Legislative Analysis
Phone: (517) 373-8080
ALLOW SPEED DETECTION SYSTEMS IN SCHOOL ZONES
http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa
House Bill 4921 (H-2) as reported from committee Analysis available at
Sponsor: Rep. John Fitzgerald http://www.legislature.mi.gov
House Bill 5726 as reported from committee
Sponsor: Rep. Mike McFall
Committee: Local Government and Municipal Finance
Complete to 5-29-24
SUMMARY:
House Bill 4921 would amend the Michigan Vehicle Code to allow speed detection systems to
be used in school zones (see Background, below). A violation of the bill’s provisions or a
substantially corresponding local ordinance would be a civil infraction subject to a fine of $100
to $150. House Bill 5726 is a companion bill that would make complementary changes to the
Revised Judicature Act.
Speed detection system would mean a portable or fixed automated system that uses
radar or lidar to detect a vehicle’s speed and that captures a recorded image of the rear
of a vehicle that exceeds the speed limit in force at the time of the violation.
Under House Bill 4921, a county or local authority 1 could install and use a speed detection
system in a school zone on a highway or street under its jurisdiction or, with the permission of
the Michigan Department of Transportation, a school zone on a state highway or street. A
county or local authority could contract with a third-party vendor to install and use the system.
Before using a speed detection system, a county or local authority would have to publicly
announce the proposed use of the system and place a sign at the start of the school zone
indicating that it is monitored by the speed detection system. The county or local authority
would have to conduct a public awareness campaign for at least 30 days before using the system
to issue citations, which would have to include a presentation to the school board of the school
district in which the speed detection system will be used to ensure that parents, faculty, and
staff are aware of the system’s implementation. During the first 30 days of a public awareness
campaign, a speed detection system could only be used to send written warnings to individuals
who violate applicable school speed zone limits by 10 or more miles per hour.
Violations
After the first 30 days of the public awareness campaign, an individual who exceeds a posted
school zone speed limit by 10 or more miles per hour, based on a recorded image produced by
the system, would be responsible for a civil infraction and a fine of at least $100 and no more
than $150.
1
A “local authority” is defined under the Michigan Vehicle Code as any local board or body authorized to enact traffic
laws under Michigan law.
House Fiscal Agency Page 1 of 5
 A citation for a violation based on a speed detection system could be executed by sending a
copy of the citation by first-class mail to the address of the registered owner of the vehicle. If
the individual fails to appear on the date of return set by the citation, a second copy of the
citation would have to be sent. If the summoned individual fails to appear on either of the dates
of return, they would be considered to admit responsibility for the civil infraction, and the fine
could be enforced as provided in the Michigan Vehicle Code or through an administrative
order, as described below.
In a proceeding for a violation, prima facie evidence that the vehicle described in the citation
was operated in violation of the posted school speed limit by at least 10 miles per hour and
proof that the individual who was issued the citation was the registered owner of the vehicle at
the time of the violation would create a rebuttable presumption that the registered owner of the
vehicle committed the violation unless either of the following occurs:
• The registered owner of the vehicle files an affidavit by mail with the appropriate court
clerk stating that they were not operating the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation
or testifies in open court under oath that they were not the operator of the vehicle at the
time of the alleged violation and provides the name and address of the individual who
was operating the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation.
• A certified copy of a police report that shows that the vehicle was reported as stolen
before the alleged violation is presented before the appearance date established by the
citation.
The owner of a leased or rented vehicle would have to provide the name and address of the
individual to whom the vehicle was leased or rented at the time of the violation.
Speed detection system evidence
A sworn statement of a police officer who inspects a recorded image produced by a speed
detection system would be considered prima facie evidence of the facts contained in the image.
An image that indicates a violation would have to be available for inspection in any proceeding
to adjudicate the responsibility for the violation but would have to be destroyed 90 days after
the final disposition of the citation.
Administrative hearing
As an alternative to the procedures provided under the Michigan Vehicle Code for civil
infractions, a county or local authority could adopt an ordinance providing for an administrative
hearing process for individuals who contest a citation based on a speed detection system. The
ordinance would have to include hearing procedures that are substantially similar to the
procedures for a contested case under the Administrative Procedures Act and would have to
appoint one or more officers to conduct the hearings. Citations issued by the county or local
authority would have to include instructions on how the individual can contest the citation
before a hearing officer.
After holding a hearing, the officer would issue a final administrative order that requires the
individual to pay the fine and any related costs or that dismisses the citation if there is
insufficient evidence. An individual could appeal the order to the district court, which would
then conduct a de novo formal hearing. If an individual fails to pay the amount ordered and
does not appeal the order, they would be subject to an additional $50 fee. The county or local
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4921 (H-2) and 5726 as reported Page 2 of 5
 authority would be able to collect any amount owed by contracting with a private debt collector
or seeking the entry of a judgement by the district court.
Fines
A civil fine issued for a violation of the bill or a corresponding local ordinance would be paid
to the appropriate county treasurer or their designee and distributed to the county or local
authority that installed and used the speed detection system. Money from the fines would be
used to cover the cost of installing and using the system, in addition to funding public safety
initiatives and safety-related traffic programs. A county treasurer could contract with a private
vendor, including a third-party vendor contracted with for the installation and use of a speed
detection system, to process the fines.
Report
Within five years of the bill’s effective date, each county or local authority that uses a speed
detection system would have to submit a report on the use of the system to the members of the
House and Senate committees that have jurisdiction over transportation. The report would have
to include the following information in relation to the speed detection system:
• The number of citations issued.
• An accounting of the costs of installing and using the system.
• An accounting of the amount collected in civil fines.
