By Kyra Theodore
@redlineproject
AI disclosure: ChatGPT was used to assist in brainstorming ideas and organizing the structure of the content. MidJourney was used to create images, and Runway ML was used to create the video. The FAQ was generated by NotebookLM.
Chicago’s Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE) program was introduced in 2013 as a way to make streets safer for everyone, especially around schools and parks.
Speed cameras were installed in designated Children’s Safety Zones with the hopes of slowing down drivers and thereby reducing traffic fatalities and protecting kids. A decade later, the program has issued over nine million tickets, generating $879 million in revenue. That’s more than three tickets for every Chicago resident.
In 2021, former Mayor Lori Lightfoot lowered the speeding threshold for tickets, marking a major turning point for the ASE program. Drivers traveling just 6–10 mph over the limit began receiving $35 fines — a change that added millions to city revenue.
That year alone, speed cameras issued 2.81 million tickets — more than Chicago’s entire population. This equates to one ticket every 11 seconds, generating revenue at a rate of $250,000 per day. Over the next three years, more than 5.3 million tickets were issued. By 2023, the program collected $102 million in fines in a single year. These numbers make Chicago’s ASE program one of the most aggressive in the nation
The financial burden of these tickets is not shared equally across Chicago. Among the 169 active speed cameras last year, 17 generated over $1 million, and five brought in more than $2 million each. Of those five top-earning cameras, three were located on the South Side, home to many predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods. These areas, long underserved by infrastructure investment, are now paying a disproportionate share of the program’s costs. This enforcement strategy targets vulnerable communities while failing to address the root causes of traffic safety issues.
Black and Latino Communities Hit Hardest
While the ASE program markets itself as a race-neutral safety initiative, its design and implementation disproportionately harm Black and Latino communities. Black and Latino neighborhoods consistently receive the highest volume of tickets, a trend tied directly to decades of disinvestment in infrastructure. Many speed cameras in these neighborhoods are placed on wide, multi-lane roads originally built to accommodate industrial traffic. Unlike the narrower, traffic-calmed streets of wealthier, majority-white areas, these roads lack features like speed bumps, roundabouts, or well-maintained pedestrian crossings. Drivers navigating these faster roads are more likely to unintentionally exceed speed limits.
A study conducted by the University of Illinois Chicago found that between 2016 and 2019, predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods received up to double the number of tickets per household compared to majority-white neighborhoods.
UIC Professor of Urban Planning Nik Theodore explained how these road designs contribute to inequity.
“Wide roads encourage higher speeds,” Theodore said. “Without closely spaced intersections or sidewalks, it’s easier for drivers to unintentionally exceed speed limits.”
Many speed cameras on the South and West Sides are installed along these roads, particularly near former industrial zones like the old stockyards. These areas were designed to move trucks and goods, not to protect pedestrians.
Financial Burdens on Low-Income Residents
For residents in low-income neighborhoods, the consequences of ASE fines are severe. Tickets pile up, late fees accrue, and the financial strain can become crushing. UIC research reveals that between 2016 and 2019, some households spent as much as 1.5% of their income on traffic fines — three times the rate of households in wealthier, white areas.
Worse yet, nearly half (46%) of tickets in low-income neighborhoods accrued additional late fees, compared to just 17% in wealthier areas. These fees can double or even triple the cost of a ticket. Consequences snowball when fines remain unpaid. Vehicle booting, impoundment, and license suspensions are common outcomes, leaving many residents without reliable transportation.
For people who depend on their cars to commute to work, run errands, or take their kids to school, losing a vehicle can derail daily life. Critics call this enforcement model a regressive tax — a system that disproportionately harms those who can least afford it, while wealthier drivers can absorb the costs with little impact. These policies, coupled wtih systemic econmic disparities, reinforces cycles of inequality, showing how so-called “race-neutral” initiatives can still produced deeply racialized outcomes.
Do Speed Cameras Actually Make Streets Safer?
City officials market the ASE program as part of Chicago’s Vision Zero initiative, which aims to eliminate traffic fatalities. They point to a modest 12% reduction in injury crashes near speed cameras as evidence of its success. However, these numbers are inconsistent at best.
In 2021, Chicago saw 167 traffic fatalities — a 20% increase from the previous year. While the COVID-19 lockdowns likely contributed to fewer crashes in 2020, the fatalities in 2021 were also significantly higher than the 108 deaths recorded in 2019.
Citywide, serious crashes haven’t declined proportionately to the scale of the program. While some camera-monitored zones have seen reductions, others have experienced no significant change — or even increases. Moreover, some of the most profitable cameras aren’t located in the city’s most dangerous intersections which further undermines the safety-first narrative.
