One of the speed cameras on North Albany Road at Thornton Lake Drive (Photo 6/22/2025)
Albany city officials are scrambling to clear up questions about the school zone speed cameras on North Albany Road. But they say signs warning drivers of photo enforcement there were placed in compliance with state law.
At Wednesday’s city council meeting, Councilor Steph Newton reported she had measured distances and found one sign was not placed far enough from the cameras at Thornton Lake Road. But the sign where she took the measurement is not a sign where the law says distance matters.
Also Wednesday, though, North Albany resident Jamie Perry raised questions about several other compliance issues, asserting among other things that the school speed zone did not comply with an ODOT speed zone order from the 1990s. She asked the council for a moratorium on enforcement until the issues are cleared up.
On Friday, Deputy City Manager Kayla Barber-Perotta sent council members the following message:
“I want to provide clarification regarding concerns raised during our last Council meeting about the placement of photo enforcement signage and whether it was posted properly. Following that meeting, our Public Works team reviewed measurements and applicable ORS provisions regarding placement. Based on that review, we can confirm that our required signage is in compliance.
“The sign referenced during the meeting as being 65 yards away is not one of the required ORS signs. It is an optional sign installed on the traffic signal, added in consultation with our vendor to provide additional warning and visibility beyond what is required by law.
“Regarding the required signage, ORS specifies that ‘Traffic Laws Photo Enforced’ signs must be installed 100–400 yards from the photo radar unit. Albany’s required signage meets these standards:
“Northbound leg: 395 yards from the intersection
“Southbound leg: 216 yards from the intersection
“Director [Chris] Bailey [of public works] will provide a more in-depth discussion on signage requirements and related legal considerations in this area at the August 27 Council Meeting. There are a lot of complexities to ORS and traffic code that our staff works through with each installation. This will give an opportunity to discuss more of those nuances and answer questions. In the meantime, please use the above information when responding to resident inquiries so our communications remain accurate and consistent.”
One part of state law requires flashing lights indicating school days when photo radar is used in school zones. Barber-Perotta said the city staff was seeking “clarification” on that issue and added: “There is conflicting language between sections of the ORS and between the ORS and ODOT’s MUTCD supplement. We have requested guidance from ODOT and are awaiting their response. Once that is received, we will update council.”
MUTCD refers to a manual of traffic control devices. Whatever the manual says, though, is probably not as important as what the law requires.
This commotion about traffic cameras has come up partly because on two days in April, the cameras resulted citations when drivers had reason to believe, because of a school reader board, that it was not a school day.
Those tickets should have been dismissed. The city should not fine people for exceeding the school zone limit when a sign says there is no school. (hh)
“Seeking clarification” ….on the city’s best day would be that the implementation of their program is arguable at best and will not be resolved until someone, or a group of people file a challenge in circuit Court to establish case law. It should not have to come to this. The benefit of the doubt should be resolved in favor of the citizens whom the government is supposed to serve. Coming clean with the error and making it right for those who received a ticket would in fact improve the city’s standing and credibility with the citizens of Albany.
It’s a shame Anon is anonymous. He has a valid point. Not following the law showsnthat this is not about safety, just a money grab against citizens who have the power to vote.
This should just be a 20mph zone all the time. Then we wouldn’t have to think about what day or time it is. We could just drive safely and never worry about a ticket.
Sounds like the folks ‘seeking clarification’ are looking for ways to get out of the tickets they got.
Unless you were raised by wolves, you went to school for 12 years and know that school runs from September to the second week of June and from 7am to 5pm. You also know that school is out on major holidays. So…utilizing even a tiny amount of common sense, ASSUME that school is in session during those times and SLOW THE HECK DOWN!!!
And for you whiners…the time difference for common sense doesn’t even cost a minute (0.835) to go from 45mph to 20mph over four blocks (typical length of a school zone). If you can’t give a minute of your time, then you shouldn’t be driving in the first place.
The City attorney should suspend all new citation issuances until this plays out. Just shut it down. Thank you Steph Newton
Good point! In fact, all tickets issued should be dismissed, including those that have already been paid. If the radar camera set up is not in compliance now, it has never been in compliance.
Grow up people, slow down and drive the speed limit, what’s so hard with that ???
I was under the impression that Albany residents were interested both in the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. All this niggling over how many feet this sign or that signal must be from some other sign or signal demonstrates clearly that many in this Fair City are interested in only one thing – their precious presence on the planet. Anything, even the most petty, draws blistering blubbering so vicious you’d think having to drop one’s speed from 40 to 20 is cruel and unusual punishment. Come on Albany. You’re really not this petty, are you? The frivolous arguments put forth by Hering and the Naybob comments cheering-on this trifling topic demonstrates that many will follow any law they deem fit … all others be damned.
Did you ever stop and think that maybe it’s YOU that’s screwed up and everybody else is right?
Those radar cameras are monitored by a third party usually out of state, all they do is see if the person thats driving has a similar match to whos registered to drive and then makes a decision to send the info back to this state. You can can often fight this ticket in court using the the right to challenge your accuser as it will be an officer from albany sent to court to deal with the ticket when technology its the third party who made the accusations and most likely will never show up to court in another state.
In Albany, the local police decide whether to issue a ticket based on the camera image.
