Traffic Lights Galore

The House passed the compromise bill. HB 77 would take 75% of all funds raised by red light cameras and send them to the state general fund, allegedly to pay for trauma care. I’m surprised they didn’t set up a designated fund for trauma care instead of doing to these funds what the feds do to social security funds.

The red light bill also contains other provisions. It states that local governments can’t tinker with the timing of a red light to decrease the yellow time before installing a camera. It requires a traffic engineering study before a camera is installed. It states that a motorist can’t get a ticket from a police officer, then get another one because of the camera.

The bill passed 110-60.

Technorati Tags: red light cameras

12 comments

  1. stephaniemills21 says:

    Not sure why I think this, but I believe that they cannot designate the funds for any particular purpose and they have to go into the general fund, and that the trauma care part of it is just a “promise” to put the money toward that end.

    Not too fond of “promises” that any politician makes about where money will be spent.

  2. CobbGOPer says:

    And how soon do you think every possible, conceivable intersection in the state will receive red light cameras? Here we go, folks.

    And next it will be computerized speed detectors placed every 500 feet along the highway, with spiffy cameras to bust the speeders.

    And after that, it will be mandatory breathalyzers in every car.

    You open the door just a little, and see how hard it will be to stop the torrent from rushing through.

  3. CHelf says:

    I haven’t read the fine print. Is there anything restricting how high local governments can run the fines up to? I figure if you take part of their money, they’ll run the fines up to get more.

  4. jaybird says:

    What city or county will want to go through the trouble of putting up a red light running camera, if they will only get 25 percent of the “profit”, with 75 percent going to the State.

  5. Doug Deal says:

    I Am Jacks Post,

    I do not run red lights, and personally think that people who run red lights should be treated as severely as drunk drivers, as running a red light is about as dangerous as a single instance of DUI.

    However, the state using “law enforcement” for revenue generation instead of public safety is dangerous, and is a direct assault on liberty. Already every adult unkowingly committs enough finable offences to pay his entire salary out to the government. When they find a way to make their enforcement automatic, we all can become slaves of state.

    You might want to live in such a world, but a lot of us do not.

  6. John Galt says:

    I’m not advocating breaking laws here, but don’t traffic cameras seem a little too “1984?” Where will they put cameras next? Or microphones?

  7. GAWire says:

    Something is wrong … I actually find myself agreeing with Bobby Kahn on something.

    Please erase that comment from your memories. If you ever try to use it against me, I’ll deny it.

    In regards to Stephanie’s comment: “””Not too fond of “promises” that any politician makes about where money will be spent.”””

    Geez aint that the truth?!?

    I would be willing to stake large amounts of money on the idea that very little funds from these traffic light sources will ever find their way to trauma care (or anything beneficial to taxpayers, for that matter).

  8. MidGaDawg says:

    I think this is great. I don’t give a damn what the funds pay for, the good part is it takes away the financial incentive for cities/counties to put up cameras. If you (as a city or whatever) *really* think cameras make things safer, then 25% should be enough to reimburse the cost of putting them up, and the local governments should be OK with that.

    If you (as a city, again) have been using these to raise money without even needing to station a cop nearby, then you always have been and always will be in the wrong, and deserved none of the money anyway. I can live with pissing off these local governments.

Comments are closed.