Rep. Mastrofrancesco Op-Ed: Speed Cameras May Be Coming to Wolcott - Residents Should be Paying Attention

From the Desk of Rep. Mastrofrancesco:

More than 114,000 warnings in just 18 days.

You read that number right, and it is not a typo.

That is how many drivers were flagged by Fairfield's new school-zone speed camera program in less than three weeks. If that statistic does not raise red flags, I do not know what will.

Supporters of these cameras want you to believe this is all about safety. But when a program is "catching" more than 100.000 drivers in a matter of days, and local officials are already talking about the millions of dollars it could generate, it is fair to ask whether this is really a public safety program or just another way for government to reach into your wallet.

Now this same type of program is being considered for our town. There will be a public meeting in Wolcott on July 21 on this system, and I strongly encourage residents to attend and ask questions. Once these cameras go up, they will not just disappear.

Like every other government program, they tend to grow.

I understand why some people support them. Everyone wants safer roads, especially around schools, and keeping children safe is something we all agree on.

But there is a difference between enforcing traffic laws and creating an automated ticket machine that also is a money grab.

Before Wolcott installs even one camera, residents deserve straight answers. Where exactly would the cameras be located? What speed would trigger a warning or fine? Would the cameras operate only during school arrival and dismissal times, or would they be active all day? Who reviews each violation before it is mailed?

How much of the money collected would stay with the town, and how much would go to a private vendor? Will the town have to hire more staff? Who will be hearing and deciding the appeals process?

Those questions go to the heart of whether this is truly about safety or simply another source of revenue. The Fairfield numbers are astonishing. Are we really supposed to believe that more than 114,000 drivers suddenly became speed demons in just 18 days? Or is the system designed to maximize violations?

Those are questions residents deserve answers to before a single camera is installed.

The installation of these cameras was authorized by the "Vision Zero" transportation legislation that was proposed by majority Democrats in 2023 as part of an "aircraft carrier" bill that was packed with multiple bills. As you can imagine, I voted NO.

Government has a long history of introducing fees, fines, and new enforcement programs under the banner of public safety, only to become dependent on the money they bring in. That is why so many taxpayers and drivers are skeptical when they hear officials discussing projected revenue alongside safety benefits.

If the purpose is truly safety, then the town should be able to show the safety data that justifies each proposed location. How many accidents have occurred there?

How many involved children, pedestrians, or school traffic? What other safety options were considered first? Better signage? Flashing school-zone lights?

Improved road design? Public awareness? More police patrols? Hiring another officer who can issue real tickets and use real judgment? Those options cost money. Cameras generate money. That distinction matters.

A driver caught by a camera faces a $50 fine plus a $15 processing fee for a first offense and $75 plus the same fee for every violation after that. Miss the payment deadline and another $25 late fee is added. If the fine remains unpaid, it can be sent to collections

and even result in a lien that prevents renewal of your vehicle registration.

That sounds less like a safety reminder and more like another tax on residents. The state is already unaffordable because of the taxes and policies put in place by the Democrat majority.

Families are being squeezed by electric bills, insurance costs, grocery prices, property taxes, and endless fees. Now government wants another way to squeeze drivers by mail.

If a town can issue more than 100,000 warnings in less than three weeks, it suggests the problem may not be reckless driving. It may suggest the program is casting far too wide a net. Of course we want people to be safe on the roads. That is important. But that sheer number of warnings is an indicator that the technology may be calibrated to make everyone, even folks just trying to get to work or traveling at normal speeds on roads with

artificially low posted limits, into a criminal.

And let's be honest about another argument we hear from supporters. They often say residents will simply learn where the cameras are and slow down when they approach them. Others suggest that local people will know where the cameras are, while out-of-town drivers will be the ones getting caught.

Does that sound like a serious public safety strategy?

If safety is the goal, we should want safer roads everywhere, not just drivers slowing down where they know a camera is waiting. We should focus on sensible speed limits, clear signs, and visible enforcement, not a system that depends on people making mistakes to

generate revenue. While these violations do not appear on your driving record, at least not yet, they still create a growing system of automated enforcement that allows governments to issue fines by mail rather than having law enforcement officers interact directly with drivers,

I also worry about where this leads. Today it is school zones. Tomorrow it will be busy intersections. Next year it is another location deemed worthy of automated enforcement. Step by step, decisions that once involved a police officer's judgment are handed over to cameras and computers.

That is the Big Brother concern, and it is real.

Once government becomes comfortable using cameras to monitor and fine citizens automatically, it rarely stops there. The real question is how much surveillance and automated enforcement residents are willing to accept in the name of safety.

There are better ways to improve safety. Increased police patrols, improved signage, flashing school-zone lights, road design improvements, public awareness campaigns, and sensible speed limits can all help slow traffic without creating a system that automatically generates violations by the tens of thousands.

The meeting later this month is an opportunity for Wolcott residents to hear the details and make their voices heard. Whether you support the cameras or oppose them, this decision deserves serious public discussion.

Residents should ask: What is the projected annual revenue? What happens to the money collected?

Will there be a sunset provision or mandatory review after one year? And if the program does not reduce accidents or improve safety, will the town shut it down?

As for me, I remain unconvinced.

When a program issues more than 114,000 warnings in 18 days, my first thought is not that government found the perfect solution. My first thought is that government found a new source of revenue.

That is why I will continue asking questions.

I can be reached by email at Gale.Mastrofrancesco@housegop.ct.gov or by phone at (800) 842-1423. You can also follow my legislative activity by visiting my website at www.repmastrofrancesco.com or my Facebook page.