A New Way to Pay to Play

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

On June 10, the Illinois-based company RedSpeed wrote two checks totaling $120,000 to the N.C. Senate Majority Fund’s building fund, according to State Board of Elections records. Senate Republicans had formed the fund, an offshoot of their political committee, less than a month earlier. As of the end of June, RedSpeed was its only donor. 

RedSpeed also contributed $100,000 to the House Republicans’ building fund in May, a donation that exceeded the total the fund raised between its creation in 2020 and 2024, records show. 

A week after RedSpeed’s donation to the Senate GOP, the chamber’s transportation committee—co-chaired by Sen. Bill Rabon, a Brunswick County Republican and top lieutenant of Senate leader Phil Berger—inserted a provision into a wide-ranging bill that could make the company millions of dollars. The bill overwhelmingly passed the Senate and House, and Gov. Josh Stein signed it into law on July 1. 

RedSpeed contracts with local governments to set up speed detection cameras that automatically issue traffic citations in exchange for a cut of the revenue. According to its website, it currently operates in five states. The legislation allows municipalities to enter into agreements with camera vendors beginning in October. 

“I obviously am very concerned because it appears to be pay-for-play,” said Sen. Sydney Batch, the Democratic minority leader. She said her caucus was unaware of RedSpeed’s donations when it supported the bill. 

Bob Hall, a longtime state government watchdog and the former executive director of Democracy North Carolina, said he was surprised by Republicans’ “hubris.” 

“At some point,” Hall said, “they just feel like they’re invulnerable, and they don’t need to hide as much, maybe, as they once did.” 

The House and Senate GOP caucus directors, who manage the building funds, told The Assembly they don’t tie donations to legislation. RedSpeed and a spokesman for House Republicans said the speed cameras would help keep roads safe.

“At some point, they just feel like they’re invulnerable, and they don’t need to hide as much, maybe, as they once did.” 

Bob Hall, former executive director of Democracy North Carolina

North Carolina prohibits corporations and businesses from directly contributing to candidates or political committees. It also forbids lawmakers from accepting contributions from companies that have hired lobbyists, which RedSpeed has, while the General Assembly is in session. 

But building funds, which were originally intended to help political parties maintain their headquarters, are exempt from these rules. There’s also no cap on the donations the funds can receive. 

Until last year, however, the legislature imposed tight rules on how donations could be spent. But Republicans quietly relaxed the law in December. 

RedSpeed wasn’t the only company that gave big this year. 

In February, Duke Energy donated $100,000 to the state GOP’s building fund, which is separate from the legislative caucuses’ building funds. In July, the General Assembly eliminated a looming carbon reduction target. 

“It’s a terrible system,” Hall said. “It corrupts the legislative process. It corrupts democracy. It means that policies are treated as commodities, and they’re not based on merit and the public interest. They become based on money.”

‘No Opposition’

Founded in London in 2004, RedSpeed set up its U.S. operations in the Chicago suburbs in 2006, shortly before the Illinois legislature authorized the use of red light cameras. It hired a lobbyist as its sales director and showered politicians and political organizations with about $368,000 in contributions between 2006 and 2023, according to campaign finance records. 

Through 2023, Illinois municipalities issued $1.5 billion in fines following red light violations. Some cities eventually removed the cameras amid complaints that they were predatory. 

RedSpeed expanded into the speed detection camera business, becoming the nation’s “only vendor utilizing lane-specific, high-resolution” cameras that can “increase the number of prosecutable violations” by up to 50 percent, according to its website. 

The company also spread across the country. Business records show that RedSpeed now has active subsidiaries in Maryland, Florida, Georgia, and Virginia. (Between 2007 and 2017, it appears to have opened and closed operations in several other states, including Texas, Mississippi, Ohio, and Indiana.) 

In Florida, campaign finance records show that, since 2021, RedSpeed has donated at least $338,500 to politicians and political committees. The state’s legislature passed a bill in April 2023 authorizing speed detection cameras near schools and setting $100 fines for violations. 

In a late July LinkedIn post, a RedSpeed vice president said the company has partnered with 35 Florida jurisdictions and has collected nearly $32 million in fines so far this year. 

