House Votes To Ban Red Light Cameras!


The Florida House on Monday passed a ban on controversial red light cameras.

The vote was a razor-thin 59 to 57.

Unlike many issues in the Legislature, banning cameras had significant Republican and Democratic support.  They fought a small army of lobbyists for the red light camera industry and cities hungry for the revenue the cameras produce.

There was clapping and supporters of the bill hugged when the vote was announced.

A companion bill has not passed the Senate…yet. The session isn’t scheduled to end until Friday.

The issue was contentious and has been debated in the Legislature for the past five years.

Last year, the cameras were approved. A bill was filed this year to repeal the approval and some members didn’t make up their minds until Monday’s floor discussion.

The debate was vigorous.

Conflicting statistics flew around the chamber like so many snow flakes, leading State Rep. John Legg, R-Port Richey, to quote Mark Twain: “There are lies, more lies and statistics.

The repeal was sponsored by State Rep. Richard Corcoran, a Republican from New Port Richey.  He said 20 impartial studies indicated that the cameras actually caused accidents.

State Rep. Bill Proctor, R-St. Augustine, countered that red light cameras saved lives.  He also said it was a local issue.

“Let the local people make (the) decision, Proctor said.

State Rep. Luis Garcia, D-Miami, said the cameras were about governments making money.  He said that “the only thing (red light cameras are) doing is producing revenue.

State Rep. Clay Ford, R-Pensacola, a supporter, conceded red light cameras was a source of state money.  He warned if the House banned the red light cameras “you’re going to give up $70 to $80 million.

State Rep. Mack Bernard, D-West Palm Beach, didn’t like the assumption created by the cameras that “you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent.

Someone getting a ticket had to go to court to prove they weren’t driving the car in the red light camera picture, Bernard said.

“The question is are you making it safe or are you making more money? Legg said.

22 Responses to “House Votes To Ban Red Light Cameras!”

  1. Pembroke Pines Resident says:

    Take that Angelo Castillo

  2. pbm says:

    If everyone was responsible and got off their cell phone while driving and pay attention to the road instead, stop texting nonsense while driving, and drive within the posted limits, this whole thing would never have been an issue in the first place. But, some people continually choose to get on the road and drive drunk. Many won’t slow down for yield signs, stop at stop signs, or do 15mph for blinking school lights. If many people did what they’re supposed to do there wouldn’t a reason for this waste of time. Some of our city’s adults act like spoiled children and then turn around and complain about our youth. Every day we have major accidents in our city. If red lights aren’t going to do it, then something else will. We have to keep looking.

  3. electricjack says:

    What a crock of nonsense. The only people against it are the folks who consistently run the red lights. Its not only about money that is a side issue the main thing is this folks people get killed by others who refuse to obey an drive like they are the only important people on planet earth the canadians the illegal aliens all of these folks run lights all the time and when questioned it’s always no habla henglish, or sorry ole chap we don’t do that where I live….Well spineless legislators the choice is cameras or destroy the worth of everyone’s homes and business cause we simply cannot afford more Police Personnel.So it breaks down to this ,” YOU WROTE THE LAW ON RED LIGHTS, THE CAMERAS WILL ENFORCE THEM IF YOU LET THEM” no thats not popular this year so I will vote against the mommys who obey the law and vote for the baby killers who day in and day out violate the law……tch tch tch no spines!

  4. Red Lite Runner says:

    A victory for democracy and an American way of life! Run those lights, roll through right on red at any speed you want, and preserve the individual freedom to disregard traffic laws no matter the consequences. For those who claim the cameras could also be used for crime fighting, take that!

    We have shown the world today, we as a people know how to preserve basic liberties and freedom over the safety of our own people. You know, they hate us for our freedom!

    I say good job to the legislature who finally got something done this session that really means something to the people. Even if I am living in my car, lost my job, no longer have unemployment benefits, and my children are facing the worst cuts in school funding in a history, our legislature was not distracted by such wordly and mundane matters. They focused on an important and persecuted minority — those who want to preserve the right to disregard traffic laws.

    Let’s break into song to celebrate.

  5. Floridan says:

    It looks like the State Legislature will end this session with a near-perfect score of bad legislation.

  6. ExCompassionate Conservative says:

    When the red light cameras are designed to add to the government coffers instead of reducing accidents, I draw the line. We have here the state admitting that they view the cameras as revenue first instead of safety.

    Over the weekend I approached an intersection and found that this particular interection seemed to have a far shorter yellow than the previous lights on Powerline. To stop in such a short distance at 45 MPH would be dangerous with a car fairly close in back of me.

    When I lived in NYC they had a scandal with motor vehicle cops who had manual control over a stoplight and would shorten the light at will to pull people over. The judge had to dismiss countless tickets when good lawyers documented this with old bulky video recorders.

    I have no love for the state simply inventing a crime for revenue which can be selectively enforced. Here is my example from NYC in 1980 or so.

