BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE       BILL NO: ab 2729
          SENATOR ALAN LOWENTHAL, CHAIRMAN               AUTHOR:  ammiano
                                                         VERSION: 4/26/10
          Analysis by:  Jennifer Gress                   FISCAL:  no
          Hearing date:  June 22, 2010






          SUBJECT:

          Automated traffic enforcement system:  City and County of San  
          Francisco

          DESCRIPTION:

          This bill authorizes, until January 1, 2014, the City and County  
          of San Francisco to use an automated traffic enforcement system  
          (i.e., red light cameras) to enforce a prohibition against  
          turning at a specified intersection.

          ANALYSIS:

          Existing law authorizes the use of automated traffic enforcement  
          systems at railroad crossings and intersections to record  
          violations of unlawful grade crossings and red light running.  

          Only a governmental agency, in cooperation with a law  
          enforcement agency, may operate an automated enforcement system.  
           "Operating" a system means that a governmental agency does the  
          following:

           Develops uniform guidelines for screening and issuing  
            violations, processing and storing confidential information,  
            and selecting locations where automated enforcements systems  
            will be utilized.

           Establishes procedures to ensure compliance with those  
            guidelines.

           Certifies that the equipment is properly installed and  
            calibrated and is operating properly.

           Ensures that the equipment is regularly inspected.




          AB 2729 (AMMIANO)                                         Page 2

                                                                       



           Inspects and maintains signs that warn drivers that an  
            automated enforcement system is in use.  These signs must be  
            visible to traffic approaching an intersection where an  
            automated enforcement system operates and clearly identify the  
            presence of the camera system at that intersection.

           Oversees the establishment or change of signal phases and  
            timing.  The yellow light change interval must be established  
            in accordance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control  
            Devices, which is maintained by the California Department of  
            Transportation.

           Maintains controls necessary to assure that only those  
            citations that law enforcement personnel have reviewed and  
            approved are delivered to violators.

          A governmental agency may contract out its duties to certify  
          that the equipment is installed and operating properly and to  
          ensure that the equipment is regularly inspected, provided the  
          agency maintains overall control and supervision of the system.

          Prior to entering into a contract with a vendor to implement an  
          automated enforcement system, the legislative body of the local  
          government (e.g., city council or county board of supervisors)  
          must conduct a public hearing on the proposed use of the system.  
           A contract between a governmental agency and a vendor of  
          automated enforcement equipment may not include a provision for  
          payment to the vendor based on the number of citations issued or  
          the amount of revenue generated, unless the contract was entered  
          into prior to January 1, 2004.  

          Prior to issuing citations, an agency utilizing an automated  
          traffic enforcement system must make a public announcement of  
          the system and issue only warning notices for 30 days. A peace  
          officer or "qualified employee" of a law enforcement agency  
          reviews the photographs and issues citations, as appropriate.  A  
          citation involves a "notice to appear," which must use a form  
          approved by the Judicial Council and contain particular  
          information, including the name and address of the registered  
          owner of the vehicle identified in the photograph, the license  
          plate number of the vehicle, the violation charged, and the time  
          and place when the person may appear in court.  A notice to  
          appear must be mailed within 15 days of the alleged violation to  
          the current address of the registered owner of the vehicle.





          AB 2729 (AMMIANO)                                         Page 3

                                                                       


           This bill  :

           Authorizes, until January 1, 2014, the City and County of San  
            Francisco to use an automated traffic enforcement system to  
            enforce a prohibition against turning from Market Street onto  
            the Central Freeway located at Octavia Boulevard, provided the  
            system meets all of the requirements established in existing  
            law for red light cameras.

           Requires San Francisco to provide a report to the Senate  
            Committee on Transportation and Housing and the Assembly  
            Committee on Transportation on the safety and traffic flow  
            impacts that have resulted from the use of an automated  
            traffic enforcement system by January 1, 2014.

          COMMENTS:

           1.Purpose  .  The Market-Octavia-Central Freeway intersection in  
            San Francisco is located at the juncture of three  
            neighborhoods with large bicycling and walking populations -  
            the Mission, Castro, and Hayes Valley.  While right turns are  
            prohibited from Market Street onto the on-ramp for the Central  
            Freeway due to the high volume of pedestrian and bicycle  
            traffic on Market Street, the Market-Octavia-Central Freeway  
            intersection experiences a high rate of collisions due to  
            vehicles making unlawful right turns at the intersection and  
            hitting cyclists and pedestrians traveling on Market Street  
            toward downtown.  

            From 2002 to 2006, the intersection was listed among the top  
            five locations with the highest incidence of  
            automobile-bicycle collisions in the city. These collisions  
            have continued through 2007 sometimes with tragic results.   
            Market Street is considered to be San Francisco's main street,  
            serving as a primary walking, cycling, driving, and public  
            transit corridor.  

            In December 2007, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation  
            Authority (SFMTA) installed a concrete barrier island and  
            reflective signage to deter the illegal turns.  The  
            intersection nevertheless experienced the highest total number  
            of injury collisions of any intersection in San Francisco in  
            2008 with nine reported collisions.  Since the barrier was  
            installed, the author believes that drivers violating the law  
            and turning illegally are doing so willfully and that  
            automated enforcement is the best way to improve cyclist and  




          AB 2729 (AMMIANO)                                         Page 4

                                                                       


            pedestrian safety at this busy intersection.

