Legislative Analysis
Phone: (517) 373-8080
AUTOMATED SPEED ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS
http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa
House Bill 4132 (H-4) as passed by the House
Analysis available at
Sponsor: Rep. Will Snyder http://www.legislature.mi.gov
House Bill 4133 as passed by the House
Sponsor: Rep. Mike Mueller
Committee: Regulatory Reform
Complete to 6-28-23
SUMMARY:
House Bill 4132 would amend the Michigan Vehicle Code to allow the Michigan State Police
(MSP) and the Department of Transportation (MDOT) to install and use automated speed
enforcement systems in work zones on highways or streets under the jurisdiction of MDOT,
create a unit within MSP to oversee the use of these systems, create the Work Zone Safety
Fund, and make other related changes. House Bill 4133 would make complementary changes
to the Revised Judicature Act. The bills are described together below.
Use of automated speed enforcement systems and citations
Currently, although Michigan law does not specifically prohibit the use of an automated system
based on recorded images to issue tickets for a traffic violation, section 742 of the Michigan
Vehicle Code generally requires a law enforcement officer to witness a violation of the traffic
laws in order to issue a citation for a violation that is a civil infraction, such as speeding. A
citation also may be issued as a result of an investigation of an accident or, if approved by the
prosecutor or attorney for the local unit of government where the violation occurred, an
investigation of a complaint by a witness to a violation.
House Bill 4132 would specifically allow MSP and MDOT, by agreement, to authorize the
installation and use of an automated speed enforcement system in a work zone on a highway
or street under MDOT’s jurisdiction. A sign indicating that an automated speed enforcement
system is being used would have to be posted one mile before the start of the work zone.
An automated speed enforcement system would mean an electronic traffic sensor
system that does both of the following:
• Automatically detects a vehicle exceeding the posted speed limit with a type of
speed timing device.
• Produces a recorded image of the vehicle exceeding the speed limit that shows
a clear and legible identification of the vehicle’s license plate and the location,
date, and time the image was taken.
If an individual was recorded violating the posted speed limit by 10 miles an hour or more in
a work zone while workers were present, the following would apply:
• For a first violation, or a subsequent violation more than three years after the
individual’s most recent violation, a written warning would have to be issued on a form
authorized by MSP.
House Fiscal Agency Page 1 of 5
 • For a second violation within three years of a written warning issued as described
above, the individual would be responsible for a civil infraction and would have to pay
a civil fine of up to $150. (These fines would be paid to MDOT.)
• For a third or subsequent violation within three years of the individual’s second or
subsequent violation, the individual would be responsible for a civil infraction and
would have to pay a fine of up to $300. (These fines would be paid to MDOT.)
Present would mean located in proximity to a roadway that is not protected by a
guardrail or barrier.
The bill would exempt an individual operating a police vehicle, a fire department or fire patrol
vehicle, or a public or private ambulance from the above provisions.
Civil fines described above would be paid to MDOT. (House Bill 4133 would amend the
Revised Judicature Act to make complementary changes regarding this distribution of civil
fine revenue.) MDOT would have to deposit any fines that exceed the cost of installing and
using automated speed enforcement systems into the Work Zone Safety Fund described below.
Under House Bill 4132, a sworn statement from an automated speed enforcement system
operator or a police officer, based on an inspection of a recorded image produced by the system,
would be considered prima facie evidence of the facts contained in the image. A recorded
image indicating a violation would have to be available for inspection in any proceeding to
adjudicate the responsibility for a violation. Any such image would have to be destroyed as
soon as the period for contesting the violation had lapsed, including any period for appeals, or
as soon as the individual paid the civil fine in full, whichever is earlier.
The following would apply to a recorded image and any other data collected by an automated
speed enforcement system:
• They would only be allowed to be used for the purpose of adjudicating a violation
under the bill.
• Except to the extent necessary to adjudicate a violation, they would be confidential and
exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
• They could not be shared with or sold to any private or public third party not involved
with installing and using the automated speed enforcement system.
In a proceeding for a violation of House Bill 4132, the prima facie evidence that the vehicle
described in the citation was operated in violation of the bill, together with proof that the
citation was issued to the registered owner of the vehicle, would create a rebuttable
presumption that the vehicle’s registered owner was the individual who committed the
violation. This presumption would be rebutted by either of the following:
• An affidavit of the registered owner filed by regular mail with the clerk of the court
stating that they were not the operator of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation.
