UPDATE: City Council Member Sue Lovell tagged the item, delaying debate on the red-light cameras.

As I have struggled to catch up on the saga of the red-light cameras this week, I have determined that this issue defines the perfect confluence of democracy – a clash between voters, legislative bodies, and the courts.

City Council adopted an Ordinance to place red-light cameras in dangerous intersections in 2006. The politically well-connected ATS won the contract. And, it was a big contract too. Lots of money involved for a long period of time.

The cameras went up, tickets were issued and maybe there were fewer collisions but the science is murky on that.

Meanwhile, a group of voters determined they did not like the cameras and began collecting signatures to place a public vote on the ballot. They achieved their goal. Some debate has ensued about the vote. The courts have weighed-in and determined that the election may not have been valid.

However, the City Attorney declared the petition valid and the election was held. 53% of voters decided they do not like red-light cameras and City Council was left with a clear directive from the voters. Some critics weigh-in here and believe that the pro-camera side did not run a very good campaign. I fall into that camp as well. ATS clearly had a vested interest in keeping the cameras but failed to deploy solid campaign strategy to win a close vote on the ballot.

Thus, they took their marbles and went to court. Lawsuits began flying on all sides. ATS told the City that if they took those cameras down, they will still owe them all the money in the contract.

The City says that they have an out to the contract.

At this point, the voters and the City Council have clashed. Now, the courts enter the picture and varying decisions are coming down from different courts.

Ultimately, the Mayor has decided to follow the position of the voters. She is asking City Council to repeal the original Ordinance. That vote will take place this week, unless it is delayed (tagged) by a Council Member.

ATS and the City will most likely resolve their contract dispute through the legal process.

The lesson here is that the majority of voters are the actual winners in this process. Democracy has succeeded. This saga contains all of the details of a true political thriller but it looks like the voters will come out on top.

From my perspective, all of this has been fascinating. By the way, it is actually illegal to run red-lights. Do we really need cameras to remind of this? People, just remember that red means stop!