Three out of four voters in the town of Kent, Connecticut, rejected automated ticketing machines in a referendum on Tuesday, January 7. The Board of Selectmen posed two questions to residents, expecting they would first approve the ordinance authorizing speed cameras and then a second question allowing the town to give the private, for-profit companies that own and operate photo ticketing programs $46,296.

Residents rejected the idea by an 80 percent margin.

Town officials lowered the speed limits by 10 MPH on routes 7 and 341 in advance of the plan. This created the prospect of raising significant revenue from the contractors who would issue up to $75 tickets to the registered owner of any vehicle accused by the vendor. An extra $15 fee for "electronic processing" would be added to each ticket, for a total of $100. Officials expected to generate at least $2 million worth of citations with the program.

Selectman Marty Lindenmayer had met with a vendor to draft the proposed town ordinance, which imposed strict limits on the ability of motorists to challenge erroneous tickets. The selectmen would choose someone to hear appeals and decide guilt or innocence.

Voters throughout the country have been consulted on photo radar and red light cameras 45 times since 1991. With only rare exceptions, the public insists on banning the devices (view list of public votes). Most recently, residents of Garfield, Ohio, rejected the city's third attempt to install photo radar in November. The devices had previously been banned after a 2010 referendum.

The first question asked in Kent: "Shall the Town of Kent enact the 'TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT SAFETY DEVICES' ordinance as on file in the Town Clerk's office, thereby authorizing the deployment of Automated Traffic Enforcement Safety Devices (ATESD) within the Town of Kent at school and pedestrian safety zones and at such other places approved by the Connecticut Department of Transportation to monitor and record motor vehicle speeds and to permit the imposition of fines for speed violations of at least 10 miles per hour in excess of the posted speed limit?"

The second question asked: "In the event question Number 1 is answered in the affirmative, shall the Town of Kent appropriate the sum of $46,296 to purchase two, ATES Devices for deployment within the Town of Kent?"