BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 539 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 4, 2011 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION Bonnie Lowenthal, Chair AB 539 (Williams) - As Introduced: February 16, 2011 SUBJECT : Vehicles: speeding: school zones: penalties. SUMMARY : Increases fines and penalties for speed limit violations in school zones. Specifically, this bill : 1)Provides for a base fine of $150 for any person who violates the speed limit in a school zone by 1-15 miles per hour (mph). 2)Provides for a base fine of $200 for any person who violates the speed limit in a school zone by 16-25 mph. 3)Provides for a base fine of $250 for any person who violates the speed limit in a school zone by 26 mph or more. 4)Provides that an additional $100 penalty would be added to the base fine for persons convicted of a second school zone speeding violation if the violation occurs within three years of the first violation. 5)Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to suspend the driver's license for a period of six months for any person convicted of a third or subsequent violation of speeding in a school zone within three years of two or more separate violations. 6)Provides that a person who is fined for speeding in school zones shall receive one violation point on his or her driving record. 7)Specifies that a court shall not reduce penalties for school zone speeding violations, as described. EXISTING LAW: 1)Sets forth provisions governing speed limits and includes fines for speeding violations. AB 539 Page 2 2)Allows local authorities to reduce the prima facie speed limit of 25 mph in a school zone to 20 mph or 15 mph, under certain, limited, conditions. 3)Allows for doubling of fines for speed limit violations in highway construction or maintenance zones, under certain circumstances. 4)Specifies that a person with 4 or more violation points in a 12 month period, 6 or more violation points in at 24 month period, or 8 or more violation points in a 36 month period is presumed to be a negligent motor vehicle operator and is subject to driver's license suspension. FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : Existing law generally provides for a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph in school zones when children are present. Recently enacted legislation (AB 321( Nava) Chapter 384, Statutes of 2007) allows a local authority, by ordinance, to determine and declare a school zone speed limit of 15 mph or 20 mph, under certain circumstances. To declare a 15 or 20 mph school zone speed limit, the local jurisdiction must conduct engineering and traffic surveys to show that the 25 mph speed limit is more than is reasonable or safe. Also, lowering the speed limit to 15 mph or 20 mph can only be done on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 mph or slower. AB 321 limited conditions under which the speed limit can be reduced to avoid creating a significant variation in speed along the route since traffic studies show that an immediate and significant drop in speeds can exacerbate traffic tie ups and result in increased accidents and associated safety issues. For example, the abrupt slowing of vehicles speeds from 30 mph or higher to 15 mph to 20 mph could increase the number of rear-end collisions or cars swerving out to avoid rear-end collisions which could further jeopardize bicyclists and pedestrians. According to the author, speeding remains a problem in school zones where local jurisdictions are unable to effectively reduce the speed limit to 15mph or 20 mph and that the resources to maintain a serious enforcement presence to curb speeding in those school zones are limited. The author notes that in Goleta alone, at least four schools were unable to lower the speed limit to 15 mph or 20 mph and, as a result, chronic and AB 539 Page 3 excessive speeding in these school zones continues. The author cites surveys that show, at times when children are present, average speeds of 10 mph to 20 mph over the posted 25 mph speed limit are the norm. The author contends that by increasing fines, speeding in school zones would be reduced. Fines are generally set to be commensurate with the crime. The Legislature has, however, authorized doubling of fines under certain circumstances. For example, fines are doubled in highway construction and maintenance areas (AB 708 (Epple) Chapter 674, Statutes of 1993), but only during times when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around the area or when highway construction or maintenance work is actually being performed and traffic controls or warning signs are erected to notify motorists of construction or maintenance workers in the area. The Judicial Council annually adopts a uniform traffic penalty schedule which is applicable to all non-parking infractions specified in the Vehicle Code. In establishing the uniform penalty schedule, the Judicial Council classifies offenses into four or fewer penalty categories, according to the severity of the offense, so as to permit convenient notice and payment of the scheduled penalty. Under current law, the base fine for speeding in a school zone is set in the uniform penalty schedule as $35 for traveling 1 mph to 15 mph over the speed limit ($154 total fine with fees and court costs), $70 for traveling 16 mph to 25 mph over the speed limit ($280 total fine with fees and court costs), and $100 for traveling 26 mph or more over the speed limit ($400 total fine with fees and court costs). This bill would increase base fines for speeding in a school zone to $150 for driving 1 mph to 15 mph over the speed