Open Letter to Zack Milkovich re Traffic Cameras

Representative Zack Milkovich

District 35

77 S. High St, 11th Floor

Columbus, OH 43215

RE: Automated Traffic Enforcement Cameras

Dear Representative Milkovich:

Let me start by saying that I have never been ticketed by any automated enforcement cameras, so this letter is not a rant about an unfair ticket: I don't have an ax to grind. As local governments consider initiating or renewing contracts for privatized traffic law enforcement, state and local officials should protect the public by adopting the following principles:

Primary Principles To Guide The Use Of Automated Enforcement Cameras

1. Put public safety first in decisions regarding enforcement of traffic laws including and especially evaluating privatized law enforcement camera systems against alternative safety options, without regard to potential revenues.
2. Retain complete public control over all transportation policy decisions.
3. Ensure that contract language is free from potential conflicts of interest.
4. Avoid direct or indirect incentives for vendors that are based on the volume of tickets or fines.
5. Retain the option to withdraw from a contract early if dissatisfied with service or its effects.
6. Ensure that the process of contracting with vendors is completely open, with ample opportunity for meaningful public participation.
7. Make information about the operation of privatized traffic law enforcement fully transparent and accessible online.
8. Do not permit information about individual vehicles and drivers gathered by camera vendors to be used for any other purpose than the enforcement of traffic laws.
9. Consider establishing state standards to help cities avoid contracting for automated enforcement systems that are not justified or when alternatives make more sense.

With those principles to guide the common good, I would like to recommend the following changes to your proposed total abolition of the cameras, which I believe would run into home rule issues and result in increased litigation using our taxpayer money on both sides. The State of Ohio can make the following rules that pertain to Automated Traffic Enforcement Cameras throughout Ohio. These recommendations do not establish an absolute ban on the use of cameras as a safety tool, and this is all about safety.

1. Revenue. 50% of all fines ticketed from cameras installed in or adjacent to any State or US highway shall be remitted to the State of Ohio Department of Transportation for use on road and road-related safety improvements and maintenance. After all, the city does not own those roads and funds used to maintain them come from the State of Ohio Department of Transportation. The camera does not need to be located on a State or US highway, but in any direction in that intersection.
   
   
2. Escrow. The remaining fines ticketed shall be placed in escrow accounts for use exclusively on road maintenance, repair, or safety-related improvements to roads in the city.
   
   
3. Locations. Automated Enforcement Cameras shall be placed at intersections only after local governments first investigate traffic engineering solutions for problem intersections or roadways. Cameras shall be placed only at intersections where the occurrence of side impact crashes or pedestrian conflicts are the highest and such locations shall not be influenced by the camera operator.
   
   
4. Local Control. No contract for automated traffic enforcement cameras shall contain deals that constrain future decisions related to protecting safety such as changing timing or traffic patterns for any traffic lights leading to the automated intersection, or for changing the duration of yellow lights, or for diverting traffic toward or away from those intersections.
   
   
5. Payment Incentives That Put Profit Above Traffic Safety: Contracts shall not contain any language that actually or appears to create an incentive for the camera operator to increase the number of tickets issued, including payment as a percentage of ticket revenue.
   
   
6. Right on Red Enforcement. No contracts shall require municipalities to strictly issue tickets on all right turns that do not first come to a complete stop, or enable vendors to impose financial penalties on cities that choose to alter their enforcement standards unless it can be shown that pedestrians are at greater risk at that particular intersection. Upon evidence of a greater risk to pedestrians, the city shall first take engineering solutions steps to reduce the risk to pedestrians.
   
   
7. Ticket Quotas. Contracts shall not include language that could penalize municipalities if they do not approve enough tickets, effectively setting a ticket quota and undermining the authority of local officials to decide which violations warrant citations. No contracts shall give camera vendors the ability to veto proposed camera locations, sometimes referring to a minimum ticket number or revenue requirement.
   
   
8. Early Termination. No contract shall include penalties for early termination or fail to provide provisions for early termination even if the camera program fails to meet its objectives.

Sincerely,