Traffic Cameras By The High School: Speeding Deterrent, Revenue Generator, Or Both?
By LYDIA BERGLAR
News Editor
Ever since the traffic cameras on GA-136 by Dade County High School were installed last fall, they’ve been a hot topic around town. In the intervening months, the Sentinel has heard several complaints in person and read many disgruntled comments on social media about the cameras. This raises the questions: Are these cameras unjustly issuing citations (like some people have claimed), are there grounds for complaints about them, or do people simply dislike following the speed limit?
Alex Case (mayor) said the city has received a lot of heat about the cameras, but he says the situation is no different than other speeding tickets written by officers. He said, “Lives are worth it to me.”
The Sentinel spoke with many different citizens, most of whom wished to remain anonymous. Only one case indicated that a citation may have been wrongfully issued. Citizens reported that they had indeed been speeding, but they still had concerns about the cameras.
A brief history: Blue Line Solutions (BLS) approached the Trenton Police Department in 2022 about the cameras, and the department brought the proposal before the City of Trenton Board of Commissioners at the Oct. 2022 meeting. BLS and Trenton PD also spoke at the Feb. 27, 2023, Dade County Board of Education meeting because the superintendent had to sign an agreement form. The school board did not have to vote on the cameras.
BLS ran a five-day speed study by the high school prior to the city meeting which found that 50 percent of drivers were speeding during school zone hours. Per the fall 2024 press release from Trenton PD, 2.8 percent of all vehicles were speeding in that area, and 28.57 percent of those were going 15-20 mph over the limit. The reason for the disparity between the data from BLS and from Trenton PD is unclear, but regardless, Case said, “We’ve got people going 20 over the speed limit—that’s 65 mph. We want to get them slowed down.”
BLS and the city cite the importance of student safety as the reason for the cameras, so the Sentinel asked Brent Cooper (DCHS principal) for an estimate of how many students walk to the school. He said, “There are not very many of them. I would guess we have five to seven students who cross GA-136 and a few more that walk across the practice football field and cross the train tracks.”
Meanwhile, Trenton PD said, “There is foot traffic every day on Highway 136 East with little to no shoulder to walk on. Most of the foot traffic is students. We are still receiving complaints about there not being sidewalks for foot traffic, but that is a state road, and we have no control over that.”
Several citizens stated that they don’t see this stretch of road in front of the high school as a particularly dangerous spot. One anonymous citizen said, “I don’t think there were accidents at that location very often, and the traffic light is sufficient to control it. It’s a money grab by the city. My granddaughter is a new driver to the high school. She is constantly in fear of an accident because of all the cars passing her (speeding) down Lookout Mountain. I guess that’s a county issue rather than city, but the point being, their first priority isn’t the safety of the citizens.”
Tim McKaig added, “I can’t help but wonder what problem the cameras were designed to fix. Were children being injured in crashes, or do we have some reason to fear it’s going to happen? I think it’s about the fine money. I think if the state would redirect fine money to other state programs, the cameras would disappear. I don’t like policing for profit. I don’t like [that] the human element is removed. There’s no deterrence for people passing by. There’s no possibility that a criminal will be jailed as a result of the investigation. Since they’ve removed those things, I believe it’s just for profit. Run the city on tax money, and stop benefiting from people’s misfortune.”
As McKaig indicated, citations from the cameras are civil offenses, meaning citations do not impact insurance or drivers’ licenses. This is good news for citizens driving a little too fast but bad news for those working to prosecute very dangerous drivers.
The Sentinel asked Trenton PD for the number of accidents on the stretch of road from South Main Street to Canyon Park Drive in the last five years. There were 27 crashes, one of which was a car vs. pedestrian.
The department said, “Over the last few months, there has been a major decrease in speed, and that has led to a decrease in crashes. That means the school zone is a safer area for our students and the motoring public. The enforcement cameras are effective, and we are glad to see their results.”
Camera installation didn’t cost the city anything. The speed study, engineering, and equipment were all covered by BLS, and the company recoups those costs by receiving 35 percent of the citation revenue (with the remaining 65 percent going to the city).
The normal speed limit in the school zone is 45 MPH. On regular school days from 7-8 a.m. and again from 2:46-3:45, the limit drops to 35 MPH, and the lights flash.
The police department puts the cameras on a schedule following the Dade County Schools calendar. In instances of school delays or unplanned events, the department can change the times for that day. The department explained, “If we do not have time to change the enforcement camera and flashing lights schedule, we will simply contact BLS and have all the tickets for that time frame voided out.”
