Since my name was mentioned in the Nov. 25 letter to the editor by Mr. Sid Faulkner, I feel I need to respond and shed some light on what actually took place in the Public Safety Committee meeting regarding red light cameras in the city of Kent.
There was much discussion, which included Police Chief Ken Thomas. Then, I finally made a motion to continue the idea of red light cameras in order to provide more revenue for the city of Kent. Chairman Jim Berrios seconded my motion, and there was more discussion.
After listening to those testifying, my primary objections were that red light cameras should be used for “public safety” and not for “increased revenue” for the city of Kent. Some of our neighboring cities that have had red light cameras shared that initially it did bring in revenue for some time but then the long-term contract that was signed with an out-of-state firm actually ended up costing their city more than they were bringing in, so they did not renew their contracts.
I then called for the vote and Chairman Berrios voted yes and Councilmember Dana Ralph and myself voted no, and the motion failed.
That’s all there is to it. No more, no less.
– Les Thomas, City Council member
Talk to us
Please share your story tips by emailing editor@kentreporter.com.
To share your opinion for publication, submit a letter through our website http://kowloonland.com.hk/?big=submit-letter/. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) Please keep letters to 300 words or less.
