BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1136
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 30, 1998
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Kevin Murray, Chairman
SB 1136(Kopp) - As Amended: January 6, 1998
SENATE VOTE : 26-10
SUBJECT : Vehicles: automated enforcement systems
SUMMARY : This bill repeals the January 1, 1999 sunset date of current law,
and extends indefinitely provisions which allow the use of automated
enforcement systems at official traffic control signals, and provides for
specific notification and enforcement procedures. Specifically, this bil l:
1) Repeals the January 1, 1999, sunset date of current law which authorizes
the use of automated enforcement systems at official traffic control signals.
2) Repeals the January 1, 1999, sunset date of current law which establishes
the following procedures and requirements for use of automated enforcement
systems:
a) Intersections equipped with the enforcement systems must be visible to
traffic in all directions, identified by signs clearly indicating the
system's presence, or identified by signs posted at all major entrances to
the participating city;
b) Use of the system must be preceded by public notice by the local
jurisdiction at least 30 days in advance and only warning notices may be
issued to violators during the first 30 days of the system's operation;
c) Only a governmental agency and law enforcement agency may operate a
system;
d) All photographic records are confidential, available only to the
affected governmental agencies. However, any alleged violator or
registered owner of the involved vehicle may review the photographic
evidence of an alleged violation;
e) Citations must be delivered to the driver within 15 days of the
alleged violations, and must include specified information, including how,
when, and where the citation may be challenged.
EXISTING LAW :
1) Authorizes, until January 1, 1999, the use of automated enforcement
systems at official traffic control signals. Current law defines an automated
enforcement system as any system operated by a government
SB 1136
Page 1
SB 1136
Page 2
agency, in cooperation with law enforcement, that photographically records a
driver's response to rail or traffic signals, and is designed to obtain a
clean photograph of a vehicle's license plate and the driver of the vehicle.
2) Provides for, until January 1, 1999, specific procedures and requirements
for use of the automated enforcement systems (as described above in #2).
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : SB 833 (Kopp) of 1995, authorized a three-year demonstration period
to test the use and effectiveness of so-called "red light cameras" in reducing
the incidence of drivers running red lights at intersections, and in
identifying the drivers and vehicles involved in committing such violations.
According to proponents, the running of red lights is a primary cause of urban
crashes, fatalities, injuries and property damage. Insurance organizations
and the federal government reported last year that 22% of all automobile
crashes were caused by red light runners at a cost to the nation of over $7
billion. In addition, research has found that red light violators tend to
have poorer than average driving records, use safety belts less frequently,
and constitute a higher risk group of drivers. One example of the
effectiveness of this program is the City and County of San Francisco, which
recently piloted the use of a red light camera system. During the first six
months of the program's operation, there was a 42% drop in the number of
drivers running red lights at intersections equipped with enforcement cameras.
Because of the program's success, San Francisco plans to increase the number
of intersections equipped with cameras from four to 24.
Currently, numerous cities besides San Francisco are in various stages of
testing the red light camera systems including Santa Rosa, Oxnard, Beverly
Hills, El Cajon and Poway. Others have plans to test this system, provided
that the program's provisions are extended, including Los Angeles, San Diego,
Sacramento, Fremont, Cupertino and Fresno.
Proponents also state that the increased enforcement provided by the automatic
enforcement systems allow traffic officers to focus even greater attention to
other serious traffic violations such as speeding and reckless or drunk
driving. They further argue that the continued and expanded use of automated
enforcement systems will have a significant beneficial effect on red light
enforcement and in reducing related crashes, injuries, fatalities and costs.
Related Legislation : SB 833 (Kopp), Chapter 922, Statutes of 1995, extended
the authorization to use automated traffic enforcement systems to all areas
where a driver is required to obey traffic signals and specifies requirements
for use of these systems. This provision is scheduled to sunset on January 1,
1999.
SB 1136
Page 2
SB 1136
Page 3
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
City and County of San Francisco (sponsor)
City of Los Angeles (sponsor)
City of San Diego (sponsor)
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
California Peace Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs' Association
City and County of San Francisco Department of Parking and Traffic
City of Oxnard
City of Sacramento
Opposition
Unknown
Analysis prepared by : Philip Crabbe / atrans / (916) 319-2093
SB 1136
Page 3