Citations are issued for those going 11 MPH over the limit (i.e. 46 MPH or 56 MPH, depending on the time).
Trenton PD reported that at 3:46, the lights and camera turn off for the day; no citations are issued after this time or on weekends. However, the tag reader portion of the camera operates continuously 24-hours a day and notifies dispatch of any hits for stolen vehicles, missing/wanted persons, or sex offenders.
The department noted that a lot of misinformation has spread about the cameras “from the times they are active to the tickets affecting credit reports to the enforcement speed being one or two miles per hour over the posted speed…State law is very clear on what we can and cannot do in regard to enforcement actions with these cameras, and we follow the law every time.”
However, part of the reason for this misinformation might be the lack of clear information shared by the police department or city. There is nowhere online where citizens can look up all of these details, and numerous citizens expressed displeasure about the lack of publicity to the Sentinel.
Searches on the city, county, and school websites produced no information about the cameras, nor were there any posts in the last eight months on the county or school’s official Facebook pages about the cameras. Trenton PD and the city’s Facebook pages both posted on Oct. 21, 2024, that ticketing had begun on Oct. 16.
When BLS first approached the city, the representative said there would be a public information phase before/during the 30-day warning period. However, that didn’t happen. Citizens began reporting that citations were showing up in their mailbox, so at the Oct. 15 city meeting, the Sentinel asked for information about the cameras. Trenton PD then sent a press release which ran in the Oct. 30 Sentinel—two weeks after the warning phase was over.
During the warning period, 787 warnings were issued. During the first full 30-day period after the warning phase, only 281 citations were issued. The first full 30 days resulted in the most citations since the cameras have been up, indicating that the cameras are achieving their stated purpose.
From Oct. 16 to Feb. 28, 1,015 citations were issued. First offenses are $100, and all future offenses are $150. Trenton PD reported that the city received $39,321.17 in revenue through the end of February. This doesn’t line up with the number of citations issued, perhaps because citizens have chosen to go to court instead of paying the fine.
Early on when the cameras were first activated, the time and speed settings weren’t correct. Trenton PD said, “All of those tickets were dismissed until the issue was fixed. We had several calls about those tickets and fixed those issues.”
The department reported that the lidar is calibrated once a year in accordance with state law. Additionally, the lidars run a self-test each morning.
When gathering input from citizens, the Sentinel heard from one city commissioner, Monda Wooten, who said, “I actually got a ticket from the camera. I’m not liking it, but it is a school zone, and I’d rather pay the ticket and hope that it cautions me to slow down next time I’m going through there, because speeding can always result in something much worse than a ticket.”
Citizen Susie Talbott has not received a ticket, but she shared her thoughts: “I wonder if the appeal of the cameras is more revenue driven. I can understand how appealing a zero overhead revenue stream would be to the city. The challenge with these school zone speeding cameras companies like BLS is that they are private companies that benefit solely from the amount of citations they write under the guise of school safety. They represent themselves as police when they mail these citations, but they are not law enforcement, just ticket writers that cannot even determine who was driving at the time of the offense.”
Citizen Danny Blevins echoed similar sentiments and further explained, “The purpose of a citation is a deterrent, not a way to generate money. Do I support speeding in school zones? Absolutely not! But now you’re saying it’s okay to speed, but not 11 mph over. Speed takes distance. Distance is what you don’t have if a child runs, pulls, or walks out in front of you.”
Numerous citizens said they would much rather have a police officer stationed at the school intersection than have the cameras. One person pointed out that officers would be better able to aid students who are crossing 136.
While BLS is the primary party in charge of citations, the police department must sign off on each citation, which brings us to another common complaint from citizens: the Sixth Amendment and the right to face your accuser.
Per the Sixth Amendment, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
One anonymous citizen explained that he received a ticket a few months back, but another family member was driving the vehicle when it was ticketed. The family member was speeding. He went to court in February, presented his evidence, and the case was postponed to May. (Several citizens who contested tickets reported that their cases were bumped to May, too.) BLS is supposed to attend the May hearings.
This particular citizen said, “My accuser is a camera. I can’t face a camera. It seems like there’s no way to get rid of this other than plead guilty in court or pay the fine.”
He also pointed out that per the Official Code of Georgia (O.C.G.A.), schools must request speed zone cameras, but this didn’t happen. “That tells me it’s a money-making scheme for the city rather than about public safety.”
Per O.C.G.A 40-14-18, “Prior to the placement of a device within a school zone, each school within whose school zone such automated traffic enforcement safety device is to be placed shall first apply for and secure a permit from the Department of Transportation for the use of such automated traffic enforcement safety device.”
