How Utah could soon have red light cameras

Rep. Jake Fitisemanu, D-West Valley, has brought back a bill that would initiate the setup of red light cameras across the state of Utah.

HB275 would set up a pilot program that includes installing red light cameras at up to 10 different intersections across the state. The main focus of the program would be for data collection to see how many people are running the lights and how many crashes occur.

“The fact of the matter is, we can never be able to afford a police officer on every single intersection at 24/7 right? And so if we can find good ways that protect privacy and can be done with the accuracy that we need it to be done,” the representative said.

He first introduced the bill last year just to start conversations with different stakeholders over the issues, after working on the program over the last year, Fitisemanu has brought the bill back this session.

“I am not opposed to finding ways to use technology assistance to help our police enforce the laws that are already on the books,” Fitisemanu said.

Opponents of the bill, including the Libertas Institute, argue the bill is not about safer roads but is rather an example of government overreach and an invasion of privacy that will deliver no real results.

Why are red light cameras needed?

Fitisemanu shared that the bill was prompted by community members in his district.

“As we continued to talk about the tragic losses of life and property that result when we have red light crashes and people are flying through our red lights, I soon found out how big an issue this is,” he said.

Fitisemanu shared that there is an intersection near his home where five people lost their lives within a year. The representative has been working with UDOT and the Department of Public Safety to gather information and find the best way to put together this program.

Data from the Department of Public Safety, shows an average of 2,375 red light running crashes a year between 2020 and 2024.

In that time there have been 64 fatalities from these red light crashes and 505 severe injuries.

According to the department 95% of these crashes are “angle” collisions meaning they were “T-bone” or “sideswipe” crashes.

“This is an issue where the existing data already says it’s a problem, and I think additional data will make that much more compelling and clear,” Fitisemanu said.

Arguing against the bill, Josh Nemeth a policy analyst from Libertas, wrote a piece arguing against the bill. He wrote that the program would not help deter people from running red lights at high-risk spots.

“It’s not true law and order; it’s bureaucracy bloating, punishing everyday drivers for minor slips without a fair chance to defend themselves,” he wrote.

The pilot program would focus on data collection

This pilot program would have two phases, the first focused solely on data collection. The second phase would be a testing and education phase where people who run red lights would be sent warnings.

“It’s not a citation, it’s not even an infraction,” Fitisemanu said. “It’s a gentle, a soft-handed reminder that, hey, running a red light is actually still against the law, even if there’s not a police officer enforcing that.”

The program would begin no later than Jan. 1, 2027, and would end by April 30, 2028. The data collection phase would be at least 60 days long and the second phase would be at least 120 days.

Cameras would be implemented at 10 high-risk intersections across the state that have been identified by UDOT.

There are a few restrictions that come with the program including that no civil or criminal penalties can come from the camera data during the pilot program and law enforcement cannot issue citations based on the data.

After the program ends, UDOT and the other departments would then report on the effectiveness and impact of the pilot program.

Opponents to the bill share privacy concerns

One of the biggest concerns critics of the bill have is privacy. Fitisemanu said he has worked with the Utah Office of Data Privacy to make sure cameras are protecting people’s privacy as much as they can.

“Keeping people safe doesn’t mean giving up our privacy. There are better, less intrusive ways to deal with red-light violations,” Nemeth wrote.

The cameras will only capture photos of the back of cars of those who run red lights.

“There’s no chance that somebody’s face of a driver or passenger would be captured in the first place,” the representative said.

Nemeth also argued the bill is an example of government overreach.

“Utahns cherish limited government and personal responsibility, yet this bill hands more power to the state, turning intersections into automated cash machines that undermine due process,” Nemeth wrote.

He also claimed that these pilot programs tend to spiral out of control and lead to constant monitoring and micromanaging of people’s free movement.

“If you’re driving your vehicle on a public road, you can’t expect that your image or anything else is fully protected. I mean, you’re in the public space,” Fitisemanu said.

The representative said he has received a lot of positive feedback over HB275, saying that for every negative response, there’s been five positive responses. He added that some people are in favor of safer traffic enforcement but are unsure of the method.

“I also don’t know if this is the best way to do it, but if we don’t have data to at least inform the discussion and to look at other options and to provide other tools, then I don’t think we’re starting in a good place,” the representative said.