Minnesota Traffic Camera Ticket Laws: The 2025-2029 Pilot Program Explained

Minnesota's camera-enforcement law does not fit neatly into the owner-civil-penalty or driver-moving-violation models used elsewhere. It is a time-limited pilot program, run by a short list of named authorities, and it treats a camera violation as a petty misdemeanor rather than either a criminal offense or a straightforward civil fine.

A Pilot, Not a Permanent Program

Minnesota's camera authority sits at Minn. Stat. 169.147, and the statute is explicit about its own lifespan: «The authority for camera-based traffic enforcement under the pilot program is limited to August 1, 2025, to July 31, 2029,» and «this section expires July 31, 2029.» That is a hard, self-executing sunset, not a renewal-by-default program. Only three authorities may run cameras under the pilot: the state, through the commissioners of MnDOT and DPS, in trunk-highway work zones; the city of Minneapolis; and the city of Mendota Heights. Locations are limited to trunk-highway work zones, or to spots within 2,000 feet of a school, a statutorily defined school zone, or a postsecondary institution that has «an identified traffic safety concern.»

The statute singles out Minneapolis for an unusual restriction: «The city of Minneapolis is prohibited from implementing the pilot program or camera-based traffic enforcement through or in substantive coordination with the city's police department.» Whatever camera enforcement Minneapolis runs under this pilot, it cannot be run by, or in close coordination with, its own police force.

Petty Misdemeanor, Not a Civil Penalty or a Crime

Most states in this cluster use one of two labels: an owner-liability civil penalty, or a driver-liability moving violation prosecuted like an ordinary ticket. Minnesota uses a third category. Under both the red light provision (Minn. Stat. 169.06, subd. 10) and the speed provision (Minn. Stat. 169.14, subd. 13), «the owner of the vehicle or the lessee of the vehicle is guilty of a petty misdemeanor,» with a fine of $40 for a red light violation or a speed violation under 20 mph over the limit, and $80 for a speed violation of 20 mph or more over the limit.

Minn. Stat. 609.02, subd. 4a, defines what that label actually means: a petty misdemeanor «does not constitute a crime,» and its fine is capped at $300. That places a Minnesota camera violation in a distinct middle category, neither a criminal conviction nor the flat administrative civil penalty New York or Illinois use.

Warning First, and Two Different Tracks After That

The pilot builds in a graduated, forgiving structure that most camera programs in this cluster do not have, but it is not identical across all three implementing authorities. For most drivers, a first offense must be handled with a warning: both Minn. Stat. 169.06, subd. 10(b), and 169.14, subd. 13(b), require that «a person who commits a first offense... must be given a warning and is not subject to a fine or conviction.» That same paragraph, not the general citation authority in 169.147, subd. 9, is also what creates the second-offense diversion option, and the traffic safety course it runs through is established under Minn. Stat. 169.147, subd. 11. Minneapolis and Mendota Heights can therefore offer diversion on a second offense and then escalate to a real $40 or $80 petty-misdemeanor fine for repeated violations. The commissioners' own trunk-highway work-zone component is different: subdivision 17(b) provides that «the commissioners must issue a warning for a violation... captured by a speed safety camera system and must not impose any fine for a second or subsequent violation.» Read plainly, that means the state's own trunk-highway work-zone cameras never escalate to a fine at all, regardless of how many violations a vehicle racks up, which is a materially more lenient outcome than the two-city track. If your camera ticket came from a state trunk-highway work zone rather than from Minneapolis or Mendota Heights, this distinction is worth checking against your specific notice.

One large class of drivers is carved out of the warning and the diversion alike. Minn. Stat. 169.06, subd. 10(c), and 169.14, subd. 13(c), each provide that the warning-and-diversion paragraph «does not apply to: (1) a violation that occurs in a commercial motor vehicle; or (2) a violation committed by a holder of a class A, B, or C commercial driver's license or commercial driver learner's permit, without regard to whether the violation was committed in a commercial motor vehicle or another vehicle.» A CDL or commercial learner's permit holder is therefore exposed to the $40 or $80 fine on the very first camera violation and cannot take the diversion course, even when the violation happened in a personal car on a day off. The legislature expected drivers to learn this from the ticket itself: Minn. Stat. 169.147, subd. 10(b)(7), requires the uniform citation to include «a notification that an owner is ineligible for diversion if the violation was committed by a holder of a class A, B, or C commercial driver's license or commercial driver learner's permit.»

Points, Record, and License Consequences

The license protection is real, but it sits in the separate limitations subdivisions rather than in the penalty subdivisions, and it is not worded identically on both sides. For red light cameras, Minn. Stat. 169.06, subd. 11(c), says flatly that «a fine or conviction under subdivision 10 does not constitute grounds for revocation or suspension of a person's driver's license.» For speed cameras, Minn. Stat. 169.14, subd. 14(c), carries a qualifier: «Except as provided in subdivision 13, paragraph (c), a fine or conviction under subdivision 13 does not constitute grounds for revocation or suspension of a person's driver's license.» Subdivision 13, paragraph (c), is the commercial-vehicle and CDL carve-out, so a commercial driver does not get the same unqualified license protection from a speed-camera violation that an ordinary driver does.

