Ohio Traffic Camera Bill On Way To Governor For Approval

 

In Ohio a new traffic camera bill is on it's way to the Governor who is expected to sign it. The bill would take effect 90 days after the Governor signs it unless it is delayed or blocked by litigation. The main aspects of this bill include the following:

- An Officer will need to be present at the camera location as a witness for a ticket to be issued.

- A camera speeding ticket can only be issued if you are going at least 10 MPH over the posted limit (6 mph in a school zone).

- All traffic camera locations must have a notification sign posted.

- A safety study must be made before a camera can be installed.

You can read more about it here:
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2014/12/anti-traffic...

Other pages

--
Live every day like it's your last. Some day you'll be right - Benny Hill

I woulda thought...

As cities (or in Ohio's case, the entire state) turn off their red light cameras because the voters or legislatures have rejected them, the red light camera companies are suing the cities for breaking their contracts. And they're winning huge settlements.
Wouldn't you have thought that when the cities were negotiating contracts with the red light companies, they would have included clauses that said if the cameras were voted or legislated out, the contracts would end without penalty?
Could it be that a whole lot of money was being thrown to the local pols by the companies just to keep such clauses out of the contracts?
Just wondering.

Phil

--
"No misfortune is so bad that whining about it won't make it worse."

Wise guy

Some smart as? wants to turn Ohio like NY now.I have hear a lot of complain and some places in Ohio they are fighting this camera law.I just Hope this go down the drain very quickly.

Ban them

This bill is not good news and will likely encourage more cameras. We really need an outright ban on them or at least a clause that requires an officer to give the driver the ticket at the time of the offense.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/45/4590.asp

And if it passes, will we

And if it passes, will we need to provide the camera babysitting officer with donuts & coffee? Seems like the officer could serve the community in a better way.

--
I never get lost, but I do explore new territory every now and then.

@plunder

If you want to know how cities were "negotiating" camera contracts just look at Chicago. Lately all behind scenes works are coming out. In short: responsible for contract officials were nicely bribed and signed contract that was written by RLC company. Do you really believe that any company will draft contract that will make possible for them to loose money, even if contract will be terminated by company fault? Especially if there is nobody who will oppose such provisions and sign under even most crooked contract.

I, for one...

...applaud this action. I appreciate the fact that warning signs will have to be posted at each camera location instead of just at the municipality limit line. Also, cities will not place an officer at a camera location issuing a citation because it will be cost prohibitive. They will not place an officer at a location for 8 hours in the hope that they get 3 or 4 citations, probably far less. As far as the safety study is concerned; I know several intersections where cameras are located and they are not intersections where you have a lot of crashes. They are there because you round a bend in the road and surprise...red light camera. I think the safety surveys will eliminate a lot of these locations. I also agree with the speed limits. I know that most police agencies in Ohio will not issue a citation for anything less than 10 mph unless it is a school zone. (I always allowed 12 mph before writing a citation when I was on the department.) I realize there are a few departments that will write for less, but they are mainly little villages that are more or less speed traps. So all in all, I applaud this action. I think the legislature has been concerned about this for while now and I expect Gov. Kasich will sign this in short order.

--
With God, all things are possible. ——State motto of the Great State of Ohio

A bit optimistic....

maddog67 wrote:

...applaud this action. I appreciate the fact that warning signs will have to be posted at each camera location instead of just at the municipality limit line. Also, cities will not place an officer at a camera location issuing a citation because it will be cost prohibitive. They will not place an officer at a location for 8 hours in the hope that they get 3 or 4 citations, probably far less. As far as the safety study is concerned; I know several intersections where cameras are located and they are not intersections where you have a lot of crashes. They are there because you round a bend in the road and surprise...red light camera. I think the safety surveys will eliminate a lot of these locations. I also agree with the speed limits. I know that most police agencies in Ohio will not issue a citation for anything less than 10 mph unless it is a school zone. (I always allowed 12 mph before writing a citation when I was on the department.) I realize there are a few departments that will write for less, but they are mainly little villages that are more or less speed traps. So all in all, I applaud this action. I think the legislature has been concerned about this for while now and I expect Gov. Kasich will sign this in short order.

You are much more optimistic than I am. I think they will just deputize the guy who mans the camera van and it will be "business as usual" for the cameras.

I don't see this happening...

...due to the fact that in order to be a certified officer in the State of Ohio one must have 579 hours of training at an OPOTA (Ohio Police Officer Training Academy) accredited police training academy and one must pass the Ohio Police Certification test. Something that is not easy to do. It is not as simple as just having someone raise their hand, put the other hand on a Bible, and swear an oath that you will uphold the laws of the State of Ohio. Also, you must be a certified officer before you can issue a citation.

--
With God, all things are possible. ——State motto of the Great State of Ohio

Sounds good

Maybe this will catch on across the Country. Arizona did away with state cams and Pima County got rid of theirs but Tucson and little dirt water towns are holding on!

Doesn't sound good

windwalker wrote:

Maybe this will catch on across the Country. Arizona did away with state cams and Pima County got rid of theirs but Tucson and little dirt water towns are holding on!

This story is not good for opponents of enforcement cameras when you peel back the onion. Despite the bill and thread title, read the story at the link in tomturtle's post which describes the proposed ban as "illusory." The bill would not do what you think. In fact it would strengthen the use of enforcement cameras in Ohio. Again here's the real story:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/45/4590.asp

--
JMoo On

Bad News, As expected

Hmmm

Quote from article: "The photo ticketing industry prefers mobile speed camera vans to red light cameras because they have the potential to yield the highest volume of citations. Mobile vans can be moved to hidden locations to surprise motorists. Ohio state senators decided to preserve this form of ticketing after being heavily pressured to enact a total ban on photo ticketing, which has, for the most part, proved unpopular at the ballot box."

So, heavily pressured from the industry also. Business as usual.

--
I never get lost, but I do explore new territory every now and then.

What is required is that a

What is required is that a local politician, who has declared his support for redlight & speed cameras, be summarily voted out of office.
The message is load & clear.
After the first individual is sent home packing, I suspect that many more will reconsider their position on cameras.

Fred

Looks Very Much Like Politics As Usual

Reading the wording of the bill, it looks very much like politics as usual - give a bill an appealing title but provide it with actual content that is very different from the title.

- Tom -

--
XXL540, GO LIVE 1535, GO 620