Ohio Reins in Red-Light Cameras: What S.B. 342 Means for Dayton Drivers and Crash Victims

Published December 19, 2014 · New Laws

Governor Kasich today signed Amended Substitute Senate Bill 342, the most significant change to Ohio's traffic-camera rules since cities began installing them. Dayton has operated red-light and speed cameras for years, roughly three dozen of them, and has defended the program as a safety measure. Starting March 23, 2015, the city will have to station a police officer at every camera while it is running, or stop issuing camera tickets. Whatever you think of the cameras, the new law changes how intersection safety is enforced in the Miami Valley, and it has consequences for people hurt in crashes.

What the bill does

S.B. 342, sponsored by Senator Bill Seitz of Cincinnati, passed the 130th General Assembly this month, was signed today, and takes effect March 23, 2015. It enacts new sections of the Revised Code beginning at R.C. 4511.092 and adds a new insurance provision, R.C. 3937.411. The key provisions are these.

An officer must be present. Under the new R.C. 4511.093(B)(1), a local authority may use a traffic-law photo-monitoring device to detect and enforce violations only if a law-enforcement officer is present at the location of the device at all times while it is operating. If the officer personally witnesses a violation, the officer may write a regular traffic ticket. If the camera records a violation and the officer does not write a ticket, the city may still issue a camera citation, but only under the bill's procedures.

Safety studies and warnings before new cameras. New R.C. 4511.095 requires a local authority, before deploying a camera, to conduct a safety study of the location that accounts for incidents over the prior three years, to run a public-information campaign, to publish notice in a local newspaper, and to observe a public-awareness warning period of at least 30 days before any fines are issued. Cities already operating cameras on the effective date may continue, but must comply before adding another.

Speed thresholds. New R.C. 4511.0912 bars a camera speeding ticket unless the vehicle exceeded the posted limit by at least 6 miles per hour in a school zone or park, or at least 10 miles per hour anywhere else.

Insurance protection. New R.C. 3937.411 prohibits insurers from using a camera ticket, or an admission or finding of liability on one, as a basis to refuse to issue a private auto policy, raise its rate, cancel it, or decline to renew it.

The bill also amends several sections governing municipal and county courts and the state's texting-while-driving law, which we wrote about when enforcement began in 2013.

Why the fight, and why cities object

Supporters of the bill argued that cameras had become a revenue tool, that tickets were issued by out-of-state vendors with little oversight, and that drivers faced civil fines with no officer and no real hearing. Dayton and other cities answered that the cameras reduce red-light running and serious angle crashes, and that requiring an officer at every camera makes the program financially impossible, which is the point. Expect the cities to challenge the law, and expect the argument to turn on Ohio's home-rule provisions.

We handle the aftermath of intersection crashes, so our view is practical rather than political. A driver who runs a red light at 45 miles per hour and strikes the side of a car produces the kind of injuries that fill our files: brain injuries, spinal fractures, deaths. Anything that reduces red-light running is good for the people we represent. Anything that reduces reliable evidence of who ran the light is bad for them.

What the cameras have meant for crash victims

In an intersection crash, both drivers often insist they had the green light. We explained how these cases are proven in our post on proving who had the green light: independent witnesses, physical evidence, signal-timing records, and sometimes a reconstruction. Camera footage has been one more tool. A red-light camera at a Dayton intersection may have captured the collision itself, or at least the other driver's approach, and that video can settle the liability dispute before it starts.

That footage is held by the city or its vendor, is not always retained for long, and must be requested promptly, usually through a public-records request or a preservation letter. If the program shrinks after March 23, that source of evidence shrinks with it.

What this means for you

If you are hurt in an intersection crash in Dayton or any other camera city between now and the effective date, the cameras are still running and the footage may exist. Ask for it immediately; do not wait for the insurance adjuster to volunteer it. Our page on intersection collisions describes the evidence we gather in these cases.

After March 23, 2015, the practical reality in most cities will be fewer cameras, and the case will rest more heavily on the traditional proof: the police crash report, witness statements, the vehicles' damage patterns, and the signal-timing data from the city traffic engineer. That evidence has always been the core of an intersection case, and it is gathered the same way: quickly, before it disappears.

For drivers, the insurance provision is a modest but real protection. A camera ticket will not be a reason for your insurer to raise your rates or drop you. For crash victims, the more important point is unchanged by the bill: a driver who ran a red light is liable for the harm he caused, with or without a camera, and proving it is our job. Learn more on our Dayton car accident page.