Iowa House passes traffic camera regulations

DES MOINES — After years of working to regulate automated traffic enforcement cameras in Iowa, with competing opinions on how far to go, Iowa House lawmakers passed a bill Tuesday that would require state approval and restrict the cameras to certain areas.

Republican state lawmakers have long sought to rein in the use of speed cameras and red-light cameras that recently have proliferated across the state. Some lawmakers have argued they are often abused by local governments to drive up revenue from tickets — but police officials say they are a vital part of a public safety strategy.

The bill, House File 2681, passed the House 85-12. The Senate has a similar bill that is eligible for a floor vote.

The bill would require local governments to receive a permit from the Iowa Department of Transportation before installing a traffic camera system, and require that the systems be installed only in high-risk areas. The city or county would need to report the severity of traffic collisions at the location it wants to install a camera, and show that the camera is the least restrictive method of improving public safety.

There are about 25 cities in the state with traffic cameras currently in place, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency. Cedar Rapids operates cameras in nine locations, and Marion operates them in two places. University Heights said it was installing cameras in two locations.

Some Republican lawmakers wanted to amend the bill to ban the use of speed cameras entirely, but the measure failed to gain majority support on the floor, with a vote of 47-50.

Rep. John Wills, R-Spirit Lake, introduced the amendment, and said he believed the cameras are an infringement of constitutional rights. He said he has constituents who received tickets when someone else was driving their car, which he said was unfair.

“These cameras are not fair, they’re not something that we should be doling out justice in a way that is not fair to all of our citizens in this state,” he said. “These traffic cameras are speed traps. I don’t believe they’re constitutional.”

Rep. Brian Best, R-Glidden, who managed the House bill and opposed the ban, said the bill was a compromise that restricts unnecessary traffic cameras while allowing their use where needed.

“We have to do something,” he said. “And without this amendment and this bill, we will be doing nothing, and I think there’s going to be a lot of unwanted and unneeded traffic cameras that are going to keep springing up.”

Democratic Rep. Sami Scheetz, who represents Cedar Rapids, said the cameras on the downtown “S-curve” on Interstate 380 in the city have dramatically reduced injuries from collisions.

The city first installed traffic cameras in 2010, including four along I-380’s S-curve. According to a 2022 report from the city, the likelihood of a crash on the S-curve causing injury was cut by nearly half when a traffic camera was in use, and the number of collisions was reduced by 15.5 percent.

“This technology not only saves lives by reducing high-speed accidents, but it also protects our first responders by minimizing risky traffic stops,” Scheetz said.

How can traffic cameras be used under the bill?

Under the bill, cities would need to gain approval from the Iowa DOT before installing traffic cameras. Cities with existing systems would need to apply for approval but could continue using the cameras until the request is processed.

Only cities or counties with a population of more than 20,000 would be allowed to issue a fine using a traffic camera, which encompasses about 25 of Iowa’s largest cities. Smaller cities still would be allowed to install traffic cameras, if approved, but they could issue only a written warning.

The cities would not be able to issue a ticket unless a driver was driving more than 10 miles over the speed limit — already below the standard used in Cedar Rapids and Marion — and the maximum amount would range from $75 to $500, based on the speed, or up to $1,000 in a work zone.

Any revenue collected by the systems would be restricted for use on transportation infrastructure or police and fire departments.