Senate vote could end traffic cameras in Ohio

Local officials say cameras make roads safer.

Ohio moved a step closer to effectively shutting down traffic cameras that automatically spit out tickets to red light runners and speeders in a move that is angering officials for local governments that rely on the millions of dollars in revenue those tickets bring.

The Ohio Senate on Wednesday voted 24-9 in favor of a bill that would require local governments to station a police officer anywhere a red light or speed camera is operating. Officials say such a provision would have the same effect as a ban on camera use.

Supporters say the cameras are effective at reducing speeding, crashes and traffic fatalities. Opponents call them modern-day speed traps that cities use to churn up cash and unfairly ticket motorists who are turning right on red where it is permitted.

“Motorists, to no one’s great surprise, have concluded that these things are noxious and should be sharply regulated,” said state Sen. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, who sponsored the bill.

“The all-seeing eye of big brother in the camera determines with NFL instant replay accuracy that you did not come to a full and complete stop. And therefore here is your $100 ticket for having violated our ordinance.”

Traffic enforcement cameras, first introduced to Ohio 10 years ago, are now used in more than 250 locations across the state.

Seitz noted that once cameras go up, they are rarely taken down, even if an intersection’s safety improves. “It’s all about the money,” he said.

The cameras have also brought legal challenges. A case pending before the Ohio Supreme Court contests the cameras’ constitutionality because the tickets are processed through an administrative process, not in municipal courts. Opponents say the procedure deprives motorists of due process.

Posting police officers at the camera sites 24/7 would cost local governments more than $77 million, including $12.2 million a year in Dayton alone, according to the Traffic Safety Coalition, which includes groups opposed to eliminating the cameras. The Ohio Municipal League, the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police, victims’ advocates and local elected leaders are among those who lined up against the bill.

Seitz also said the evidence shows “it is all about the money,” but Hamilton Police Department Sgt. Ed Buns vehemently disagrees.

“Our van is out there to slow people down,” he said. “We make very little off our speed van.”

The city receives about $50 from a $95 ticket, and the city has only issued just more than 6,000 citations since January 2013 out of more than 1.1 million vehicles that had been assessed, said Buns, who oversees the city’s speed traffic van.

Buns said the Hamilton Police Department is following everything except for one caveat of the Senate-approved bill: having an officer man the van. That would defeat the purpose, he said, of using technology to aid in policing the city and take an officer off the street. The department’s officer staffing has dropped by about 20 over the past few years, he said.

“We use technology for everything,” Buns said, adding tickets aren’t issued unless a threshold is met — 10 miles over in a school zone, 12 miles over in a 25 mph zone, 13 miles over in a 35 mph zone, etc. “Our job is to correct a behavior that the public or the politicians have said is wrong. That’s the baseline of this whole thing, fairness.”

A representative for the Middletown Division of Police couldn’t be reached for comment on this story, but past Journal-News stories cite police officials saying they do move cameras if accidents drop. While Hamilton has only had its speed camera program for two years, Middletown has had red light cameras since 2005, and city officials have said it’s worked to decline the number of violations at intersections deemed “high accident” areas.

Maj. Mark Hoffman, who oversees Middletown’s program, had previously said to the Journal-News a decrease in citations and program revenues is a good thing because it’s working. The money that could be lost from the violator-funded program isn’t equal to the cost of funding a police officer, he has said.

The village of New Miami had speed cameras until February when Butler County Common Pleas Judge Michael Sage ordered the village to stop using the cameras because the lack of an appeals process. A Journal-News investigation found the village increased its spending once the speed camera cash started coming in.

The village is waiting to see the outcome of a case before the Ohio Supreme Court that contests the camera’s constitutionality because the tickets are processed through an administrative process, not municipal courts. Opponents say the procedure deprives motorists of due process.

At stake with the legal case and the bill is millions of dollars that local jurisdictions pocket in ticket revenue generated by the cameras.

Posting police officers at the camera sites 24/7 would cost local governments more than $77 million, including $5.9 million a year in Middletown alone, according to the Traffic Safety Coalition. The bill is opposed by the Ohio Municipal League, the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police, victims’ advocates and local elected leaders.

In addition to stationing officers when the cameras are operating, Seitz’s bill would require:

  • Posting signs informing motorists of the cameras;
  • Conducting a safety study before the devices are put in place;
  • Publishing advanced notice of where and where the cameras will be used; and
  • Giving a 30-day grace period during which motorists will be issued warnings instead of tickets.

The bill would also specify that points can’t be added to a driver’s record for a traffic camera ticket, and give ticketed drivers options to contest the citations.

Seitz’s bill is the latest round in attempts by lawmakers to do away with or curtail the use of red light cameras since 2006. On his way out of office in January 2007, then Gov. Bob Taft vetoed a camera ban bill, saying it pre-empted local control.

Two weeks ago, 77 percent of voters in Cleveland and Maple Heights said no to red light cameras. But officials in other cities say the cameras have helped them deal with reduced resources due to budget cuts.

West Carrollton Police Chief Doug Woodard said that’s why his city voted to have the cameras in the first place. West Carrollton received $158,000 in fines from its nine cameras in 2013.

The bill now goes to the Ohio House, which passed a similar measure in June 2013.

About the Author