Pennsylvania Act 38 of 2023, which is keeping speed cameras in place in Philadelphia and which expanded their use there, also directed the state Local Government Commission to deliver a report within two years making recommendations about whether and how to allow other municipalities to install the cameras in question.

Approval for the photographic devices for widespread use in the Keystone State is not a new issue. The state Legislature has tinkered with the idea for a number of years, but in a way that defied any sense of urgency.

There are Pennsylvania residents who wonder whether the perceived lack of urgency — or at least the perception of lack of expeditious movement — is a telltale sign of lawmakers speeding to and from state business in Harrisburg or elsewhere and the lawmakers wanting to remain free of this additional risk of being ticketed for ignoring posted limits.

Many other drivers merely prefer not having to worry at all about the permanent presence of cameras — that such cameras not be installed to regulate their routine driving practices, some good, some bad.

That said, if lawmakers are not serious about the issue, they probably should shelve it without a future date set for a new round of consideration.

But if they are serious about it, they should step up preparation in anticipation of the coming report so they will be able to vote without inordinate delay or intentional stonewalling blocking action.

It does cost the taxpayers money when lawmakers waste valuable time on an issue they really do not have any intention to pass.

Nevertheless, the importance and value of this issue should dictate that putting it up for a vote should occur within a reasonable amount of time, not be put on hold again for years to come, without good cause and/or explanation.

Important points need to be brainstormed and debated prior to any vote on the measure, however, whenever that might be slated to occur.

Some information in a recent Capitolwire article should have caused Pennsylvanians to ponder whether a lawmaker mentioned in the article truly understands the potential size and complexity of the issue.

That lawmaker, Rep. Joe Hogan, R-Middletown Township, said rather than wait for the study that presumably is underway, the Legislature should move ahead now with expanding the use of speed cameras to allow their use in Pennsylvania’s boroughs.

But many boroughs in this state are small and do not need such equipment monitoring their roadways, while townships such as Lycoming Township could benefit greatly from having such speed controls monitoring certain heavily traveled roadways.

Hopefully the coming report will delve deeply into that aspect of the camera issue. Also, that report should focus heavily on the cameras’ potential use in cities of this state not named “Philadelphia.”

Act 38, besides its provisions mentioned above, also created a pilot program for speed cameras in school zones in Philadelphia. Findings need to be applied to other school systems across the commonwealth.

Yes, the issue is complex, but it is important. It is reasonable to believe that lives will depend on whatever decision or decisions might be handed down.

Not finally tackling the issue once and for all would be the wrong path to pursue.