Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Upper Dublin discusses school‑bus camera program and traffic‑calming fund after hundreds of violations
Summary
Board members discussed using camera footage on school buses to document vehicles that pass buses with flashing lights, reported $9,800 in recent citation proceeds and said 20% will be set aside to seed a traffic‑calming fund for studies, signs and related measures.
The Upper Dublin board discussed plans to use camera footage from school buses to identify vehicles that illegally pass stopped buses, and outlined how citation proceeds will be used to pay for local traffic‑calming measures.
Frank, the meeting’s primary speaker, said the township has ‘‘collected $9,800,’’ which was described in the meeting as ‘‘the equivalent essentially for 90 days, of 392 paid violations.’’ He said the township will retain 20% of those citation proceeds ‘‘or essentially $10 per citation’’ to seed a traffic‑calming fund that will pay for speed studies, traffic counts, signage and related administrative costs. "We will start having a monthly report that will go out to all of you showing how many of them is that we are processing," he said.
Officials described the proposed operational model: a private vendor mounted on buses would provide video evidence that the police department would review and confirm before a citation is authorized. The chair emphasized that the police department has final authority to determine whether an incident meets the legal threshold for a violation and said the township will conduct public outreach to clarify what constitutes an offense.
The board said it will issue monthly summaries of submitted footage and citations and that the traffic‑engineer group (police traffic division, the traffic engineer and relevant staff) will use speed studies and turning‑radius reviews to evaluate targeted engineering measures. The chair cautioned that certain physical measures, such as speed humps, are typically used only in lower‑speed areas and may raise liability or emergency‑vehicle access concerns.
The discussion also stressed that the program is intended to complement enforcement and education; officials said they would consider residents’ reports and that engineering remedies would follow formal review and agenda consideration. The board did not adopt a final ordinance at the meeting; it described next steps including continued traffic‑engineer analysis and public reporting.
