School Zone Cameras: For the Children?

One topic that has come up this session and seems to be getting a lot of support and attention is the law regarding school zone cameras (that’s O.C.G.A. § 40-14-18 for all you legal nerds out there.)

For those of you that are not aware, in some communities there are cameras that detect speed in school zones that are designed to record a vehicle’s speed and issue a citation to the owner of the vehicle. The vehicle owner, in theory, has the opportunity to pay the fine prior to their court date with no citation going on his or her record. The owner, in theory, has the opportunity to contest the ticket, but it often is a futile pursuit because the presumption is that the owner was driving the car and the owner committed the violation. Municipalities, school boards, and police departments that have these cameras love them because they are getting more revenue all the while “saving the children.”

An argument I often hear is that “Well, if you don’t speed then there’s no problem and I’m all for student safety.” The argument falls short in several areas, so I’ll break them down accordingly.

Here’s the first problem. Studies have shown that they don’t save lives. In Georgia, pedestrian fatalities have increased by over 31% since 2019 and the number of school-aged deaths have remained virtually the same.  

Here’s the second problem. The government isn’t issuing the speeding citations. Private for-profit companies issue them. These companies pay for the equipment to be installed (i.e. the school system and/or municipality pay nothing) and the company then takes around a 35% share of the citation money paid. Let me say that again—a private for-profit company is incentivized to issue these citations. Atlanta News First found back in May of 2024 that 54 Georgia municipalities have generated more than $112 million since 2019. By my math, that means that these companies have made around $40 million off the backs of Georgia drivers.

The third problem and, in my opinion, the biggest. Alleged violators are not given Due Process as guaranteed in the Constitution.  When you are accused of a crime in this country, such as speeding, you have the right to a probable cause hearing, notice of said violation (service), and a fair trial. The State, in each instance, has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you are guilty of said crime. That is not the case with school zone cameras. I won’t bore you with level of proof and the presumption of innocence–we’ll just focus on the lack of service.

There is no requirement that you be actually served notice personally or notoriously of the school zone violation. The requirement of O.C.G.A. § 40-14-18 is that the private for-profit company send you notice by first-class mail (the company is incentivized for you to not receive this notice, by the way.) That’s it. There is no requirement that you receive this notice. There is no requirement for it to prove that the notice was even sent via first-class mail. The company does not even have to scan a copy of the letter that they supposedly sent you. The proof that it was sent to you is literally just “Well, it wasn’t returned back to us. So, just take my word for it.” In a related matter, Georgia ranks dead last out of 50 states for mail service by the USPS. Re-stated—The worst USPS in the country is entrusted with sending you notice by mail of this infraction. So if the notice is indeed sent, there’s only about a 63.7% chance that it gets there on time.

Now, how do they get around this due process requirement? Well, they call it a “civil infraction.” I find that terminology to be interesting, because the law doesn’t even follow civil procedure. Civil procedure requires, generally, that a defendant be served personally a notice of a lawsuit (i.e. a marshall or deputy place the lawsuit in your hand), or in certain circumstances by publication (i.e. posting notice of the suit in the local newspaper.) There is no requirement in the school zone speed camera law that they do any of that. If you do not receive notice, it doesn’t matter. You are deemed guilty/liable.  

Now back to the argument of “If you don’t speed, you have nothing to worry about.” That’s not exactly true. There are instances all around the state where people have had holds put on their tags (Scot detailed my personal story in the Jan. 16th episode of Peach Pundit the Podcast™–give it a listen) because citations were issued in cities where the person has never even visited before (myself included.) Notices have been sent to wrong addresses as well (myself included.) There are cases where people have been cited during non-school hours, as early as 5-6AM when obviously there are no kids at the schools. Oh, and by the way, even though an officer has to sign an affidavit (which is a sworn statement taken under the pains and perils of perjury), the officer evidently is immune from prosecution for lying on the affidavit. That’s right, you evidently don’t have a right to view the affidavit and pursue a perjury charge, according to the government.

Now, how can we move forward on this?

Well, for starters, get rid of this terrible law. Rep. Dale Washburn is spearheading an effort to get rid of this law all together. I have never met him, but this man is my hero. This would be the most effective way to move forward. If it’s not about the money (it is about the money, but many politicians and law enforcement officials will tell you it isn’t—they’re lying, in my opinion), then install speed bumps and have police officers patrol the school zone to stop these criminals. There’s nothing conservative or liberal about this law. It’s just plain wrong.

Alternatively, there are some other things that can be done because, let’s face it, a lot of legislators are VERY hesitant to outright repeal any law—particularly one that brings their local governments money.

1. Add a service requirement of the violation—This is a no-brainer. If you violate the law, you should be told you did. Taking a conflicted municipality or for-profit corporation’s word for it shouldn’t suffice. Follow civil or criminal procedure. Allow a sheriff deputy or a marshall to personally serve the defendant. Or, AT LEAST send notice by certified mail. Any middle school child can send a certified letter to an address—for the life of me, I do not know why grown adults can’t.
2. End the contracts with these for-profit companies and have all of the violations be processed by law enforcement. This one speaks for itself. If an officer wants to sign an affidavit saying that your vehicle is in violation, then he should be the one processing the violation from Point A to Point Z. Passing this off on a corporation does not help anything.
3. Do not use GCIC to locate the violator’s address. The Georgia Crime Information Center is one tool that these companies use to get the information on the violator’s address to mail them the notice. It is highly inaccurate. The Department of Revenue is the department that keeps up with your tag information and that should be the only source allowable for this violation.
4. Require that the camera actually be placed on the road that the school is on. Believe it or not, school zones are pretty big areas at times—but a lot of these cameras are not on roads that schools are on. Example: Bloomingdale, GA (population 3,129)’s speed camera is at a red light 3 blocks down from the school on a highway that traffic flows away from. If this is about protecting kids, then why is it nowhere near the school? By the way, Bloomingdale has made nearly $1 million off of its speed camera.
5. Require that municipalities conduct a traffic study that is not funded by the private for-profit company that stands to benefit from the implementation of the cameras to determine the need of such cameras. Admittedly this may be a pipe dream, but should we take a private company’s word for it that these cameras are needed? Every municipality is different. If you say that these cameras are needed, there needs to be some sort of proof that they actually are.

There are a plethora of other issues with this law, but this is a start. I find that the conversation always turns to “saving the children,” when the conversation should focus on how it is implemented and where it is flawed. What say you?