On the agenda: Bristolct Ordinance Committee — automated license plate (Sep 1)

Good evening members of the Committee. My name is Nick Palmer, and I'ma
resident and property owner here in Bristol.

I'm speaking tonight against the red light camera ordinance under review. I know
tonight's discussion is scoped to red light cameras specifically, so I want to focus
on something I haven't heard discussed much: who this ordinance actually costs,
and how.

Referencing the city's own materials, every violation carries a $50 fine for a first
offense, $75 for later ones, plus a state-regulated $15 fee that goes directly to the
vendor running the cameras. That means the company installing this system gets
paid per ticket. The more violations, the more revenue, for both the vendor and the
city. It's worth asking directly: who reviewed the yellow light timing at these
intersections, and was that review done independently of the vendor that profits
from every red light violation recorded? When a program's revenue model, its
timing decisions, and its messaging are all touched by the same profit motive, this
Committee owes the public a real answer on how that conflict is managed.

I'd also ask this Committee to think about who actually pays these fines. A flat $50
or $75 fine is not the same expense for every household. For someone on a fixed
income, or working an hourly job, or living on SSI, that's a substantial hit to
groceries, a utility bill, or a car payment. A flat fine isn't neutral. It's regressive by
design, and it falls hardest on the residents who can least absorb it.

And it doesn't stop at the fine itself. Unpaid tickets turn into late fees. Late fees
turn into collections. In many towns with these programs, unresolved fines can lead
to license or registration holds. For someone already living paycheck to paycheck,
one missed payment can spiral into a debt that's genuinely difficult to climb out of.
This is a well-documented pattern, and I'd ask this Committee to be proactive and
build in real protections, before adopting this ordinance, not after the first wave of
complaints.

Last, I'd ask this Committee to clarify a due process question directly: does this
ordinance issue the fine to the vehicle's registered owner, or to whoever was
actually driving? If it's the registered owner by default, then someone who lent
their car to a family member, a co-worker, or a teenager is on the hook for a
violation they didn't commit, unless they can prove otherwise. I'd like to know
what that appeals process actually looks like, and how much burden it places on an
innocent owner to clear their own name.

I'm not asking you to pretend traffic safety isn't a real concern. I'm asking this
Committee to take the financial and due-process side as seriously as the safety
pitch. The way this program is structured, it functions less like a safety measure
and more like a private revenue system with the City of Bristol's name on it.

My honest position is that this Committee should reject the red light camera
ordinance and discontinue the program altogether. The financial incentives built
into this model, and the burden it places on residents who can least afford it, aren't
problems that get fixed with better language... they're inherent to a for-profit,
automated ticketing system. If this Committee isn't prepared to do that tonight,
then at minimum I'd ask you to send this ordinance back with real answers on
vendor incentive structures, a fine schedule that doesn't fall disproportionately on
low-income residents, and a clear, low-burden process for an innocent registered
owner to contest a ticket.

Thank you for your time.

Ordinance 9/1/26

Good morning. Councilman Dicka..

iam writing in support of cameras at selected intersections around Bristol. Some drivers are snowing
‘ttle reaard for traffic signals. Cell phones and internet connections have taken much of our privacy
away. Public safety far outweighs any additional loss of privacy.

Hal Kiipy
G51 Lake Ave.
Bristol

Mark, for the record, Patti and | are strongly behind red light cameras especially in high traffic anc
accident areas of Bristol. We travel a lot around Bristol and are amazed by the disregard of red liar:
just about everywhere in Bristol. High traffic areas, low traffic areas, it doesn’t matter. It realiy isa
serious probiem. Will red light cameras solve everything, no, but they will certainly help and send a
strong message that Bristol has had enough of speeding through red lights. | hope the city is
successful in this venture

Bob and Patti Kalat
24 Hollev Rd

Dear Councilman Dickau and Councilman Sevmou;

{ ama 7estdeatand property owner in District 3, writing ahead of Tuesday’s Ordinance Committee
_—
neeting regarding t Teraviow of the Red Light Camera ordinance,_--— —

| plan to speak during public participation ifrs@Schedule allows, but | want to ensure mv district

representatives hear my perspeetive directly. | oppose beth the red liaht camera ordinance and the
city's continued use ef automated license plate readers (ALPRs), reg. of the vendor. My concern

is not witha Cific implementation, but with the broader precedent of inca
a tea tracking of residents and visitors, especially given current concerns regarding data use,

sharing. and retenuor

Additionally, Governor Lamont has asked municipalities statewide to pause new camera and ALPR
installations oendina POST Council guidance, and the Newtown Police Department has already paused
its program in response. | believe Bristol should take this guidance seriously before expanding further.

ou must weigh public safety considerations, and | do not tak at responsibility
t to emphasize that this is not a fringe concern within our district, and many

wo“

! recognize th
ighily. However, |
residents share this views

-
| welcome the opportunity to discusS*his furthest ajdt make every effort to attend Tuesday's

aeetna.

that the city should discontinue the red lier

. [have real questions about tn+

e fines are flat rather than income-
sidents who can least absorb
est meaningful

To be upfront about where | stand: actual positiom™
camera program altogether. Bey6nd the civil liberties concé
program's financial structure: the vendor is paid per ticket issue
adjusted, and unpaid-tickets can spiral into late fees and collections fo
them. If the Comrfittee isn't prepared to reject the ordinance outright, I'll re
safeguards a¥ a fallback, but that's not my actual ask.

k vou for vour time and for your representation of District 3.
Sincerely.

Nick Patmer
69 Cronin Street

Sot A226

3ood mornina Councilman Dickau:

After speaking with the Police Chief last year about them. | believe there is a need for them.
Unfortunately i cannot attend tonight's meeting at which time io would support the proaram but | a
have a question (about the draft) that | hope you'll help me witn:

i. Sec. 14-81 Penalty for Violations - Throughout this section if refers to notifying the OWNER and
citing the OWNER. But hasn't the process always been when a poiice officer cites a person i

motor vehicle violations, it is the OPERATOR, not the OWNER, who is cited?? Although i peileve tne
QWNER is ultimately responsible for his/her motor vehicle, how does citing the OWNER, rather than the
PERATOR. help aet to the root of the violation, assess responsibility to the correct person, and
ultimately reduce occasions and improve safety?

05 Paimorr Piace