukwila School Board • Community Oriented Police Citizens Advisory Board • Tukwila International Boulevard Action Committee • Tukwila Reporter Newspaper • Hazelnut Publication • City of Tukwila Website linked to Police Department Website Proposed Red Light Camera Intersections Collision Stats 2014-2016 Boeing Access Road at MLK Jr Way S 21collisions: 0 Fatalities 2 right angle w/no injuries reported 5 sideswipes 13 rear -enders lfixed object Sou hcenter Parkway at Strander Blvd 34 collisions: 0 Fatalities 5 right angle w/2 injuries 15 sideswipe 9 rear -enders 5 fixed objects • Grady and Interurban Ave S 24 Collisions: 1 Fatality 5 Right angle w/5 injuries 9 Rear -enders 10 Fixed objects Approximate Locations of Red -Light Cameras MLK At Boeing Access Approximate Location of Red -Light Camerasfor Southcenter Parkway at Strander Blvd Approximate Locations of Red -Light Cameras Grady and Interurban Ave S School Speed -Zone Camera Analysis • In Washington State, school speed zones are posted at 20 mph • Despite mitigation efforts between Public Works and the Police Department, individual drivers continue to speed through Tukwila school zones, creating concerns among citizens. • Other mitigation methods; speed limit signs, flashing (radar) speed measuring signs, crosswalks and other warning signs/controls themselves have been ineffective. The Need for School Speed -Zone Cameras • The unfortunate reality is there are many ways that tragedy can strike when you combine vehicle traffic, particularly high-speed traffic, and high -volumes of young pedestrians. • Speed limit signs by themselves tend to be relatively ineffective. Flashing signage is recommended for indicating school speed zones during the active school hours. • Other possible counter measures to speeding in school zones can include speed humps, raised pedestrian crossings, intersection or mid -block bump -outs, or using crossing guards. School Speed -Zone Camera Analysis • Reports show that crashes including pedestrians are eight times more likely to result in death than those not involving pedestrians. • That likelihood is greatly impacted by the speed at which the car is traveling. • Someone under the age of 30 years old only has a 3% chance of being killed by a vehicle traveling 20 mph and that risk increases to 13% at 30 mph. • The risk increases rapidly from, reaching about 52% when the vehicle speed is 45 mph. • Slower vehicle speeds mean a Pedestrian has a greater chance of survival if hit, which is the benefit of a sciool speed zone. 12 Proposed School Speed -Zone Camera Locations The data presented below is the basis for the location of the school speed - zone camera pilot program on South 144th Street in the vicinity of Foster High School and Showalter Middle School. The two cameras (Westbound and Eastbound) would be located between the 4200 and 4600 blocks of the school zone. The police department in coordination with public works, conducted an updated study of speeds during school hours in the area of Foster High School and Showalter Middle School. The updated speed analysis over a three-week period shows compelling data to support the recommended automated enforcement. Proposed School Speed -Zone Camera Locations Speed summary Reports for Foster High and Showalter Middle School in the 4600 Block of 5.144th Street East and West Bound (March 25-29, 2019) Direction of Travel on S. 144th Westbound Eastbound - - - Westbound Radar Speed Measuring Device - Without Flashing Speed Notification Travel Times - Children Present 7:30AM - 9:30AM Total Number of Vehicles 1,397 7:30AM - 9:30AM 1,576 2:OOPM - 3:30PM 1,625 2:OOPM - 3:30PM 1,729 Total Violators Speeds 25 - 45 mph 320 477 568 776 6,327 2,141 Speed summary Reports for Foster High and Showalter Middle School in the 4600 Block of 5.144th Street East and West Bound (April 1-5, 2019) Direction of Travel on S. 144th Eastbound Eastbound Westbound Radar 5peed Measuring Device - With Ftashing SpeedNtitifitatio6--Atthiat6d:_-:, Travel Times - Children Present 7:30AM - 9:30AM Total Number of Vehicles 1,422 7:30AM - 9:30AM 1,417 Violators Speeds 25 - 45 mph 341 344 2:OOPM - 3:30PM 1,713 500 2:00PM - 3:30PM Total 1,634 566 6,186 1,751 Speed summary Reports for Foster High and Showalter Middle School in the 4600 Block of 5.144th Street East and West Bound (April 22-26, 2019) Radar Speed Measuring Device - With Flashing Speed Notification Activated on of Travel Direction Dire S. 144th Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound Travel Times - Children Present 7:30AM - 9:30AM 7:30AM - 9:30AM 2:OOPM - 3:30PM Total Number of Vehicles 1,422 1,487 1,713 Violators Speeds 25 - 45 mph 376 385 564 2:00PM - 3:30PM 1,642 587 Total 6,264 1,912 Public Records Requests Retention for Violations and Traffic Enforcement • public records requests are forwarded to the city and the city can request needed information from the selected vendor. • Images must be retained and accessible up through the exhaustion of the appeals process and then destroyed. • The police department does not have a specific policy related to the retention of Automated Traffic Safety Cameras or Notice of Infractions Issued since the Washington State Law Enforcement Records Retention Schedule dictates our retention schedule. Retention for Violations and Traffic Enforcement The activity of enforcing laws and ordinances and citing violations (including traffic, non -traffic and vessel or vehicle -related violations). DISPOSITION AUTHORITY NUMBER (DAN) DESCRIPTION OF RECORDS RETENTION AND DISPOSITION ACTION LE2010-052 Rev. 0 Automated Traffic Safety Cameras— Retain until exhaustion of appeals process Citation or Notice of Infraction Issued then Images captured by automated traffic Destroy. safety cameras which have resulted in the issuance of a citation or notice of infraction. LE2010-053 Rev. 0 LE2010-054 Rev. 0 LE2010-055 Rev. 0 DESIGNATION NON -ARCHIVAL NON -ESSENTIAL OPR Automated Traffic Safety Cameras — Retain until verification that no. infraction NON -ARCHIVAL Citation or Notice of infraction Not Issued has been captured NON -ESSENTIAL Images captured by automated traffic then OPR safety cameras which have not resulted in Destroy. the issuance of a citation or notice of infraction. Automatic License Plate Recognition Retain until exhaustion of appeals process Images — Case -Specific then Images of vehicle license plates captured Destroy: by automatic license plate imaging equipment and which do contain images significant to case investigations or court proceedings. Automatic License Plate Recognition Retain until verification that a significant Images— Not Case -Specific image has not been. captured Images of vehicle license plates captured then by automatic license plate imaging Destroy. equipment and which do not contain images significant to case investigations or court proceedings. NON -ARCHIVAL NON -ESSENTIAL OPR NON -ARCHIVAL NON -ESSENTIAL OPR Vendor Selection Process • The Police Department has drafted an RFP to select a suitable vender. • The review and selection process will incorporate criteria based on experience and a broad level of service focused on past successes in other jurisdictions. • Input from the council will help guide that criteria Budget for Proposed Red -Light and School Speed - Zone Cameras • Vendor