• An analysis on the effect of the use of the system on the number of speeding vehicles
in the county or local authority’s jurisdiction.
MCL 257.907 and 257.909 and proposed MCL 257.79g and 207.627c
House Bill 5726 would amend the Revised Judicature Act, which provides for the distribution
of fines and costs ordered in a state or local civil infraction action, to make complementary
changes regarding the distribution of civil fine revenue proposed by HB 4921.
Under the bill, a civil fine ordered in a civil infraction action for violating a school zone speed
limit by 10 or more miles per hour based on a recorded image produced by a speed detection
system, or for violating a substantially corresponding county, city, village, or township
ordinance, would have to be paid to the appropriate county treasurer or their designee and
distributed to a county or local authority in accordance with the provisions of HB 4921.
MCL 600.8379 and 600.8396
The bills are tie-barred together, meaning that neither bill can take effect unless both are
enacted.
BACKGROUND:
The Michigan Vehicle Code provides that a school zone speed limit on a highway segment in
a school zone is in force not more than 30 minutes before the first regularly scheduled school
session (rounded to the nearest multiple of five minutes) until school begins, and from
dismissal until not more than 30 minutes after the last regularly scheduled school session
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4921 (H-2) and 5726 as reported Page 3 of 5
 (rounded to the nearest multiple of five minutes). 2 A school zone speed limit can be decreased
by up to 20 miles per hour less than the speed limit normally posted but cannot be less than 25
miles per hour.
According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, automated speed enforcement
systems have been implemented in some capacity in 21 states and the District of Columbia.3
The National Conference of State Legislatures reports that as of 2022, at least 12 states allow
the use of these systems in school zones. 4
The H-2 substitute for House Bill 4921 also serves as a “conflict substitute” to reflect changes
made to section 907 of the Michigan Vehicle Code by 2024 PA 22, an act that revised the law’s
requirements for car seats and booster seats. 5 2024 PA 22 was signed into law in March 2024
and will take effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns its 2024 session. (Without a substitute
that takes both bills into account, the last bill signed into law would overwrite and undo the
changes made by the earlier one. In addition, the H-2 substitute is written in a way that would
ensure that, if HB 4921 were to take effect before 2024 PA 22, the changes made to section
907 by 2024 PA 22 would not become effective before the rest of the act.)
BRIEF DISCUSSION:
According to committee testimony, local governments facing law enforcement shortages can
lack the capacity to enforce school zone speed limits. Supporters of House Bills 4921 and 5726
suggest that to solve this problem, local governments should be allowed to use speed detection
technology in school zones to improve safety and promote responsible driving. They argue that
the bills address speeding in an equitable and educational manner by focusing on outreach and
only issuing citations to those who violate the speed limit by 10 or more miles per hour, a speed
at which serious collisions are more likely to occur.
Opponents of House Bills 4921 and 5726 believe that because section 9 of Article VIII of the
state constitution requires all penal (e.g., criminal) fines to be directed to public libraries and
county law libraries, the exemption for civil fines proposed by the bills conflicts with that
principle and the traditional allocation of civil fines to libraries. Additionally, concerns were
raised about inconsistencies with current language in the Michigan Vehicle Code, such as
House Bill 4921’s provisions regarding an administrative hearing process and a traffic citation
specific to speeding in a school zone.
FISCAL IMPACT:
House Bill 4921 would authorize the installation and use of a speed detection system in a school
zone by a county or local authority. The bill would not have a direct fiscal impact on the state
or on local units of government. The bill is permissive only. It authorizes but does not mandate
2
A school superintendent can modify the start times of the 30-minute before-school and after-school periods and can
designate an off-campus lunch period as a period during which the school zone speed limit applies.
3
See https://www.iihs.org/topics/speed/speed-camera-communities.
4
See https://www.ncsl.org/transportation/traffic-safety-review-state-speed-and-red-light-camera-laws-and-
programs#anchor16197.
5
See https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/billanalysis/House/pdf/2023-HLA-4511-
152E1FAB.pdf.
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4921 (H-2) and 5726 as reported Page 4 of 5
 the use of speed detection devices under specific conditions defined in the bill. There could be
potential costs to counties and local authorities that elected to install and use speed detection
devices. Those costs are not available at this time.
The bills would have an indeterminate fiscal impact on local units of government. The impact
would depend on the number of jurisdictions implementing the speed detection systems and,
subsequently, the number of individuals that violate school zone speed limits. Violators would
be held responsible for a civil infraction and ordered to pay a fine of not less than $100 and not
more than $150. Under the bills, revenue collected from civil fines paid for violating section
627c would be distributed to the county or local authority to be used to cover costs of installing
and using the system, in addition to funding public safety initiatives and safety-related traffic
programs. Under section 909 of the Michigan Vehicle Code, civil fine revenue is required to
be applied exclusively to the support of public and county law libraries, so the bills would
reduce revenue for public and county law libraries, as revenue collected from civil fines would
be redirected to the county or local authority instead. There is no practical way to determine
the number of violations that would occur, so there is no practical way to estimate the amount
of additional civil fine revenue that would be collected.
POSITIONS:
Blue Line Solutions indicated support for the bills. (5-21-24)
The following entities indicated support for House Bill 4921:
• Detroit Greenways Coalition (9-27-23)
• Michigan Municipal League (5-21-24)
• Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (9-27-23)
Legislative Analyst: Holly Kuhn
Fiscal Analysts: Robin Risko
William E. Hamilton
■ 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 4921 (H-2) and 5726 as reported Page 5 of 5


Statutes affected:
Substitute (H-2): 257.907, 257.909
House Introduced Bill: 257.907
As Passed by the House: 257.907, 257.909