§ 3116. Automated red light enforcement
systems
in first class cities
(a) GENERAL RULE.--
(1) A city of the first class, upon passage of an ordinance,
is authorized to enforce section 3112(a)(3) (relating to traffic-control
signals) by recording violations using an automated red light enforcement
system approved by the department.
(2) This section shall only be applicable at intersections
in the city of the first class agreed upon by the system administrator
and the Secretary of Transportation who shall consider using the automated
red light enforcement system at the following intersections:
(i) U.S. Route 1 (Roosevelt Boulevard) at Grant
Avenue, at Red Lion Road and at Cottman Street.
(ii) Kensington Avenue at Clearfield Street.
(iii) Richmond Street at Allegheny Avenue and at
Castor Avenue.
(iv) Aramingo Avenue at York Street.
(v) Thompson Street at Lehigh Avenue.
(vi) Broad Street at Washington Avenue.
(b) OWNER LIABILITY.-- For each violation pursuant to this
section, the owner of the vehicle shall be liable for the penalty imposed unless
the owner is convicted of the same violation under another section of this title
or has a defense under subsection (f).
(c) CERTIFICATE AS EVIDENCE.-- A certificate, or a facsimile
of a certificate, based upon inspection of photographs produced by an automated
red light enforcement system and sworn to or affirmed by a police officer employed
by the city of the first class shall be prima facie evidence of the facts contained
in it. The city must include written documentation that the automated red light
enforcement system was operating correctly at the time of the alleged violation.
A photograph evidencing a violation of section 3112(a)(3) shall be admissible
in any judicial or administrative proceeding to adjudicate the liability for
the violation.
(d) PENALTY.--
(1) The penalty for a violation under subsection (a) shall
be a fine of $100 unless a lesser amount is set by ordinance.
(2) A fine is not authorized for a violation of this section
if any of the following apply:
(i) The intersection is being manually controlled.
(ii) The signal is in the mode described in section
3114 (relating to flashing signals).
(3) A fine is not authorized during:
(i) The first 120 days of operation of the automated
system at the initial intersection.
(ii) The first 60 days for each additional intersection
selected for the automated system.
(3.1) A warning may be sent to the violator under paragraph (3).
(4) A penalty
imposed under this section shall not be deemed a criminal conviction
and shall not be made part of the operating record under section
1535 (relating to schedule of convictions and points) of the individual
upon whom the penalty is imposed, nor may the imposition of the penalty
be subject to merit rating for insurance purposes.
(5) No surcharge
points may be imposed in the provision of motor vehicle insurance
coverage. Fines collected under this section shall not be subject
to 42 Pa.C.S. § 3571 (relating to Commonwealth portion of fines, etc.) or 3573
(relating to municipal corporation portion of fines, etc.).
(e) LIMITATIONS.--
(1) No automated red light enforcement system shall be utilized in such
a manner as to take a frontal view photograph of the vehicle as evidence of having
committed a violation.
(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, camera
equipment deployed as part of an automated red light enforcement
system as provided in this section must be incapable of automated
or user-controlled remote intersection surveillance by means of recorded
video images. Photographs collected as part of the automated red
light enforcement system must be 35-millimeter film only, must only
record traffic violations and may not be used for any other surveillance
purposes. The restrictions set forth in this paragraph shall not
be deemed to preclude a court of competent jurisdiction from issuing
an order directing that the information be provided to law enforcement
officials if the information is reasonably described and is requested
solely in connection with a criminal law enforcement action.
(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, information
prepared under this section and information relating to violations
under this section which is kept by the city of the first class,
its authorized agents or its employees, including photographs, written
records, reports or facsimiles, names, addresses and the number of
violations under this section, shall be for the exclusive use of
the city, its authorized agents, its employees and law enforcement
officials for the purpose of discharging their duties under this
section and under any ordinances and resolutions of the city. The
information shall not be deemed a public record under the act of
June 21, 1957 (P.L. 390, No. 212), referred to as the Right-to-Know
Law. The information shall not be discoverable by court order or
otherwise, nor shall it be offered in evidence in any action or proceeding
which is not directly related to a violation of this section or any
ordinance or resolution of the city. The restrictions set forth in
this paragraph shall not be deemed to preclude a court of competent
jurisdiction from issuing an order directing that the information
be provided to law enforcement officials if the information is reasonably
described and is requested solely in connection with a criminal law
enforcement action.
(4) Photographic evidence obtained through
the use of automated red light enforcement systems deployed as a
means of promoting traffic safety in a city of the first class shall
be destroyed within one year of final disposition of any recorded
event. The city shall file notice with the Department of State that
the records have been destroyed in accordance with this section.
(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, registered
vehicle owner information obtained as a result of the operation of
an automated red light enforcement system under this section shall
not be the property of the manufacturer or vendor of the automated
red light enforcement system and may not be used for any purpose
other than prescribed in this section.
(f) DEFENSES.--
(1) It shall be a defense to a violation under this section that
the person named in the notice of the violation was not operating
the vehicle at the time of the violation. The owner may be required
to submit evidence that the owner was not the driver at the time
of the alleged violation. The city of the first class may not require
the owner of the vehicle to disclose the identity of the operator
of the vehicle at the time of the violation.
(2) If an owner receives a notice
of violation pursuant to this section of a time period during which
the vehicle was reported to a police department of any state or municipality
as having been stolen, it shall be a defense to a violation pursuant
to this section that the vehicle has been reported to a police department
as stolen prior to the time the violation occurred and had not been
recovered prior to that time.
(3) It shall be a defense to a violation
under this section that the person receiving the notice of violation
was not the owner of the vehicle at the time of the offense.
