- A Massachusetts bill would let cities install traffic cameras.
- The systems could catch speeding and red-light violations.
- Critics question the privacy and due process impact.
Automated traffic cameras are becoming more common in the USA. Now, a new bill in Massachusetts could enable cities in the state to set up their own. Fines would be capped at $150, and while legislators say this isn’t a bill aimed at revenue, privacy advocates and constitutionalists have their concerns.
House Bill 4087, titled “An Act Relative to Traffic Safety at Intersections,” would allow cities and towns across the state to install automated cameras that photograph drivers speeding and running red lights. It wouldn’t require cities to use the technology, but it opens the door for state-wide use.
More: California Wants More Automated Traffic Fines, Your Car Gets The Bill
State Representative Orlando Ramos, a sponsor of the bill, told Western Mass News that this isn’t about money. “We are simply trying to keep the road safe, trying to keep the people on the road safe,” he explained. “We’re not trying to make money or make the city any money through this legislation.”
Under the proposal, municipalities would choose whether to opt into the program and determine where any collected fines go.
How The Ticket Process Works
Citations would be civil, not criminal, and as such, they’d arrive in the mail the same way that many toll roads send in fees. The registered owner of the vehicle in question would get the ticket regardless of who was driving. That said, drivers would still have a chance to contest the violation.
The bill allows vehicle owners to log in, review camera footage of the alleged offense, and appeal within 60 days. They could also submit an affidavit identifying another driver if someone else was using the vehicle at the time.
Privacy And Constitutional Concerns
As cameras become commonplace on roadways, it’s clear that privacy advocates have good questions. Ramos believes that part of the solution is crafting the bill with that in mind. “We’re talking about a civil infraction, not a criminal infraction, right? So, there’s a huge difference there,” Ramos explained. “But I am very concerned about government surveillance, which is why I decided to file a bill because if we’re going to do it, we have to do it the right way.”
Of course, he didn’t clarify exactly how the bill would prevent unlawful use of the technology. Moreover, in Florida, a recent ruling saw a traffic camera ticket dismissed due to a constitutional violation in the judge’s eyes.
He said it was “quasi-criminal,” in that the ticket carried significant penalties, including a guilty verdict and long-lasting consequences to a driver’s record. Rather than allow the state to presume the driver and owner are the same, he said that the state should be forced to prove its case. No doubt, this new legislation in Massachusetts could face similar challenges if not crafted carefully.
