HSPD Chief Sheppard posts message about automated enforcement of school zones in the next school year
Staff report
HIGH SPRINGS, Fla. – High Springs Police Department Chief Antoine Sheppard posted a message to High Springs residents on Facebook today, providing information about photo speed enforcement in school zones that will be implemented in the next school year. The letter said, “An aggressive educational campaign is forthcoming.”
Sheppard explained that a bipartisan new law, HB 657, provides for automated enforcement of school zones when children are present. Last year, the High Springs City Commission discussed the cameras in four public meetings, and the City conducted a speed study, which “revealed excessive speeding violations in our school zone.” He said the cameras will not cost the City anything.
At the December 23 City Commission meeting, Sheppard said, “There’s still a police officer that is reviewing every transaction, and then there’s still an appeals process. Everything’s still there.” He said the system, which will go into effect for the next school year, issues citations only during school hours, and the City keeps 60% of the fines.
Sheppard’s letter lists the following benefits of the system:
- Up to a 90% reduction of speeding in school zones.
- A vital law enforcement tool for Amber Alerts, Sexual Predators, or other fugitives near the school zone.
- A proven success in other states, including the state of Georgia.
- Video transactions are officer-verified, and there is a judicial appeal process.
- Speeding violations must be excessive, exceeding the speed limit by eleven miles.
- A 30-day warning period and educational campaign must be conducted.
- Most of the funds are returned to the community and restricted to crossing-guard salaries and public safety improvements.
The $100 fine for violations breaks down as follows:
- $60 – Local municipality or county for public safety
- $20 – State General Fund
- $12 – Local school district security, improve safety of student working conditions
- $3 – FDLE Criminal Standards & Training Fund
- $5 – School Crossing Guard Recruitment and Retention
Sheppard concluded: “My primary responsibility is safety and security, and we must combat traffic issues in our growing community. The community I serve is not monolithic, and there will be community members who differ in my policing approach. Nevertheless, I am always willing to listen, discuss those differences, and explain how the program works individually or in a group setting.”
I am all for enforcement of traffic enforcement and promoting safety. Unfortunely it is needed within these school zones because people do not listen or slow down, or plain flat out do not care.
“He said the cameras will not cost the City anything.” What does that mean? Did someone give them to the city for free Is there an additional, added “fee” added to the ticket? What will be the total cost to an alleged violator?
I believe the camera and computer system leased or contracted. I sure there is a cost somewhere in the breakdown of fees. A lot of these programs are state or federal funded. I think it’s the same type of contract that cities use for the gunfire location identifier system.
Per the bill, the 60%/$60 that the city retains from each ticket will go toward paying for the system. If they do not issue very many tickets then I have no idea how the cost of the system will be covered. They conveniently left that part out.
Page 15
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/657/BillText/er/PDF
Grant funded
Who’s providing the grant funding? Any details?
Grant funded
The way I have seen traffic cameras implemented is ripe for corruption: The company(s) will install and maintain them ‘for free’, only asking for a percentage of the revenues. All of these schemes must be strictly regulated to prevent ‘mistakes’ in calibration and software that is biased towards error in favor of the state and the private entity’s profit.
Roger, You can be our tester. Speed through the school zone and let us know how much it costs you. 🙂
Big Brother…for the children…
We are being conditioned to accept constant surveillance. I am uncomfortable with cameras everywhere, replacing real law enforcement officers.
Another angle – with AI, can the images be altered? Can the cameras/digital evidence be hacked?
Seems like another step down a slippery slope.
Children have been the presenting justification for so many encroachments to our liberties. The trade-off should at least be part of the discussion.
Where does this lead next? What’s the next nudge toward accepting a surveillance society?
Well as far as the High Springs Community School goes there are two resource officer on campus during school hours. There are more around the city at intersections to insure safe road crossing since the school district cut bus routes. There is another officer ir two usually posted at the entrances to the school to assist the crossing guards. And there are officers at First Christian Academy doing the same thing.i for one want the officers free to respond to any active threat that may come up at the school. It was not all that long ago when that did happen at the school and officers did their job and took care of the shooter.