business models for Red Light and School Zone Cameras require no upfront costs • The equipment is owned and maintained by the contracted company (Leased Equipment) Most reputable vendors have indicated that the lease pays for itself and our collaboration with other agencies have confirmed this model • Less than two fully paid infractions per day will cover the monthly lease for each camera. • 6 Red Light Cameras at $4,500 to $5,000.00 per camera, per month $360,000.00 per year • 6 Photo enforcement signs $500.00 each - $3,000..00 • 2 School Speed Zone at $4,500-5000 per camera, per month - $120,000 per year • 2 Photo enforcement signs $500.00 each - $1,000.00 No additional FTE's for the PD Recommend a "wait and see" approach with regard to adding personnel for the potential municipal court workload s�� Protections Under RCW 46.63.170 • Per the RCW 46.63.170, Cameras Only Take a Picture of the Vehicle and Plate Only, not the Driver or Interior of the Violating Vehicle. Electronic images prepared under this section are for the exclusive use of law enforcement in the discharge of duties under this section and are not open to the public and may not be used in a court in a pending action or proceeding unless the action or proceeding relates to a violation under this section. No photograph, microphotograph, or electronic image may be used for any purpose other than enforcement of violations under this section nor retained longer than necessary to enforce this section. RC 46.63.170 Guidance and Best Practices • compensation paid to the manufacturer or vendor of the equipment used must be based only upon the value of the equipment and services provided or rendered in support of the system, and may not be based upon a portion of the fine or civil penalty imposed or the revenue generated by the equipment. (RCW 46.63 170) Recommend any revenues realized after the monthly cost of the camera program be slated for traffic safety programs since this is the best practice. Tukwila Police Red -Light and School Speed -Zone Cameras Implementation Timeline DEC 2022 DEC 2021 DEC 2020 SEP 2020 JUN 2020 MAR 2020 JAN 2020 OCT 2019 SEP 19 AUG 19 VENDOR SELECTION & SITE SURVEYS 7." ANNUAL ANALYSIS WITH UPDATES AS REQUESTED FINAL PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE UPDATE FULL IMPLEMENTATION DETERMINATION ANNUAL ANALYSIS QUARTERLY ANALYSIS QUARERLY ANALYSIS QUARTERLY ANALYSIS QUARTERLY ANALYSIS OF THE PROGRAM BEGINS RED LIGHT CAMERA PILOT PROGRAM BEGINS BEGINS CONTRACT REVIEWAND COUNCIL APPROVAL July 19 DRAFT PROPOSAL & RFP Public Safety Committee Minutes December3, 2018 D. Contract Amendment: BNBuilders Staff is seeking Council approval of Amendment No. 3 to Contract 18-049 in the amount of $165,100 and $100,00 contingency for demolition of the vacant buildings on the Travelodge property. Staff would like to demolish as soon as possible due to the risks associated with vacant buildings. The contractor is hoping to begin demolition in December 2018 pending utility disconnects and permits. The demolition and associated work is included in the approved Justice Center project budget. The Committee asked that the memo be updated to reflect that the City will pay a premium of around $60,000 to demolish the Travelodge now before demolishing the other buildings on site. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO DECEMBER 10, 2018 SPECIAL CONSENT AGENDA. E. 2018 Public Safety Committee Work Plan Committee members and staff discussed the status of items on the Committee work plan, which will be included in the Committee of the Whole packet for a Council year-end report. DISCUSSION ONLY. III. MISCELLANEOUS Traffic Camera Pilot Project The traffic camera pilot proposal and ordinance were sent back to Committee after the addition of a proposed school zone camera pair in the vicinity of Foster High and Showalter Middle School on South 144th. The Police Department's original proposal was for three red light intersection cameras, but some Councilmembers expressed interest to include school zone speed cameras in the pilot. Committee members discussed the proposal. Judge Walden offered that tickets given by officers in school zones cannot be reduced, and tickets resulting from these cameras would be preferable as they can be reduced and they do not go on a permanent record. Community service is also an option in lieu of payment. She believes school zone cameras are effective at reducing speeding behavior. Chief Linton addressed outreach, stating that PD will engage with social media just as with the original proposal. He met with the new interim Superintendent and will reach out to the School Board. Chair Hougardy asked that the following questions about the school zone cameras, some of which are answered in the memo and presentation, be incorporated into a fact sheet for Council and public reference before the next meeting: 1) What is the fine amount in the school zones? Give examples. 2) At what times of the day will the cameras be operational? Can these times be changed? If so, who makes that decision and how are others notified? 3) At what speed limits would the fines be enforced? Can these be changed? If so, who makes that decision, and how are others notified? 4) Where would the cameras be placed? 5) When was the study referenced in the presentation conducted? 6) Will the tickets be reported to insurance companies? 7) What other types of mitigation are available and are they being considered? 39 Public Safety Committee Minutes December 3, 2018 8) What other nearby cities have speed limit cameras in their school zones? Have any removed the cameras and why? 9) What kind of public outreach, if any, is planned before consideration of passing the ordinance? 10) What kind of outreach to the School Board and School District, if any, is planned before consideration of passing the ordinance? Chair Hougardy indicated that she had concerns about the social justice impact of school zone cameras but liked the idea of the flashing lights serving as warning as well as the fact that the fine can be reduced or substituted with community service. Councilmember McLeod stated that he was in support of moving forward with the red-light pilot and that the school zone cameras needed another touch by Committee. He asked if PD would consider removing one red light camera from the pilot. Chief Linton stated that the locations were identified based on data and complaints and the proposal is to leverage modern technology since officers can't be everywhere. His recommendation remains three intersections and one school zone speed area. Councilmember Robertson said he wants the focus to remain on safety and reducing dangerous driving behavior. The Committee agreed that the 2019 Public Safety Committee should discuss this item prior to sending it on to Committee of the Whole. Adjourned 6:38 p.m. Committee Chair Approval Summary by LH 40 Dear Tukwila School District Staff, Students and Parents: The Tukwila Police Department recently proposed school zone speed cameras for the area of S 144th betvveen42 mAve South and 46mAve S. VVecontinue toreceive mounting complaints regarding speeding in school zones. The Safety of our children is the number one priority for the Tukwila Police Department. The Tukwila Police Department has attempted