Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Veterans And Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsors propose education, cameras and fines to reduce work‑zone crashes in House Bill 82
Summary
Representatives Gary Click and Mark Johnson told the House Public Safety Committee that House Bill 82 would expand driver education, allow limited camera monitoring and create a mandatory safety course to reduce work‑zone crashes and fatalities.
Representatives Gary Click and Mark Johnson presented House Bill 82 to the House Public Safety Committee, saying the measure is intended to reduce work‑zone crashes and injuries by combining education, monitoring and stiffer penalties.
Sponsor testimony cited data on a rise in work‑zone fatalities and injuries and said the bill would: require driver's education courses to teach construction‑zone safety; require completion of a DPS‑approved safe‑driving course after a work‑zone offense (with a $400 fine if the offender fails to complete the course within 30 days); permit private contractors or ODOT to install speed‑monitoring devices and flashing lights; and expand reporting and camera use to give law enforcement video evidence for investigations. Sponsors said the measure would be focused on higher‑speed, multi‑lane state highways and interstates and that some earlier, larger fine proposals were reduced during drafting.
"One of the things they deserve more than anything else after working a long hard day out on the roads is to be able to go home," Representative Gary Click said, cataloguing national and state statistics for work‑zone crashes, injuries and fatalities. Representative Mark Johnson told committee members the bill would enhance education and allow targeted camera monitoring so police can obtain footage when investigating an alleged traffic violation.
Committee members asked how the proposal differs from existing Ohio law on obeying traffic control devices and reckless operation, and whether the state has a fiscal plan to pay for cameras. Representative Brent cited Ohio Revised Code sections addressing traffic devices and reckless operation and asked where funding for any camera program would come from. Sponsors said private contractors could include cameras in bid specifications for large interstate jobs, and that ODOT cooperation could be permissive rather than universal. Sponsors said the bill does not create automated mail‑in citations from cameras; instead footage would support officer investigations.
Members also raised enforcement options such as hiring detail officers. Sponsors said the bill is intended to increase education and on‑site tools for enforcement and that they would consider amendments addressing fine assessment and mitigation if a defendant completes training.
No committee vote was taken; sponsors and committee members signaled willingness to work on amendments, including fiscal language and the scope of camera deployment.