The citizen reported that he asked Jeremy Roerdink (Dade County Schools director of federal programs and safety) for a copy of the application for the cameras. Roerdink said that as far as he knew, the school did not request the cameras. This aligns with what was covered in public city and school board meetings.
Another citizen received three tickets in December, each with different dates but with the exact same speed. She suspects that these are duplicates because of the identical speed. “I would imagine that they would vary a mile or two per hour.”
She added, “I think the cameras are overkill. The school sits so far back from that main road, and during school hours, having a police officer present with lights on would be more than enough to slow people down.”
More concerningly, she has proof that she was at her office in Chattanooga at the time stamped on one of the tickets. By the time she received the citation, she was unable to appeal. “The only reason I paid them was because they would not allow me to renew my tag. I tried paying the fine locally, however, that was also not allowed. I had to call a number and pay it over the phone to a third party organization.”
Another anonymous citizen confirmed this, saying, “It costs an additional $5.90 to process online or over the phone. You cannot pay this fine at city hall, which is an inconvenience to some.” He explained that he deserved the ticket he got, and he does not want people to speed, especially not in a school zone, but he still has concerns about the system.
“My fine did not have a court date. If you can cite me, then you should provide me with the information needed. This includes a court date, not just a pay by date. If, by chance, you don’t get the citation and you show up to buy your car tags, you will then find out that there is a hold, and you can’t purchase tags until you have paid the fine. I personally know two people who had this happen. They receive mail at a PO box, but the citations were sent to their home addresses. They had no idea until they showed up to buy car tags. This led me to ask, ‘Why are these not sent registered mail?’”
The Sentinel went to the tag office to speak with Angie Galloway (tax commissioner) who reported that the issue was first brought to the office’s attention when someone came in to renew his tax, but the office found a hold on it. Not knowing what the hold was for, they called a help desk in Atlanta. “That’s how we even knew that it was something that was happening,” Galloway said. “A few days later, another customer came in, and it was the same thing.”
The tag office had not been told anything about this process prior to calling down to Atlanta, and as of mid-March, they still hadn’t received any more information. All they can do is direct citizens to city hall.
Galloway said, “We don’t place the holds. We don’t know where that comes from, but I’m assuming it’s whoever placed the camera there. That company may have something to do with the Department of Revenue, and they do it.” This aligns with O.C.G.A 40-14-18.
Trenton PD reported that out-of-state drives do get citations, but Georgia cannot put a hold on those tags if the drivers do not pay the fine. Additionally, “When there are two people listed as registered owners of a vehicle, the state provides only the first name listed, and that is who is issued the ticket.”
One citizen, Mark Dumke, noted the confusion caused by the three different speed limits along this stretch of 136. Leaving town, the speed limit starts as 45 MPH but quickly goes to 35 during school zone hours for a short stretch before returning to 45 before switching to 55 further down the road. Heading into town, the limit quickly changes from 55 to 45 to 35 MPH. Dumke suggested that perhaps it should stay 35 MPH from town until the eastern edge of the school zone.
Another anonymous citizen reported that he received three tickets from these cameras—the first tickets he’s received in his life. He was driving above the speed limit when he received these tickets, but he chose to contest them because he hadn’t received a warning. Stating that he is consistent with his speed and drives through the school zone at the same time each day, he wondered why he hadn’t received a warning during the 30-day phase.
He added that the ticket dates were close together, but he didn’t receive them until nearly a month later, and they weren’t sent in sequential order. “If it’s a true problem, you want to get feedback back to citizens as quickly as possible,” he said.
Noting that the other schools in Dade County don’t have cameras in front of them, he said, “If it’s for safety, I would like to see how many traffic incidents have happened in front of the high school.”
The citizen also pointed out that per state law (O.C.G.A. 40-14-6), cities and counties with speed detection devices must have signs on all state highways at the city and/or county limits noting the use of these devices, but Trenton hasn’t added these signs.
The Sentinel asked the citizen if he would ever be in favor of the cameras. He said he is concerned about reckless drivers and isn’t pushing to have the cameras removed. Rather, he feels that the issue being addressed is not that serious because if it was, a police presence would be required.
He said he sees officers (Trenton PD and Dade County Sheriff’s Office) sitting in parking lots around town but not stationed around DCHS. “They don’t have an active presence at the high school. That indicates it’s not a real safety issue. Other schools have a police presence.”
He concluded, “I feel like the approach wasn’t executed in a manner to actively change the motorists’ behavior; it was executed to collect revenue. It just has a bad public image, using your citizens as a source of revenue.”