According to RedSpeed’s agreements with Boca Raton and Fort Walton Beach, the company retains 21 percent of the fines its cameras generate. If that’s the case with all of RedSpeed’s Florida contracts, the company reaped more than $6.7 million in the Sunshine State in the first seven months of 2025.   

In Georgia, speed cameras have likewise been lucrative—but also controversial. 

The Georgia legislature allowed cities to install the cameras in school zones in 2018. Drivers are charged $75 for their first violation and $125 for subsequent violations. From 2019 to May 2024, the camera systems collected more than $112 million in fines, according to Atlanta First News. Vendors, including RedSpeed, reportedly keep about 25 percent. 

Despite the more than $863,000 in donations from speed camera vendors to Georgia lawmakers from 2012 to 2025—including $491,000 from RedSpeed—both the state House and Senate advanced bills this year to repeal the camera law or reduce the system’s perceived unfairness. 

One lawmaker argued that the cameras used “deceit and trickery” to “rake in revenue.” Critics said inadequate signage leaves many drivers unaware of the speed limit changes. In addition, problems with ticketing systems have led to hundreds of thousands of dollars in refunds. 

Georgia isn’t alone in its skepticism. Eight states have laws prohibiting speed cameras, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Last year, Iowa shut down most of its speed cameras—RedSpeed left the state soon after, business records show—and earlier this year, Ohio banned counties and towns from using them, though cities still can in limited circumstances. 

Proponents counter that speed cameras save lives. Studies in Maryland showed that speed cameras reduced incidents of speeding by 70 percent in one county and accidents by 35 percent in another. 

Indeed, 31 states plus Washington, D.C., allow speed cameras, with varying restrictions and penalties. In Arkansas, for example, a police officer must be present to issue a citation after a camera-captured violation. More commonly, cameras are permitted only in school zones, near construction or work sites, or in specific jurisdictions. 

But none of this was debated—or even discussed—when the North Carolina Senate’s transportation committee inserted the speed camera provision into the Department of Transportation omnibus bill on June 17. Sen. Michael Lazzara, a committee co-chair, assured his colleagues that this provision, along with several others, had been “thoroughly vetted, worked through with the House, and there’s no opposition.”

Lazzara, an Onslow County Republican, did not respond to requests for comment.

In a statement to The Assembly, RedSpeed said that its “efforts to bring this program to North Carolina [are] a big win for better school safety and more public school funding.”

“The safety of students, parents, and teachers is our top priority, and numerous studies have proven that camera-based traffic enforcement in school zones reduces speeding and accidents,” the company said. “In addition to improving school safety, the revenue from fines generated by school-zone safety enforcement in North Carolina must be used by state and local governments on expenses that support public schools like raising teacher salaries.”

‘Absolutely Outrageous’

In 2003, the General Assembly allowed Charlotte to create a three-year pilot program that placed speed cameras along 14 traffic corridors. A study found that the number of speeders declined by 55 percent, but the legislature declined to continue the program.  

Even with legislative support, however, speed camera programs faced a constitutional hurdle. In a 2005 ruling, the state Court of Appeals determined that municipalities could use only 10 percent of the revenue red light cameras generated to offset the costs of collections. The state Constitution required that at least 90 percent go to public schools, the appeals court said.  

That made agreements with vendors like RedSpeed untenable. 

But in May 2024, the state Supreme Court reversed course. In a decision authored by Justice Anita Earls, the court ruled that when the General Assembly authorized a red light program in Greenville in 2016, it granted the city “greater flexibility to share costs and reimburse expenses.” So Greenville’s agreement to share only 72 percent of the proceeds with Pitt County schools was acceptable. 

“The safety of students, parents, and teachers is our top priority, and numerous studies have proven that camera-based traffic enforcement in school zones reduces speeding and accidents.”

statement from RedSpeed

Justice Phil Berger Jr. dissented, arguing that Greenville’s agreement was unconstitutional and Earls’ opinion “cannot be squared … with basic math.” 

The majority’s rationale opened the door to speed camera vendors across the state, said Shea Denning, a professor in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Government and an expert on the state’s motor vehicle laws. They just needed the General Assembly to sign off.  

RedSpeed made its move this year. 

The company hired Kevin Wilkinson, a former staffer to Republican elected officials, and former Republican state Rep. Jason Saine as its lobbyists, according to state records. (Wilkinson declined to comment, deferring to RedSpeed. Saine did not respond to requests for comment.) In May and June, the company donated a total of $220,000 to the House and Senate GOP’s building funds. 

