Flash or cash? Metro Denver experiments with red-light, speed cameras

Less than two weeks after the Town of Morrison installed a photo speed camera along Highway 8 near the entrance to Red Rocks Amphitheater earlier this year, the unit detected more than 10,000 violations.

With Colorado laws setting the maximum fine for citations at $40 from a photo van and $75 from a red light camera, it’s easy to see how the tiny municipality of fewer than 400 residents might be staring down the lens of an awful lot of revenue.

Morrison’s Chief of Police Bill Vinelli insisted it’s not so much about revenue as it is about safety, and he maintained that the sole photo camera in his town is making a difference.

To satisfy his own curiosity, Vinelli said, he had parked his vehicle next to the unit to see the operation for himself while working a concert at the town’s popular concert venue.

“I sat out there and observed the camera and people as they were approaching (the unit) and as they saw their speed (displayed) on the side,” he said. "I'm gonna say, from the time I was there, about 70% of the people were well under (the posted speed limit of 25 mph), or anywhere from 25 to 30 miles per hour. So, yes, I would say that it's curbing people's behavior in the Town of Morrison, at least from what I can see on a Monday night.”

By installing the unit, Morrison had jumped into one of the most hotly debated and controversial speed enforcement mechanisms in the country — Automated Vehicle Identification Systems units. It's a debate that implicates public safety, government revenue and people's liberties.

On the one hand, motorists loathe speed cameras. Privacy advocates want their use halted or delayed until their worries are remedied. On the other hand, city officials cite improvements to road safety and reductions in the number of traffic accidents and police departments say they help fill gaps in the shortage of officers.

And whether officials expressly say so or not, they bring in cash for municipalities and red-light vendors alike.

Cities point to reduced traffic speed, accidents

Speed-light cameras were developed by professional “speeders” and first appeared on European race tracks in the 1960s.

The brainchild of Dutch rally race driver Maurice Gatsonides, who wanted to gauge his own speed better and improve lap times, the Gatsometer became the world's first photo speed measuring device and evolved into the first speed camera.

Across the metro Denver area, more than a dozen municipalities employ photo red-light cameras and even more use photo radar speed cameras — both with human oversight and without.

In June 2023, Gov. Jared Polis signed Senate Bill 23-200 into law, which expands the way local government may deliver photo-enforced citations to include personal service and by first-class mail.

AVIS technology has been used in the metro area for more than two decades. The first Denver photo-speed vans came online in 1998, and the City of Greenwood Village launched its first red-light camera in 2005.

Research suggests that photo-enforced traffic technology can reduce fatalities.

A study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), an independent nonprofit organization, found that red light safety cameras “reduced the fatal red light running crash rate of large cities by 21% and the rate of all types of fatal crashes at signalized intersections by 14%.”

Denver Police Department officials said they use red-light cameras primarily to keep crosswalks safe and prevent dangerous side-impact crashes. Speed vans are usually deployed on residential streets with a posted speed limit of 35 mph or less, on streets bordering parks with any posted speed limit, and in safety zones — which include school zones and work zones throughout the City and County of Denver.

On its photo radar enforcement webpage, the city said in the four locations where red light cameras operate, incidents of motorists running red lights and accidents have decreased. Those locations are: eastbound 6th Avenue and Kalamath Street; eastbound 6th Avenue and Lincoln Street; westbound 8th Avenue and Speer Boulevard; and northbound at 36th Avenue and Quebec Street.

“The data from photo radar vans is conclusive, as well,” the city said on the website. “The presence of the (photo speed) van for five consecutive days results in a 21% reduction in excessive speeding (vehicles traveling 10+ MPH over the speed limit).”

Other municipalities said they have seen similar results or reported improvements.

The City of Lone Tree, which has one red light camera that doesn’t monitor the entire intersection and focuses on select turn lanes, pointed to improved traffic.

“The single photo red light at the intersection of southbound Park Meadows Drive and eastbound Lincoln Avenue in Lone Tree was installed due to increased complaints of drivers running red lights and to alleviate traffic congestion and reduce backups,” City Communications Director Melissa Gallegos said. “Before its installation, vehicles used to queue through the intersection, causing delays for westbound traffic and further backups on the southbound I-25 exit ramp to Lincoln Avenue."

"Due to the increased traffic at this intersection, it is difficult for a patrol officer to conduct traffic enforcement in a safe manner. Since the photo red light was installed, Lone Tree has not experienced traffic backups at this intersection,” Gallegos said.

The City of Golden does not have permanently mounted photo radar systems installed on its roadways, such as red-light cameras. Instead, photo speed radar enforcement in the city is conducted from a staffed, vehicle-based system, allowing easier deployment at different locations.

“We have begun to see vehicles slowing down in our commonly used locations, such as school zones and neighborhoods,” Golden Special Enforcement Unit Supervisor Jamie Segal said.

Denver announced that it will soon be adding cameras to two city intersections that have historically seen a high number of crashes, as first reported by CBS Denver. The new cameras will be installed at 88th Avenue and Washington Street and another at 120th Avenue and Colorado Boulevard.

What motorists think

Regardless of whether it was a ticket from a speed van or a red-light camera, motorists shared tales of disbelief, mistaken identity, lost mail, inadequate signal timing and equipment malfunctions.

While there are a few holdouts, most admit to pleading guilty and paying the fines begrudgingly — seeing it as the path of least resistance.

That no points are assessed against one’s driver’s license for photo-enforced tickets — which means it's a form of economic sanction — also leads to claims that photo enforcement is a cash cow for municipalities and a lucrative business for vendors.

Elsewhere in the country, others have complained that photo enforcement eliminates their ability to confront their accuser, a right guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment. A mechanical unit "witnesses" the alleged offense, and a ticket is sent to the vehicle's owner, regardless of who drove the car. That is, that accusation arrives in the mail and a motorist's only choice is to pay or not.

