SPRINGFIELD — Communities around the country have been grappling with the role of cameras on city streets. While most of the conversation in recent months has focused on license plate reader cameras, the Springfield City Council is considering whether to support a state law that would allow cities and towns to install automatic traffic cameras.
Under Massachusetts law, automatic speed cameras and those that record when triggered by a red light are not legal for the purpose of traffic enforcement. State Rep. Orlando Ramos filed bill H. 4087 under the name, “An Act relative to traffic safety at intersections.” Ramos has long been a proponent of traffic safety measures.
Municipalities that opt in to the law could use the cameras to identify vehicles that violate the rules of the road at intersections and fine the registered owner. The resolution considered by the council states that, rather than acting as a revenue generator, the fines are meant to “change dangerous behavior, prevent crashes, and save lives.”
When presenting the resolution in support of the bill to his colleagues on Sept. 8, Ward 5 Councilor Lavar Click-Bruce compared Boston Road to a “racetrack.” Ward 1 Councilor Maria Perez thanked Ramos, who was not at the meeting, for addressing dangerous driving and said her district contains four schools, including Brightwood and Gerena elementary schools.
Click-Bruce emphasized that the cameras are not the same as those made by Flock, a popular license plate reader company that has recently drawn controversy around the state and the country. He said they are “not intended for general surveillance. The proposed system captures photographic images — not continuous video.”
The cameras would only be allowed at intersections along public roadways and municipalities would be required to install signage alerting drivers to the use of traffic cameras. The Massachusetts Department of Transportation would also need to develop regulations, including minimum safety and privacy standards.
Despite these measures, some councilors expressed concern about the bill. At Large Councilor Justin Hurst asked if Click-Bruce had sought input from the American Civil Liberties Union or the NAACP, the country’s oldest civil rights organization. “I’m always leery to approve cameras that are recording folks’ movements,” he said. He also asked for assurances from Police Superintendent Lawrence Akers regarding what content will be recorded.
Ward 8 Councilor Zaida Govan said she rarely breaks with Ramos on matters and said it is a “great concept.” Accidents, and even deaths, have not influenced speeders’ behaviors, she said. However, she said she was “conflicted” and that the council must “proceed with caution.” Like Hurst, she had several questions about the cameras, including whether they would record continuously and if they could be used to stalk people.
“By no means do we want to target anyone,” Click-Bruce assured. He said he was willing to meet with the NAACP to hear any concerns they may have. He said he wanted a “healthy dialogue” on the issue.
Ward 7 Councilor Gerry Martin, who chairs the Public Safety Committee, said speeding is a citywide issue and asked that the resolution be sent to his committee. The matter was referred to a joint meeting of the Public Safety and Maintenance and Development committees.
