The state takes, not gives.

The basic idea is great! The majority of Maryland drivers will never get a camera ticket, however, so choosing who get a voucher for a meaningful amount might be problematic.

Another option might be to direct any extra revenue to a vicim's fund - for persons permanently injured or disabled by a speeder or for the families of people killed by speeders.

Maybe. But I doubt this would ever generate a meaningful check. It is an incredibly clever idea, true, but I think the money could be best spent on safe routes to school, traffic calming rather than the massive undertaking of sending out a few million $0.20 checks.

I love the idea! In fact I've suggested that exactly that be done. But in fact there were TWO such amendments proposed during the 2009 general assembly to return the revenues as tax rebates:
SB0277/133429/1 and SB0277/453421/1

But the legislature rejected both.

Apparently 'what's not to like' is that the local governments and the state do not collect revenue from the cameras, and that is their primary purpose.

See how Cheverly Maryland is trying to speed limits around speed cameras specifically so they can hand out tickets. Excerpts from Cheverly town meeting minutes:

"CM Schachter will have questions about how creatively and expansive the Town could be in interpreting the law regarding the expenditure of these funds. Noted that it doesn’t bother him one bit to make money to be used for additional public good. Can we lower speed limits around the schools? "

"CM Tevault: 12 miles per hour seems like quite a fast clip in going over 25 miles per hour. Can we consider the starting speed when adding 12 miles per hour over?
Mr. Warrington: noted that the speed limits are up to the Mayor and Council. Also, that some of the revenue requirements are still somewhat unclear.""

In a later meeting the council proposed lowering the speed limits on one of the town's main thoroughfares even though they acknowledged that no traffic study would support this speed limit. One council member stated "I would like to see it 20 mph, but only if we aren’t going to lose funding or something else". They have been moving ahead with a plan to lower many of the speed limits in the town by 5mph.

----
Statements like 'just obey the law and you won't get a ticket' presume that those limits were set according to some rational engineering practice. But the fact is that in some cases they were instead the result of a political decision to turn many ordinary safe drivers into 'violators'.... or perhaps in this case a decision to try to steal money from of out of town visitors.

Could lowering speeds possibly be the concerns of residents of an area who would like their daily lives to be a pleasant experience and not a NASCAR experience? I vote for the funds being funneled to traffic wrangling.

That idea is too common sense and law-abiding citizen friendly to ever work! (Note the sarcasm).

Seriously, that's a great idea, but I don't see it passing b/c what's in it for the state and local governments? As Oat stated: "the state takes, not gives."

if you don't want a ticket, don't speed or run red lights, but a reward for safer drivers is a good idea,