Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Work Zone Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs work-zone camera program that routes images to officers for on-scene traffic stops
Summary
House Bill 664, revised in committee to require an officer on-site before work-zone speed cameras operate and to issue district-court citations rather than civil notices, was reported favorably after proponents said it protects workers and funnels fines to the highway safety fund.
The Kentucky House Transportation Committee on March 1 reported House Bill 664 with a committee substitute that changes prior automated work-zone enforcement proposals by requiring a law-enforcement officer be present when cameras operate and by routing enforcement through standard traffic citations.
Chairman John Blanton and Vice Chair Iams led discussion of the committee substitute, which sponsors described as differing from earlier proposals in two major ways: photographs captured by work-zone cameras will be transmitted directly to an officer at or near the end of the work zone, and the officer will conduct a traffic stop outside the work zone and issue a regular citation through district court rather than a civil fine mailed to the vehicle owner.
The measure requires cameras to operate only when workers are present and requires the presence of an officer to put the system into operation; if no officer is available, the cameras will not be activated that day. Proceeds from citations collected under the program are designated to go into the existing highway safety fund to pay for program costs, including compensation for off-duty officers assigned to enforcement.
Supporters and committee members emphasized collaboration among law enforcement, highway contractors and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet in crafting the substitute. Representative Elliott and others praised the inclusion of signage that warns drivers when enforcement is active. Several members who had opposed earlier versions of automated enforcement credited the presence-of-officer requirement for securing their support.
The committee adopted the substitute and reported HB 664 with favorable expression. Committee members did not provide a fiscal estimate in the hearing; questions remain about local law-enforcement availability for off-duty assignments and program staffing on a daily basis.
