BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: AB 612 SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: nazarian VERSION: 3/19/13 Analysis by: Erin Riches FISCAL: no Hearing date: June 25, 2013 SUBJECT: Automated enforcement systems: yellow lights DESCRIPTION: This bill establishes longer yellow light intervals at intersections with automated enforcement systems and requires courts to dismiss citations occurring at intersections where local agencies have not designated these yellow light intervals. ANALYSIS: Existing law: Provides that a yellow light signal warns a driver that a red indication will be shown immediately thereafter, signaling a change in the right-of-way assignment. Authorizes a local government agency, in cooperation with a local law enforcement agency, to install an automated traffic enforcement system (commonly known as a red light camera) at an intersection pursuant to specified requirements. Defines an automated traffic enforcement system as a system operated by a government agency, in cooperation with a law enforcement agency, that photographically records a driver's responses to a rail or rail transit signal and/or crossing gate, or to an official traffic control signal, and is designed to obtain a clear photograph of a vehicle's license plate and the driver of the vehicle. Requires the local agency to establish minimum yellow light change intervals at red light camera intersections in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California MUTCD). AB 612 (NAZARIAN) Page 2 The California MUTCD: Provides that a yellow light change interval should have a minimum duration of three seconds and a maximum duration of six seconds, with the longer intervals reserved for use on approaches with higher speeds. Recommends specific yellow light intervals ranging from 3.0 seconds for a posted speed of up to 25 miles per hour to 5.8 seconds for a posted speed of 65 miles per hour. This bill : Requires a local agency to establish minimum yellow light intervals at red light camera intersections at one second longer than the yellow light change intervals provided in the California MUTCD. Requires courts to dismiss traffic citations issued at red light camera intersections if the local agency or local authority has failed to establish the specified yellow light intervals. COMMENTS: 1.Purpose . The author states that red light cameras create situations where motorists brake earlier than usual at a yellow light in order to avoid a ticket for running the red light; the author contends that this leads to an increased number of rear-end collisions. The author and sponsor cite numerous studies which have found that extending yellow light intervals reduces collisions related to red light running. The author states that this is because local jurisdictions may set the yellow light interval below the minimum. In addition, jurisdictions tend to set yellow light intervals according to the posted speed limit rather than the actual speed motorists are traveling, which is often higher than the posted limit. The author states that this bill is a logical step toward achieving the ultimate mission of red light cameras, namely, to improve safety. 2.Red light cameras . California first authorized the use of red light cameras in 1994 at rail crossings, and expanded this authorization to signalized intersections several years later. Red light cameras have been the subject of some controversy, AB 612 (NAZARIAN) Page 3 and numerous pieces of legislation in recent years have addressed issues such as privacy and concerns that red light camera intersections are more focused on revenue generation than traffic safety. SB 667 (Peace), Chapter 396, Statutes of 2001, required local agencies to set yellow light intervals based on the California MUTCD at intersections with red light cameras. The author of SB 667 introduced the bill based on testimony at an informational hearing indicating that at some red light camera intersections the yellow light interval was shorter than California MUTCD standards, effectively creating red light speed traps. 3.Caltrans review . Existing law requires Caltrans, after consultation with local agencies and public hearings, to adopt rules and regulations prescribing uniform standards and specifications for traffic control devices in the state. Caltrans fulfills this mandate through its California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CTCDC), which Caltrans created for this purpose. The CTCDC is an advisory body which reviews rules and regulations and makes recommendations to the Caltrans director, who ultimately adopts and publishes rules and regulations in the CA MUCTD. The committee is made up of representatives from Caltrans, the California Highway Patrol, and local governments, and also consults with technical advisors. During its quarterly meeting on July 25, 2013, the CTCDC will consider issues concerning yellow signal timing at all signalized intersections in relation to findings cited in a new National Highway Cooperative Research Program report. The CTCDC will decide whether to assign a subcommittee to look further into issues raised by this report. If it chooses to do so, the full committee may consider a recommended policy change as early as fall or winter of this year. The committee may wish to consider holding this bill pending CTCDC review of this issue, or directing Caltrans to study yellow light timing and report back to the Legislature with recommended action. 4.Unintended consequences . Traffic engineers calculate red, yellow, and green light intervals for each intersection based on both engineering formulas (pursuant to the CA MUCTD) and circumstances (e.g., two main streets intersecting versus a side street intersecting a main street). In addition, engineers often synchronize traffic lights along a high-traffic corridor to facilitate traffic flow. Adding one second to yellow lights at red light camera intersections AB 612 (NAZARIAN) Page 4 could wreak havoc with such synchronization and cause a need to re-time the entire corridor, at potentially significant cost to localities. 5.Why not all intersections ? The Northern and Southern California Automobile Associations note that minimum yellow light intervals reduce red light violations and related collisions so dramatically that they should be instituted at all intersections in the state. The sponsor notes that these intersections have, by definition, been targeted as areas with high rates of red light running. In addition, the red light cameras provide data to enable localities to track results. Thus, the sponsor states that it is logical to apply this bill just to those intersections, at least as a start. 6.Battling studies . The sponsor, who opposes red light cameras, cites numerous studies showing that localities that have lengthened yellow light intervals have experienced significant drops in red-light running and collisions. Other studies, many funded by the red light camera industry, show that red light cameras have a much more significant impact. 7.Opposition concerns . The California Police Chiefs Association notes that this bill is inconsistent with the formulaic approach established in the CA MUCTD. Similarly, the League of California Cities states that current yellow light intervals are based on considerable research and actual practice, and reflect the conditions of the particular intersection. The City and County of San Francisco states that making yellow lights longer encourages disrespect of yellow lights, particularly in slow-speed urban conditions. Finally, Redflex Traffic Systems argues that providing longer yellow lights would encourage drivers to enter intersections further into the yellow phase and could disrupt the flow of vehicles from intersection to intersection, ultimately creating a risk of increased crashes. Assembly Votes: Floor: 72-1 Trans: 15-0 POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Wednesday, June 19, 2013.) SUPPORT: Safer Streets L.A. (sponsor) AB 612 (NAZARIAN) Page 5 American Automobile Association Northern California, Nevada, and Utah Automobile Club of Southern California California Association of Highway Patrolmen California Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit Union California Conference of Machinists California Construction Trucking Association California Teamsters Public Affairs Council National Motorists Association Peace Officers Research Association of California One individual OPPOSED: California Police Chiefs Association City and County of San Francisco League of California Cities Redflex Traffic Systems