Partly I am sentimental about the past when the community adequately funded the police force and they actually enforced traffic laws (when was the last time you saw a police officer watching an intersection in Albany?). And partly I am fearful about the loss of freedom in America that would come with automated law enforcement in general (imagine the dystopian image of cameras, drones, and robotics coupled with AI broadly enforcing laws in America). So I find myself staunchly opposed to the increased deployment of stop light cameras; I see it as a slippery slope where we increasingly trade freedom for safety, and like a frog in a pot of heated water, we won’t know how dire the situation is until it is too late. Benjamin Franklin’s words come to mind: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” If you agree please speak up and let’s stand together in opposition.
https://ww2.motorists.org/blog/10-reasons-to-oppose-red-light-cameras-2/
https://legalclarity.org/are-red-light-cameras-unconstitutional/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/red-light-cameras-may-not-make-streets-safer/
Well put Sir. Clearly what is wrong in our current society.
Mr. Wheeler, read the August 13th 2025 city council agenda. On page 9 there are letters from people that were informing the city council of some people who received 6 tickets in one day and the city’s actions of using drones and city employees to access their yards to harass a neighbor that has a building permit saying they were not building to code. Benton County is defending the owner, Eaton and his wife. On page 11 Mayor Johnson wanted to look into it but Kidd, the city attorney said they cannot discuss it due to the pending litigation. Spying, drones, mass ticketing and litigations! Our liberty is already up for sell.
How many Bots do you get on you blog here, Hasso? I’d be curious. Law states 100-400yards. One is 300ish another is 250ish. The extra sign in Question is 65 yards. So you get double warning it sounds like going one way. I’m as angry as the next person about this surveillance state that the nation is falling under but ppl ripping challengers at 115, I think was the high score, Is excessive in a 45. But, I got a minivan so what do I know. Lol
Where is the signage on Santiam East bound. I just got a warning letter allegedly speeding at the intersection of Geary and Santiam. I’ve looked and don’t see signage let alone the camera itself
For photos of the east and westbound cameras at Santiam Road and Geary, go to my story: https://hh-today.com/another-albany-site-for-getting-a-camera-ticket/
As for signs I’ll see if any are there.
I live in a neighboring town, we have flashing yellow lights warning people that school is in session and to be careful, reduce speed to 20mph. If this was actually about safety, they would install flashing lights. Nothing does more to remind people, hey this is a school zone, than flashing lights. The idiotic comments about flashing lights being too expensive, is an absurd statement. The cameras have brought in enough money to pay for flashing lights in one month. Jefferson 10 miles away, has a population of less than 3,500 people, yet we have flashing lights to protect kids on a street that is otherwise 45mph, guess what, I rarely see anyone disregarding them. Albany at 55,000 people, nearly 20x bigger than Jefferson and you can’t handle the budget of installing a few flashing lights, COME ON, don’t even talk about safety and how you care about the kids until you install flashing lights and make it obvious and indisputable that this is about safety and not just a money grab. This is the only city I’ve seen that doesn’t have flashing lights. If this is about safety, it’s the first thing that should have been done, because as someone from out of town, I assumed if school was in session, there would be lights, every other town has lights… you want safety, make your school zone uniform with other school zones throughout the state.
I question the validity of “School Zone Camera” where there are no schools! I received a “School Zone Camera” infraction at 165th Street and Cross Island Expressway (WB), and yet there are no schools anywhere in the vicinity! I chose to pay it as it would cost me more to fight it than the $50 fine. A total money grab!
That intersection happens to be in New York. Glad to see they charge only 50 bucks for a school zone ticket there.
Fingers crossed we get the lights the flashing lights that is. I’ve been a big believer in them since the beginning of all this mess for years actually. I believe that it is safer for the children and four drivers to have the flashing yellow lights. That other person had a good point that smaller towns could afford to do this why can’t Albany afford to do this? I have another question about the tickets and the revenue, I have a hunch that North Albany road is probably the most paid tickets so far. I don’t know if they’ve gotten the most tickets given or if there’s even a way to know the difference between the two. For some reason I believe that we’ll have more people that pay on North Albany road then let’s say on Geary and Queen
Just to clarify what’s now confirmed in law: ORS 810.439 was repealed by HB 4109, effective June 6, 2024. That means any citations issued in 2025 cannot rely on that statute.
The current governing law is ORS 810.444, which now requires a real-time speed feedback sign—not just a static speed limit or photo enforcement warning. The sign must show the driver’s actual speed and be placed between 100 and 400 yards before the radar unit.
If no such sign exists, citations are noncompliant and legally vulnerable.
Ironically, the City’s own rebuttal confirms that the 65-yard sign is optional and not within the required range—meaning their own defense now reinforces the legal concern.
This isn’t about technicalities—it’s about due process and lawful enforcement.
Well, whatever HB 4109 was intended to do, as I read it, the bill amended ORS 810.444, which refers to photo radar operated under the photo radar law 810.438. I’m pretty sure that the North Albany cameras are operated under 810.437, which is the law on speeding tickets issued under the “speeding red light” law. The red light speeding law does not have the same sign requirements as the photo radar law.
Thank you, Hasso. It’s important to clarify that citations are being issued under ORS 811.111 for speeding violations, that statute does not authorize photo enforcement. The authority for automated enforcement must come from either ORS 810.437 (photo red light systems) or ORS 810.444 (photo radar in high crash corridors, including school zones).
The City has referenced signage standards from HB 4109 and ORS 810.444—specifically the 100–400 yard requirement. That language does not appear in 810.437. So if the City is enforcing in a school zone and referencing signage standards from HB 4109 or ORS 810.444, they’re implicitly acknowledging that school zone-specific radar enforcement falls under 810.444, not 810.437.
That distinction matters, because 810.444 carries specific procedural requirements that must be met for citations to be valid.