![]() ![]() "The demands on the city budget are, we have more needs than we have resources," Fairchild said. He said this is one more blow to municipalities across the state that are trying to exercise self government, and the court decision could make Dayton's roadways less safe if the city can no longer deploy traffic cameras in the same way. Since 2018, revenue from the photo enforcement program has helped pay for marked and unmarked cruisers, in-car cameras, radios, automated CPR units, body-worn cameras and other purchases, the city said.Ĭrash data show that automated traffic cameras change driving behaviors and slow motorists down, and it's unfortunate that the state has put up obstacles for cities that want to use technology to help save lives, said Dayton City Commissioner Darryl Fairchild. "We certainly don't want to be irresponsible fiduciary agents for the community," Dickstein said.ĭayton expected to collect more than $1.2 million in revenue from its photo enforcement program last year, city budget documents show, which was put toward police and fire equipment and capital costs.ĭayton received about $7.9 million from the local government fund in 2021, according to city budget documents. "This is another one of those ridiculous decisions that is coming from Columbus that has a negative impact on our city," he said.ĭayton should still be able to use mobile speed trailers in school zones since they are not subject to the state's financial penalties.ĭickstein said the city would like to continue to use traffic cameras along high-crash and high-problem roadways, like North Gettysburg Avenue, but no decisions have been made yet about the photo enforcement program.ĭayton's internal policy team is going to meet to discuss the Ohio Supreme Court decision and help determine if the city can still deploy traffic cameras in a thoughtful and strategic way, Dickstein said. said reckless driving is a big problem in the city, and traffic cameras are valuable tools that encourage safer driving behaviors without the use of significant law enforcement resources. "The spending setoff may disincentivize municipalities from adopting or continuing to use traffic cameras, but it does not forbid what municipal law permits any more than the creation of a financial incentive to adopt the use of traffic cameras would require a municipality to do what its own laws proscribe," the ruling states.ĭayton Mayor Jeffrey Mims Jr. The legislature has the authority to establish priorities and decide how much funding to give to local cities, the court decision says. The law does not violate home rule authority because it does not prohibit municipalities from enforcing their traffic laws with cameras, according to the Ohio Supreme Court's decision. Home rule, the communities argued, blocks the General Assembly from using its spending power to punish municipalities from exercising their right to local self-government.īut the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the Ohio constitution does not require the General Assembly to give municipalities any funds and Ohio communities have no specific rights to local government money. The law, which has been challenged by Dayton and other communities, allows the state to reduce local government allocations by the same amount that communities collect in fines from the use of automated traffic cameras.Įast Cleveland and Newburgh Heights claimed this and other requirements of the state law violate home rule protections under the Ohio constitution. The Ohio communities challenged the constitutionality of a 2019 law that allows the state to reduce its local government fund distributions to municipalities that use automated traffic cameras. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |