BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 1303
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 16, 2012

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                  SB 1303 (Simitian) - As Amended:  August 13, 2012 

          Policy Committee:                             
          TransportationVote:11-1
                        Judiciary                               9-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program: 
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill adds requirements regarding the installation and 
          operation of an automated traffic enforcement system (ATES) and 
          the notices sent concerning alleged violations recorded by an 
          ATES.  (Summary continued below.)

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          Minor costs to Judicial Council to approve forms and to compile 
          and maintain reports from operators of ATES.

           SUMMARY (continued)
           
          Specifically, this bill:

          1)Prohibits a governmental agency that proposes to install or 
            operate an ATES from considering revenue generation, beyond 
            recovery of operating costs.

          2)Requires any governmental agency seeking to install or operate 
            an ATES after January 1, 2013, to adopt a finding of fact that 
            the ATES is needed at a specific location for safety reasons. 

          3)Requires the governmental agency utilizing an ATES to identify 
            the system by signs posted with 200 feet of an intersection 
            where the system is in use, which are visible to traffic 
            approaching from all directions, effective January 1, 2014, 
            for any ATES installed as of January 1, 2013.

          4)Requires, by January 1, 2014, any governmental agency 








                                                                  SB 1303
                                                                  Page  2

            operating an ATES installed as of January 1, 2013, to 
            establish guidelines for screening and issuing violations and 
            for storage and processing of confidential information.

          5)Authorizes the issuing agency, manufacturer or supplier of the 
            ATES to mail a "notice of non-liability" to the registered 
            owner or the alleged violator prior to issuing a notice to 
            appear, prescribes the form that must be sent, and prohibits 
            the manufacturer or supplier of the system, or the 
            governmental entity, from altering the notice to appear, or 
            any other form approved by the Judicial Council.

          6)Applies, to the printed representation of computer-generated 
            information stored by an ATES the rebuttable presumption in 
            current law that declares a printed representation of computer 
            information to be an accurate representation of the computer 
            information, demonstrable, if challenged, by a preponderance 
            of evidence.

          7)Provides procedures by which, after a notice to appear for an 
            alleged traffic violation recorded by an ATES has been issued, 
            qualified law enforcement personnel, in the interest of 
            justice, may recommend to the court that a case be dismissed 
            and, if the magistrate or judge makes a finding of grounds for 
            dismissal, requires the infraction to be dismissed and the 
            finding to be entered into the record.

          8)Requires a manufacturer or supplier that operates an ATES to, 
            in cooperation with the governmental agency, submit an annual 
            report to the Judicial Council that includes specified data, 
            including the number of alleged violations captured by the 
            ATES; the number of citations issued based on information 
            collected from the ATES; the number of violations that 
            involved travelling straight through the intersect, or turning 
            right or left;  the number and percentage of citations 
            dismissed by the court; and the number of collisions at each 
            intersection before and after installation of the ATES.

           COMMENTS  

           1)Rationale  . According to the author, the bill is intended to 
            ensure ATES are operated for safety, not revenue, and due 
            process is afforded for ATES.
           
          2)Background  . ATES have been authorized for use by local 








                                                                  SB 1303
                                                                  Page  3

            governments since 1998. Current law authorizes use of these 
            systems subject to various requirements relating to posting of 
            signs to notify motorists of the presence of the system, 
            adherence to traffic signal timing and intervals standards, 
            and confidentiality of data collected by the system. Current 
            law also prohibits a contract between a government agency and 
            a manufacturer or supplier of automated traffic enforcement 
            equipment from including provisions for the payment or 
            compensation to the manufacturer or supplier based on the 
            number of citations generated, or as a percentage of the 
            revenue generated, as a result of the use of the equipment. 

           3)Related Legislation.  

             a)   SB 29 (Simitian 2011) made changes to installation and 
               operation of ATES and notification of alleged violations 
               recorded by ATES that were similar this bill.  SB 29 passed 
               the Assembly 70-4 and the Senate 38-0, but was vetoed by 
               the governor, who stated such issues are better handled by 
               local government.

             b)   SB 1362 (Simitian, 2010) also made changes to 
               installation and operation of ATES and notification of 
               alleged violations recorded by ATES similar to this bill.  
               SB 1362 was held by this committee over concerns with the 
               bill's potential effect on local revenues that would result 
               from the bills specific notification requirements, 
               requirements SB 1303 does not include.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081