The case for and against Arizona Prop. 319, a ban on new speed and red light cameras

MARK BRODIE: If you've spent any time at the state Capitol over the last decade plus, you've most likely heard debate over photo radar, the cameras that catch drivers speeding on Arizona roadways.

This fall, Arizona voters will have their say on the issue in the form of Proposition 319. If passed, the measure would ban new photo enforcement systems. Those that are already in place would have to be approved by voters in that city or town to stay up and running.

KJZZ's Wayne Schutsky from the Politics Desk is with me now to talk more about this. Good morning, Wayne.

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: Good morning.

MARK BRODIE: So basically, that's kind of what it would do, right? If you vote for this, it would say no city or town can put up a new photo radar system, and those that are there would have to be approved by voters.

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: That's right. So, yeah, any state agency or local government, city, town, what have you, that already has a contract in place by the end of this year would be allowed to keep it, assuming voters approve it next year in an election in 2027. So, it would go to voters to say, “Yes, we want to keep this around.” If they vote yes, then they get to keep it for 10 years before it has to go back to voters again.

MARK BRODIE: This has been something that — I remember when I was based at the Capitol, which is many years ago now, this was a debate and an argument back then. It feels like this conversation has been going on forever.

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: Yeah, because it was newish technology then. I'm thinking like the early [2000s,] and it was kind of becoming popular, especially coming out of the recession. It was seen as a new revenue generator for cities and towns, essentially. They could put these things up. I mean, longtime Arizona residents will remember they were ubiquitous on freeways for a while. They're no longer there, but we still, we saw them disappear from just about everywhere but Paradise Valley and Scottsdale for a while. But now they're starting to pop up in cities like Phoenix and Tempe again.

MARK BRODIE: OK. So, cities and specifically cities' police departments have long argued that ... you shouldn't tell us we can't use these because they make the roads safer. Is that true?

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: Studies would suggest that they do. Again, back when they were first introduced, there wasn't anything to go on to base that on. But now they've been around for 20-plus years all across the country. There's been a lot of studies, and they do seem to show that when you put these things out there, over time, there's a reduction in speeding incidents, there's a reduction in traffic accidents, that kind of thing. And again, that's what a lot of the police departments who showed up at the Legislature to oppose it this time around told lawmakers.

MARK BRODIE: It should be worth noting, though, you mentioned revenue generation. This can bring in a good amount of money for the cities.

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: It can. And that's one of kind of the arguments against it is that, I think Sen. Wendy Rogers, who sponsored this piece of legislation, called it a scam. Because No. 1, there's also the civil liberty kind of part of it, that you're getting basically you don't have an actual officer who's observing this, you don't have a chance to speak with them as you would if you had a —

MARK BRODIE: To confront your accuser, right?

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: If you had a regular speeding ticket. So, there's all that, but then also, yeah, there's this contract in place with this private company that's running these, and it's generating revenue for both sides, and all of that.

And I will say that there seems to have been a little bit of a change in that, at least as far as some of the new cities that are coming back with it like Phoenix, like they're telling you where they are, and they're saying that they want the program to be revenue-neutral. So, it's more ... of they're pitching it now more as like a deterrent factor, changing behaviors versus trying to drive revenues.

MARK BRODIE: How prevalent are photo radar systems now? I mean, you mentioned Paradise Valley has it, Phoenix — not that long ago — started it up again.

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: Yeah, again, I think they're starting to make a comeback ... prompted maybe by this legislation a little bit because it has that 2026 deadline. So Tempe has them as well, and I mean, and there's not a ton of them as far as how large the city of Phoenix is, for instance. I think there's like 19 or 20 out there, but they're mobile now. They can move them around as they see the need.

And I mean, they are catching a lot of people. I think I read in the Arizona Republic that the Phoenix ones caught around 60-plus-thousand people since March when they set them out into August, and Tempe, I know, saw ... quite a few immediately right after they put theirs out.

MARK BRODIE: I think I know the answer to this, but I'll ask you anyway, has there been polling on this? Do we have a sense of where voters are on this?

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: I haven't seen much polling, but if you're looking at it more generally and how voters tend to behave, voters like, for instance, when there's tax cuts, voters tend to vote for those things. Well, this isn't a tax, but it is kind of a punitive type of thing. If voters see — most people don't like photo radar tickets, I guess is what I'm trying to say —

MARK BRODIE: You think people don't like getting traffic tickets?

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: And this is just based on conversations, what you see on posts about these type of stories, what you hear down at the Legislature. So, I would imagine that this could prove somewhat popular with voters on the ballot.

MARK BRODIE: All right. Well, we'll have to see how voters look at this. Again, Proposition 319 dealing with photo enforcement systems. That is KJZZ's Wayne Schutsky from the Politics Desk. Thanks, Wayne.

WAYNE SCHUTSKY: Yeah. Thank you.