    Before Ipods, kids had huge radios which were blasting their music on the subways. A sound violation ordinance was passed to allow subway cops to write tickets or confiscate very loud boom boxes if they were not turned down. my lily white friend was riding in an A train at midnight in a car by himself. He had a tiny cassette player which was playing a Mozart Opera to himself. He was there because the car ahead of him had several very loud boom boxes playing and it looked like a fight was going to break out between warring bom boxes.

    The transit cop walked through the car of dueling boomboxes, owned by people who would never pay a ticket to my friend’s car. Seeing that he had a tiny cassette player and looked like he could pay a ticket, he was written up with the cop explaining how to pay the fine to avoid court.

    Come the court date, my friend told the judge what happened and the judge had a hard time not laughing when he dismissed this selective enforcement.At no time did the cop ask my friend to turn it down since he could not hear the Don Giovonni overture till he was directly in front of him.

  7. Commissioner Angelo Castillo says:

    Dear Friends,

    High drama…please wake me up when the bill fails in the Senate. Drive safely. Peace.


    Pembroke Pines was cited in floor debate in a list of cities making money from the cameras. The figure given was $100,000.

  8. New is not Better says:

    Do you really think that those who ran red lights were not caught before cameras? For me the camera is not the problem. It is the law that says the registered owner is responsible for the ticket. How does it help to keep us safe if the owner and not the actual driver is fined? Whose behavior are you trying to change? I know that within the 1st 30 days the owner can file an affidavit and give up the driver so that the city can issue the violation to that person. I wonder how often that actually happens? The law is poorly written and even so the cities can’t comply with it. That is why the majority of the cases are dismissed at trial. However, since 75% of people pay before the trial the cities are happy to dismiss 25% at trial as a cost of doing business.

  9. watcher says:

    statistics show that running red lights is a fairly nominal cause of accidents…i fear the guy behind me hitting me when i stop more than the guy traveling perpendicular to me being a second late crossing against a red light…want safety have a delayed green…this is about money not safety and it’s the wrong way to raise it

  10. Dear Angelo says:

    How many Pines red light traffic tickets have been thrown out of Court. How many cases did the Pines attorney attempt to show guilt by freeze framing the photo of the car in the intersection to show literally they were an inch over the line. Its all about the money nothing more.

  11. watcher says:

    True its about money and generating money for the cities. But if you are not doing anything wrong it really shouldn’t matter you can fight it and win. I personally find it hysterical that all eyes will be on you when you think no one is watching catching you doing things your not suppose to. Some folks should be worried about that lol.

  12. SAM FIELDS says:

    I guess Speaker Cannon got a ticket

    Cannon did vote to repeal the red light cameras.

  13. Commissioner Angelo Castillo says:


    That’s funny! I thought the rap was we were losing money.

    Who on the Broward Delegation voted against it? Just curious.


    I don’t believe any House members living in Broward voted for it.

  14. South Florida says:

    Glad did not pass. There are other ways to save life .

  15. Commissioner Angelo Castillo says:

    Dear South Florida:

    Like what? I keep asking that question of people who say there’s a better way, and all I get is silence in response. Tell us. What way is better?


  16. Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents says:

    All the votes on HB 4087 (Y = ban RLCs in Florida) can be seen here:

  17. Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents says:

    Rep. Bill Hager (R) did vote Yes on HB 4087, and he does represent Broward County (as well as Palm Beach County).

  18. Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents says:

    Like increasing the length of the yellow light. And Commissioner Castillo, you misrepresent the truth when you falsely claim that nobody is suggesting other ways.

    53.Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents says:
    [April 28th, 2011 at 6:41 pm]

    Georgia: Longer Yellows Force City to End Red Light Camera Program
    New Georgia law forces longer yellow times that made red light cameras unprofitable in Norcross.

    The Norcross, Georgia City Council voted Monday to end its relationship with LaserCraft Inc., a red light camera company whose US headquarters lies just
    three miles down the road from city hall. LaserCraft’s troubles began last year when the Georgia General Assembly enacted a law requiring the yellow signal
    warning time at any intersection equipped with a red light camera be increased by one second over the minimum national standard. City documents show that once
    the law took effect, the accident and red light violation problem in Norcross virtually disappeared. […]

  19. watcher says:

    watcher at 5/3 …get your own fake name…watcher 5/2

  20. mayget newname says:

    government is not wise to raise revenue in ways that cause additional anger…paying when one uses a government service hurts less and is resented less…..

  21. Duke says:

    Cut it down the middle. Have municipalities that want to employ red light cameras ensure that every yellow light is at least 4 seconds long. They of course won’t agree to that. Increasing the yellow time = less red light running = less revenue.

  22. Myopinion101 says:

    This is really obvious here. We keep hearing the cameras are taking down when they are no longer profitable. Many cities have done this. So when profits are not there safety is no longer an issue? I don’t like the guilty until innocent thing, but I especially do not like the government to admit to the need for these things to be profitable-and then talk safety out of the other side of their mouth.