San Francisco has unveiled a controversial new speed camera system that charges drivers based on their income level, raising questions about equality in law enforcement.
At a Glance
- San Francisco has installed California’s first 33 fixed-speed cameras, primarily in school zones and high-injury corridors
- The program includes income-based fines with discounts of up to 50-80% for low-income drivers
- Penalties range from $50 for minor speeding to $500 for driving 100+ mph, with no points added to licenses
- The cameras could potentially issue up to 42,000 citations daily after a two-month grace period ends
- Similar programs are planned for other California cities, including Los Angeles in 2026
California’s First Income-Based Speed Enforcement
San Francisco has rolled out 33 automated speed cameras across the city in what marks California’s first implementation of fixed-speed enforcement technology. Primarily located in school zones and high-injury corridors, these cameras began monitoring traffic on March 20, 2025, following the passage of AB 645. The program currently includes a two-month grace period where violators will receive warnings rather than fines. This initiative, endorsed by Governor Gavin Newsom, represents a significant shift in traffic enforcement strategy that adjusts penalties based on a driver’s income level.
Watch coverage here of new speed cameras.
The cameras are designed to photograph vehicles exceeding posted speed limits by more than 11 mph. Once the grace period concludes, violators will face civil penalties ranging from $50 for driving 11-15 mph over the limit up to $500 for traveling at 100 mph or more. Unlike traditional speeding tickets, these automated citations won’t add points to drivers’ licenses. Warning signs have been installed at intersections with cameras to alert motorists of the surveillance, though critics question whether this gives drivers adequate notice.
Tiered Pricing System Raises Questions
Perhaps most controversial is the program’s tiered pricing system based on income. Low-income drivers can receive a 50% discount on fines, with income thresholds adjusted by household size. Some reports indicate discounts could reach up to 80% for the lowest-income residents. To qualify for reduced rates, drivers must participate in government assistance programs such as SNAP, CalWORKS, Medi-Cal, CAPI, or IHSS. This “equity” approach to traffic enforcement has drawn both praise from safety advocates and criticism from those who question whether laws should be applied differently based on economic status.
“Speed cameras change behavior and then that reduces crashes,” says Marta Lindsey, representing the pedestrian advocacy group Walk SF. “New York City has just seen dramatic results in behavior change and very few people getting second tickets, so people learn quickly.”
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) has created a comprehensive implementation plan including an interactive map showing camera locations, background information on the program, and a payment portal that will be available once citations begin. The agency could potentially issue up to 42,000 citations daily once fully operational, raising questions about whether revenue generation might become a primary motivation rather than safety.
Expanding Beyond San Francisco
The speed camera program isn’t intended to remain exclusive to San Francisco. Los Angeles is already planning to implement a similar system in 2026, and other California cities may follow suit. Stella Escobedo from One America News Network highlighted the expanding nature of the program, noting that it is “backed by California’s Governor Gavin Newsom.” The growth of automated, income-adjusted enforcement represents a significant shift in how traffic laws are applied throughout the state.
“San Francisco has launched a speed camera program that is backed by California’s Governor Gavin Newsom,” reported Stella Escobedo from OANN.
For drivers passing through these areas, understanding the new system has become essential. The SFMTA has established resources for inquiries and created a sign-up system for updates as the program evolves. Related initiatives include new speed limit signage throughout affected areas. While safety advocates point to potential reductions in crashes and fatalities, the introduction of income-based enforcement raises fundamental questions about equal application of the law and governmental overreach in traffic management.
​
