Ruidoso outlines early results and procedures for newly deployed speed cameras

Village police and traffic staff presented the initial results and operational procedures for four automated speed-enforcement cameras during the July 14 council meeting.

Police staff said the cameras went live in late June and that, from June 28 through July 11, the four devices recorded 1,128 total violations across two locations on Paradise Canyon and Junction Road. "Total for all 4 cameras within that 2 weeks is 1,128, violations," a traffic staff member told the council, with average observed speeds in the high 30s to low 40s mph at sites where posted limits are 25–30 mph.

Staff emphasized the early-phase nature of the deployment: the first 30 days are warnings and the vendor’s automated detections are reviewed by AI, then a human reviewer, and finally a village third-party check before citations are issued. The village reported a roughly 12.8% rejection rate on initial captures, attributing many rejections to calibration issues or legibility problems. "This first 30 days is only warnings," staff said. Retention for review copies is short — generally not less than 30 days and not more than 60 days — to allow owners to request hearings or submit affidavits.

On privacy and data handling, staff told the council the system records license-plate images and short clips used solely for citation verification. The village described no facial-recognition function and said the operating company and village/police have access for enforcement; they denied routine sharing with outside agencies. A community speaker during public input urged caution about mass surveillance systems and said immigrant residents felt frightened after recent federal actions; she told the council she had left a formal statement with the clerk.

Staff also explained enforcement mechanics: civil citations are mailed to registered owners (owners may submit a notarized affidavit to identify the actual driver). On revenue, staff corrected earlier reports that a vendor would receive 50% of fines; they said $25 of a $100 fine goes to the company, the remaining funds support program costs and traffic-safety uses, and the state receives half of the remaining share per statute.

Councilors asked how many violators were local; police estimated approximately a 50/50 split between local and out-of-town drivers. Staff said they are preparing to request permits for two additional fixed sites — including a school-zone location — that will require State Highway Commission approval; they hope a permanent school-zone camera could be operational by September if permits and power access are arranged.

Next steps: staff will provide a full-month analysis after the first 30-day warning period, present the proposed state-highway locations to the State Highway Commission, and begin the formal hearing-officer contracting process paid from program revenue before citations are issued.