If the public can’t see the logic, it’s not oversight, it’s targeting
Most people assume traffic cameras are placed based on safety data. But in many cities, the logic behind camera placement isn’t public and often, it isn’t even owned by the city. Placement can be guided by vendor proposals, budget targets, or enforcement volume, not public review. Some cities use crash data. Others use contract performance clauses. Very few publish the criteria. Even fewer let residents contest it. This page explores how placement decisions are made, why they’re often opaque, and what structural oversight should look like, starting with public access to the logic itself.
Understanding the Hidden Logic Behind Camera Placement
Traffic cameras are often marketed as safety tools. But the decision to place them, where, when, and under what justification, is rarely public, and in many cases, not even owned by the city itself.
Placement logic can be based on crash data, but it’s just as often shaped by vendor proposals, expected fine volume, or legal thresholds written into enforcement contracts. Some cities openly disclose these criteria. Most do not.
In places like New York City, the public can find camera locations but not the process behind site selection. In others, entire placement maps are hidden behind non-disclosure agreements with equipment vendors. If the public wants to question the logic, they have to submit FOI requests, and even then, results are mixed or denied.
Why Placement Matters
When a camera is placed at a busy intersection, it changes behavior, but it also generates fines. If those fines climb, the system profits. If they drop, the contract may not renew. That logic creates an incentive structure, one the public can’t see.
If you can’t see why a camera was placed, or contest whether it belongs there, that’s not oversight. It’s silent targeting at the infrastructure level.
What 200 Brady Street Makes Visible
This platform does not place cameras. It does not sell enforcement systems. And it does not assist cities with location targeting. Instead, it exists to expose what’s already happening and to give the public a civic record they can see and challenge.
- Milestone 1 makes red light and speed enforcement visible, ticket by ticket
- Milestone 2 supports FOI logic to map enforcement decisions across jurisdictions
- Governance ensures no vendor or city can override redaction, licensing, or placement visibility
- The Enforcement Economy shows how camera placement ties into $20B+ in ticket revenue
We’re not questioning whether enforcement should exist. We’re asking why the public doesn’t control the logic that governs it.
What happens when you try to ask where cameras come from?
In April 2024, 200 Brady Street founder Warren Leroux submitted a Freedom of Information request to the City of Greater Sudbury. The request asked for a list of government entities, including any other municipalities, consulted in the decision to justify or implement a red light camera system.
The city responded with an invoice of $1,810.00, including 60 hours of search time.
View the original FOI response (PDF screenshot)
This isn’t a complaint about fees. It’s an Identification of a structural problem: public visibility should not be cost prohibitive, especially when asking for the logic behind surveillance based enforcement. The current system makes it easier to deploy cameras than to question them.
This is why Milestone 2 includes FOI indexing, metadata scaffolding, and public request transparency, so no one has to pay $1800 just to ask where enforcement policy comes from.
Visibility shouldn’t depend on your budget.
When enforcement becomes automated, the logic behind it must be public. 200 Brady Street exists to expose that logic, not through speculation, but through verified records, public scaffolding, and milestone based deployment.
Explore the first milestone, or see how FOI indexing and metadata tools will make these records accessible.
Still have questions about camera placement, policy justification, or how the public can push for real oversight? Email us at invest@200bradystreet.com.