to mitigate the multiple traffic complaints in our school zones. Several methods have been used to curtail traffic issues. These efforts include speed signs, cross walks, speed notification signs, and school zone speed enforcement. These efforts have not been effective in that we are still receiving complaints about significant speeding in our school zones, especially along 3l441»Street. We collected data over the course of one week, between 7:30 AM-9:00 AM and again at 2:30 PIVI-3:30 PM The data shows that in the mornings and evenings when students are present, there is a significant amount ofspeeding inthis school zone. The radar equipment captured 6,264 motorists. Of those 1,912were traveling atspeeds between 254O miles per hour. The posted speed limit in school zones is 20 mph because at this speed or below drivers and children walking have more time tnsee each other and react. |naddition, the likelihood ofafatality atorbelow 2Omiles per hour |sapproximately lOY6. When that speed isincreased to3Qmph the risk nf afatality increases toapproximately G0Y6. Many emphasis patrols involve citations that are written by hand by officers. These patrols often take attention away from other areas inthe city. Those that receive tickets from officers can experience the p High penalties and fees w Tickets received byofficers are included onthe offender's driving record. n This could have and effect oninsurance rates * And those tickets cannot bemitigated. The cameras would beactive from 7:30Am|-9:D0AMand again fnom21X)PM 3:30PM. Signs and or flashing lights will beactivated during the times that the cameras are operational. The cameras are connected to the school zone beacons and only operate when the beacons are flashing. If the beacons are not flashing, then drivers will not be issued citations. Photos of the vehicle and the vehicle license plate taken at the time the vehicle was detected speeding 41 The violator will besent anotice ofinfraction inthe mail. That notice will contain aphoto nfthe vehicle and license plate. The driver or occupants of the vehicle will not be photographed or distributed, as that would be in violation of RCW 46.63.170. The photograph and video of the violation will be available online for the violator to review. Additional information associated with camera enforcement: * Citations can bemitigated. w Camera enforced citations are treated much the same way as a parking violation and are not included onthe violator's driving record Camera enforced citations do not affect insurance rates. We would like to hear from you about your concerns related to speeding in our school Zones and we certainly ask for your consideration by monitoring your speed when transiting our school zones. We truly believe you are as concerned as us when it involves the safety of our kids'". Please send comments totrafficsefety(cDtukvvi|avva.gov 42 Automated Safety Camera Enforcement Tukwila Police Department Communications Re: The Proposed Automated Safety Camera Enforcement Pilot Program (commonly known as Red -Light Cameras) The Police Department is proposing an Automated Safety Camera Enforcement Pilot Program (commonly known as Red -Light Cameras) and we want our community members to weigh in. The department is faced with the challenge of ensuring the safety of our arterials and neighborhood roadways while traffic volumes continue to increase. Ongoing patrols by our officers can only accomplish so much, and it is important that we look at other tools that can help increase the safety of our roadways. Automated enforcement, commonly referred to as "Red -Light Cameras," provides us an opportunity to reduce serious injury accidents at intersections with a history of high -frequency red light running violations. The Department has reviewed historical data at key intersections to better understand if this technology would improve safety with in the city of Tukwila. Indeed, the data clearly shows the need for these in multiple major arterial intersections. These proposed intersections were chosen based on collision data and potential violations based on officers' observations and experience: • Boeing Access at Martin Luther King Jr (Southbound and Eastbound) • Southcenter Parkway at Strander Blvd (Northbound and Westbound) • Grady at Interurban Ave South (Eastbound and Westbound) The Police Department's goal is to make these proposed locations well known before the cameras are installed in the hopes that everyone will increase their vigilance and drive more carefully, avoiding a ticket and or a terrible accident. Automated enforcement is currently used in King, Pierce, Snohomish, Spokane, and Chelan counties. Here in King County there are programs in Bellevue, Des Moines, Federal Way, Issaquah, Kent, Lake Forrest Park, Mercer Island, Renton, and Seattle. Red light running nationally causes hundreds of deaths, tens of thousands of injuries and billions of dollars in property damage. A driver runs a red light about every 20 minutes and this happens more frequently during peak times. Studies show that automated safety cameras have reduced red light running, which in turn reduces the potential serious injury right angle collisions. The camera systems will also assist with better tracking of intersection statistics such as traffic flows, number of vehicles, peak hours of the days, number of collisions, and tickets issued in these intersections. As we seek to increase the safety of our roadway by incorporating this technology into our enforcement efforts, the Police Department is interested in hearing from the public on their thoughts on its use within the city of Tukwila. Thank you for your interest and please share your thoughts at (Trafficsafety@tukwilawa.gov). 43 Automated Safety Camera Enforcement FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS AUTOMATED SPEED CAMERA ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM Q: Are Photo Safety Enforcement Programs effective? A: Yes. Automated cameras have been proven to be effective in reducing red light running violations and right-angle collisions. Jurisdictions that use this system consistently report safer roads and intersections with fewer collisions. Q: Why are cameras used? A: According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, red light running is a leading cause of urban vehicle accidents and often cause injury and death. Jurisdictions install the system to improve public safety by deterring red light running. Q: Isn't the main purpose of red light cameras to make money? A: No. The goal of red-light camera enforcement systems is to improve public safety by reducing injuries and deaths caused by accidents. Drivers are advised of camera systems at each intersection that photo enforcement is in use by way of signage. Q: Are motorists warned when they are approaching a Red -Light Camera Zone? A: All locations where an automated traffic safety camera is used must be clearly marked at least thirty days prior to activation of the camera by placing signs in locations that clearly indicate to a driver that he or she is entering a zone where traffic laws are enforced by an automated traffic safety camera. Signs placed in automated traffic safety camera locations after June 7, 2012, must follow the specifications and guidelines under the manual of uniform traffic control devices for streets and highways as adopted by the department of transportation under chapter RCW. Q: Who receives the ticket? A: Tickets are mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle. Q: Will "points" be assessed to my driving record? A: This violation is considered a non-moving violation and no points will be assessed. 