Red light camera enforcement in Pueblo, Colorado, was introduced with the promise of safer streets and a self-sustaining revenue stream. The city expected that fines collected from violations would cover the costs of leasing and maintaining the equipment while helping to fund public safety initiatives. But reality has proven far more complicated. A significant share of tickets went unpaid, leaving Pueblo with a shortfall that raised questions about the long-term viability of the program.
The Financial Strain of Unpaid Tickets
City leaders quickly discovered that roughly 20 percent of tickets issued by the red light cameras were not being paid. That unpaid balance left Pueblo with a budget deficit of about $20,000. Instead of generating a surplus for safety programs, the cameras became a financial burden.
Pueblo leases three red light camera units from a private vendor at a cost of about $15,000 per month. Over the course of just six months, lease payments totaled $90,000, while actual collections from fines amounted to only around $70,000. The gap revealed a core weakness in the program: it depended entirely on near-perfect compliance to break even.
Why Drivers Don’t Pay
The unpaid ticket problem in Pueblo reflects broader national trends. Drivers choose not to pay their red light camera fines for several reasons:
-
Financial hardship. Even modest fines can be a strain on families living paycheck to paycheck.
-
Disagreement with the program. Some drivers refuse to pay on principle, seeing red light cameras as unfair or unconstitutional.
-
Administrative challenges. Notices may not always reach the correct person, particularly if vehicle registrations are outdated or the car has changed hands.
-
Weak enforcement tools. Without strong mechanisms such as registration holds or credit reporting, some drivers simply gamble that nothing will happen if they ignore the fine.
The combination of these factors makes it difficult for cities like Pueblo to achieve high compliance rates.
The Broader Impact of Unpaid Fines
Unpaid red light camera tickets carry more than just financial consequences for city budgets. They also create problems of fairness, credibility, and enforcement consistency.
-
Budget Deficits: Cities often plan around the assumption that revenue from tickets will cover costs. When large numbers go unpaid, taxpayers may end up subsidizing programs that were supposed to pay for themselves.
-
Credibility Issues: Officials who promised that the cameras would be self-funding and improve safety risk losing public trust when the math doesn’t add up.
-
Public Safety vs. Profit: When revenue shortfalls dominate the conversation, the original safety purpose of the program can appear secondary.
-
Unequal Burden: Those who pay their fines shoulder the full cost of compliance, while those who refuse effectively avoid punishment if enforcement mechanisms are weak.
Pueblo as a Case Study
Pueblo’s experience demonstrates the challenges small and mid-sized cities face with automated enforcement. Unlike larger metro areas with broader tax bases and enforcement infrastructure, smaller cities often cannot absorb large amounts of unpaid fines. The result is a cycle in which the cost of leasing and maintaining cameras outweighs the collected revenue, forcing officials to reconsider whether the program is financially sustainable.
What Pueblo Could Teach Other Cities
The Pueblo example highlights several lessons for other jurisdictions:
-
Plan for Nonpayment: Cities should budget with the expectation that a portion of fines will go uncollected. Overly optimistic revenue projections can create financial shortfalls.
-
Strengthen Enforcement: Options like vehicle registration holds, liens, or partnerships with state agencies can increase collection rates.
-
Focus on Safety Metrics: Programs should be judged by their impact on reducing crashes, not by how much revenue they bring in. If cameras prevent accidents, their value extends beyond dollars.
-
Transparency Matters: Public trust depends on clear communication about where revenue goes, how much is collected, and how safety is measured.
The Bigger Picture
Across the country, unpaid red light camera tickets are an increasing problem. Nationally, some cities report collection rates under 80 percent, meaning one in five tickets goes unresolved. For larger cities with higher ticket volumes, this can represent millions in lost revenue. For smaller cities like Pueblo, it can be the difference between a sustainable safety program and a financial liability.
The debate over red light cameras often centers on fairness, revenue, and safety. But the Pueblo case shows that unpaid fines are at the heart of the controversy. If enforcement cannot ensure compliance, then the cameras risk losing their credibility both as a safety measure and as a financial tool.
Conclusion
Unpaid red light camera tickets in Pueblo, Colorado, turned a program meant to improve safety and generate revenue into a budget shortfall. With nearly one in five tickets going unpaid, the city found itself covering costs it had expected violators to pay. Pueblo’s experience serves as a warning to other communities: unless strong enforcement tools are in place and realistic collection rates are assumed, red light cameras may become more of a liability than an asset.