Tennessee Tackles Traffic Cameras Again
The Tennessee General Assembly, which in past sessions has endorsed the use of speed cameras and red light cameras, is preparing once more to either expand or restrict their use. Bills introduced earlier this month provide the foundation for action that frequently takes a different turn after committee consideration.
Lobbyists for municipalities that use automated ticketing machines have a strong hold over the General Assembly and its committees. In 2008, municipalities joined forces with the camera industry to push through a measure authorizing photo ticketing. To deal with vocal opponents to the idea, then-state Senator Tim Burchett (R-Knoxville) drafted the bill in such a way that its wording appeared to be a ban on cameras. Similarly, attempts at placing limitations on camera use last year were watered down in the committee process to the point where the remaining “limits” merely reflected existing practices.
November’s elections, however, brought new members to the legislature. State Senator Stacey Campfield (R-Knoxville) has replaced Burchett who was elected mayor of Knox County. Campfield takes a dimmer view on the use of automated enforcement, referring to the devices on his blog as “revenue cameras.” His legislation, Senate Bill 54, would strike at Burchett by denying his jurisdiction, and only his jurisdiction, of the ability to issue right-turn tickets with cameras. This type of citation is the primary source of income for photo ticketing systems in the area. State Representative Ryan A. Haynes (R-Knoxville) added his own loophole-free proposal to ban speed cameras.
“No traffic citation for a violation of a speed limit… may be issued that is based solely upon evidence obtained from a traffic surveillance camera for the enforcement or monitoring of traffic violations,” House Bill 61 states. “This act shall take effect July 1, 2011, the public welfare requiring it.”
Other proposals are more favorable to camera use. State Representative John Ragan (R-Anderson County) introduced a measure directing 95 percent of revenue from red light camera and speed camera systems into the educational fund of the municipal budget. This shift in funding mechanisms would result in no net change in income for a municipality that chooses to use cameras. Haynes also introduced House Bill 64 which would allow drivers to yield when making a right turn on red anywhere in the state.
[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]
More by The Newspaper
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- JMII Hyundai Santa Cruz, which doesn't do "truck" things as well as the Maverick does.How so? I see this repeated often with no reference to exactly what it does better.As a Santa Cruz owner the only things the Mav does better is price on lower trims and fuel economy with the hybrid. The Mav's bed is a bit bigger but only when the SC has the roll-top bed cover, without this they are the same size. The Mav has an off road package and a towing package the SC lacks but these are just some parts differences. And even with the tow package the Hyundai is rated to tow 1,000lbs more then the Ford. The SC now has XRT trim that beefs up the looks if your into the off-roader vibe. As both vehicles are soft-roaders neither are rock crawling just because of some extra bits Ford tacked on.I'm still loving my SC (at 9k in mileage). I don't see any advantages to the Ford when you are looking at the medium to top end trims of both vehicles. If you want to save money and gas then the Ford becomes the right choice. You will get a cheaper interior but many are fine with this, especially if don't like the all touch controls on the SC. However this has been changed in the '25 models in which buttons and knobs have returned.
- Analoggrotto I'd feel proper silly staring at an LCD pretending to be real gauges.
- Gray gm should hang their wimpy logo on a strip mall next to Saul Goodman's office.
- 1995 SC No
- Analoggrotto I hope the walls of Mary Barra's office are covered in crushed velvet.
Comments
Join the conversation
YES!!! We'll put the money into EDUCATION! No one can argue with that! Until you find out that it's a cash grab like when the State of Ohio got the Lottery approved. $20 Million for the schools translates directly in $20 million in state education funding shifted away from school funding. Bare minimum they have to have an amendment stating the monies collected by RLC will go explicitly above and beyond normal school operating costs.