Colorado is taking a bold step towards road safety with a new program that aims to curb speeding, even when you're not actively driving. This initiative introduces a novel approach to traffic enforcement, focusing on vehicle ownership and accountability.
The crux of this program lies in assigning responsibility to the registered owner of a vehicle caught exceeding the speed limit by 10 mph or more. This means that even if someone else was behind the wheel at the time of the infraction, the owner is ultimately held accountable.
This may seem unconventional, but the reasoning behind it is clear: to ensure that vehicle owners take responsibility for how their vehicles are being used on public roads. It aims to create a culture of awareness and accountability, encouraging owners to be mindful of who is driving their car and how they are behaving on the road.
The program, known as AVIS (Automated Vehicle Identification System), employs camera technology to monitor vehicle speeds along designated stretches of road. By calculating the average speed of a vehicle between two points, the system can identify instances of speeding and automatically issue a penalty.
Currently active on Highway 119 in Boulder County, AVIS has already been issuing warnings to drivers since late July. The transition to actual fines is imminent, marking a significant escalation in enforcement efforts. The penalty for exceeding the speed limit by 10 mph or more is a $75 civil fine.
For those who receive a fine, the state provides a dedicated online portal, ColoradoSpeedSafety.com, where motorists can access detailed information about the violation and initiate dispute procedures if they believe the fine was issued in error. This transparency is crucial for maintaining public trust and ensuring fairness in the enforcement process.
Looking ahead, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) plans to expand the AVIS program to other high-risk areas, including school zones and construction zones. These areas are particularly vulnerable, and increased enforcement is essential to protect pedestrians, students, and road workers.
To ensure transparency and fairness, CDOT will implement clear signage indicating camera enforcement areas. Furthermore, a 30-day warning period will precede the activation of the system in each new location, giving drivers ample time to adjust their behavior and avoid penalties.
The primary objective of this program is to improve safety for all road users, including drivers, road workers, law enforcement, pedestrians, and cyclists. By deterring speeding, the program aims to reduce accidents and create a safer environment for everyone.
Revenue generated from the penalties will be used to cover the operational costs of the AVIS program. Any excess funds will be allocated to projects that directly benefit vulnerable road users, further enhancing safety and improving infrastructure for pedestrians, cyclists, and other at-risk groups.
In conjunction with the AVIS program, CDOT is launching a public awareness campaign to dispel common myths surrounding speeding. The campaign will highlight the dangers of speeding and emphasize the minimal time saved compared to the increased risk of accidents.
Shoshana Lew, CDOT’s Executive Director, underscores the importance of this initiative, stating, “Speeding drivers put everyone on the roads at risk, especially vulnerable road users like pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists.” Her words emphasize the collective responsibility of drivers to prioritize safety and protect others.
Lew also addresses a common misconception, noting that “A common misconception is that speeding mainly occurs on highways, but the truth is, it happens on all roads.” This highlights the pervasive nature of speeding and the need for vigilance on all types of roadways.
The program is designed to be as fair as possible. For example, the registered owner can dispute the fine if the vehicle was stolen or recently sold. However, it is the owner's responsibility to provide evidence to support their claim.
It's important to remember that while this program is new, many existing laws and regulations still apply. For example, in Colorado, Adams, El Paso, and Denver counties already have systems in place to monitor and penalize speeding.
However, sometimes even when drivers try to follow the rules, they can still get caught in a difficult situation. For instance, consider the case of a woman in Denver who was recently fined after following a clear road sign that warned of a closure.
Heather Elliott exited the toll lane after seeing a red “X” overhead, signaling that the lane was closed. She believed she was doing the right thing to avoid breaking the law, but she still received a ticket. "I thought 'no problem,' all I would have to do is tell them that there was an accident and I made the right choice to get over," Elliott said.
Her initial appeal was rejected without explanation, highlighting the frustration that can arise when navigating bureaucratic processes. Undeterred, she requested a formal hearing to challenge the citation, demonstrating her commitment to fighting what she believed was an unjust fine.
It was only after she sought further assistance that the full extent of the lane issue was revealed, emphasizing the importance of persistence and advocacy in resolving complex situations.
Fortunately, there are strategies for fighting a speeding ticket if you believe it was wrongfully issued. These strategies, outlined in a legally reviewed post, offer drivers a path to challenge citations and ensure fairness.
One approach is to argue that the ticket was based on a subjective opinion rather than objective evidence. If the officer's assessment of your speed was based on their judgment, you can argue that it was not an accurate reflection of the situation. For example, you could argue that it would be more dangerous to travel at 65 mph when others were traveling at the same speed of 75 mph.
Another strategy is to dispute the officer's presentation of evidence. While you cannot contest an officer's direct observation of a violation, you can introduce evidence such as eyewitness accounts, diagrams, or photos to challenge their interpretation of events.
You could also argue that the ticket was issued due to a "mistake of fact," a situation where you were unaware of violating the law due to circumstances beyond your control. For example, you could argue that you were driving in two lanes because the lane markers were so worn down that you could not see them.
Finally, if all else fails, consider consulting a traffic attorney. Many offer free consultations to assess the merits of your case and provide guidance on the best course of action.