Tampa Bay 28 investigative reporter Katie LaGrone says a Hillsborough County magistrate who spent months ruling on school speed zone camera appeals has reached a breaking point, and he’s now speaking publicly about what he calls a system built to fail drivers. In LaGrone’s report, the magistrate says Florida’s controversial new camera program isn’t just confusing – it’s unfair, vague, and structured in a way that can’t reliably prove the violations it’s charging people for.
“I said enough is enough,” the magistrate tells LaGrone as the story opens.
His name is Dr. Tom Santarlas, and LaGrone identifies him as the impartial hearing officer appointed to decide whether a $100 school-zone camera fine should be upheld or dismissed when a driver appeals.
Santarlas doesn’t just sound frustrated. He sounds like someone who has read the same file hundreds of times, listened to the same confused drivers, and finally concluded that the program is collecting money faster than it is collecting solid evidence.
“It’s a broken system,” Santarlas says in LaGrone’s piece. “There’s no doubt about it.”
A Magistrate Who Heard The Appeals Says The Evidence Doesn’t Match The Law
LaGrone explains that since July, Santarlas has been the sole magistrate in Hillsborough County hearing appeals from drivers who say the cameras got it wrong.
The hearings, she shows, often turn into drivers asking for exoneration while the magistrate tries to interpret a law he says is vague.
“It’s a bit confusing,” Santarlas says during one of the proceedings LaGrone includes, “but that’s the way the law stands at this time.”
LaGrone reports that Santarlas began raising concerns early on, and he often expressed those concerns during hearings. In one moment, he says it seems confusing to the driver and suggests lawmakers need to revisit the statute.
Then LaGrone gets to the core of his complaint: Santarlas says the cameras don’t even capture the kind of evidence needed to prove a driver violated the law.
She walks viewers through what the camera package includes. The images show a vehicle along with a date and timestamp of an alleged violation. But LaGrone says there is no image of the sign the driver supposedly violated – no proof in the frame that the driver saw or should have seen the school-zone speed limit sign at that moment.
She contrasts that with red-light cameras, which typically show the vehicle crossing the line at the wrong time in a way that makes the violation easy to understand.
LaGrone then asks the question in plain language: so is this a program that is deliberately unfair to drivers?
“I think it is,” Santarlas answers.
That exchange is the hinge of the report. LaGrone isn’t just saying the program is unpopular. She’s saying a county magistrate believes it is unfair by design, because it punishes people without giving them a fair way to evaluate what they supposedly did wrong.
“Profits Over Student Safety” And A Program That Keeps Growing
LaGrone says Santarlas’ accusations are just the latest glitch in a program that continues to raise questions about whether money has overshadowed the original safety pitch.
She reminds viewers that her team has been investigating the intent behind these cameras since July.
In that time, LaGrone reports, the cameras have operated in about three dozen Florida cities and counties, producing more than 827,000 driver violations in less than a year and a half and generating nearly $66 million in paid fines.
Those numbers, LaGrone says, come from the private camera vendor RedSpeed.
She also reports that RedSpeed collects the biggest single slice of each ticket – about $21 of every $100 paid fine – while the rest of the money is divided among the state, local school districts, and other local entities.
That is where the “money grab” suspicion starts to feel less like a conspiracy theory and more like a predictable human incentive problem. When a program generates tens of millions of dollars, and a private company gets paid per ticket, it becomes harder to convince the public that the system is only about safety.
LaGrone doesn’t argue that school zones shouldn’t be enforced. Her reporting focuses on whether the enforcement is fair, consistent, and transparent, especially when the punishment is automated and the driver’s first interaction with it is a bill.
Drivers Say It Feels Like Entrapment, And Some Counties Hit Pause
LaGrone says she’s heard from drivers who believe they were unfairly fined. She includes sound from people describing the experience in blunt, everyday terms.
One driver tells her, “I got a raw deal. Felt like it was an entrapment.”
LaGrone also notes claims that crossing guards weren’t present in some cases, feeding the idea that the camera system may be ticketing people in conditions that don’t match what most drivers imagine a “school zone” enforcement window should look like.
She reports her investigation uncovered issues serious enough that some counties and cities stopped “rolling on drivers” altogether.
That’s an important detail because it suggests the complaints aren’t limited to a few angry motorists. If entire jurisdictions pause enforcement, it usually means they’re worried the program can’t be defended in its current form, or they’re worried the political blowback is getting too hot.
LaGrone also says her team brought findings to a state lawmaker who helped make the cameras a reality. The lawmaker expressed concern about confusion, pledged to look into it, and said, “I don’t like gotchas.”
LaGrone then adds a pointed note: they never heard back.
It’s a small line, but it says a lot about how these programs survive. Once the system is running and the money is flowing, the burden shifts to citizens to prove something is wrong, and even then the response can be slow.
Santarlas Says Officials Keep Taking Money “Month After Month”
LaGrone reports that seven months after he started raising alarms in Hillsborough County, Santarlas says he’s had enough.
He describes officials as “obstinate” about continuing the process month after month.
“Right now, we have something that doesn’t work,” Santarlas says, “and yet they are obstinate about continuing this process month after month and taking money from our fellow citizens that work very hard for that money.”
He adds a simple moral frame: “Right is right and wrong is wrong and that’s why I am coming forward.”
That line matters because it shows how he sees his role. He’s not just an administrator. He’s someone tasked with fairness, and he’s claiming the system can’t meet that standard.
LaGrone then adds another statistic that sharpens the “rip-off” accusation. She cites a recent state report saying violations from these cameras increased more than 2,000% in one year.
A jump like that might mean compliance got worse, but it could also mean the system expanded, the settings changed, or enforcement became more aggressive. Whatever the cause, LaGrone presents it as more evidence that the program is growing faster than accountability is.
A Fix Is Being Discussed, But The Real Issue Is Trust
LaGrone’s reporting also points to the fact that Florida lawmakers are considering changes to the program after her investigation uncovered ticketing issues.
She says a bill received strong support in committee, and one proposed fix would require flashing beacons to be active during school speed zone enforcement, which would make the “this is a school zone right now” signal clearer to drivers. Another change would give drivers more time to respond to a violation.
The existence of a reform bill is meaningful, but the bigger problem is that the program has already damaged trust.
When people feel like a system is designed to trick them, they don’t respond by driving safer. They respond by resenting the entire concept, including the part that actually matters – protecting kids near schools.
That’s what makes LaGrone’s story interesting. It’s not a simple “cameras good” or “cameras bad” argument. It’s about whether a safety program can survive if the public believes it’s really a revenue machine wearing a child-safety mask.
And Santarlas’ whistleblowing gives that suspicion extra weight, because he isn’t a random driver who got a ticket. He’s the person tasked with reviewing the tickets, and he’s telling LaGrone the system is broken.
If the goal is truly safer school zones, a program that can’t clearly show the sign, can’t clearly show the conditions, and relies on confusing rules is going to keep producing the same reaction: anger, appeals, accusations of “gotcha” enforcement, and a growing belief that drivers aren’t the only ones who need to be held accountable.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa is our dedicated Second Amendment news writer and also focuses on homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Lisa aims to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.
