Bills › 88th General Assembly
Prohibiting the use of automated or remote systems for traffic law enforcement, requiring the removal of existing systems, and including effective date provisions
Topics:Transportation
Where it is now
- Done: IntroducedFebruary 6, 2019
- Done: SubcommitteeApril 1, 2019
- Stopped: House committeeDied when the General Assembly ended
- Next: Passes the House
- Skipped: Senate committeeSkipped
- Done: Passes the SenateMarch 26, 201930–19
- Next: To the Governor
- Next: Signed into law
Died when the session ended The 2020 session adjourned on June 14, 2020, the General Assembly’s last regular session. Bills that didn’t pass both chambers died. What’s a funnel?
What’s in it
This bill prohibits the state or a political subdivision of the state from placing or causing to be placed on or adjacent to a highway, or maintaining or employing the use of, any automated or remote system for traffic law enforcement. The bill defines “automated or remote system for traffic law enforcement” to mean a camera or other optical device designed to work in conjunction with an official traffic control signal or speed measuring device to identify motor vehicles operating in violation of traffic laws, the use of which results in the issuance of citations sent through the mail or by electronic means.
Read the full explanation
The bill requires that prior to July 1, 2019, a local authority using an automated or remote system for traffic law enforcement must discontinue using the system and remove the system equipment. Effective July 1, 2019, all local ordinances authorizing the use of automated or remote systems for traffic law enforcement are void. However, the bill provides that any citation issued or mailed pursuant to such an ordinance prior to July 1, 2019, is not invalidated by the bill and must be processed according to the provisions of law under which the citation was authorized. This provision of the bill takes effect upon enactment.
Changed since by amendment S-3075; see Amendments.
Fiscal note
AI summary This bill prohibits state and local authorities from using automated traffic enforcement devices and requires all existing devices to be removed by July 1, 2019. It is estimated to decrease annual revenue to local authorities by $10.8 million per fiscal year. Additionally, the bill is estimated to reduce annual revenue to the Department of Administrative Services by $65,000 in fiscal year 2021.2
Read the fiscal note
Description
Senate File 343 prohibits the use of automated traffic enforcement (ATE) devices by State and local authorities. This Bill requires the removal of all existing ATE devices by July 1, 2019. Citations issued before July 1, 2019, remain enforceable.
Background
As of February 2019, eight cities operate 72 speeding and red light ATE devices. This does not include the cities of Ottumwa and Waterloo. Ottumwa ceased operating ATE devices in October 2018. The number of ATE devices in Waterloo is currently not available, and therefore Waterloo is not included in the table totals.
In January 2014, the Department of Transportation (DOT) adopted an administrative rule that regulated the use of ATE devices on the primary road system. In March 2015, the DOT ordered nine traffic cameras on the primary road system to be removed. Of the nine ordered removed, seven remained in use pending rulings on several lawsuits filed by cities against the DOT. The ATE devices operating on secondary or city roads are not impacted by the DOT’s existing administrative rule.
In April 2017, the Iowa district court for Polk County ruled that the DOT had the authority to regulate ATE devices on the primary road system. By May 2017, the cities of Cedar Rapids, Des Moines, and Muscatine ceased issuing violations from ATE devices on the primary road system. Automated traffic enforcement devices operating on secondary or city roads were not impacted by the court ruling and are still operating per the local authorities’ discretion. In April 2018, the Iowa Supreme Court reversed the Polk County decision and ruled that the DOT did not have the authority to regulate ATE devices.
Polk County declined to renew its vendor contract for ATE devices and ceased issuing violations from its two mobile units in December 2017; Ottumwa ceased operating ATE devices in October 2018.
Under Iowa Code section 8A.504, the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) operates the Iowa Offset Program which can withhold certain State payments on behalf of local authorities to individuals and companies that do not pay their ATE violations. DAS charges $7 per violation collected to offset the costs of administering the Program. Fees are deposited into the DAS general operating budget.
The cities of Council Bluffs, Davenport, Des Moines, Fort Dodge, Muscatine, and Windsor Heights participated in the Program in FY 2018. Cedar Rapids has a signed agreement with the Iowa Offset Program; however, as of February 2019, the city is not submitting any unpaid violations for collection. Waterloo began participation in the Iowa Offset Program in September 2018 (FY 2019).
Assumptions
- All existing ATE devices will cease operation on or before July 1, 2019. Table 1 provides data on the number of ATE devices, base cost per violation, vendor’s share, and share of local authorities’ revenues.
- All citations issued prior to July 1, 2019, would remain valid.
- Citations for FY 2018 for Cedar Rapids are similar to FY 2017.
- Automated Traffic Enforcement issued citations would not be submitted for offset after June 30, 2020.
Fiscal Impact
Senate File 343 is estimated to reduce annual revenue to DAS by $65,000 in FY 2021. While cities have discretion on submitting unpaid citations to the Iowa Offset Program, given the stated assumptions the revenue decrease would occur in FY 2021.
The Bill will decrease revenue to local authorities by an estimated $10.8 million per fiscal year. Table 1 includes information attained by the Legislative Services Agency (LSA) for the last full fiscal year. Table 2 shows each city’s use of ATE revenue and which cities participate in the Iowa Offset Program.
Table 1 Fiscal Number of Number of Number of Base Fine Vendor Local Authority Local Authority Year Operating ATEs Violations Issued Violations Collected per Violation* Revenue Revenue** Cedar Rapids FY 2017 28 124,346 66,405 75$ 2,095,213$ 4,029,318$ Council Bluffs FY 2018 12 21,264 13,069 100 535,911 740,376 Davenport FY 2018 14 38,126 22,762 65 833,894 645,642 Des Moines FY 2018 9 30,545 22,105 65 624,582 812,290 Fort Dodge FY 2018 2 2,473 2,615 75 78,450 121,475 Muscatine FY 2018 2 10,398 8,161 75 220,347 500,746 Ottumwa FY 2018 1 610 672 80 3,930 6,880 Sioux City FY 2018 2 31,452 25,116 100 742,270 1,828,960 Windsor Heights FY 2018 3 40,201 31,514 65 755,508 2,068,334 Totals 73 299,415 192,419 5,890,105$ 10,754,021$ * Lowest violation amount. Actual violation amounts may increase depending on miles over the legal speed limit. ** Collected revenue may include fine moneys collected through the Iowa Offset Program for violations issued in prior years. *** Waterloo is not included in revenue totals.
Source: Local authorities Estimated Violations and Revenues from ATE Devices*** (As of February 2019) Table 2
Sources
- Iowa Department of Transportation
- Local authorities
- LSA calculations
- Department of Administrative Services
- Automated Traffic Law Enforcement Ban · February 27, 2019 · $65,000
Family tree
Study bill
88th General Assembly
Similar bills
- HSB 125 HSB 12588th General Assembly · Approved by committeeNearly identical
- SF 2319 Prohibiting the use of automated or remote systems for traffic law enforcement, including …89th General Assembly · Approved by committeeSimilar
- SF 516 Prohibiting the use of automated or remote systems for traffic law enforcement, including …89th General Assembly · Approved by committeeSimilar
Matched by wording or an identical title.