Titusville council approves school-zone speed camera contract with 60-day warning; debate centers on hours, fines and equity

The Titusville City Council on June 10 approved use of a Baker County Sheriff's Office contract (RFP 24-002) and a piggyback agreement with Ultimate (Lanham, Md.) to install speed detection cameras in city school zones. Council also approved Resolution No. 11-2025 to authorize the program and authorized the mayor to execute the piggyback contract. The council set a 60-day public warning period before citations would issue.

Major (Titusville Police) and a company representative described the vendor and the system at the meeting. The company representative said Ultimate has operated photo-enforcement programs nationally for more than 20 years and keeps processing and equipment work in the U.S. The police major presented speed-study data and said zones measured showed speeds high enough to justify automated enforcement.

How the program will work: The state-authorized program issues civil citations by mail for drivers who exceed the posted school-zone speed limit by more than 10 mph during the reduced-speed times set in law. The city will receive $60 per $100 citation; $12 goes to the local schools, $5 to the city's crossing guard program, $3 to FDLE and $20 to the state, while vendor fees will be deducted from the municipality's share. The council included a 60-day warning period before citations begin; enforcement applies during statutory school-zone reduced-speed periods (for example, 30 minutes before and after school or other posted times) and not on weekends or regular school breaks, the vendor said.

Council and public discussion: Several council members and members of the public raised concerns about whether cameras should operate only in the 30-minute pre- and post-school windows or throughout the day when the reduced school-zone speed is in effect; whether tourists or transient drivers might be unfairly fined; and whether the program removes the community contact that uniformed officers provide. Council member Member Stoeckl expressed opposition on record. Member Nelson requested a 60-day warning period, which the council adopted. Other council members argued the cameras were a force multiplier that can deter speeding when officers cannot be physically present.

Financial and administrative notes: The vendor charges a rental fee (cited in discussion as $3,499 per camera) and processes citations; the city will not pay upfront capital costs, and the vendor's contract language includes a 60-day cancellation provision. Council discussed whether to charge an additional municipal cost for appeal hearings (a statutorily permitted fee not to exceed $250); the council did not set that fee at the June 10 meeting.

Outcome: Council approved the piggyback contract and related resolution and authorized the mayor to execute the agreement. The resolution and contract specify program details consistent with state law and the vendor's contract. Council directed staff to proceed with the 60-day warning period before issuing citations.