           2.Will automated enforcement help  ?  Based on data provided by  
            the author's office, after the opening of Octavia Boulevard on  
            September 9, 2005, SFMTA observed that while the majority of  
            drivers complied with the prohibition on turning right onto  
            the Central Freeway, a sizable minority began to violate it.   
            Traffic counts conducted during the morning commute hours in  
            September 2005, January 2006, and October 2006 found an  
            average of 29.5 illegal right turns per hour.  Based on those  
            observations, SFMTA took several engineering measures to  
            reduce right turns, including erecting extensive signage,  
            painting a white "island" on the roadway, and installing  
            safe-hit posts separating the bicycle lane and the right-most  
            vehicle lane as the lanes approach the intersection.  

            Traffic counts conducted between February 2007 and May 2007  
            immediately following these measures revealed an average of  
            only two illegal right turns during the morning commute hours,  
            a 93 percent reduction.  

            Despite the reduction in the number of motorists turning right  
            illegally, the number of collisions between bicycles and  
            illegally right-turning vehicles actually increased during  
            that same time period.  Between September 2005 and January  
            2007, that intersection saw five collisions occurring between  
            bicyclists and right-turning vehicles, a rate of 0.3 per  
            month.  After the installation of those measures, six such  
            collisions occurred between February 2007 and December 2007,  
            an increase in the collision rate to 0.6 per month. 

            In December 2007, SFMTA replaced the painted traffic island  
            with a raised concrete island, installed object markers on the  
            island, installed new safe-hits and striping approaching the  
            intersection, and adjusted the lane extension markings through  
            the intersection.  Between December 2007 and July 31, 2008,  
            SFMTA continued to observe very few right-turn violations  
            (traffic count data collected on January 15 and 16, 2008  
            revealed a total of one and zero illegal turns, respectively),  
            but collisions continued to occur at a rate of 0.6 per month.

            In summary, SFMTA has implemented a number of engineering  
            measures to the intersection that have proven successful in  
            reducing the number of right-turn violations.  While the  
            violations have decreased, the collision rate has increased,  
            suggesting that the correlation between violations and  




          AB 2729 (AMMIANO)                                         Page 5

                                                                       


            collisions is not as strong as previously thought or that the  
            engineering measures may be inadvertently increasing the  
            likelihood of a collision when a violation does occur.

            It is unclear how increased enforcement will address this  
            issue.  While the effectiveness of using automated traffic  
            enforcement to deter drivers from making specific turns has  
            not been evaluated, red light cameras have been shown to  
            reduce, but not eliminate, red light running violations and  
            collisions associated with those violations.  Automated  
            enforcement may be successful in reducing violations at this  
            intersection in San Francisco, but it is unlikely to eliminate  
            them and the underlying problem appears to be the risk of  
            collision when a violation does occur.  

            Finally, it is unclear how much the city has increased the  
            presence of law enforcement at this intersection or whether  
            the presence of an enforcement officer might have the same  
            deterrent effect as the automated system.  While automated  
            systems have the capacity to capture more violators than a  
            police officer could on site, having an actual law enforcement  
            officer issuing citations may provide greater opportunity to  
            educate the violator of the dangers of turning right at that  
            intersection.   

           3.Expanding authority  .  This bill expands the authority to use  
            an automated traffic enforcement system, which is currently  
            limited to capturing red light running and illegal grade  
            crossings, to include the enforcement of unlawful turns.   
            Furthermore, the bill limits the use of the system to a single  
            intersection, rather than authorizing its use for this purpose  
            statewide.  What standard does this particular intersection  
            meet to warrant expanding the use of red light cameras to  
            enforce other traffic laws?  The committee may wish to  
            consider whether it wishes to establish a precedent of  
            expanding the use of automated traffic enforcement and doing  
            so for a single situation without defining a clear standard or  
            threshold to justify its use in that situation.  

           4.Earlier sunset date  .  Under this bill, the authority to use an  
            automated enforcement system expires after three years.  SFMTA  
            should, however, be able to determine whether the system has  
            resulted in a reduction of collisions after one year.  If the  
            bill moves forward, the committee may wish to consider an  
            amendment to limit the length of time that the City and County  
            of San Francisco may use the system from three years to one  




          AB 2729 (AMMIANO)                                         Page 6

                                                                       


            year to further narrow the scope of the bill.
           
          5.Recent legislation  .  AB 23 (Ma), 2008, contained nearly  
            identical provisions as this bill does, but did not include a  
            sunset date or a reporting requirement.  Failed passage in the  
            Senate Transportation and Housing Committee.
          
          Assembly Votes:
               Floor:    49-24
               Trans:    10-2

           POSITIONS:  (Communicated to the Committee before noon on  
                     Wednesday,                              
                      June 16, 2010)

               SUPPORT:  City and County of San Francisco (co-sponsor)
                         San Francisco Bicycle Coalition (co-sponsor)
                         Hayes Valley Neighborhood Association
                         North Mission Neighborhood Alliance
                         Walk San Francisco
                         1 individual
          
               OPPOSED:  California Conference Board of the Amalgamated  
          Transit Union
                         California Teamsters Public Affairs Council