BILL ANALYSIS
SB 667
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 9, 2001
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
John Dutra, Chair
SB 667 (Peace) - As Amended: June 4, 2001
SENATE VOTE : 40 - 0
SUBJECT : Automated enforcement system
SUMMARY : Requires at each intersection where there is an
automated enforcement system that the minimum yellow light
change intervals be established in accordance with the Traffic
Manual of the Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes the installation of an automated enforcement system
at an intersection or other specified location if the presence
of the system is identified by signs visible to all
approaching traffic or posted at all major entrances to the
city, and if the system meets specified criteria.
2)Requires that the minimum yellow light intervals at
intersections equipped with automated enforcement systems are
in accordance with the Traffic Manual of the Department of
Transportation.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes governmental agencies, in cooperation with law
enforcement agencies, to operate an automated enforcement
system.
2)Defines an "automated enforcement system" as a system that
photographically records a driver's response to a rail or rail
transit signal or crossing gate, or both, or to an official
traffic control signal (stoplight), and is designed to obtain
a clear photograph of the vehicle's license plate and the
driver of the vehicle.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, costs to the General Fund of more than $200,000 in
Fiscal Year 2002-03 and between $30,000 and $170,000 in Fiscal
Year 2003-04.
SB 667
Page 2
COMMENTS : SB 1802 (Rosenthal), Chapter 1216, Statutes of 1994,
authorized the use of automated rail crossing enforcement
systems to record violations occurring at rail crossing signals
and gates. Two years later, SB 833 (Kopp), Chapter 922,
Statutes of 1995, authorized a three-year demonstration period
to test the use and effectiveness of such systems in reducing
the incidence of drivers running red lights at roadway
intersections and in identifying the drivers committing such
violations and the vehicles involved. After reviewing the
operations and effectiveness of the pilot program, the
Legislature enacted SB 1136 (Kopp), Chapter 54, Statutes of
1998, to indefinitely authorize the use of automated enforcement
systems, or "red light cameras," at intersections.
According to the National Highway Transportation Safety
Administration (NHTSA), the objective of red light cameras is to
improve enforcement and safety at "high crash or other high-
risk locations where on-site traffic enforcement personnel
cannot be utilized, either because of insufficient manpower or
inherent on-site safety problems that make traditional law
enforcement difficult.
Since the introduction of red light cameras in California,
advocates have cited numerous studies and statistics showing a
reduction in red light violations and accidents at intersections
equipped with such cameras. The Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety (IIHS) conducted a study in the City of Oxnard
(California), a city that recently installed red light cameras
at various intersections. Since the city's use of red light
cameras, IIHS announced significant citywide crash reductions.
They noted a 29 percent reduction of injury crashes at
intersections with red light cameras, with front-into-side
collisions reduced by 32 percent overall, and front-into-side
crashes involving injuries reduced by 68 percent.
While the author does not dispute the statistics favoring the
safety of red light cameras, he contends, however, that
increased safety is not always the outcome nor is it the motive
for the installation of these cameras. With issues such as
privacy and entrapment still a concern, he believes that the
implementation and expanded use of red light cameras needs
sufficient review.
Earlier this year, the Senate Committee on Privacy held a
hearing to examine red light cameras and relating issues, such
SB 667
Page 3
as privacy, the handling of photographic evidence, processing of
traffic citations, reliability, etc. At the hearing, local
officials testified that yellow light intervals at intersections
equipped with red light cameras are often shorter than those
recommended, but still not required by Caltrans. Caltrans'
standards for light intervals, ranging from 3.2 and 5.6 seconds,
are increased and decreased according to the street or road's
speed limit. Even though Caltrans has determined that longer
yellow light intervals at higher speed areas actually decrease
intersection accidents, the author contends that some cities
still have yellow light intervals less than 3.0 seconds, which
makes it difficult for motorists to avoid red light violations
and the subsequent fines.
Currently, a fine for running a red light in California can
equal as much as $270 ($100 for the base fine and up to $170 for
penalty assessments). Thirty percent of the total fine amount
is allocated to the city or county general fund.
According to the author, local governments have become
especially reliant on the revenue generated by the fines
resulting from red light violations. For example, in the 18
months of their existence, San Diego's 19 cameras have generated
almost $29 million. The author claims that "red-light cameras
now generate nearly half of all traffic ticket revenues to the
city" and that instead of expanding their use at dangerous
intersections to reduce accidents, "cameras instead are deployed
in high-traffic areas with the highest probability of citations
to generate fines."
The author points out a particular intersection in San Diego
that is regarded as one of the busiest in the city. Even though
this intersection has encountered one accident each year in the
past several years, a camera was installed in October 1999.
According to the author, this camera has since generated over
$6.7 million in fine revenue for the city, but has done nothing
to reduce the number of red-light accidents.
After a review of public records and "more than 5,000
documents," a team of criminal defense attorney's, known as the
Red Light Camera Defense Team, reported that the red light
camera program in San Diego was designed to "generate revenue
rather than increase public safety." They contend that the
intersections equipped with red light cameras were selected
because they had "extremely short yellow lights and high traffic
SB 667
Page 4
volume, not because [they] had high accident rates."
SB 667 responds to such concerns and requires that all yellow
light intervals at intersections equipped with red light cameras
are based on uniform standards established by Caltrans.
The California State Automobile Association (AAA) believes that
certain safeguards must be in place to ensure due process and
privacy rights of vehicle operators. They state that the
safeguards should include the use of automated enforcement
systems to "promote traffic safety rather than to generate
revenue for government or technology vendors and assurance that
traffic signals at AES [automated enforcement systems] sites
comply with all applicable traffic-engineering principals and
standards."
What are the current yellow light change intervals specified by
Caltrans? The yellow change intervals detailed in the Traffic
Manual of the Department of Transportation is outlined in the
following table:
-------------------------------------
|Approachable |Yellow Intervals |
|Speed (km/h) |(seconds) |
|------------------+------------------|
|45 or less |3.1 |
|------------------+------------------|
|50 |3.3 |
|------------------+------------------|
|55 |3.5 |
|------------------+------------------|
|60 |3.7 |
|------------------+------------------|
|65 |3.9 |
|------------------+------------------|
|70 |4.2 |
|------------------+------------------|
|75 |4.4 |
|------------------+------------------|
|80 |4.7 |
|------------------+------------------|
|85 |4.9 |
|------------------+------------------|
|90 |5.1 |
|------------------+------------------|
SB 667
Page 5
|95 |5.3 |
|------------------+------------------|
|100 |5.5 |
|------------------+------------------|
|105 |5.8 |
|------------------+------------------|
|110 |6.0 |
-------------------------------------
Author's Amendments: The author will be amending the bill to
ensure the confidentiality of any public records necessary for
enforcing red light camera violations.
SB 667
Page 6
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Automobile Club of Southern California
California State Automobile Association
Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC)
Opposition
None received
Analysis Prepared by : Ryan Spencer / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093