Phoenix, Mesa & other cities oppose Republican plan to slash Arizona photo radar fines

The price of tickets issued by speed
or red-light cameras would be reduced by more than a third under a
proposal that has the backing of the Republican legislative majority,
who ignored concerns from cities in Maricopa County that say it would
take away a critical incentive for Arizona drivers to follow the law.

The Arizona House of Representatives on Wednesday gave preliminary approval to Senate Bill 1624, which would cap the fine for tickets originating from photo radar cameras at $75, far below the current maximum of $250.

Doug Cole, a lobbyist for the League
of Arizona Cities and Towns, testified during a March 18 meeting of the
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee that six cities in
Maricopa County have photo radar enforcement systems, and the highest
fine is Paradise Valley’s $243. Chandler, Mesa, Paradise Valley, Phoenix
and Tempe, all of which use photo radar cameras, are opposed to the
legislation.

Republicans have long railed against traffic camera enforcement systems, and have pushed a ban on speed and red light cameras for years with no success. This year’s iteration would ask voters in November to decide
whether city officials need to get their permission every 10 years to
keep traffic cameras in place. If lawmakers send it to the ballot and
voters approve the proposal, they would be given a chance at the next
general election to preserve existing photo enforcement systems or scrap
them altogether.

Cole told lawmakers in March that the
proposal slashing the cost of tickets should be tabled until after
voters have a chance to weigh in on whether they want photo enforcement
at all, but supporters of the bill are pushing ahead regardless, in a
bid to chip away at traffic camera systems even if voters choose to keep
them.

The bill also prohibits the Arizona
Department of Transportation and its Motor Vehicle Division from
considering tickets issued via photo radar when deciding whether a
person’s license should be suspended or revoked. And insurance companies
would be forbidden from using data from photo radar cameras to raise
rates or decide which clients to take on or keep.

Several insurance companies,
including Allstate, Progressive and Nationwide have registered their
opposition with the legislation.

While the bill won an initial
greenlight from the House, it has a long way to go before it can become
law. It must still undergo a final vote in the chamber and travel back
to the Arizona Senate to have its amendments approved before it can be
sent to Gov. Katie Hobbs. And it’s unlikely that the Democrat will sign
it into law: Hobbs has rejected previous attempts to regulate photo
radar systems and frequently sides with city officials when they
criticize legislation. And her party appears poised to oppose it.

During early hearings in the Senate,
the legislation netted bipartisan approval. It passed out of the Senate
with the backing of the majority of the chamber, on a vote of 25-2. But
in the House, it began to face pushback from Democrats who voiced
concerns about the possibility that Arizona drivers would lose a
deterrent to speed or run red lights.

“Seventy-five dollars – that’s chump
change for some people,” said Rep. Patty Contreras, D-Tempe, during the
March 18 meeting of the House Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee.

Republicans, meanwhile, emphasized
that the point of the legislation is to persuade people to pay their
fines and noted that traffic cameras, unlike police officers, don’t have
the ability to discern why a driver might be forced to speed or run a
red light sometimes.

Sen. David Gowan, a Republican who
represents Sierra Vista, said that most people wait to pay their tickets
until they’ve been served. Arizona law
doesn’t require people to respond to a mailed notice of a traffic
violation caught by a photo radar enforcement system, but failing to
respond can result in being officially served and additional fees.
Gowan, during debate of the bill in March, said that a lower ticket cost
might convince people to pay faster and help cities capture that
revenue.

“The issue is just making it simple,” he said. “And it’ll probably get people to just pay their fines at the end of the day.”

But Cole told lawmakers that the
ticketing system was never meant to function as a revenue source and
that its value lies instead in the threat of an expensive punishment.

“We don’t want those seventy five dollars,” he said. “We want behavior changed for things to be safer.”