Speed cameras in Sykesville will be left up to the voters to decide.

The town today certified that Boulder Court resident Chris Martin had collected  401 signatures to force the issue to a referendum. He needed signatures from 15 percent (or 338 total) of the town’s registered voters, according to the town’s charter.

“Now the hard work begins to get the vote out,” Martin told The Eagle.

Now, a simple majority vote by town voters will decide the fate of the ordinance.

Town Clerk Janice Perrault finalized the count March 18, after Martin turned in the signatures March 14, just hours before the deadline.

It is believed that Sykesville is the only municipality in Maryland to have a speed camera ordinance forced to referendum.

Perrault had to verify that each signature was a town resident, and a registered voter. She said 120 signatures were invalid because either the residents didn’t live in town, were not registered voters or signed a second time.

Still, Martin had enough signatures to satisfy the requirement.

The council is expected to address the date of the election at its Monday, March 22 meeting, at 7 p.m. at the Town House, 7547 Main St., Sykesville.

Martin said he will take up the offer of about 40 people to help influence people to vote against speed cameras, and hopes that other Marylanders will follow suit in their towns if speed cameras are proposed there.

“To me, the most important thing is to motivate people across the state to fight back, and for them to see it’s possible,” he said.

Some residents said they were unhappy with how the signatures were collected. Elizabeth Guroff Armstrong turned to the Sykesville Main Street Facebook page to share her frustration.

According to Armstrong, two Ellicott City men came to her door asking to sign the petition for Martin.

“As the mother of four boys who go to those schools and daycares and walk our streets to go to their school buses, I am very upset that people from Ellicott City would be interfering in our attempts to keep our children safe,” she said in her post.

Martin defended his approach via e-mail to The Eagle, saying only two of the eight people carrying petitions were from Ellicott City.

“If a town adjacent to mine had a similar petition drive, I’d be there helping,” Martin said.

“Now the hard work begins to get the vote out,” said Martin. “To me, the most important thing is to motivate people across the state to fight back, and for them to see it’s possible.”

On Feb. 22, the mayor and council voted, 5-1, to approve the speed camera ordinance establishing three school zones in town, and authorizing speed cameras to be used in those areas.

The cameras would be established in three school zones around Ava Wanas Montessori School, Stepping Stones Pre-School at Springfield Presbyterian Church and Sykesville Middle School.

---

user comments (2)

user casualobserver says...

Whatever the results of the referendum, we will remember Mr. Martin's enthusiasm for keeping speeders free to continue to endanger our citizens (using the guise of some lofty privacy argument even though the cameras violate no one's privacy - they even protect it by not having the speeder seen in public receiving the ticket, or the guise of not being able to face one's accuser, even though the violator may face that accuser in court if they choose to do so). We will make sure to recall Mr. Martin's efforts after the next injury to or death of a citizen by a neighborhood speeder. Remember, Chris Martin admitted that he has no alternative to offer, he just wants to prevent Sykesville from employing this tool to assist their small police force. Thank you Mr. Martin, for your diligent efforts to convince people that this is something (a devious tactic to make money for the Town) other than what it truly is (a proven tool to help change driving behavior over time where the cameras are deployed and that is financed by the speeders themselves through the fines).

Posted 8:16 AM, 03.19.10

• Permalink

user resident says...

Have you lost your mind? If the town votes against them, then the town doesn't want them! It is not Mr Martins sole decision to have or not have the cameras-the town charter says that a vote can be put to a referendum with in 20 days-so he got it to go to a town vote-that is all. I suppose that you will seek out all those who voted against the cameras and hold them responsible too? Your logic(or lack there of) is astounding!

Posted 8:30 PM, 03.23.10

• Permalink