44 Automated Safety Camera Enforcement Q. If I am already in the intersection when a light turns red, will I qet a violation? A: No. Violations are only issued when a vehicle enters the intersection AFTER the light has turned red. If you enter the intersection on a green or yellow light you will not be photographed by the camera system. Q: Is a penalty issued for making a right turn on red? A: Tickets will also be issued if a driver makes a right turn on red —before failing to come to a complete stop and if pedestrians are crossing the street or at intersections posted "No right turn on red." Q: Will the red-light camera take a picture of the driver of the vehicle? A: No. A violation is assessed against the registered owner of the vehicle; it is not a moving violation. Similar to a parking ticket, there is no need to identify the driver and therefore, no need to capture the image of the driver. This violation will NOT affect your driving privileges or insurance rates. Q. Can I receive citations for other offenses as a result of my red light camera? A: No. Drivers who receive photo enforcement citations are cited for Red Light Camera Violations only. Q: How much is the fine? A: The amount of the fine for a Red -Light Camera Violation is $139.00 Q. How can I dispute this violation? A: CONTEST A VIOLATION: (1) Tickets may be contested through the Tukwila Municipal Court. The Police Department and the Court will communicate the specifics as the program is further developed. (2) If the basis of the claim is that the registered owner was not driving the vehicle, he or she may complete an affidavit an any supporting documentation and forward to the court. 45 46 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER OF THE TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE AUTHORIZING THE USE OF AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS, AND ADOPTING STANDARDS RELATED THERETO, TO BE CODIFIED AS TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.52 PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, very serious traffic accidents involving right-angle collisions at high rates of speed are often the result of drivers running red lights; and WHEREAS, studies show that these accidents result in more serious injury and deaths than other accidents at signalized intersections; and WHEREAS, locating automated traffic safety cameras at signalized intersections has been shown to reduce the frequency of traffic violations at these intersections and has resulted in a corresponding reduction in injuries and associated economic costs; and WHEREAS, the City has arterial intersections that would benefit from the strategic placement of automated traffic safety cameras; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila desires to improve traffic safety and pedestrian safety throughout the City with emphasis on critical intersections; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature has adopted Chapter 46.63 RCW, which authorizes local jurisdictions to use automated traffic safety cameras at signalized arterial intersections, subject to some limitations; and WHEREAS, in accordance with RCW 46.63.170(1)(a), the City has prepared an analysis of the locations where automated traffic safety cameras are proposed to be located; W: Word Processing\Ordinance WD:bjs utomated traf lc safety cameras -intersections 5-23-19.doc Page 1 of 5 47 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 9.52 of the Tukwila Municipal Code Established. A chapter of the Tukwila Municipal Code entitled "Automated Traffic Safety Cameras at Signalized Intersections," to be codified as Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 9.52, is hereby established to read as follows: CHAPTER 9.52 AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Sections: 9.52.010 Automated traffic safety cameras — Detection of violations — Restrictions 9.52.020 Notice of infraction 9.52.030 Prima facie presumption 9.52.040 Infractions processed 9.52.050 Fine 9.52.060 Nonexclusive enforcement Section 2. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.52.010, "Automated traffic safety cameras — Detection of violations — Restrictions," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.52.010 Automated traffic safety cameras — Detection of violations — Restrictions A. City law enforcement officers and persons commissioned by the Tukwila Police Chief are authorized to use automated traffic safety cameras and related automated systems to detect and record the image of stoplight violations at the intersection of two arterials; provided, however, pictures of the vehicle and the vehicle license plate may be taken only while an infraction is occurring, and the picture shall not reveal the face of the driver or of any passengers in the vehicle. B. Each location where an automated traffic safety camera is used shall be clearly marked by signs placed in locations that clearly indicate to a driver that the driver is entering a zone where traffic laws are enforced by an automated traffic safety camera. C. "Automated traffic safety camera" means a device that uses a vehicle sensor installed to work in conjunction with an intersection traffic control system or a speed measuring device, and a camera synchronized to automatically record one or more sequenced photographs, microphotographs or electronic images of the rear of a motor vehicle at the time the vehicle fails to stop when facing a steady red traffic control signal as detected by a speed measuring device. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Automated traffic safety cameras -intersections 5-23-19.doc WD:bjs 48 Page 2 of 5 Section 3. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.52.020, "Notice of infraction," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.52.020 Notice of infraction A. Whenever any vehicle is photographed by an automated traffic safety camera, a notice of infraction shall be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within 14 days of the violation, or to the renter of a vehicle within 14 days of establishing the renter's name and address. A person receiving a notice of infraction based on evidence detected by an automated traffic safety camera may respond to the notice by mail. B. If the registered owner of the vehicle is a rental car business, the law enforcement agency shall, before a notice of infraction is issued, provide a written notice to the rental car business that a notice of infraction may be issued to the rental car business if the rental car business does not, within 18 days of receiving the written notice, provide to the agency by return mail: (1) a statement under oath stating the name and known mailing address of the individual driving or renting the vehicle when the infraction occurred; or (2) a statement under oath that the business is unable to determine who was driving or renting the vehicle when the infraction occurred; or (3) in