What the number means
The 42-of-46 figure is a Camera Tax Project compilation of identified local ballot contests, not a claim that every jurisdiction or every ballot question was identical.
Questions differed. Some asked whether to prohibit cameras. Some sought repeal. Others required voter approval or restricted operation. The jurisdictions, years and political contexts also differed. The consistent lesson is narrower and powerful: when residents receive a direct choice, automated enforcement often proves less popular than official statements suggest.
Safety policy still requires legitimacy.
Revenue dependence changes incentives
When a government budgets for citation proceeds, residents deserve to know whether safety or revenue continuity is driving expansion.
Flat fines are policy choices
Voters may support enforcement while rejecting a fine structure that treats a day's wages and pocket change as equivalent.
Targeted use is not ubiquity
A school-zone camera during school hours is not the same question as hundreds of devices financing general operations.
A vote can authorize guardrails
The choice need not be all or nothing. A ballot measure can require engineering, income-based penalties, audits and periodic reauthorization.
The District has never put its system to residents.
DC officials frequently defend automated enforcement as popular and necessary. A fair referendum would test that claim while allowing residents to set the conditions under which enforcement continues.
The Camera Tax Project is seeking a Council hearing and a public vote. At minimum, DC should conduct a credible citywide survey and publish ward-level results rather than using selective constituent requests as a substitute for consent.
Should the District continue automated traffic enforcement at its present scale unless the program adopts income-scaled fines, transparent location-level safety reporting, safety-dedicated revenue and periodic voter reauthorization?
How we will publish the record
The public tracker will identify the jurisdiction, date, exact ballot language, result, source and how each contest is coded. Ambiguous advisory votes will be labeled separately. Corrections will be logged rather than silently changed.
This page currently states the compiled top-line finding while the row-level source table is prepared for publication. Until that table is live, the figure should be attributed to the Camera Tax Project's review rather than presented as an official government statistic.