Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Photo Radar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances photo-radar limits after hours of debate over safety and profit motives
Summary
After extended floor debate, the Senate advanced substitute Senate Bill 59 — which restricts automated photo-radar enforcement to school zones and specified incident areas, requires signage and local approval, and mandates disclosure of contractor finances — by a 23–5 vote and sent it to third reading.
Senators advanced substitute Senate Bill 59 on a 23–5 roll call after several hours of debate over whether automated photo-radar enforcement helps public safety or risks turning traffic enforcement into a revenue stream.
Sponsor Senator Morine told colleagues the substitute limits photo-radar to school zones, areas with documented speed incidents, or when a peace officer is present; it requires warning signs and local elected approval and bars contractor agreements tied to citation counts. "The bill says that photo radar may not be used except in school zones or areas where speed related incidents have been documented," Morine said, summarizing the measure.
Supporters argued the technology can improve safety where traditional enforcement is difficult. Senator Holmgren pointed to trials in small communities that issued warnings and later far fewer notices once drivers adjusted, saying the devices can be safer than high-speed enforcement: "If you really want to control our speed limit, the technology is available…this technology will go further to controlling the speeder," he said.
Opponents raised concerns about cost, accuracy and incentives. Senator Nelson called the machines "a money machine," warning that private companies with contracts could be motivated to maximize citations. Senator Oakey said he was torn between protecting people and avoiding harassment from automated enforcement. Several senators warned that expensive technology would be infeasible without revenue from citations and could invite abuse if contracts were structured poorly.
The floor considered and rejected amendments that would have broadened who may operate units and whether a certified technician could replace an on-site peace officer. Sponsors and committee members said the bill tries to strike a balance — allowing pilot uses in high-need areas while imposing transparency and local oversight to limit profit-driven misuse. The Senate then voted to move the substitute to the third-reading calendar.
The bill now returns to the calendar for a final vote or further amendment; under the substitute the local authority must approve deployments and must post signage where the equipment is used, and contractor financials must be open to public review.
Votes at a glance: substitute SB 59 — advanced to third reading, 23 ayes, 5 nays, 1 absent.
