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