BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    




                                                                      SB 1136  
                                                                     Page 1

SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1136 (Kopp)
As Amended January 6, 1998
Majority vote
 
  SENATE VOTE  :  26-10
                                                  
  TRANSPORTATION           19-2                                                

Ayes:  Murray, Brewer, Baca, Bowler,
       Cardenas, Figueroa, Havice,
       Shelley, Margaett, Mazzoni,
       Morrow, Napolitano, Oller,
       Perata, Runner, Scott, Takasugi,
       Torlakson, Wayne

Nays:  McClintock, Poochigian

  SUMMARY  :  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 bill  repeals the January 1,  
1999, sunset date of current law which:

1)  Authorizes the use of automated enforcement systems at official traffic  
control signals.

2)  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; and

    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  :











                                                                      SB 1136  
                                                                     Page 2

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  
    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), Chapter 922, Statutes 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.

SB 833 (Kopp) 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.


  Analysis prepared by  :  Philip Crabbe / atrans / (916) 319-2093 










                                                                      SB 1136  
                                                                     Page 3




                                                                     FN 037691