Urge Veto of SB1234

(Photo: Mark Henle/The Republic)

Today I contacted Gov. Hobbs to urge her to veto Sen Rodger’s SB1234, which would further ban all forms of automated enforcement in the state. Including red-light signal, as well as school zone speeding enforcement.

The current status quo would simply allow local authorities to continue to use it where they feel it will improve safety. The state legislators have no business telling localities what to do. Republican’s claims that phot0-enforcement is unconstitutional are entirely unfounded, and unsupported; and their continuing to peddle that lie is shameful.

This seemingly never-ending battle has been a dream for fringie Republicans as it really whips up their base; not unlike pontificating about how ridiculous is it to put bike lanes on freeways in Phoenix (hint: there are no bike lanes on freeways anywhere).

There’s a pretty good roundup of facts by saferoads.org in their letter; they are backed by industry, of course, but their reasoning is sound and shouldn’t be considered a problem.

You can read more about transportation bills being pushed thru the Arizona Legislature this session, here and here.

There’s a guy named Shawn Dow who pops up for years regarding photo bans who has a theory I hadn’t heard before (i’m not clear if he’s the same person as Shawn Justin Dow who is an AZ P.I. attorney):

Political consultant and Fountain Hills resident Shawn Dow … said the way these cameras work is unconstitutional, and argues they aren’t safe at all. “Every vehicle that drives by those cameras has a background check done on them, violating our 4th amendment. There was no probable cause,” said Dow.

So parroting that (or possibly the other way around), and throwing in the 5th amendment for good measure is

Rep. Rachel Jones, R-Tucson, said red-light cameras violate not only state laws but multiple parts of the U.S. Constitution.

“This is a huge violation of the Fourth Amendment because every single car that passes by these cameras has a photo taken of their license plate and that information has been sent to a foreign company,” she said. “Use of these cameras also violates our Fifth Amendment rights because there is no due process and guilt is assumed without even being reviewed by a police officer.” — Wash. Examiner

There’s this other, stranger, prong of Republican’s complaints: “clean elections” is funded, by law, partially by a 10% surcharge on speeding fines. They then make this intricate argument that if a candidate utilizes Clean Elections funds, he/she is therefore corrupt. (a very brief explanation of Clean Elections is if you agree to accept the CE money on a run for public office, you may not accept other donations to your campaign). Although if you don’t like how Clean Elections is funded, why not fix the funding — it’s what lawmakers themselves set up (Republican controlled, by the way). “Funding comes from lobbyists fees, violator fines, and voluntary contributions, encouraged by tax reductions for those who support clean elections.” from history of the CEF, League of Women Voters NW AZ.


On Friday, May 26th, the Governor veto the bill, not really unexpected:

President Petersen,

I have vetoed SB1234.

I’ve heard from local leaders and the law enforcement officers across the state about the impact this bill will have on the safety of Arizonans. Research indicates that photo radar cameras demonstrate effectiveness in changing driver behavior and decreasing fatal accidents, especially in vulnerable areas like school zones. The bill’s ban of photo radar would eliminate an important tool for law enforcement that allows for a more efficient allocation of limited police resources.

I look forward to continuing the work with the Arizona legislature, law enforcement, and local municipalities to solve traffic issues and enhance public safety.


Katie Hobbs


State of Arizona

2 thoughts on “Urge Veto of SB1234”

  1. Sorry, I dont like government use of focused surveillance in any situation. Not on streets or in airports passing through TSA. I realize its here to stay, but it easily can lead to abuse. It certainly was not used (by PVPD) to identify and search for the hit and run SUV that put me in the hospital for 11 days. Legislation on records retention and allowed usage of the imagery in the daylight would go a long way. Now to focus on safety, training, enforcement and prosecution reform involving collisions with vulnerable road users.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *