Donate red light revenue to charity

The Jan. 31 Saturday Soapbox article regarding red-light cameras really ought to be in a more prominent place in the paper and repeated more often. How about starting a monthly column with a summary of income earned by our municipalities while they are promoting these cameras as being for our "safety" and not because of the increased revenue? Then maybe, an explanation from them on where the money goes?

The rush by our communities to the trough of the red light cameras is merely a way to scoop up more money from the taxpayers. Sounds like a sin tax, doesn't it? No one would complain about our city Fathers "protecting" us, would they? Maybe I'm just lucky, but neither I nor anyone I know has had a life-threatening experience from someone not coming to a complete stop before making a right turn.

I have a suggestion for city managers to redeem themselves in the eyes of their constituents and prove once and for all they are on the up-and-up with their safety claims. They merely need to avoid the taint of the money. To accomplish this: 1. Donate all proceeds above any costs to local charities, churches, or food pantries in their towns. Better yet, let the charities form a committee to disburse the money between themselves with no governmental involvement. 2. Let local businesses bid for the right to control one intersection for a year and keep the proceeds for their business to help offset the burden of taxation and oversight placed on them by the town overseers. 3. Publish the revenue numbers and apply any proceeds to reduce taxation of the townspeople, split equally, of course, i.e. free water, electricity, or some other city chargeable service.

Of course, this means the city councils will need to cut back on expenses like the rest of us.

Mike Hill

Batavia