lieu of identifying the vehicle operator, the rental car business may pay the applicable penalty. Timely mailing of this statement to the agency shall relieve the rental car business of any liability under this chapter for the infraction. C. The law enforcement officer issuing a notice of infraction shall include with it a certificate or facsimile thereof, based upon the inspection of photographs, microphotographs or electronic images produced by an automated traffic safety camera, citing the infraction and stating the facts supporting the notice of infraction. This certificate or facsimile shall be prima facie evidence of the facts contained in it and shall be admissible in a proceeding charging a violation under this chapter. The photographs, microphotographs or electronic images evidencing the violation must be available for inspection and admission into evidence in a proceeding to adjudicate the liability for the infraction. D. The registered owner of a vehicle is responsible for an infraction detected through the use of an automated traffic safety camera unless the registered owner overcomes the presumption set forth in TMC Section 9.52.030, or, in the case of a rental car business, satisfies the conditions under TMC Section 9.52.020.B. If appropriate under the circumstances, a renter identified under TMC Section 9.52.020.B is responsible for an infraction. E. All photographs, microphotographs or electronic images prepared under this chapter are for the exclusive use of law enforcement in the discharge of duties under this chapter and, as provided in RCW 46.63.170(1)(g), they are not open to the public and may not be used in a court in a pending action or proceeding unless the action or proceeding relates to a violation under this chapter. No photograph, microphotograph or electronic image may be used for any purpose other than enforcement of violations under this chapter nor retained longer than necessary to enforce this chapter. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Automated traffic safety cameras -intersections 5-23-19.doc WD:bjs Page 3 of 5 49 Section 4. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.52.030, "Prima facie presumption," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.52.030 Prima facie presumption A. In a traffic infraction case involving an infraction detected through the use of an automated traffic safety camera under this chapter, proof that the particular vehicle described in the notice of traffic infraction was involved in a stoplight violation, together with proof that the person named in the notice of infraction was at the time of the violation the registered owner of the vehicle, shall constitute in evidence a prima facie presumption that the registered owner of the vehicle was the person in control of the vehicle at the point where, and for the time during which, the violation occurred. B. This presumption may be overcome only if the registered owner, under oath, states in a written statement to the court or in testimony before the court that the vehicle involved was, at the time, stolen or in the care, custody or control of some person other than the registered owner. Section 5. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.52.040, "Infractions processed," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.52.040 Infractions processed Infractions detected through the use of automated traffic safety cameras shall be processed in the same manner as parking infractions. Section 6. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.52.050, "Fine," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.52.050 Fine The fine for an infraction detected under authority of this chapter shall be a base monetary penalty of $136.00; and provided further, that whenever, in the future, the state of Washington increases the fine imposed under this chapter, by legislation or court rule, the City's fine shall be increased to a like amount upon the effective date of such legislation or court rule. Section 7. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.52.060, "Nonexclusive enforcement," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.52.060 Nonexclusive enforcement Nothing in this chapter prohibits a law enforcement officer from issuing a notice of traffic infraction to a person in control of a vehicle at the time a violation occurs under RCW 46.63.030(1)(a), (b) or (c). W: Word ProcessinglOrdinances \Automated traffic safety cameras -intersections 5-23-19.doc WD:bjs 50 Page 4 of 5 Section 8. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 9. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2019. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'F aherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Allan Ekberg, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Automated traffic safety cameras -intersections 5-23-19.doc WD:bjs Page 5 of 5 51 52 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER OF THE TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE AUTHORIZING THE USE OF AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS IN SCHOOL ZONES, AND ADOPTING STANDARDS RELATED THERETO, TO BE CODIFIED AS TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.53; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, reduced speeds in school zones help decrease the likelihood of an accident in areas with an increase in school -related pedestrian and vehicular traffic; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila desires to improve traffic safety and pedestrian safety throughout the City with emphasis on school speed zones; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature has adopted Chapter 46.63 RCW, which authorizes local jurisdictions to use automated traffic safety cameras in school speed zones, subject to some limitations; and WHEREAS, in accordance with RCW 46.63.170(1)(a), the City has prepared an analysis of the locations where automated traffic safety cameras are proposed to be located; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 9.53 of the Tukwila Municipal Code Established. A chapter of the Tukwila Municipal Code entitled "Automated Traffic Safety Cameras in School Zones," to be codified as Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 9.53, is hereby established to read as follows: W: Word Processing \Ordinances\Automated traffic safety cameras -school zones 5-23-19.doc RT:bjs Page 1 of 5 53 CHAPTER 9.53 AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS IN SCHOOL ZONES Sections: 9.53.010 Automated traffic safety cameras — Detection of violations — Restrictions 9.53.020 Notice of infraction 9.53.030 Prima facie presumption 9.53.040 Infractions processed 9.53.050 Fine 9.53.060 Nonexclusive enforcement Section 2. