Ford government's own research warned against calling speed cameras 'cash grabs' — years before they were finally banned

“Yet, ASE programs remain controversial and are often portrayed in negative terms by the media and vocal opponents resulting in some cases in an ASE program not being implemented or an existing program being cancelled.”

The 77-page report was obtained through a Freedom Of Information request by Safe Parkside, a Toronto community group advocating for safety improvements on Parkside Drive — the site of a speed camera that was repeatedly decapitated last year, making headlines and spurring copy cats.

Last year, Premier Doug Ford outlawed speed cameras, dismissing them as “cash grabs,” despite weeks of pleading by mayors, researchers and families to improve rather than eliminate the ASE legislation. Ford rejected the plea and promised to bring in other methods to curtail speeding.

“Instead of working to fine-tune his legislation, they just came in with a sledgehammer,” said Faraz Gholizadeh, co-chair of Safe Parkside. “They’re making decisions without any sort of evidence. Well, actually, they have the evidence — they’re just choosing to ignore it.”

Gholizadeh filed the FOI request asking for any speed camera studies and reviews from 2018 to this past January. The ministry’s FOI office granted access to this report and denied access to 11 other documents.

The ministry did not answer the Star’s questions Tuesday about whether it conducted any reviews on public support or speed cameras’ effectiveness after 2022. “Repealing municipal speed cameras is about fairness and keeping life affordable, not raising revenue on the backs of hard-working families,” said ministry spokesperson Dakota Brasier.

Speed camera acceptance tied to transparency

Ford’s government passed a law allowing the devices in 2019. By the time they were banned last year, more than 700 speed cameras had been installed in 40 municipalities, with Toronto accounting for 150. At the time of 2022 report, Toronto had 50 cameras that were periodically relocated.

The 2022 report warns that public acceptance of speed cameras is tied to the need for transparency and education “as there is a tendency for ASE to be seen as a ‘cash-grab’ rather than for its potential to contribute to road safety.” 

Gholizadeh said Ford fed into the “cash grab” narrative, which was covered by media, despite having this report’s words of caution three years earlier.

“So to hear a premier just keep repeating that misnomer again and again is beyond disappointing,” he said.

According to the report, studies and reviews of other jurisdictions “suggest that a well-designed program can garner community support generating a positive public perception of an ASE program.” 

Report warns of need for public support

It highlights “public acceptance” as “one of the more important aspects” of deploying speed cameras. It also includes several warnings to the Ontario government, namely that the province and municipalities need to maintain public support and be strategic in where they place the cameras.

The provincial legislation only allowed the devices to be installed in school zones and safety zones, but municipalities decided where those zones were. The report said this approach made sense to protect the most vulnerable road users, “especially as pedestrian fatalities in the province are on the increase.”

But at the same time, “these locations tend to be areas of low speeds and therefore the beneficial effects, although important, are more difficult to observe.”

Given studies have shown that the higher the speeds the more likely collisions can cause injury and death, the report advised the province it should consider expanding its selection criteria to prioritize “roads with high speeds or by extension, high collision occurrence,” pointing to Saskatchewan and Quebec as examples.

Toronto councillors previously argued that speed limits were too low in some areas the city chose to deploy the cameras.

The report suggests other ways to ensure “good program design and generate public support,” including creating stakeholder groups to have a say in the design and site selection process, being transparent in how the revenue is used and creating “clear guidelines” for how revenue should be used.

In Toronto, a city report showed ASE revenues went to funding the city’s Vision Zero initiatives or to the province.

Ticket threshold a key issue

Gholizadeh said Toronto should have also been more transparent about the speed threshold at which it ticketed drivers. City staff argued that disclosing the threshold was tantamount to informally raising the posted speed limit. 

“But the alternative is you get people making things up, like claiming they were getting a ticket for going one or two kilometres over — and that’s even worse,” said Gholizadeh.

When he announced the ban on speed cameras, Ford said he believed drivers were being ticketed for going just a few kilometres an hour over the posted limit. But the Star revealed Toronto and other large GTA municipalities had adopted a threshold of 11 km/h over the limit, though that threshold varied despite cities’ best efforts to keep such enforcement consistent.

The document also said using “coming soon” and “in use” signs is essential for trust. Vaughan gave notice of speed camera locations months in advance, through public education and large signs, but Mayor Steven Del Duca said residents were still “caught off guard.” 

A Vaughan staff report showed they contemplated a number of measures to enhance public awareness, including flashing lights on the “municipal speed camera in use” signs, but they said that was not allowed by the province.