• Presentation before the appearance date on the citation of a certified copy of a police
report showing that the vehicle had been reported stolen before the alleged violation.
Notwithstanding section 742 (described above), a citation for a violation under House Bill 4132
could be executed by first-class mail to the registered owner’s address as shown in the records
of the secretary of state. If the summoned individual fails to appear on the date set out in that
citation, a copy of the citation would have to be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested.
If the summoned individual fails to appear on either date set out on the mailed citations, the
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4132 (H-4) and 4133 as passed by the House Page 2 of 5
 citation would have to be executed in a manner provided by law for personal service. The court
could issue a warrant for the arrest of an individual who fails to appear within the time limit
established on the citation if a sworn complaint is filed with the court for that purpose.
Work Zone Safety Fund
House Bill 4132 would create the Work Zone Safety Fund in the state treasury. The state
treasurer would direct the investment of money in the fund and would have to credit any interest
and earnings to the fund. MDOT would be the administrator of the fund for audits of the fund.
As noted above, any civil fines paid to MDOT for a violation of the bill that exceed the cost of
installing and using automated speed enforcement systems would be deposited into the fund.
MDOT would have to expend money in the fund, upon appropriation, for the purpose of
improving worker safety at work zones by doing both of the following:
• Coordinating with MSP and local law enforcement agencies to increase police presence
at work zones.
• Funding the use of traffic control devices at work zones that provide greater protection
for workers.
Automated Speed Enforcement System Unit
Subject to appropriation, House Bill 4132 would create the Automated Speed Enforcement
System Unit in the Department of State Police (MSP). The unit would consist of appointees of
the MSP director and would have to do both of the following:
• Oversee the implementation and use of automated speed enforcement systems.
• Train automated speed enforcement system operators to operate and monitor the
systems and provide sworn statements as required by the bill.
Report to the legislature
Finally, by March 1 of each year after the effective date of House Bill 4132, MSP would have
to submit a report on the use of automated speed enforcement systems to the members of the
House and Senate committees with jurisdiction over transportation and make the report
publicly available on the MSP website. The report would have to include at least all of the
following:
• The number of citations issued.
• The age, ethnicity, race, and sex of the individuals given citations.
• The locations where automated speed enforcement systems are installed and used and
where citations have been given.
• An accounting of both the costs of installing and using automated speed enforcement
systems and the revenue generated by them.
HB 4132: MCL 257.907 and 257.909 and proposed MCL 257.2c, 257.627c, and 257.907a
HB 4133: MCL 600.8379
Neither bill will take effect unless both bills are enacted.
BRIEF DISCUSSION:
Supporters of the bills argue that they will protect road construction and maintenance workers
in Michigan, where there has been an average of fourteen worker fatalities in work zones each
year over the past decade. They point to Maryland, which is among the seventeen other states
that currently allow the use of automated speed enforcement systems in work zones, where a
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4132 (H-4) and 4133 as passed by the House Page 3 of 5
 similar program has led to decreases in both the number of speeding violations and worker
fatalities in work zones. Supporters also argue that the bills would protect not only construction
workers, but also police officers, who will no longer need to be stopped along the side of the
highway at night to enforce speeding violations.
Critics of the bills note that they would redirect civil fine revenue from its longstanding
allocation to public libraries and county law libraries, which was placed in law when several
traffic violations were made civil infractions in 1978. Before those amendments, all traffic
violations were criminal violations. Civil infractions were created as a new class of traffic
violations for which imprisonment was not imposed. The state constitution requires that penal
(i.e., criminal) fines be exclusively applied to support public libraries and county law libraries.
The allocation of traffic civil fines to those libraries was established as a compromise to offset
the loss of penal fine revenue that would result from the decriminalization of traffic violations.
Some opponents of the bills argue that this commitment, and the spirit of the constitutional
provision, should be honored and that the allocation of civil fine revenue to libraries should
thus be protected.