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.53.010, "Automated traffic safety cameras — Detection of violations — Restrictions," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.53.010 Automated traffic safety cameras — Detection of violations — Restrictions A. City law enforcement officers and persons commissioned by the Tukwila Police Chief are authorized to use automated traffic safety cameras and related automated systems to detect and record the image of vehicles engaged in school speed zone violations; provided, however, pictures of the vehicle and the vehicle license plate may be taken only while an infraction is occurring, and the picture shall not reveal the face of the driver or of any passengers in the vehicle. B. Each location where an automated traffic safety camera is used shall be clearly marked by signs placed in locations that clearly indicate to a driver that the driver is entering a zone where traffic laws are enforced by an automated traffic safety camera. C. "Automated traffic safety camera" means a device that uses a vehicle sensor installed to work in conjunction with an intersection traffic control system or a speed measuring device, and a camera synchronized to automatically record one or more sequenced photographs, microphotographs or electronic images of the rear of a motor vehicle at the time the vehicle exceeds a speed limit in a school zone as detected by a speed measuring device. Section 3. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.53.020, "Notice of infraction," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.53.020 Notice of infraction A. Whenever any vehicle is photographed by an automated traffic safety camera, a notice of infraction shall be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within 14 days of the violation, or to the renter of a vehicle within 14 days of establishing the renter's name and address. A person receiving a notice of infraction based on evidence detected by an automated traffic safety camera may respond to the notice by mail. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Automated traffic safety cameras -school zones 5-23-19.doc RT:bjs 54 Page 2 of 5 B. If the registered owner of the vehicle is a rental car business, the law enforcement agency shall, before a notice of infraction is issued, provide a written notice to the rental car business that a notice of infraction may be issued to the rental car business if the rental car business does not, within 18 days of receiving the written notice, provide to the agency by return mail: (1) a statement under oath stating the name and known mailing address of the individual driving or renting the vehicle when the infraction occurred; or (2) a statement under oath that the business is unable to determine who was driving or renting the vehicle when the infraction occurred; or (3) in lieu of identifying the vehicle operator, the rental car business may pay the applicable penalty. Timely mailing of this statement to the agency shall relieve the rental car business of any liability under this chapter for the infraction. C. The law enforcement officer issuing a notice of infraction shall include with it a certificate or facsimile thereof, based upon the inspection of photographs, microphotographs or electronic images produced by an automated traffic safety camera, citing the infraction and stating the facts supporting the notice of infraction. This certificate or facsimile shall be prima facie evidence of the facts contained in it and shall be admissible in a proceeding charging a violation under this chapter. The photographs, microphotographs or electronic images evidencing the violation must be available for inspection and admission into evidence in a proceeding to adjudicate the liability for the infraction. D. The registered owner of a vehicle is responsible for an infraction detected through the use of an automated traffic safety camera unless the registered owner overcomes the presumption set forth in TMC Section 9.53.030, or, in the case of a rental car business, satisfies the conditions under TMC Section 9.53.020.B. If appropriate under the circumstances, a renter identified under TMC Section 9.53.020.B is responsible for an infraction. E. All photographs, microphotographs or electronic images prepared under this chapter are for the exclusive use of law enforcement in the discharge of duties under this chapter and, as provided in RCW 46.63.170(1)(g), they are not open to the public and may not be used in a court in a pending action or proceeding unless the action or proceeding relates to a violation under this chapter. No photograph, microphotograph or electronic image may be used for any purpose other than enforcement of violations under this chapter nor retained longer than necessary to enforce this chapter. Section 4. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.53.030, "Prima facie presumption," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.53.030 Prima facie presumption A. In a traffic infraction case involving an infraction detected through the use of an automated traffic safety camera under this chapter, proof that the particular vehicle described in the notice of traffic infraction was involved in a school speed zone violation, together with proof that the person named in the notice of infraction was at the time of the violation the registered owner of the vehicle, shall constitute in evidence a prima W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Automated traffic safety cameras -school zones 5-23-19.doc RT:bjs Page 3 of 5 55 facie presumption that the registered owner of the vehicle was the person in control of the vehicle at the point where, and for the time during which, the violation occurred. B. This presumption may be overcome only if the registered owner, under oath, states in a written statement to the court or in testimony before the court that the vehicle involved was, at the time, stolen or in the care, custody or control of some person other than the registered owner. Section 5. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.53.040, "Infractions processed," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.53.040 Infractions processed Infractions detected through the use of automated traffic safety cameras shall be processed in the same manner as parking infractions. Section 6. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.53.050, "Fine," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.53.050 Fine The fine for an infraction detected under authority of this chapter shall be a base monetary penalty of $136.00; and provided further, that whenever, in the future, the state of Washington increases the fine imposed under this chapter, by legislation or court rule, the City's fine shall be increased to a like amount upon the effective date of such legislation or court rule. Section 7. Regulations Established. TMC Section 9.53.060, "Nonexclusive enforcement," is hereby established to read as follows: 9.53.060 Nonexclusive enforcement Nothing in this chapter prohibits a law enforcement officer from issuing a notice of traffic infraction to a person in control of a vehicle at the time a violation occurs under RCW 46.63.030(1)(a), (b) or (c). Section 8. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 9. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Automated traffic safety cameras -school zones 5-23-19.doc RT:bjs 56 Page 4 of 5 Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2019. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney Allan Ekberg, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Automated traffic safety cameras -school zones 5-23-19.doc RT:bjs Page 5 of 5 57 58 RCW46.63.