Traffic center plans screech to a halt

POST FALLS — Around 350 community members were ready to be heard Thursday during a Kootenai Metropolitan Planning Organization meeting at Post Falls City Hall.

They didn’t get the chance, and instead erupted into applause when the board started the meeting by terminating a study to explore a traffic management center.

“We terminated the traffic management system,” Rathdrum Mayor and KMPO board member Vic Holmes said.

“Thank you,” attendee Ron Hartman said, to more applause from the council chamber and antechamber.

The study on the benefits of a traffic management center was hotly contested by residents, citing fears of government overreach, spying or surveillance in exchange for improved traffic.

According to the study, “traffic detection cameras do not record data, and that data is not stored. Even images displayed on 511 are temporary still shots.”

Data storage is not generally a concern because traffic centers stream live data, KMPO Executive Director Glenn Miles said during a KMPO meeting in March.

“Miles discussed camera technology and explained that the purpose of a traffic center is not surveillance — but to observe traffic, in real time, in order to identify roadway incidents and quickly dispatch the appropriate response team,” according to the meeting minutes.

The study posed a countywide centralized traffic management project that would address traffic shortcomings by consolidating management into a central hub. The hub would use real-time data from traffic cameras to improve traffic flow.

“Even if they intend it for fairly innocent, innocuous and even helpful purposes, it just seems like it was something that could easily be manipulated not to be,” attendee Amy Lee said. “It’s not even about the cameras. It’s just about the idea of making sure that freedom can be retained here.”

Traffic is one of the biggest complaints residents have as the county continues to grow. The plan for a traffic management center sought to answer some existing and future shortcomings.

The concept and purpose of the plan was to reduce bottlenecks, improve intersection service levels, enhance travel-time reliability, and reduce traffic related incidents on arterials.

“Now that the traffic management center has been killed, thank you very much, I want to have the traffic lights resynchronized,” attendee Bill Breezy said after the applause died down.

People still want a solution to traffic challenges, but many will not accept it in exchange for freedom.

Lee doesn’t want to feel spied on as she moves through her community.

“I’m elated that they voted it down,” attendee Tom Shafer said. “The last three years have given me very little reason to trust that the government only has the best intentions for us. I’m kind of tired of having the instruments of government turned against us. I just wonder, is the risk to benefit really worth it?”

The cost to conduct the study was around $400,000 through Iteris, a California-based company that provides software, hardware and services for smart mobility infrastructure management. Up to 60% of the cost of the project would’ve been funded by federal grants.

Not pursuing the traffic management center or the study will leave unanswered problems in the existing traffic framework.

Now, and more that will likely develop in the future.