It’s unclear if anyone besides RedSpeed lobbied for the speed camera legislation. 

Representatives of the N.C. League of Municipalities, the N.C. Association of County Commissioners, the N.C. School Boards Association, and the N.C. Sheriffs’ Association said their organizations didn’t advocate for it. House and Senate Republicans didn’t respond to questions about whether local governments or law enforcement agencies asked for speed cameras.  

It’s also unclear who authored the speed camera provision. 

A source familiar with the Senate’s side of negotiations told The Assembly that the House asked to have the camera language inserted ahead of the Senate transportation committee’s June 17 meeting. Senate leader Berger’s office declined to comment.

“House Republicans make decisions on transportation legislation based on keeping our state’s roads well-maintained and safe,” a spokesman for House Republicans said in a statement. “Senate Bill 391 is in line with those principles.”

The spokesman declined to say which lawmakers were involved in adding the provision. “Omnibus legislation like this is often negotiated and examined by members of both chambers, stakeholders, and agency officials,” the spokesman said. 

North Carolina’s statute mirrors Georgia’s in many respects. It allows local governments to use speed detection cameras in school zones during posted hours. Violations won’t count toward license points or affect insurance rates, but drivers who fail to pay won’t be allowed to register their vehicles.   

But North Carolina could prove more profitable for RedSpeed than other states. 

Unlike Florida, North Carolina’s law doesn’t give drivers a 10 mph buffer before they can be ticketed by a speed camera. In other words, drivers could potentially be fined if cameras capture them going just 1 mph over the limit. 

Denning, the UNC School of Government professor, said the statute wasn’t clear on whether counties and municipalities will be allowed to create their own buffers when they adopt ordinances to install speed cameras. 

The law says that local governments “shall” assess a penalty for violations—and in North Carolina, exceeding the limit by even 1 mph is a violation. But police officers usually don’t ticket low-level speeders, and Denning believes the law might permit local governments to apply that same principle to cameras. Then again, it might not. 

“It’s a really interesting question,” Denning said. “I don’t think I could definitively say one way or the other.” (One reform proposed in Georgia this year would have allowed municipalities to enact 10 mph buffers.) 

If local governments can’t—or choose not to—establish buffers, a lot more drivers will get tickets. And the penalty in North Carolina is $250, more than double the fine levied by Florida and, in most cases, Georgia. That likely means more money for companies like RedSpeed, which typically receive a percentage of the proceeds. 

Batch, the Democratic leader, said that had the bill not been rushed through the legislature, Democrats would have pushed back on the steep penalty. 

“Hitting someone with a $250 fine because they go one mile over is outrageous,” she said. “Absolutely outrageous. The fact that no one thought to bring that up … ” 

‘Fully Complied’ 

In 1999, the Democratic-controlled General Assembly had a purpose for exempting “political party headquarters building funds” from donation restrictions. The Andrew Goodwin House, the historic Raleigh building that serves as the North Carolina Democratic Party’s headquarters, needed extensive renovations. 

From 2000 to 2003, the state Democratic Party’s building fund received more than $3.3 million in donations and loans, according to state campaign finance records. Under state law, this money could only be spent on the party’s headquarters. 

Over time, the General Assembly allowed building funds to also cover rents and some personnel expenses, and dozens of county parties now have them. But by 2016, state Democrats had little use for their building fund, raising only about $50,000. Their fund raised nothing at all from 2021 to 2024.

The state GOP’s building fund has been more active, bringing in about $980,000 from 2020 to 2024. Still, the funds haven’t been primary outlets for major donors. 

During December’s special session, however, Republicans tucked language into disaster relief legislation that allowed building fund donations to go toward parties’ legal expenses. At the time, N.C. Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin was seeking to overturn his loss to incumbent Justice Allison Riggs in last year’s state Supreme Court race—an unsuccessful effort that ultimately cost both sides at least a combined $1.5 million.  

The change was largely overlooked amid the firestorm over another provision that put the state’s elections under the control of the incoming Republican auditor rather than the Democratic governor-elect. 