|70: Automated traffic safety cameras —Definition. Page lof4 Automated traffic safety cameras —Definition. (1) The use of automated traffic safety cameras for issuance of notices of infraction is subject tOthe following requirements: (a) The appropriate local legislative authority must prepare an analysis of the locations within the jurisdiction where automated traffic safety cameras are proposed to be located: (i) Before enacting an ordinance allowing for the initial use of automated traffic safety cameras; and (ii) before adding additional cameras or relocating any existing camera to a new location within the jurisdiction. Automated traffic safety cameras may be used to detect one or more of the following: 8tOp|ight, railroad o7useing, or school speed zone violations; or speed violations subject to/:\ofthis subsection. At aminimum, the local ordinance must contain the restrictions described inthis section and provisions for public notice and s' Dng8.C|tiaoand counties using automated traffic safety cameras before July 24,2O05.are subject tothe restrictions described in this aeoUon, but are not required to enact an authorizing ordinance. Beginning one year after June 7, 2012, cities and counties using automated traffic safety cameras must post an annual report of the number of traffic accidents that occurred at each location where anautomated traffic safety camera islocated aswell o3the number ofnotices of infraction issued for each camera and any other relevant information about the automated traffic safety cameras that the city or county deems appropriate on the city's or county's web (b) Except as provided in (c)ofthis nubaention, use ofautomated traffic safety oaoleFos isrestricted tothe following locations only: /i> Intersections Dftwo arterials with traffic noDtnu| o|gDa|e that have yellow change interval durations in accordance with RCVV47.3G.O22. which interval durations may not bSreduced after placement 0fthe camera; (ii)railroad crossings; and (iii)school speed zones. (o)Any city west ofthe Cascade mountains with opopulation Ofmore than one hundred ninety-five thousand located |nacounty with opopulation nffewer than one million five hundred thousand may operate anautomated traffic safety camera tOdetect speed violations 'subject tVthe following limitations: (i)/\city may only operate one such automated traffic safety camera within its respective jurisdiction; and (ii) The use and location of the automated traffic safety camera must have first been authorized bythe Washington state legislature as o pilot project for at least one full year. ()/\UtnOngtedtraffiCsafntyoonleran0ayon|ytakep|Otu[esofthevehid8andV8hid8 license plate and only while an infraction is occurring. The picture must not reveal the face of the driver or of passengers in the vehicle. The primary purpose of camera placement is to take pictures of the vehicle and vehicle license plate when an infraction is occurring. Cities and counties shall consider installing cameras in a manner that minimizes the impact of camera flash nndrivers. ) A notice of infraction must be mailed to the registered owner Vfthe vehicle within fourteen days of the violation, or to the renter of a vehicle within fourteen days of establishing the renter's name and address under subsection (3)(a) of this section. The law enforcement officer issuing the notice of infraction shall include with it a certificate or facsimile thereof, based upon inspection of photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images produced by an automated traffic safety camera, stating the facts supporting the notice of infraction. This certificate orfaosini|a is prima facie evidence of the facts contained in it and is admissible in a RCW46.63.170: Automated traffinsafety oameras—Definitiuo. Page 2of4 proceeding charging aviolation under this OhaPter. The photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images evidencing the violation must beavailable for inspection and admission into evidence jna proceeding to adjudicate the liability for the infraction. A person receiving notice of infraction based on evidence detected by an automated traffic safety camera may respond to the notice bymail. (f) The registered owner of a vehicle is responsible for an infraction under RCW 46.63.030(1)(d) unless the registered owner overcomes the presumption in RC\8/4G.G3.O75. or, in the case of a rental car business, satisfies the conditions under subsection (3) of this section. If appropriate under the circumstances, a renter identified under subsection (3)(a) of this section is responsible for an infraction. (g) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all photographs, Mnio[oohotognaphS, or electronic images prepared under this section are for the exclusive use of law enforcement in the discharge Vfduties under this section and are not open tothe public and may not beused in a court in a pending action or proceeding unless the action or proceeding relates to a xiU|obnn under this section. No photograph, microphotograph, Vrelectronic image may be used for any purpose other than enforcement of violations under this section nor retained longer than necessary t0enforce this section. (h) All locations where an automated traffic safety camera is used must be clearly marked at least thirty days prior to activation of the camera by placing signs in locations that clearly indicate t0adriver that heorshe ioentering ozone where traffic laws are enforced by an automated traffic safety camera. Signs placed in automated traffic safety camera locations after June 7.2O12,must follow the specifications and guidelines under the manual Ofuniform traffic control devices for streets and highways asadopted bythe department of transportation under chapter 47.3GRCVV. (i)|fa county or city has established an authorized automated traffic safety camera program under this section, the compensation paid tothe manufacturer Orvendor ofthe equipment used must be based only upon the value of the equipment and services provided o[rendered insupport ofthe system, and may not be based upon aportion ofthe fine orcivil penalty imposed orthe revenue generated bythe equipment. (2) Infractions detected through the use of automated traffic safety cameras are not part ofthe registered owner's driving record under RCVV4G.S2.101 and 46.52.120. Additionally, infractions generated by the use of automated traffic safety cameras under this section shall he processed in the same manner as parking |nfiact|nns, including for the purposes ofRC\8/3.5O.1O0.3S.20.32O.4G.1GA.12O.and 4G.2O.2TO(2).The amount of the fine issued for an infraction generated through the use of an automated traffic safety u8rn8ra shall not exceed the amount of a fine issued for other parking infractions within the jurisdiction. However, the amount of the fine issued for a traffic control signal violation detected through the use ofanautomated traffic safety camera shall not exceed the monetary penalty for a violation ofRCVV4G.G1.D5o as provided under RCVV4G.G3.11O. including all applicable statutory assessments. (3) If the registered owner of the vehicle in a rental car business, the |avv enforcement agency shall, before o notice of infraction being issued under this section, provide o written notice to the rental car business that a notice of infraction may be issued to the rental car business if the rental car business does not, within eighteen days of receiving the written