With the invalidation of last year's red-light camera vote by a federal judge, Houston officials have a rare opportunity to undo a mistake that has cost the city millions of dollars while undermining public safety.

The Chronicle strongly supported the cameras, as did law enforcement officials and executives of major hospital facilities. We urge Mayor Annise Parker and City Council members to reactivate the system as soon as possible.

The 70 cameras remain in place at intersections, although they are not being used to generate traffic tickets. The city issued more than 800,000 tickets and collected $44 million in fines since the council approved their installation in 2004. Out of that the Houston Police Department received $16 million, hospital trauma centers got $13 million and the operator of the cameras, American Traffic Solutions, was paid $9 million.

The city and the contractor are currently facing off in court over the terms for severing their contract, which runs through 2014. Although 53 percent of voters rejected the camera system in November and the cameras were turned off soon after, Judge Lynn Hughes issued an opinion that the election violated the city charter requirement that such challenges be mounted within 30 days of the passage of an ordinance. Although the petitioners had claimed their initiative was a city charter amendment, the judge found that in fact it was an illegal repeal of an ordinance six years after the deadline had passed.

He had critical words for Mayor Parker and City Council members who voted to schedule the election. "Presented with this mislabeling," wrote Hughes in his opinion, "the council supinely ignored — over the voices of some of its members - their responsibility and put the proposition to the voters as an amendment to the charter."

Even though she is a strong supporter of red-light cameras, Mayor Parker, backed by City Attorney David Feldman, had insisted that the council had an "absolute sworn duty" to put the camera ban on the ballot. If Judge Hughes is right, they were wrong.

District C Councilmember Anne Clutterbuck was the only official to vote against scheduling the election. At the time, she declared, "Items like this don't belong in the city charter. Otherwise, we would be like California …anything we vote on at this table could be overturned by petition." Clutterbuck says she still supports the cameras, but to turn them back on now would "be a violation of the will of the people."

We disagree. The election violated the will of the people as expressed in the city charter. If this result stands, it will set a precedent that would allow activist groups to attempt to overturn any long-standing city ordinance they choose, in the process potentially violating contracts that could cost the city millions of dollars.

The city's pact with American Traffic Solutions runs for 31/2 more years. Company officials said this week that if the camera system is reactivated they will work with the city for a mutual settlement of damages accrued during the shutdown. Otherwise, they predicted a lengthy court fight that could cost the city $20 million.

Another factor to consider is new Houston Police Department statistics showing a sharp increase in accidents at monitored intersections since the cameras were turned off. Major collisions more than quadrupled from 44 to 200 in comparative November-to-April periods before and after the cameras were turned off. That bolsters camera supporters' contention that they are a valuable tool to improve public safety.

We believe the best solution for the city and taxpayers is to restart the red-light cameras and fulfill Houston's legal commitment to its contract with ATS. If opponents want to mount a legitimate challenge, they can follow the rules and do so when the contract comes up for renewal in three years.