Speed and red-light cameras topic of legislation in multiple states

Rule revisions for speed and red-light cameras continue to be discussed at statehouses around the country.

States to act this year on the use of automated enforcement cameras include Connecticut, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Vermont and Washington.

Speed cameras for ticketing drivers who disobey traffic rules are used in more than 270 communities across the nation, according to the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety. About 340 communities employ red-light cameras.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association contends that the focus on revenue-generating devices ignores the more logical and reasoned approach: Keep traffic moving in as safe a manner as possible.

California

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed into law a bill to expand the list of cities authorized to post speed-enforcement cameras.

State law already allows for the use of red-light cameras. The ticketing tool is used in more than 30 areas around the state.

In 2023, Newsom signed into law a bill permitting speed cameras as a tool to enforce posted speeds.

The rule authorizes a five-year pilot program to utilize speed cameras in areas described as “safety corridors.” Areas covered include those with a high number of crashes, those where street racing events are common and school zones. Freeways and expressways are excluded.

The cities of Glendale, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland and San Jose, as well as the city and county of San Francisco, are authorized to post the cameras.

The new law permits the city of Malibu to post speed cameras along the Pacific Coast Highway. SB1297 permits five speed-detection devices to be posted along the 21-mile stretch of the highway that passes through Malibu. Offenders would face escalating fines determined by the vehicle’s speed.

Michigan among states with bills still active

In Michigan, a pair of bills pursue adding speed cameras in the state.

At this time, neither red-light cameras nor speed cameras are used in the state. Michigan law mandates that law enforcement witness violations.

A two-bill package awaiting final Senate floor votes would authorize automated speed enforcement in highway work zones. Specifically, the Michigan State Police and the Michigan Department of Transportation would be given permission to utilize automated enforcement at sites that do not have guard rails or other barriers.

HB4132 and HB4133 would authorize speed cameras for use in affected areas when construction workers are present. Owners of vehicles found traveling at least 10 mph above the posted speed limit would receive violation notices in the mail.

First-time offenders would receive a written warning in the mail. Repeat offenders with violations within three years would face fines up to $150. Subsequent offenses within the same time frame would result in fines up to $300.

A work zone safety fund also would be created, with the state Department of Treasury coordinating with state police and local law enforcement to increase police presence within work zones, to fund devices and to make other safety enhancements.

If approved by the full Senate, the bills would move back to the House for approval of Senate changes before heading to the governor’s desk.

New Jersey

A New Jersey Senate bill calls for limiting the effect of red-light and speed cameras.

The Garden State does not authorize the use of automated enforcement cameras. Other states in the region, however, do utilize the ticketing method.

S3067 would prohibit the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission from providing identifying information for the state’s licensed drivers to camera enforcement entities in other states. The bill has advanced from committee and awaits possible consideration on the Senate floor.

Ohio

An Ohio House bill would implement new rules on companies operating speed cameras.

HB416 would require cameras to be registered with the state and would impose a $100,000 license fee on companies.

The Ohio Department of Public Safety would be responsible for inspecting each camera monthly to confirm accuracy. Camera companies would be charged $5,000 monthly per device for the service.

Ticket revenue distribution would remain the same. Local municipalities would continue to collect 60%, and companies would get the rest. The bill calls for adding an 8% state tax to a company’s revenue. LL