notine, provide tothe issuing agency byreturn mail: (a) A statement under oath stating the name and known mailing address of the individual driving urrenting the vehicle when the infraction occurred; o[ RCW 46.63]70: Automated traffic safety cameras Definition. Page 3of4 (b)/\statement under oath that the business iaunable todetermine who was driving nr renting the vehicle adthe time the infraction occurred because the vehicle was stolen at the time of the infraction. A statement provided under this subsection must be accompanied by a copy ofefiled police report regarding the vehicle theft; Ur (o) In lieu of identifying the vehicle operator, the r8rt8| car business may pay the applicable penalty. Timely mailing of this statement to the issuing law enforcement agency relieves a rental car business ofany liability under this chapter for the notice Vfinfraction. (4) Nothing in this section prohibits a law enforcement officer from issuing a notice of traffic infraction tO8person incontrol ofavehicle atthe time aviolation occurs underRCVV 46'63.030(1)(o). (b). or(c). (5) For the purposes of this section, "automated traffic safety camera" means a device that uses vehicle sensor installed to work in conjunction with an intersection traffic control system, a railroad grade crossing control system, or a speed measuring device, and a camera synchronized to automatically record one or more sequenced photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images of the rear of a motor vehicle at the time the vehicle fails to stop when %8oinQ a Steady [ad traffic control signal or an activated [8Unuad grade crossing control signal, or exceeds a speed limit as detected by a speed measuring device. (6) During the 3O11-2O13and 2013_2O15fiscal biennia, this section does not apply to automated traffic safety cameras for the purposes of section 216(5), chapter 367, Laws of 2O11and section 21O(0),chapter 3Q6.Laws cf2O13. [30153rdsp.s.c44§406t20151ntsp.o.c108702 %O13o3OG8711.Prior: 2012c85G 3;2012083§7;2011c367§704k2010o161§1127;2009c4708714;2007c372§ 3; 2005c167§1.] NOTES: Effective date-20153rdmp.s.c 44:See note foUcwingRCW 46.68.395. Effective dmte--2U151st sp.s.u10:See note following RCVV43.19LG42. P|ndingm--nbant--2013 c85: "The legislature finds that itiS|nthe interests ofthe driving public to continue b/provide for o uniform system of traffic control signa|e, including provisions relative to yellow light durations, fine amounts for certain traffic control signal vio|oUons, and signageand reporting requirements at certain traffic control signal locations. The legislature further finds that a uniform system of traffic control signals greatly enhances the public's confidence in a safe and equitable highway network. Therefore, it is the intent of the legislature to harmonize and make uniform certain |eAe| provisions relating to traffic control Effective dmtm--2011o367GQ7O3.7O4`71G.and 719:See note following RCVV 46.18.060. https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/defaLiIt.aspx?cite=46.63.170 7/10/2019 61 RCW 46.63.170: Automated traffic safety cameras —Definition. Page 4 of 4 Effective date —Intent —Legislation to reconcile chapter 161, Laws of 2010 and other amendments made during the 2010 legislative session-2010 c 161: See notes following RCW 46.04.013. Effective date-2009 c 470: See note following RCW 46.68.170. 62 haps ://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.63.170 7/10/2019 C^ty f Tukwila [-Hn��UnC'|PUb|i��@f�+v�O0[�'t�ee - -' Council Public �--, Committee PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes July 15, 2019 -5:30p.m. - Hazelnut Conference Room, CityHoll CVund|nleonbers Dennis Robertson, Chair; Kate KruUer Staff: David Cline, Bruce Linton, Kraig Boyd, Kimberly VV8[deD' Trish Kinlovv Chris Flores Guests: Jan 8o(e j8Ck'Tukm/i(a3ch0niBoand Director CALLTOORDER: Chair Robertson called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. U. ANNOUNCEMENT A. Automated Traffic Safety Camera Pilot Project Staff is seeking Council approval of two ordinances that would authorize the use of automated traffic safety cameras and adopt standards related thereto. One ordinance would cover "red light" cameras, with a pilot program proposed for three intersections: Boeing Access Road at Martin Luther King Jr, 5uuthcenter Parkway at3trander Boulevard, and Grady at Interurban Avenue South. The other ordinance would cover school speed zone cameras with a pilot location proposed for South l44mStreet in the vicinity of Foster High 3chnmi and Showalter Middle School. Chief Linton provided an overview nfthe proposals including collision and speed data tosupport the pilot locations, information about public records requests and retention standards, and answers tVquestions asked byCounci|nlembeMs8tprevious meetings. There will be no upfront cost to the City and the per camera, per -month charge is estimated to be $4'500-$5'000. Cameras will only take photos of violations, not of every vehicle going through. [ounci\nnennbersasked clarifying questions about the presentation. CVunc|(OOe[nbp[ |dan asked for collision data for the intersection at East Marginal Way South and Tukwila International Boulevard. [nunc|irnenlber K[uiierexpressed concern that the data from the three proposed pilot intersections is from 2014-20I6 and not current. She would like to see more compelling data to support the program. Chair Robertson previously submitted questions around privacy and civil rights. Any vendor will have to meet the FBI [G|5 requirements around data protection and those requirements will bepart ofthe RFP and contract process. R[VV 46.63.I70 prohibits the sharing of infraction data, although if an individual contest the infraction it will become a public record atthat point. Chair Robertson cited research claimingthat red lightcameras increase the frequency of rearend and sideswipe collisions. Chief Linton said that is not supported in the data he has reviewed. Councilmember Kru(ier asked if social equity has been considered as she is concerned about impacts on low- income residents. Staff responded that mitigation for those with financial hardships can be facilitated by the court via community service or reduced fines. Chief Linton presented the proposed programs to the Equity and Social Justice Commission and did not hear a significant concern. Councilmember Krutler is also concerned about the sale of big data to private 63 Public SofetyCommittee Minutes July l5,2029 companies such asinsurance. Chief Linton stated that the vendor will not beallowed todo that under the terms nfthe contract. Director BoJ jakcprnnnentedthattheSchonlBoardis very supportive ofthe proposal for speed zone cameras inthe pilot location. CoUndimenibers Kruiier, |dan' and Robertson all spoke in total favor of the school zone pilot program, but decided there was not conclusive/convincing enough evidence to support making a recommendation infavor ofthe red light intersection pilot atthis time. They requested that Administration research local jurisdictions with red light cameras to see if they have more current and detailed information on accident rates for before and after camera installations. FORWARD TO JULY 23,2019 COMMITTEE OFTHE WHOLE. Ill. MISCELLANEOUS Adjourned 6:50 p.m. '�'f Committee Chair Approval 64