Help me understand this one… One of the benefits of the new system is listed as, “Speeding violations must be excessive, exceeding the speed limit by eleven miles.” This means that no violation will occur unless the driver exceeds the school zone posted speed limit by eleven miles per hour. So, in a 15 MPH posted school zone, one can travel at 25 MPH without being ticketed ?? What am I missing here ??
My thoughts exactly. Isn’t that area 35 without the school zone until the road curves? For an active school zone I feel like the limit should be less.
We appreciate your taking the time to explicitly answer questions people have. Unfortunately most people don’t take the time to attend or watch (on videos) commission meetings. Also I believe many complaints are from “drive-through” people from areas outside of High Springs. In any event, I know that Chief Shepherd will be glad to talk with anyone who has concerns. We appreciate the Chief, police officers and school resource officers.
Before they do this they should do a comprehensive analysis of the traffic patterns to justify the need for a school zone in the first place.
On Williston Road, for example, there’s a school zone that’s a quarter-mile away from the school it serves. Crossing guards cause significant traffic delays in both directions daily, and it is a rare day when a student actually needs to cross the road at that point.
Most students at that school ride the bus or are dropped off by parents, and that’s what the zone’s purpose appears to be: a glorified manual traffic light to let returning buses and parents easily merge back on to Williston Road.
That’s my perception and that’s why an independent traffic analysis is needed– in case the zone actually does serve a valid purpose that’s less obvious– but slowing traffic appears to be pointless that far from the school, and flow would be better handled by a signal.
You obviously do not live in High Springs or have children attending the High Springs schools to observe the traffic issues. There are needs for a school zone. Please stay in Gainesville and in your own city ways
“That’s my perception and that’s why an independent traffic analysis is needed.”
It’s been done already. That is why it’s being installed. Catch up
That is NOT TRUE AT ALL. I live in that area. Traffic light is NOT needed, as the only time traffic is congested is during 7:20 ~ 7:50 a.m. What IS needed is to add an additional Northbound turn signal timing at Williston and 441. Before, and after, the Southbound Williston Rd traffic flows. Just like they do on Southbound 34th Street turning onto SW 35th place.
:
What does Williston and 441 have to do with school zone cameras in High Springs? You say you “live in that area”, the area of Williston and 441 or High Springs? This article is addressing an issue in High Springs at High Springs Community School which isn’t on either Williston or 441.
Exactly.
It’s this new thing called “comparing similar situations”. It’s all the rage these days. 😉
Actually, on digging a bit more, the new law permitting the use of cameras REQUIRES the analysis I suggested– reported to the commission and repeated on an annual basis. I should have checked that first.
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/657/BillText/er/PDF
‘Last year, the High Springs City Commission discussed the cameras in four public meetings, and the City conducted a speed study, which “revealed excessive speeding violations in our school zone.”’
Actually you aren’t “comparing similar situations”. The area on Williston road is 4 lanes and not at the entrance to the school. High Springs Community School is a 2 lane road with the main entrance to the school directly off of CR236. These situations are not “similar” in any way. The article also isn’t suggesting a light vs crossing guards. It’s stating that cameras will be used to monitor speed. A crossing guard will still be there. Right now they have a crossing guard plus officers to monitor speed. This impedes the ability of the officers to respond to other calls. Seems to me that in the situation at HSCS cameras are the way to go.
should be like monoply do not pass go directly to jail
Please ensure compliance with the laws. By adhering to this straightforward principle, you can eliminate any concerns regarding speeding tickets. In the unfortunate event of a child being struck by a speeding vehicle, those who express discontent will swiftly disappear. It is important to note that meetings and studies have been diligently conducted, despite your absence. Your apparent desire to vent about a particular matter should not overshadow this fact.
Sounds like one of the Good Copper’s.