PORT ST. LUCIE — City commissioners voted 3-1 on Nov. 24 to move forward with a proposal from the Port St. Lucie Police Department to install red light traffic cameras at selected intersections across the city. Mayor Shannon Martin was absent.
Ten intersections were identified as likely initial locations:
- Cashmere Boulevard and St. Lucie West Boulevard
- Southwest Tradition Parkway and Southwest Village Parkway
- Southwest Bayshore Boulevard and Southwest Port St. Lucie Boulevard
- Peacock Boulevard and St. Lucie West Boulevard
- Southwest Gatlin Boulevard and Southwest Port St. Lucie Boulevard
- California Boulevard and St. Lucie West Boulevard
- Southwest Gatlin Boulevard and Southwest Savona Boulevard
- U.S. Highway 1 and Southeast Leonard Road
- U.S. Highway 1 and Southeast Port St. Lucie Boulevard
- Northwest Bayshore Boulevard and Southwest Crosstown Parkway
Vice Mayor Jolien Caraballo supported the initiative and said the rollout would be gradual.
"The chief is going to do a few, and he's going to pilot them out first, and we're going to see how it goes from there," she said.
Commissioner Anthony Bonna voted against the motion, expressing concern that the cameras could create additional safety issues.
"I worry about increased rear-end accidents," he said. "I see a lot of other cities that have implemented this suddenly discontinuing their cameras."
Research from the Federal Highway Administration has shown red light camera programs can reduce angle crashes while increasing rear-end collisions. The agency recommends installation only at intersections with high levels of right-angle crashes and other specific traffic conditions. Despite the potential for increased rear-end crashes, the FHA study reported a "modest aggregate crash-cost benefit."
Angle crashes carry a higher risk of severe injury, said Master Sgt. Dominick Mesiti with PSLPD.
“The majority of traffic crashes that result in injury and or death either are related to alcohol consumption and angle crashes," he said.
Some residents also questioned the cameras’ effectiveness. George Umansky, who has 20 years of experience in the CCTV industry, argued for more officer enforcement.
"The only person that learns anything is the person who receives the citation in the mail," he said. "Live enforcement has proven that it has a spill-over effect. When drivers see an officer conducting a stop, the deterrent effect can last a week or more."
Umansky also raised concerns about the business model behind camera systems, which often generate revenue from citations.
"If the systems truly eliminated violations, their revenue would collapse," he said.
He suggested more community engagement on traffic safety, in addition to increased enforcement.
Caraballo said she believes signage accompanying cameras can have a deterrent effect similar to patrol cars.
"Seeing a [police] car versus an actual camera and signage, which I believe is required, that is going to let them know that there is an intersection with a red light camera. So I think both are effective," she said.
She said increasing live enforcement would be difficult amid staffing shortages and potential budget reductions from the state.
"The national average of officers is 2.1 for every 1,000 people. The city is trying to at least get to 1.6, and we continue to stay around 1.4," she said.
Mesiti described the cameras as a "force multiplier" that could provide coverage where officers cannot.
Caraballo noted the city faces uncertainty as state legislators consider removing property tax revenue. She said that without it, the city budget would be $108 million, with the police department currently receiving $94 million.
The motion to advance the camera initiative passed 3-1, with Bonna opposed.