Research further challenges the safety-first narrative. A 2023 UIC study found little correlation between the number of tickets issued and improved safety outcomes. Studies from other regions, including Arizona and Great Britain, also suggest that speed cameras have limited effectiveness in reducing crashes. In some cases, they may even increase risk. Drivers often brake abruptly near cameras to avoid fines, only to speed up again once they’ve passed, creating erratic traffic patterns.
Attempts at Reform
In response to mounting criticism, the city has made some adjustments. The Clear Path Relief Program, introduced by Lightfoot, offers reduced fines and debt forgiveness for low-income residents. While this program offers some relief, it still fails to tackle the program’s root problems.
In 2023, the city also relocated 16 cameras to higher-crash zones in an effort to boost safety outcomes. However, the effectiveness of these changes remains unclear, and broader trends continue to show inconsistent results. Likewise, without significant investment in infrastructure improvements, Chicago’s reliance on speed cameras remains a Band-Aid solution.
Root Causes and Long-Term Solutions
The ASE program’s challenges go beyond enforcement. Decades of urban planning decisions have created a city where Black and Latino neighborhoods are over-policed for traffic violations and underfunded when it comes to infrastructure improvements. While wealthier neighborhoods benefit from streets designed to slow traffic naturally, many South and West Side communities still rely on enforcement to manage speeding.
Advocates argue that the key to safer streets lies in prevention, not punishment. Investments in infrastructure — such as narrowing streets, adding pedestrian crossings, and installing protected bike lanes — could reduce speeding at its source. These measures would not only improve safety but also reduce reliance on punitive systems that disproportionately affect low-income and minority residents.
If Chicago truly wants safer streets, it must rethink its approach. Fixing outdated road designs, addressing distracted and reckless driving, and ensuring transparency in enforcement are essential steps. Until then, speed cameras will remain a contentious issue — profitable for the city, but costly for its most vulnerable residents.
“As long as we focus on punishing drivers rather than fixing the streets themselves, we’re missing the point,” said Nik Theodore. “We can’t ticket our way to safer streets.”
Chicago Speed Camera FAQ
1. What is the purpose of Chicago’s Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE) program?
The ASE program, launched in 2013, aims to enhance street safety, particularly in designated Children’s Safety Zones near schools and parks. By utilizing speed cameras, the program seeks to deter speeding, thereby reducing traffic accidents and protecting pedestrians, especially children.
2. How has the program evolved over time?
Initially, the program focused on higher speed violations. However, in 2021, the threshold for issuing tickets was lowered to include drivers exceeding the speed limit by 6–10 mph. This change resulted in a significant increase in the number of tickets issued and revenue generated, making Chicago’s program one of the most aggressive in the US.
3. Are the effects of the ASE program felt equally across Chicago?
No, the program’s burden falls disproportionately on Black and Latino communities. These neighborhoods tend to have wider roads designed for industrial traffic, lacking traffic calming features prevalent in wealthier areas. This leads to unintentional speeding and a higher concentration of speed cameras, resulting in a greater number of tickets issued in these areas.
4. What are the consequences for residents in low-income neighborhoods?
The financial strain of ASE fines can be severe for low-income residents. The accumulation of tickets, late fees, vehicle booting, and license suspensions can create significant hardship, potentially impacting employment and daily life. This enforcement model is often criticized as a regressive tax that exacerbates existing inequalities.
5. Is there evidence that speed cameras improve street safety?
While the city cites a modest reduction in injury crashes near speed cameras, the overall impact on traffic fatalities is inconsistent. Some studies, including research from UIC, suggest a weak correlation between ticket numbers and safety outcomes. Critics argue that speed cameras may even encourage erratic driving patterns due to sudden braking near cameras.
6. What steps has the city taken to address concerns about the program?
The city implemented the Clear Path Relief Program, offering reduced fines and debt forgiveness for low-income residents. Additionally, some cameras were relocated to high-crash zones. However, these measures are viewed as insufficient by advocates who call for a more fundamental shift in approach.
7. What alternative solutions are being proposed to address traffic safety?Advocates emphasize the importance of investing in infrastructure improvements, such as narrowing streets, adding pedestrian crossings, and creating protected bike lanes. These measures aim to prevent speeding by design rather than relying solely on punitive measures.
8. What is the main criticism of Chicago’s current reliance on speed cameras?Critics argue that focusing primarily on punishment through speed cameras fails to address the root causes of traffic safety issues, particularly the lack of investment in infrastructure in marginalized communities. They advocate for a more holistic approach that prioritizes preventative measures and equitable distribution of resources to create truly safer streets for all residents.