School Zone Cameras?
Yesterday, the county commission chambers were packed and the overflow room was needed initially. A LOT of people showed up for the data center moratorium. I believe they went through close to 60 public comments regarding it.
The moratorium vote passed 5-0, so the county will implement it for up to 12 months. This means that all data centers are banned for now in Citrus. Any project currently working through the process can continue, such as Holder Industrial Park, but even if approved, the moratorium on building it would block it until it expires.
The 2nd biggest part of the day in my opinion was the talk of the Sheriff's office implementing a school zone speed detection system to be placed in several school zones around the county.
State law dictates how this will work. Basically, if a local ordinance is passed, the system is implemented. The violations would trigger if the person is going at least 10 mph over the speed limit. The fine would be $100 that is billed to the owner of the vehicle. The owner then has an option to appeal it through a magistrate at a fee the county decides. There would be a 30 day grace period one the program is implemented for public education.
It is important to note that these are civil issues and not criminal infractions. There will be no points taken or insurance issues to worry about with this program.
This would be the breakdown of where the fee money goes and how it can be used.
Vincent goes on to explain that when this was studied previously in 2023 under Prendergast, there was some data collected at the time to suggest how many violations occurred per day that would trigger a citation.
The data collected showed that these were the total numbers per day over the 10 mph threshold:
Forest Ridge - 500 violations
Hernando - 250 violations
Rock Crusher - 200 violations
Citrus Springs - 240 Violations
So apparently, the numbers suggest that there is an issue with speeding in school zones, at least in 2023 when this data was collected. Commissioner Barek then pointed out that the study was done by a company that wanted to earn the county's business, so suggested that the CCSO do their own study. Valid point. Does not hurt to collect more data and more accurate data.
A few things
1) I have seen many people question this as a violation of Constitutional rights. The 4th, 6th and 14th Amendments are typically cited. Courts have largely ruled that since these are Civil issues and not criminal in nature that cities can continue to use these systems.
Florida has an approval process for the technology that is being used. A recent case in South Florida was recently dismissed because the state did not approve the technology that the camera system used.
There are questions on facing your accuser, but again, courts have ruled that despite the "accuser" being software/hardware, there are people who can be called in to verify the data or the technology used for the system.
2) The next biggest thing I see is people asking who gets the fine. My understanding is that the owner of the vehicle gets the fine. That person may or may not have been driving the car.
So is it fair to give a $100 fine to someone who may not have been driving despite no having definitive proof of them behind the wheel?
It is a valid question, but I would suggest that people are responsible for what happens to their vehicles. Take a look at insurance. If someone borrows your car and gets into an accident, the insurance is with the vehicle... not the individual. So you can be held liable for someone else driving your vehicle that gets into an accident.
Why would this not be the same for a speed camera? It is your responsibility to control who has access to your vehicles... if someone driving it gets the $100 fine, that is the risk you run for allowing them to drive it. Again, it is just the fine, no points or anything on your license.
You can always do what car rental companies do and send the bill to the person who was driving at that time. Make them pay for it.
3) Is this better for enforcement than a deputy doing it? If we are talking about safety of children, I would argue placing a deputy at each school zone everyday would make people actually slow down. I am not sure a camera has the same effect.
But the camera is far cheaper than having deputies stationed there. So there is that.
The board did not really come up with a plan to work through this, so we will see if it comes back in the future!