BILL ANALYSIS SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Bill No: ab 1191 Senator Quentin L. Kopp, Chairman Author: shelley Amended: 6/9/97 Analysis by: Steve Schnaidt Fiscal: Yes SUBJECT: Traffic fines: red light violations. DESCRIPTION: This bill would increase the base fine for running a red light to $100 from the current $35 and would specify that a portion of the fines, forfeitures, and assessments collected for convictions of such violations be allocated to the local law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction in which the offense occurred. ANALYSIS: Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle approaching an intersection controlled by a traffic signal light to stop at the marked limit line when faced with a steady red light or flashing red light. Under the law, it is an infraction punishable by a base fine not exceeding $100 for any person to fail to stop at a steady or flashing red signal. A second violation is punishable by a base fine not exceeding $200 while third or subsequent violations are punishable by base fines not exceeding $250. State and local penalty assessments are added to base traffic fines in the total amount of 170% of the base fine. The operative base fine for running a red light is $35, as established by the Judicial Council, making the total fine amount $100 when the penalty assessments are added. Under existing law, all fines and forfeitures imposed and collected for crimes, other than parking offenses, resulting from a filing in a court are required to be deposited with the county treasurer and distributed in accordance with a specified formula each month to the state, counties and cities. This bill would specify that the base fine for running a red light is $100, thereby increasing the total fine amount to $270 with the addition of existing penalty assessments. The bill would require that $80 of each $270 total for fines, forfeitures and assessments be allocated to the local law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction in which the red light offense occurred. In the case where a person convicted of a red light violation is permitted to attend a traffic violator school, $80 of the fees paid to attend the school shall be allocated to the appropriate local law enforcement agency. COMMENTS: 1. The intent of the bill is to make fines for running red lights more closely match the seriousness of the offense. Running red lights creates significant safety hazards for other motorists and pedestrians. The author has cited a number of statistics to that effect, including that running red lights and stop signs results in 7% of traffic fatalities statewide (288 deaths) and 11% of all traffic-related injuries (33,400 injured) in 1995. In some areas of the state, the rate of red-light related collisions far exceeds the statewide average of 102 collisions per 100,000 population: Pasadena has a rate of 409, Oakland 246, Modesto 224, Sacramento 213, Ontario 185, Riverside 177, San Francisco 158, Concord 152, Long Beach 133, etc. The author places the total cost of such deaths and injuries in San Francisco in 1995 at $41,782,000. 2. Opponents of the measure contend that the bill would require the court to separately track red light violations and report fine distributions to the county treasurer because of the $80 fine subvention to local law enforcement. The Judicial Council believes it would have to act as a tax collector and bear additional administrative burdens. 3. The required $80 subvention to local law enforcement is intended to support increased enforcement efforts. The specified allocation could be construed as a "bounty" for a particular offense and would be in marked contrast to the state's policy which attempts to avoid a direct link between the enforcement agency and revenues from the citations issued by same. Modifying the bill to subvene the $80 to the affected cities and counties, rather than the law enforcement agency directly, might help ease the perception. Assembly Votes: Floor: 60-13 Appr: 21-0 Trans: 19-1 POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on Wednesday, June 11, 1997. ) SUPPORT: City and County of San Francisco League of California Cities Californians for Safer Streets Senior Action Network EDS OPPOSED: Judicial Council of California 6/10/97