Sheriff asks county to lift ban on speed cameras to address chronic speeding on Route 51
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Sheriff Robertson urged commissioners to consider repealing the county code ban on speed cameras to reduce speeding and crash risk on Route 51; commissioners discussed drafting a repeal of section 461‑9 and the possibility of amending a pending state bill for cameras on I‑68.
Sheriff Robertson asked the Allegany County Commissioners to reconsider the county’s ban on automatic speed‑enforcement cameras and discussed options to reduce persistent speeding and a history of serious crashes on Route 51.
The sheriff told commissioners that private vendors (he named Red Speed) can provide, install and maintain cameras at no up‑front cost to the county and that the county could receive a share of revenue generated. He described enforcement logistics and said an officer must review camera captures to determine whether a vehicle meets enforcement criteria. He argued that some stretches of Route 51 are unsafe for an officer to stop a vehicle and said the technology can also assist crash reconstruction and criminal investigations.
Commissioners discussed two paths: (1) draft and introduce local legislation to repeal section 461‑9 of the county code (the existing ban), or (2) pursue changes at the state level. Staff noted Senator McKay has a pending bill to allow cameras on I‑68 and said there may be an opportunity to seek amendments or coordination with the delegation to cover routes with demonstrated safety problems. Sheriff Robertson said Route 51 is especially problematic and characterized the corridor as “a race track down there.”
Board members signaled they were open to staff drafting code changes but also raised concerns about public perception, appropriate local controls and limiting deployments to locations where law enforcement determines they are necessary. One commissioner suggested any change should preserve sheriff discretion or involve the local traffic committee to review sites. Staff offered to draft model language for the code and to explore whether rapid amendments could be added to the pending state legislation.
What happens next: staff will draft possible code language to repeal or modify the ban on speed cameras (section 461‑9) and return it to the board for consideration; staff also will coordinate with the county’s legislative delegation and lobbyists if commissioners want state‑level amendments.