limit, $200 for driving 16 mph to 25 mph over the speed limit, and $250 for exceeding the speed limit by 26 mph or more. According to the Judicial Council, these base fines, with fees and penalties, would result in total fines of $728 for driving 1 mph to 15 over the speed limit, $928 for driving 16 mph to 25 mph over the speed limit, and $1,128 for traveling 26 mph or higher over the speed limit, well exceeding fines established for other violations including, engaging in speed contests, exceeding maximum speed limits by 26 mph or more, or driving with a suspended or revoked license. AB 539 Page 4 Committee Concerns: The author's intent, to make conditions safer for children in school zones by slowing traffic, is certainly laudable. Nonetheless, this bill raises a number of concerns such as: 1)This bill relies on the presupposition that the threat of increased fines will sufficiently influence driver behavior and infers that drivers are speeding in school zones because current fines are insufficient to influence driver behavior. It is generally accepted in the field of traffic engineering, however, that effective speed management combines engineering, enforcement, and education strategies to reduce speed-related accidents. This bill fails to address any of these three strategies. For example, consider the following: a) Engineering: Drivers generally drive at the speed which they believe is prudent and safe. Engineering solutions such as flashing yellow lights, warning signs, planted medians, or even curb bulb-outs are effectively used to affect the driver's perception of what is a safe and prudent speed. The committee was unable to ascertain whether or not any of these solutions have been attempted to resolve the problem of speeding through school zones in Goleta; b) Education: This bill would impose stiff penalties without the requirement that motorists be informed of the penalties. Consider by way of contrast provisions in existing law that provide for increased fines in construction zones or automated red light enforcement. These provisions require motorists to be informed of the increased penalties by signs posted at or near the construction zone or the intersection. This bill includes no such requirement; and, c) Enforcement: The author states that this bill is necessary, in part, because the resources to maintain a serious enforcement presence to curb speeding in school zones are limited. Higher penalties are unlikely to curb speeding if there is no law enforcement presence to issue citations. 2)The author specifies that this bill is intended to affect school zones that could not otherwise be affected by lowering AB 539 Page 5 speed limits to 15 mph or 20 mph, as authorized under AB 321. AB 539, however, applies to all school zones. Consequently, motorists will be subjected to a sort of double-jeopardy-that is, an artificially low speed limit combined with extraordinary penalties for exceeding those speed limits. 3)The author offers evidence from four schools in his district that speeding through school zones is a chronic problem that needs to be fixed via a statewide solution. However, the committee was not able to ascertain that speeding in school zones is, in fact, a chronic statewide problem meriting a statewide solution, as this bill proposes. 4)Generally, the Vehicle Code assigns higher penalties to traffic violations with potential for injury or death. Fines proposed by this bill (up to $250 with the possibility for additional penalties for repeat offenses) significantly exceed those of arguably greater offenses such as: passing a school bus with flashing signals ($150 base fine); overtaking vehicles stopped for pedestrians ($100 base fine); and speeding over 100 mph ($120 base fine). Consequently, the monetary penalties imposed by this bill are not equitable in the context of other traffic violations. Previous Legislation : AB 321 (Nava), Chapter 384, Statutes of 2007, authorized local governments, under certain conditions, to extend school safety zones from 500 feet to 1,000 feet and authorized the reduction of speed limits from 25 mph to 15 mph when approaching at a distance of 500 feet and passing a school. SB 1227 (Denham) of 2006, would have allowed, until January 1, 2010, a prima facie speed limit of 15 miles per hour for specified school zones in Merced and Monterey counties. That bill would have also required local authorities in these counties to report to the California Highway Patrol on the collisions, citations, average vehicle speed, speed limits, and use of specified "children are present" signs. SB 1227 was held under submission in the Senate Committee on Appropriations. AB 1886 (Jackson) Chapter 590, Statutes of 2001, allowed for the increase of fines for traffic violations in school zones within Alameda, Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. That bill sunset on January 1, 2007. AB 539 Page 6 AB 708 (Epple) Chapter 674, Statutes of 1993, provided that in highway construction and maintenance areas, in specified misdemeanor cases, fines shall be double the amount otherwise prescribed, and, in the case of an infraction, the fine shall be one category higher than the penalty otherwise prescribed by the uniform traffic penalty schedule. Double referral : This bill has also been referred to the Committee on Public Safety. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support California State PTA California State Sheriffs' Association (CSSA) California WALKS City of Goleta Peace Officers Research Association of California Opposition AAA Clubs Analysis Prepared by : Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916) 319- 2093