(g) DEPARTMENT APPROVAL.-- No automated red light enforcement
system may be used without the approval of the department, which shall have the
authority to promulgate regulations for the certification and use of such systems.
(h) DUTY OF CITY.-- If a city of the first class elects to
implement this section, the following provisions shall apply:
(1) The city may not use an automated red light enforcement system
unless there is posted an appropriate sign in a conspicuous place
before the area in which the automated red light enforcement device
is to be used notifying the public that an automated red light enforcement
device is in use immediately ahead.
(2)
The city shall designate or appoint the Philadelphia Parking Authority
as the system administrator to supervise and coordinate the administration
of notices of violation issued under this section.
(3) The system administrator shall prepare a notice of violation
to the registered owner of a vehicle identified in a photograph produced
by an automated red light enforcement system as evidence of a violation
of section 3112(a)(3). The issuance of the notice of violation must
be done by a police officer employed by the police department with
primary jurisdiction over the area where the violation occurred.
The notice of violation shall have attached to it a copy of the recorded
image showing the vehicle; the registration number and state of issuance
of the vehicle registration; the date, time and place of the alleged
violation; that the violation charged is under section 3112(a)(3);
and instructions for return of the notice of violation. The text
of the notice must be as follows:
This notice shall be returned personally, by mail or by an agent duly authorized
in writing, within 30 days of issuance. A hearing may be obtained upon the written
request of the registered owner.
(i) SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR.--
(1) The system administrator may hire and designate personnel as
necessary or contract for services to implement this section.
(2) The system administrator
shall process fines under subsection (1).
(3) The system administrator shall file an annual report to the chairman
and the minority chairman of the Transportation Committee of the
Senate and the chairman and minority chairman of the Transportation
Committee of the House of Representatives. The report shall include
for the prior year:
(i) The number of violations and fines issued.
(ii) A compilation of fines paid and outstanding.
(iii) The amount of money paid to a vendor or manufacturer under this section.
(j) NOTICE TO OWNER.-- In the case of a violation involving
a motor vehicle registered under the laws of this Commonwealth, the notice of
violation must be mailed within 30 days after the commission of the violation
or within 30 days after the discovery of the identity of the registered owner,
whichever is later, and not thereafter to the address of the registered owner
as listed in the records of the department. In the case of motor vehicles registered
in jurisdictions other than this Commonwealth, the notice of violation must be
mailed within 30 days after the discovery of the identity of the registered owner,
whichever is later, and not thereafter to the address of the registered owner
as listed in the records of the official in the jurisdiction having charge of
the registration of the vehicle. A notice of violation under this section must
be provided to an owner within 90 days of the commission of the offense.
(k) MAILING OF NOTICE AND RECORDS.-- Notice of violation must
be sent by first class mail. A manual or automatic record of mailing prepared
by the system administrator in the ordinary course of business shall be prima
facie evidence of mailing and shall be admissible in any judicial or administrative
proceeding as to the facts contained in it.
(l) PAYMENT OF FINE.--
(1) An owner to whom a notice of violation has been issued may admit
responsibility for the violation and pay the fine provided in the
notice.
(2) Payment must be
made personally, through an authorized agent or by mailing both payment
and the notice of violation to the system administrator. Payment
by mail must be made only by money order, credit card or check made
payable to the system administrator. The system administrator shall
remit the fine, less the system administrator's operation and maintenance
costs necessitated by this section, to the department for deposit
into the Motor License Fund. Fines deposited in the fund under this
paragraph shall be used by the department to develop, by regulation,
a Transportation Enhancements Grant Program.
(3) Payment of the established
fine and applicable penalties shall operate as a final disposition
of the case.
(m) HEARING.--
(1) An owner to whom a notice of violation has been issued may, within
30 days of the mailing of the notice, request a hearing to contest
the liability alleged in the notice. A hearing request must be made
by appearing before the system administrator during regular office
hours either personally or by an authorized agent or by mailing a
request in writing.
(2) Upon receipt of a hearing request, the system administrator shall
in a timely manner schedule the matter before a hearing officer.
The hearing officer shall be designated by the city of the first
class. Written notice of the date, time and place of hearing must
be sent by first class mail to the owner.
(3) The hearing shall be informal; the rules of evidence shall
not apply; and the decision of the hearing officer shall be final,
subject to the right of the owner to appeal the decision to the traffic
court.
(4) If the owner requests in writing that the decision of the hearing
officer be appealed to the traffic court, the system administrator
shall file the notice of violation and supporting documents with
the traffic court, which shall hear and decide the matter de novo.
(n) COMPENSATION TO MANUFACTURER OR VENDOR.-- If a city of
the first class has established an automated red light enforcement system deployed
as a means of promoting traffic safety and the enforcement of the traffic laws
of this Commonwealth or the city, the compensation paid to the manufacturer or
vendor of the automated red light enforcement system may not be based upon the
number of traffic citations issued or a portion or percentage of the fine generated
by the citations. The compensation paid to the manufacturer or vendor of the
equipment shall be based upon the value of the equipment and the services provided
or rendered in support of the automated red light enforcement system.
(o) DURATION OF YELLOW LIGHT CHANGE INTERVAL.-- The duration
of the yellow light change interval at intersections where automated red light
enforcement systems are in use shall conform to the yellow light change interval
duration specified on the traffic signal permit issued by the department or the
first class city.
(p) REVENUE LIMITATION.-- A city of the first class may not
collect an amount equal to or greater than 5% of its annual budget from the collection
of revenue from the issuance and payment of violations under this section.
(q) EXPIRATION.-- This section shall expire December 31, 2007.