Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube

By Karen Fassuliotis

Raise your hand if you think speeding is a problem in Greenwich.

Most of us would.

Now imagine this: You’re driving to get to the hospital for an emergency, pass by a school at 2:00 PM focused on getting there, when weeks later a $50 fine shows up in your mailbox. No officer pulled you over. No chance to explain a momentary lapse or an emergency. Just a cold, automated ticket from a camera you barely noticed.

This is happening right now in our town. While First Selectman Fred Camillo, Selectpersons Lauren Rabin and Rachel Khanna, and Police Chief Jim Heavey call these cameras “lifesavers,” the reality is far less reassuring.

How We Got Here – A Quick History

For decades, Connecticut wisely banned traffic cameras. Lawmakers saw them for what they often are: sneaky revenue tools that invade privacy, bypass due process, and disproportionately punish lower-income and minority drivers. States like Arizona and Texas have scrapped similar programs for the same reasons.

Then, in 2023, the Democratic-led legislature passed Public Act 23-116 under the Vision Zero banner (a goal we all support: zero traffic deaths). The law allows towns to install speed and red-light cameras in school zones—but only with these rules:

• Pass a local ordinance
• Get state DOT approval (renewed every 3 years)
• Place cameras equitably, focused on safety—not profit
• Use fine money only for road/safety improvements or program costs—no general fund slush

Sounds reasonable. But the law has a glaring weakness: no strong protections to stop private vendors from steering placements toward the most profitable (i.e., highest-ticket) spots while claiming it’s all about “safety data.”

Greenwich’s Rushed Process

On May 9, 2024, the Board of Selectmen, led by Fred Camillo, Lauren Rabin and Rachael Khanna — acting as the town’s traffic authority — unanimously rubber-stamped the camera ordinance proposed by Chief of Police Heavey after multiple poorly attended meetings which allowed public comment. Their authority allowed them to bypass the Board of Estimate and Taxation and Representative Town Meeting entirely. No broad community debate. No real public hearing (the sessions where it was discussed weren’t posted as such). No neighborhood votes on specific locations. Just a quick 3-0 green light. Did it meet the requirements of the state statute? Possibly. It all rests on whether their meetings allowing public comment is a hearing.

The plan flew to Department of Transportation with approval by July 2025. By year end Greenwich had traffic cameras. That’s not careful governance—that’s a rush job.

The Biggest Problem: A Vendor That Profits from Every Ticket

Police Chief Heavey handed the keys to Blue Line Solutions, a Tennessee vendor who installed the cameras, and runs daily operations – all at zero upfront cost to the town and whose profits rise with every ticket. Blue Line ran the “studies,” crunched the numbers (223,109 drivers a week across the zones, 44,208 speeding by 10+ mph — nearly 20%, the vast majority in the minor 11-14 mph range), and picked the sites.

Blue Line said they chose the sites because of the combination of accidents and speed. In reality they chose high-volume ticket factories like North Street School and Eagle Hill — places where hardly any kids actually walk to school. Most arrive by bus or parent drop-off. Crash history at some of these spots? None to minimal at best. Blue Line admitted they prioritized locations with “the most speeders,” not the worst accident records. That’s not safety planning — that’s revenue engineering.

How do they get paid? From your fines.

State law bans straight percentage cuts, so Blue Line charges fixed fees per ticket or warning (in Greenwich, the Town gets $28-32 per ticket and Blue Line gets $18-22 per ticket). Here’s the number of tickets issued in Greenwich in January alone:

This means that in January 2026 alone - 7,225 violations were issued (it’s been reported that another 9,537 are pending review), and gross revenue of over $361,000 (or more if someone got multiple tickets) collected at $50–$75 per ticket (which also doesn’t factor in the $15 online “convenience” fee that goes straight to Blue Line).

• Every $50 first-offense ticket → They take ~$18-22 + a $15 “convenience fee”
• Every $75 repeat ticket → Another fee to them

Blue Line also gets paid first — installation, maintenance, and profit — before any real safety work gets funded. Persistent high ticket volume months after rollout proves the system isn’t solving speeding; it’s feeding on it.

Facing intense “feedback” from Greenwich residents, Camillo and Rabin adamantly insist this is “not a revenue generator” and “the furthest thing from a money grab.” One neighborhood association has even dubbed this “Ticket Gate”. Chief Heavey claims that tickets will drop significantly as people become aware of the cameras. Post-installation they are now going to any public meeting that will listen to them to say that cameras are a school safety issue, nothing more.

