LISBON — Tucked into the new two-year state transportation budget bill signed into law by the governor is a provision financially penalizing communities that use traffic cameras, such as East Liverpool and Liverpool Township.

Among other things, the bill would result in less state funding for communities that deploy traffic cameras to catch speeding motorists and it will also require all citations be heard in a court instead of before an administrative hearing officer appointed by the community.

The language inserted into the bill requires communities using traffic cameras to file annual reports with the state by July 31 each year. These reports would state how much in gross fine money was generated by tickets, including the portion paid to the company providing the camera system.

That amount would be deducted from the community’s state Local Government Fund allocation, with the state tax commissioner required to deduct it from the communities’ monthly LGF payment. The withheld LGF money is to be redistributed among local transportation districts for road safety improvements.

East Liverpool’s speed cameras generated a little over $1 million in fine money last year, of which 60 percent, or $633,190, went to the city. East Liverpool’s LGF allocation for this year is expected to total $95,101.

Liverpool Township’s speed cameras generated $488,376 in 2018, with 60 percent, or $293,025, going to the township. Liverpool Townships’ estimated LGF allocation for this year is $43,956.

The law also abolishes the practice of allowing communities to create an administrative hearing process to perform their own hearings for motorists who contest their ticket. Instead, contested speeding tickets will be heard by a municipal or county court judge.

Communities using speed cameras would also be required to pay all court costs for related appeals, even when the local government wins.

Several communities that deploy speed cameras, such as Toledo and Dayton, intend to file lawsuits challenging the law’s legality. They believe it violates the Ohio Constitution’s home-rule protections that allows cities, villages and townships leeway to enact its own laws.

Legislative attempts to impede the use of speed cameras have been appealed in the past. In 2017, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled a 2015 law requiring police officers be present to monitor the use of the portable traffic cameras was unconstitutional because it conflicted with the home-rule powers of local communities.

This year’s measure was first introduced as a stand-alone bill 12 months ago by state Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, and was passed by the Ohio House, but the Ohio Senate did not take it up.

Seitz, an outspoken critic of traffic camera, had it inserted into the transportation bill. He has said before if the real purpose of these cameras is safety, as the communities claim, and not about the money that is generated, they should have no objection to the loss of LGF funds.

tgiambroni@mojonews.com