Many reached via Nextdoor said the choice to pay isn’t a difficult one.

One driver, traveling west through a Greenwood Village Intersection at I-25 and Belleview Avenue, triggered the red-light camera mid-way through and received a citation by mail.

“I am a senior citizen and very cautious and slow going through intersections, making sure nobody will hit me,” he said.

“Rather than going through the trouble of contesting the picture, I paid the fine, but I think it is very unfair,” the driver said.

Sara has gotten red-light tickets before, but while she believes the cameras improve safety, she thinks they aren’t always configured correctly and sometimes they let speeding cars go through without flashing.

“I did pay the tickets,” she said. “It’s the truthful thing to do.”

But Sara said there appears to be a loophole.

“The ticket says that if you don’t own the cars, you don’t have to pay,” she said. “So, if my husband drives the car and the title is in my name, he gets off the hook from paying. Even though his face is clearly shown in the picture. In my opinion, they could word the form differently to avoid this loophole.”

Another driver encouraged drivers who get tickets to just pay them.

“There are so many reckless and dangerous drivers on the Denver metro area roads, it’s scary to drive,” he said. “There should be red light cameras at every intersection in the metro area and the fine should be $500.”

Privacy, fairness and 'mission creep'

Over the years, studies on the effectiveness of red-light cameras have been mixed.

A 2005 study conducted by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration found that red-light cameras yielded a 24.6% reduction in total right-angle crashes and a 15.7% reduction in right-angle injury crashes. However, total rear-end crashes increased by 14.9%, and rear-end injury crashes increased by 24% the study said.

The debate over photo enforcement extends beyond questions of efficacy.

The American Civil Liberties Union has cited worries over privacy, bias, fairness and future “mission creep.” In particular, the ACLU has developed race-based arguments against photo enforcement.

“Because red-light cameras have the potential to invade people’s privacy, exacerbate existing racial and socioeconomic disparities, and create new possibilities for misuse and abuse, red-light cameras should not be adopted without a robust community engagement process and approval from local government,” ACLU of Colorado Staff Attorney Laura Moraff said.

In communities that employ red-light and other photo-radar-driven technology, Moraff said rules must be adopted to ensure that they are not disproportionately installed in low-income or communities of color.

“Guardrails must also be placed to prevent red-light cameras from being used for purposes besides traffic enforcement, to require that cameras retain data no longer than necessary, and to prevent the data from being shared with any other government entities absent a warrant,” she said. “There must also be a fair opportunity to contest any fine or citation that results from red-light camera footage. Red-light camera footage should also never serve as the basis for an arrest.”

Earlier this year, Elbert County Commissioners voted unanimously to not renew the contract for nine Flock Safety brand license plate readers, citing concerns over privacy and the constant surveillance of passing vehicles.

Unlike groups that have focused on race in pushing back against photo enforcement, the county's elected officials largely advanced arguments about curtailing people's liberties.

“This is a place where people ought to be able to live freely and enjoy their properties and their lifestyle without being concerned about who’s watching them,” Commissioner Chris Richardson said at the time.

“This is not a conservative or a liberal issue," added Commissioner Dallas Schroeder. "Freedom is more important than public safety. Any freedom-loving American should have concerns with this.”

Elbert County is home to just under 28,000 residents who live across 1,851 square miles.

County Sheriff Tim Norton pleaded with the panel to keep the county’s nine automated units rolling.

“You all know that it’s a widespread county. You all know that we don’t have that many deputies that can respond in that timely of a manner,” he told commissioners.

AI is coming

To many, it's only a matter of time before artificial intelligence enters law enforcement on a large scale, presenting a new set of complications, such as predictive crime modeling.

Notably, license plate readers and facial recognition have already been deployed in many European countries.

Already, the idea of AI-based policing has raised hackles in the U.S.

Many, such as the Michigan Civil Rights Commission, have also advanced race-based arguments against predictive crime modeling.

The state commission asked U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, as reported by George Hunter in Government Technology magazine, to “halt all Department of Justice grants for predictive policing systems until the DOJ can ensure that grant recipients will not use such systems in ways that have a discriminatory impact.”

The commission argued that “predictive policing systems rely on historical data distorted by falsified crime reports and disproportionate arrests of people of color."

"As a result, they are prone to over-predicting crime rates in Black and Latino neighborhoods while under-predicting crime in White neighborhoods. The continued use of such systems creates a dangerous feedback loop: biased predictions are used to justify disproportionate stops and arrests in minority neighborhoods, which further biases statistics on where crimes are happening,” the commission said.

At what cost?

Officials at municipalities that employ photo-radar enforcement units said their goal is to improve safety and save lives.

But AVIS technology can come with a hefty price tag.

The City of Aurora recently discontinued its photo speed enforcement pilot program, citing struggles with staffing and the loss of a significant amount of money.

The program, deemed an "epic failure" by Aurora City Councilmember Danielle Jurinsky, who chairs of the city's Public Safety, Courts and Civil Service Policy Committee, ended after a year, and just over $42,000 in revenue.

Expenses have added up to almost $395,000, with $83,400 per month going toward the three vans provided by Conduent, the contract vendor.

And like in other places, Aurora's officials delved into familiar arguments for or against photo enforcement.

"This seems like an epic failure to me if we're upside down $350,000 on this program and there are 2,400 rejections for not getting a clear picture or whatever," said Councilmember Danielle Jurinsky, who also chairs the city's Public Safety, Courts and Civil Service Policy Committee.

Councilmember Steve Sundberg countered that the program slowed people down in a city that had 65 traffic-related deaths last year.