Take them down.
While police say the cameras help keep children and school employees safe, drivers have complained for years about ticket-happy cameras that benefit private companies and governments. Both state lawmakers and plaintiffs’ attorneys have taken notice.
Read the article at Fox5 Atlanta
Summary of Backlash Against School Zone Speed Cameras in Georgia
Quick Overview
In Georgia, a growing backlash against school zone speed cameras has captured the attention of state lawmakers and legal representatives. While proponents argue these cameras enhance safety for children, critics claim they are overly punitive and profit-driven, prompting calls for reform or outright repeal of the existing system.
Key Points
- Public Outcry: Many drivers have voiced complaints about the aggressive ticketing practices of school zone speed cameras, which they argue are confusing and poorly marked.
- Legislative Action: State lawmakers are contemplating reforms, with proposals to either amend the current system or eliminate it entirely.
- Legal Challenges: Plaintiffs’ attorneys have initiated class action lawsuits against companies operating these cameras, questioning their business models and practices.
- Safety vs. Profit: Supporters assert that the cameras significantly reduce speeding, while opponents argue that the system prioritizes revenue generation over genuine safety concerns.
- Proposed Bills: New legislation aims to standardize signage, restrict ticketing times, and prevent camera companies from profiting from fines.
Detailed Breakdown
Public Concerns
Georgia’s automated school zone speed cameras have been criticized for issuing excessive tickets, often leading to confusion among drivers regarding their operation times. State Senator John Albers highlighted that some jurisdictions have mismanaged the program, leading to complaints about the cameras being “ticket-happy” and not properly marked.
Legislative Proposals
Two key bills are under consideration in the Georgia legislature:
House Bill 348: Sponsored by Sen. Albers, this bill seeks to eliminate the profit-sharing model between municipalities and camera operators, ensuring companies receive a flat fee rather than a percentage of fines. It also mandates consistent school zone signage and limits ticket issuance to times when school zone lights are flashing.
House Bill 1126: Sponsored by Rep. Clay Pirkle, this bill proposes the complete repeal of the 2018 law that authorized speed cameras, labeling the current system a “hot mess” and a “gravy train” for revenue.
Legal Actions
Attorney John Bell has launched class action lawsuits against RedSpeed and Blue Line Solutions, the companies managing the cameras. These lawsuits allege wrongful impersonation of law enforcement and challenge the legality of profit-sharing arrangements. Bell argues that the low fines discourage people from contesting tickets, effectively making it a “money grab.”
Safety Claims
Supporters of the camera systems, including attorney Christopher Cohilas, assert that the cameras have led to a significant drop in speeding—by as much as 84% in some areas—indicating their effectiveness in enhancing community safety.
Notable Quotes & Data
- Senator John Albers stated, “It’s going to make sure that no camera company is benefitting financially from the amount of tickets they write.”
- Attorney John Bell remarked, “There is a reason we have law enforcement that are elected… who are not paid based on how many people they arrest or how much money they can extract out of people.”
- RedSpeed reported that recidivism rates show most drivers only need one ticket to change their behavior.
Context & Implications
The controversy surrounding school zone speed cameras in Georgia reflects broader tensions between public safety initiatives and revenue generation by local governments. The outcome of the proposed legislation and ongoing lawsuits could significantly reshape how automated enforcement is implemented in the state. As lawmakers and citizens grapple with the balance between safety and fairness, the future of these speed cameras remains uncertain, highlighting the need for transparent and equitable traffic enforcement policies.
This situation underscores the importance of legislative oversight in automated enforcement practices and the potential for reform to address public concerns while maintaining safety objectives.