In the first six months of 2025, the state GOP’s building fund raised about $136,000—not counting transfers from other GOP accounts—including $100,000 from Duke Energy. The House GOP’s building fund, meanwhile, raised about $115,000, mostly from RedSpeed. Its $100,000 donation on May 13 is by far the largest in the fund’s history. (Second place: $37,000 last year from a New York casino company.) 

“Public policy decisions have never been, nor will they ever be, based on contributions to the North Carolina House Republican Caucus,” caucus director Luke Stancil told The Assembly. 

Senate Republicans launched their building fund on May 14, and RedSpeed’s $120,000 contribution followed on June 10. 

“Public policy decisions have never been, nor will they ever be, based on contributions to the North Carolina House Republican Caucus.”  

Luke Stancil, House GOP caucus director

Dylan Watts, director of the N.C. Republican Senate Caucus, said the timing was a coincidence. The fund’s creation “had to be approved by a quorum at a political caucus meeting, and attempting to schedule that kind of meeting during session is not an easy task,” Watts told The Assembly. 

Watts said the Senate GOP’s campaign arm “does not engage in any conversations with any representatives of any company about contributions being tied to legislative action. Period.”

RedSpeed told The Assembly that it “fully complied with all lobbying and campaign finance regulations.” It did not respond to a follow-up question asking who suggested donating to the legislative caucuses’ building funds—something an out-of-state company seems unlikely to have thought of on its own. 

The state Democrats’ building fund has raised only $5,000, all from the progressive group Carolina Forward, not counting transfers from Riggs’ or the party’s legal funds. The House and Senate Democratic caucuses don’t have building funds. 

Because of the state’s reporting schedule, the donations from RedSpeed and Duke Energy weren’t disclosed to the elections board until July. By then, the speed camera legislation was already law, and the carbon reduction repeal was awaiting a veto override. 

A Duke Energy spokesman did not directly address whether the donation was related to the carbon bill, pointing instead to a statement he provided to The Assembly earlier this month: “We contribute to organizations across the political spectrum who are supportive of our focus on providing reliable energy at the lowest cost possible for our customers.”

‘Cash for a Campaign’

The General Assembly banned corporate donations in 1973, after the Watergate scandal sparked a wave of government reform efforts. It banned in-session contributions from lobbyists and their clients in 1997, a year after The News & Observer won a Pulitzer Prize for exposing the pork industry’s outsized influence. 

In 2006, responding to what a federal court later described as a decade of “corruption and the appearance of corruption,” lawmakers made the prohibition on lobbyist donations year-round. 

These laws were designed to assure voters that special interests couldn’t purchase desired policies, said Hall, the former Democracy North Carolina director. Building funds provide a workaround. 

They aren’t the only avenue. Corporations can donate unlimited amounts to independent expenditure committees, which support or oppose candidates, or 501(c)(4)s, so-called dark-money groups that spend money to influence elections but aren’t required to disclose their donors. 

But those are “indirect ways of demonstrating support,” Hall said. “They’re not like, ‘Here’s cash for a campaign.’” Building funds offer “a more direct link to a North Carolina politician,” Hall said. 

State law forbids lawmakers from accepting “anything of value or personal advantage”—including a “campaign contribution”—in exchange for “performing or omitting to perform any official act.” But experts say that proving such an exchange took place without a clearly documented quid pro quo is almost impossible. 

Even if there was a quid pro quo, it’s not clear whether lawmakers would obtain something of “value or personal advantage” from donations that, by law, can’t directly benefit them or their campaigns. 

Batch said that just because RedSpeed’s donations appear to be legal, “it doesn’t make it right.” 

Since corporations can donate to building funds while lawmakers are considering bills that benefit them, Batch said, the public shouldn’t have to wait months to learn about the contributions. 

Donations to state committees are reported every six months in odd-numbered years. That means that in the years when the General Assembly holds its consequential long sessions—which typically wrap at the end of June—the state elections board doesn’t publish campaign finance reports until late July. 

Batch said building funds should have to file more frequent reports when the legislature is in session. 

“It’s not appropriate for us to be in a situation in which we continue to allow for constituents, and also legislators who are looking at legislation, to not know who might be putting money in or has a vested interest in a bill,” Batch said. 

This article has been updated to include responses from the N.C. School Boards Association and the N.C. Sheriffs’ Association.