Does anyone really believe that? Here we are with a self-funding machine that reimburses the vendor, Blue Line, from the first dollar collected and profits from the cameras generating millions a year. Early data from December 2025, reported in local media, showed a promising 90% reduction in speeders at pilot sites like Eagle Hill and North Street schools after just six weeks. Yet by January 2026, the town was still issuing over 7,000 tickets in one month. If the cameras are such a deterrent, why the persistent high volume of violations?

And let's not ignore the broader concerns: these cameras raise privacy issues by capturing license plates and vehicle data en masse, potentially without adequate safeguards. Errors in calibration or timing could lead to wrongful fines, and appeals processes, first local, then to Superior Court, are burdensome to those caught by the camera.

Chief Heavey, meanwhile, got the easy way out: no need to coordinate with Public Works on speed humps, chicanes, narrowed lanes, or consistent patrols. Just outsource to a camera company and call it a day.

No matter how you slice it, when a private company directly profits from every “gotcha” moment, it looks a lot like a cash grab dressed up as safety.

No Real Accountability or Transparency

Let’s face it. The speed cameras do not allow for real accountability or transparency. It does the opposite. Here’s the process:

• Vendor Blue Line does the first review (and profits from upheld tickets).
• Greenwich Police take a second look.
• Any appeals are via vendor-run forms/phone lines, like parking tickets.
• The appeals panel wasn’t even fully set up by late 2025.
• There’s no independent oversight for errors (wrong plate, emergency vehicle).
• Reporters asking for data in December 2025 were told to call Blue Line—“We don’t operate the cameras.”
• No public dashboard for violations, revenue, or crash reductions.
• ACLU warns these systems disproportionately burden lower-income and minority drivers.

Drivers are also confused as to the correct speed limit since all of these locations have different ones – is it 20 mph, as it is by Central Middle School or up Fairfield Avenue by Country Day School, or 25 mph, by North Street School? And slowing down the hill on the Post Road in front of the High School potentially causes more traffic hazards and possible accidents.

Is this what we want in Greenwich?

Other Towns Actually Listened—and Said No

When towns hold real public hearings or referendums, residents push back hard—and cameras often die.

• In Kent, voters crushed a proposal 391–100 in January 2025, calling it a trust-destroying speed trap.
• Nearby northwest towns (Falls Village, Salisbury, Cornwall, Sharon, North Canaan) backed off after privacy and overreach concerns.
• Even on the Gold Coast: Norwalk stalled rollout amid pushback, Westport paused after “gotcha” fears, Darien and New Canaan ditched the idea to protect liberties and keep real officers on patrol.

When towns treat residents as partners, automated cameras usually lose. Greenwich’s leaders, Camillo, Rabin, Khanna, and Heavey, skipped that step.

Real Solutions Exist

We all agree: Speeding cars near our schools and in our neighborhoods are dangerous, and we want safer streets for our kids and families. The Skylark-Glen Rd – Patterson Ave neighborhoods, for example, and other neighborhoods, have begged for proven alternatives for years and heard the same tired excuses: “not enough officers,” “can’t change the roads,” “kids will speed up at feedback signs” (research says the opposite). Enough.

Real solutions exist that can be done within the Greenwich budget process and they don’t require a vendor payday:

• Visible police patrols that monitor speeding, use judgment, issue tickets when appropriate, and deter broadly.
• Physical traffic calming — speed humps, raised crosswalks, chicanes — that cut speeds 20-25% permanently.
• Radar feedback signs that actually slow drivers (5-7 mph drops, up to 50% fewer violations).
• Community education that builds safer habits instead of fining them.

It’s Time for a Reset

Camillo, Rabin, and Khanna must pause the program immediately. Stop issuing new tickets. Account for every dollar, including Blue Line’s cut. T hen hold multiple, real town hall meetings in Cos Cob, Old Greenwich, Riverside, Glenville, and every neighborhood — not just a couple of sparsely attended sessions at Town Hall.

This isn’t about being anti-safety. It’s about protecting our rights, our wallets, and our community from a system that puts profits over people.

Please continue to contact First Selectman Camillo, Selectpersons Rabin and Khanna, and Chief Heavey today. Tell them: Listen to the community. Reconfigure the program or abandon it altogether. Replace it with measures that actually make drivers slow down — not because a camera caught them.

Together, we can bring back real policing and genuine safety—not robotic fines.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!'