FISCAL IMPACT:
House Bill 4132 would have significant fiscal implications for the Department of State Police,
namely by introducing new costs for the Automated Speed Enforcement System Unit created
within the department. The bill conditions the creation of the unit on an appropriation, but the
bill does not include an appropriation for the unit, so it is unclear what fund sources would be
used to support the costs of the unit. MSP projects that the unit would require six FTE positions
at a cost of $985,000 annually, though the actual number of FTEs would depend on the volume
of citations and the scope of the program. MSP also indicated that each citation would cost
approximately 65 cents, which does not include additional costs that would be incurred if
notices were required to be sent via certified mail or if personal service were necessary. MSP
would also incur one-time equipment and outfitting costs, which would include information
technology expenses. Total costs for equipment and outfitting could be in the vicinity of
$20,000. Ongoing IT costs for lifecycle replacement and warranty fees for such an IT scenario
would total approximately $5,000.
The bill would limit the use of automated speed enforcement systems to streets and highways
under MDOT jurisdiction (that is, state trunkline highways) and only in work zones when
workers are present. The bill would thus have no impact on local road agencies.
The bill would earmark civil fine revenue from violations of section 627c first to MDOT, by
implication for the cost of installing and using automated speed enforcement systems. The bill
directs MDOT to deposit civil fine revenue from violations of section 627c in excess of the
costs of installing and using automated speed enforcement systems into the Work Zone Safety
Fund, established in the bill as a restricted fund for the purpose of improving work zone safety.
The amount of civil fine revenue generated from violations of section 627c cannot be readily
estimated at this time, or whether such fine revenue would be sufficient to cover the cost of
installation and ongoing use of automated speed enforcement systems.
With regard to the potential violation of its provisions, House Bill 4132 would have an
indeterminate fiscal impact on the state and on local units of government. Public and county
law libraries would experience a decrease in the amount of funding allocated to them, the
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4132 (H-4) and 4133 as passed by the House Page 4 of 5
 state’s Justice System Fund would experience a decrease in the amount funding allocated to it,
and local court units would experience an increase in costs.
Currently, under section 909(1) of the Michigan Vehicle Code, civil fine revenue is to be
applied to the support of public and county law libraries. In addition, under section 907(12) of
the Michigan Vehicle Code, for any civil fines ordered to be paid, the judge or district court
magistrate is required to order the defendant to pay a justice system assessment of $40 for each
civil infraction determination, except for parking violations. Revenue deposited into the state’s
Justice System Fund supports various justice-related endeavors in the judicial branch, the
Departments of State Police, Corrections, Health and Human Services, and Treasury, and the
Legislative Retirement System.
Under the bill, revenue paid from civil fines would be required to be paid to MDOT. The
department would be required to deposit revenue in excess of the cost of installation and use
of automated speed enforcement systems into the Work Zone Safety Fund.
The number of individuals who would be responsible for civil infractions is not known. There
is no practical way to determine the number of violations that will occur under provisions of
the bill, so there is not a way to estimate the amount of revenue that would be lost by libraries
or by the state. The fiscal impact on local court systems would depend on how provisions of
the bill affected court caseloads and related administrative costs. It is difficult to project the
actual fiscal impact to courts due to variables such as law enforcement practices, prosecutorial
practices, judicial discretion, case types, and complexity of cases.
POSITIONS:
Representatives of the following entities testified in support of the bills (3-21-23):
• Blue Line Solutions
• Michigan Infrastructure and Transportation Association
• Michigan Laborers Union
The following entities indicated support for the bills (4-11-23):
• Michigan Municipal League
• County Road Association Self-Insurance Fund
• Michigan Paving & Materials Company
The following entities indicated opposition to the bills:
• Michigan Library Association (3-21-23)
• American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan (4-11-23)
Legislative Analyst: Alex Stegbauer
Fiscal Analysts: Marcus Coffin
William E. Hamilton
Robin Risko
■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by House members in their
deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4132 (H-4) and 4133 as passed by the House Page 5 of 5


Statutes affected:
Substitute (H-1): 257.907, 257.909, 257.79
Substitute (H-4): 257.907, 257.909, 257.79
Substitute (S-1): 257.907, 257.909, 257.79
Substitute (S-2): 257.79
Substitute (S-5): 257.79
House Introduced Bill: 257.907, 257.909, 257.79
As Passed by the House: 257.907, 257.909, 257.79
As Passed by the Senate: 257.79
House Concurred Bill: 257.79
Public Act: 257.79
House Enrolled Bill: 257.79