The driving-record question is answered too, just in a different chapter. Minn. Stat. 171.12, subd. 6a, titled «Driving record; traffic safety camera system,» provides that «the commissioner must not record on an individual's driving record any violation of: (1) a traffic-control signal under section 169.06, subdivision 10; or (2) a speed limit under section 169.14, subdivision 13.» The same carve-out appears here as well: the no-record rule does not apply to a violation in a commercial motor vehicle or to one committed by a holder of a class A, B, or C commercial driver's license or commercial driver learner's permit. Like the rest of the pilot, this covers violations committed on or after August 1, 2025, and before August 1, 2029. For an ordinary Minnesota driver, then, a camera violation should not reach the driving record at all, which is the same result New York and Illinois reach through their own no-record clauses.

Owner Defenses

The defenses are listed in Minn. Stat. 169.14, subd. 14(a), and there are seven of them. An owner or lessee is not subject to a fine or conviction if the vehicle was stolen at the time of the violation; if a transfer of interest in the vehicle under Minn. Stat. 168A.10 was made before the violation; if the owner is a lessor and identifies the name and address of the lessee; if the vehicle was an authorized emergency vehicle operated in the performance of official duties at the time; if another person is convicted for the same violation; if the owner gives the court or prosecuting authority a sworn statement that the owner was not operating the vehicle; or if the owner gives a sworn statement that the owner was operating under the circumstances of a medical emergency for the driver or a passenger. The medical-emergency defense also requires a sworn statement from the physician responsible for treating the underlying condition, under subd. 14(d).

Those same seven defenses cover red light camera tickets as well. Minn. Stat. 169.06, subd. 11(a), provides that an owner or lessee «is not subject to a fine or conviction under subdivision 10 if any of the conditions under section 169.14, subdivision 14, paragraph (a), clauses (1) to (7), are met.» A Minneapolis red light ticket and a speed-camera ticket are therefore defended on identical grounds. Both limitations subdivisions also bar issuing a citation under the camera subdivision and under another subdivision of the same section for the same conduct.

Information last verified on 2026-08-12. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Related Resources

• Traffic Camera Ticket Laws by State
• Do You Have to Pay a Camera Ticket?
• How to Fight a Camera Ticket
• DUI Laws by State
• Can You Get a Speeding Ticket Without Being Pulled Over?

---

Last updated: 2026-08-12.

More Minnesota Laws

• Minnesota Car Accident Laws
• Minnesota Dashcam Laws
• Minnesota DUI Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Minnesota's traffic camera program permanent?

No. It is a pilot authorized by Minn. Stat. 169.147, running from August 1, 2025, to July 31, 2029. The statute expires on its own on that date unless the legislature acts to extend or replace it.

Where does Minnesota's camera pilot actually operate?

In trunk-highway work zones run by MnDOT and DPS, and in the cities of Minneapolis and Mendota Heights, each limited to work zones or locations within 2,000 feet of a school, school zone, or postsecondary institution with an identified traffic safety concern.

Is a Minnesota camera ticket a crime?

It is a petty misdemeanor, which under Minn. Stat. 609.02 does not constitute a crime. That puts it in a different legal category from both an ordinary civil penalty and a genuine criminal offense, with a fine capped at $300.

What happens the first time I get a Minnesota camera violation?

For most drivers a first offense must be handled with a warning only, and the statute bars a fine or conviction for it. The exception is commercial driving. Minn. Stat. 169.06, subd. 10(c), and 169.14, subd. 13(c), make the warning-and-diversion paragraph inapplicable to a violation in a commercial motor vehicle, and to any violation by a holder of a class A, B, or C commercial driver's license or commercial driver learner's permit even in a personal vehicle. Those drivers can be fined on a first offense and cannot take diversion.

Does a Minnesota camera ticket affect my driver's license?

Minn. Stat. 169.06, subd. 11(c), states that a red light camera fine or conviction does not constitute grounds for license revocation or suspension. Minn. Stat. 169.14, subd. 14(c), says the same for speed cameras but excepts the commercial-vehicle and CDL cases described in subd. 13(c). Separately, Minn. Stat. 171.12, subd. 6a, bars the commissioner from recording a camera violation on a driving record at all, with that same commercial-vehicle and CDL exception.

Can Minneapolis police run the camera program?

No, not directly. The statute specifically prohibits the city of Minneapolis from implementing the pilot or camera-based traffic enforcement through, or in substantive coordination with, its police department.

What speed triggers a Minnesota camera citation?

Ten miles per hour over the posted limit is the statutory minimum, not necessarily the margin actually enforced. Minn. Stat. 169.147, subd. 9(b)(2), permits a citation only if the violation is at least 10 mph over the limit, and subd. 9(d) expressly allows an implementing authority to set a higher margin, so MnDOT, Minneapolis, or Mendota Heights may choose to issue citations only above a larger threshold.