Police commission refers red‑light camera ordinance to city council with final‑site approval reserved for commission

The Bristol Police Commission voted to refer a proposed red‑light camera ordinance to the city council and the ordinance committee, while reserving for the commission the right to approve any final camera locations before a Department of Transportation application is submitted. The motion, which asked that ordinance language include police‑commission approval of program‑specific details and approved locations, was moved by Commissioner Rory Guillot and seconded; the motion carried on a voice vote.

Commissioners debated whether the ordinance should cap initial camera sites and whether timing restrictions (for example, turning cameras off overnight) should be included. In discussion, Chief Eric Costa of the Middletown Police Department described Middletown’s experience deploying cameras, saying cameras were placed on corridors where traffic studies showed frequent high‑speed violations and that “in the first, I would say, 2 to 3 months, that dropped by 94% being 20 miles over the speed limit.” He said the program also correlated with a drop in petty larcenies near camera sites.

Several commissioners said they wanted to avoid the perception that cameras are used primarily as a revenue source. Commissioner Shu Tyler said she remains “100% for school bus cameras” but expressed opposition to speed cameras and said red‑light cameras felt like a compromise position; she urged limits on timing and assurances that enforcement would be focused on safety rather than revenue. Commissioner Lemieux asked that the commission be provided with proposed camera locations in advance of any DOT application so the commission could review crash and census‑tract data.

A member of the public, Marianne Saroise, urged caution, saying automated enforcement “would object to the city finding drivers for minor violations” and warning that fines add burdens for households already struggling with higher costs of living; she recommended operational safeguards including regular maintenance, calibration and timing checks to avoid false positives.

Under the path the commission approved, the ordinance committee will draft a sample ordinance and schedule public hearings; any resulting ordinance would enable the city to submit a DOT application and proceed with the required 18‑month study period. The commission’s referral explicitly includes language that the police commission will review and approve specific deployment locations and program criteria before final DOT submission.