New bill allows towns to auto-ticket speeders

By Joe Kelly

Driving around Norfolk, one is likely to encounter a speed bump, a roadside “your speed” monitoring device or even a new stop sign. All are attempts to get people to drive more slowly. While speed limits on town streets and parts of Route 44 can go as low as 25 mph, with no method of active enforcement many drivers ignore such limits with impunity.

Next year, however, that could change. Starting in 2024, Norfolk will have the option to install speed cameras that lead to the automatic issuance of tickets.

For School and Pedestrian Zones
By large bipartisan margins, both houses of the Connecticut legislature this spring passed a bill that was signed into law by Gov. Ned Lamont giving municipalities across the state the option to use cameras to crack down on drivers that go too fast and run red lights.

The new law, which went through significant revisions while it was under consideration, allows for the following:

• Speed and red-light cameras to be placed in school zones or areas designated as pedestrian safety zones. (Connecticut previously adopted legislation allowing speed cameras in work zones);
• The cameras would capture the license plate number of the speeding vehicle and lead to the automated issuance of a traffic ticket;
• To get an automated ticket, speeders would have to be going at least 10 miles per hour over the limit;
• Fines would be capped at $50 for a first offense and $75 for a second offense, regardless of a violator’s recorded speed;
• Because the image capture is limited primarily to the license plate, the ticket would be issued to the person registered as the vehicle owner, not the driver;
• No points would be assessed to a driver’s license.

Last Year: 300-Plus Fatalities
Connecticut legislators said they were acting in response to a rising tide of vehicle-related deaths across the state. Last year was the deadliest on Connecticut roadways in decades, with more than 300 drivers and pedestrians losing their lives in vehicular-related accidents.

Automated speed enforcement programs have been around since the 1980s, and as technology has evolved and become more accurate, are now allowed in over a dozen states. New York and New Jersey have already approved their use, so with the addition of Connecticut, the tri-state region will become one of the most populated areas to put them to use. (By contrast, in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine the cameras are illegal.)

Studies Say Cameras Are Effective
Speed camera systems typically comprise some combination of tracking radar plus high-definition video and still image capture: radar signals detect if you are speeding, and the still and video images become the proof. Because of differences in the technology and how these camera systems are deployed, it’s difficult to make blanket statements about their effectiveness. However, most studies indicate cameras lead to a reduction in crashes, fatalities, injuries and speed:

• According to the ­­­National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, one review of the literature found that the best-controlled studies suggest injury crash reductions of 20 to 25 percent.
• Studies in Oregon, Maryland and elsewhere have found that once cameras are installed, the percentage of vehicles exceeding the speed limit by more than 10 mph decreased and also went down at nearby sites where there were no cameras.

Concerns: Privacy, Impact on Minorities
While saving lives may be a universal aspiration, speed cameras have raised concerns over privacy and the spread of a “surveillance society,” as well as their potential for imposing a disproportionate burden on minority communities.

In its coverage of the law, the Connecticut Mirror reported Republican State Senator John Kissel of Enfield as saying, “I am concerned about Big Brother.” Kissel was one of eight Republican state senators to oppose the bill. He added: “What we’re doing by this bill is we’re giving government yet one more tool to monitor our behavior.”

Sen. Saud Anwar, Democrat of South Windsor, also voted no, the only member of his party to do so.

Both the NAACP and the ACLU raised concerns that because streets where speeding is an issue also often have a high percentage of residents who are members of minority groups, the use of automated enforcement techniques such as speed cameras inevitably ends up unfairly impacting those communities.

The final bill included requirements that cameras can only be installed after efforts are made to ensure that “patterns of discrimination and disparities of race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status, whether intentional or unintentional, are neither reinforced nor perpetuated.”

To address privacy concerns, the law requires that personally identifiable information and other data that specifically identifies a motor vehicle must be destroyed within 30 days of any fine being collected or the ticket being dismissed.

The Town Acts First
Before any camera is installed in Norfolk, several decisions would have to be made. For starters, where would they go, on Route 44 near Botelle School? Or in what might be considered a pedestrian zone near the library and town green? Would cameras be placed on local streets? Would the support that has existed for passive traffic control measures such as speed bumps extend to the active, automated enforcement of speed cameras?

Once Norfolk develops a plan, it would formally adopt an ordinance to use the cameras and then present its plan for approval to the state Department of Transportation (DOT).

These considerations notwithstanding, nothing can happen until at least next year. The state DOT must first issue guidelines on how cameras should be deployed, and it has until January 2024 to make that happen.

Whatever is decided, the costs of designing, installing, operating and maintaining the speed camera systems would be borne by the town. In many, if not most cases, municipalities contract with private companies to handle the entire operation. Connecticut’s law specifically prohibits compensation to that company to be based on either the number of tickets issued or the amount of fines paid. Revenue that accrues to the town from automated speed limit enforcement must be re-invested in traffic safety.