Traffic Cameras Promoted as Deterrent to Speeding
Officer's Death Stirs State Senator to Act

By Mary Otto
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 17, 2008

Maryland state Sen. James N. Robey Jr. (D) had been thinking about a law to allow speed detection cameras on Howard County roads. Then, last June, Howard County Police Cpl. Scott Wheeler was fatally injured on Route 32 as he attempted to flag down a speeding car.

"That put a fire in my belly to do something about this," said Robey, a former county police chief and county executive.

So Robey will be pushing for a measure this legislative session giving Howard law enforcement officials the authority to use speed cameras on local roads. A 2006 state law cleared the way for Montgomery County officials to use the cameras.

"This is the 21st century," Robey said. "We have the technology to prevent injuries and save lives."

Robey supports use the cameras on county roads with speed limits of up to 45 mph, such as Little Patuxent, Snowden River and Broken Land parkways. The cameras would also be allowed in school zones, as they are in Montgomery.

Images taken by the cameras would be reviewed by police department employees before citations are issued, Howard County Police Chief William J. McMahon said.

"The police department has the final authority on issuing citations," he said.

Drivers, who could be fined up to $75, could challenge the citations in court, much the way they can with red-light violations.

McMahon estimated that a dozen lives are lost each year in the county because of speed-related accidents, and said he hopes the cameras will make drivers more mindful.

"Our goal is not to catch people," McMahon said. "Our goal is to make people slow down."

County Executive Ken Ulman (D) also supports the use of speed cameras.

"We don't have enough man- and woman-power to have a police officer in every location doing speed enforcement," he said.

Howard has used red-light cameras since 1998. The county was included in a nationwide study of the effectiveness of red-light cameras conducted by the Federal Highway Administration. Overall, the 2005 study found, the devices were effective in reducing the most damaging side-angle collisions, though less destructive rear-end collisions increased as drivers stopped abruptly to avoid entering intersections on red lights.

Ultimately, the study, which tracked the costs of crashes, including car repairs, hospital bills and lost productivity from serious injuries, calculated that each camera resulted in a savings of $28,000 to $50,000.

As the use of red-light and speed cameras has grown, however, the devices have stirred controversy. Opponents say the cameras raise privacy concerns or become "speed traps," generating revenue for local governments and camera companies at the expense of unwary taxpayers.

In a statement, the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland said it does not oppose the use of speed cameras, "provided that the cameras capture only those images that are necessary to enforce the traffic laws."

But the group said it is concerned that the data collected could be used for other purposes. "Government and privacy industry surveillance techniques created for one purpose are rarely restricted to that purpose, and every expansion of a data bank and every new use for the data opens the door to more and more privacy abuses," the statement said.

The ACLU in other states has defended drivers who received tickets as a result of speed cameras.

Robey said the automated cameras are far less intrusive than a police officer "shining a light in the car" or detecting the smell of alcohol or illicit drugs. He said the object of installing the cameras is not to raise money but "to save lives and reduce injuries."