Automated traffic enforcement system programs.

Plain English Breakdown

The exact penalties and escalation process for fines are not detailed in the provided official summary.

Automated Traffic Enforcement System Programs

This law allows cities, counties, or city and county governments to set up programs using automated traffic enforcement systems to detect violations of traffic signals. It also sets rules for fines and appeals.

What This Bill Does

• Allows local governments to use automated traffic enforcement systems to detect violations of traffic control signals if the system meets specified requirements.
• Requires escalating civil penalties for violations recorded by these systems.
• Provides a process for issuing notices of violation, initial reviews, administrative hearings, and appeals.
• Clarifies that local jurisdictions can choose between different types of automated traffic enforcement programs.
• Sets a $25 filing fee for appealing a notice of violation from an automated system.

Who It Names or Affects

• Drivers who violate traffic signals in areas where these systems are used.
• Local governments and agencies that set up and manage automated traffic enforcement programs.
• Courts and administrative bodies handling appeals related to violations.

Terms To Know

Automated Traffic Enforcement System

A system using cameras or sensors to detect and record traffic signal violations, such as running red lights.

Civil Penalty

A fine imposed for breaking a law that is not considered criminal behavior.

Limits and Unknowns

• The bill does not specify the exact penalties or how they escalate.
• It does not detail all aspects of the appeals process beyond mentioning its existence.
• The effectiveness and fairness of these systems in reducing traffic violations are not addressed by this legislation.

Official Summary Text

SB 720, Ashby.
Automated traffic enforcement system programs.
Existing law authorizes the limit line, intersection, or other places where a driver is required to stop to be equipped with an automated traffic enforcement system if the governmental agency utilizing the system meets certain requirements, including identifying the system with signs and ensuring that the system meets specified criteria on minimum yellow light change intervals. Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the Cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, Oakland, Glendale, and Long Beach, and the City and County of San Francisco to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement that utilizes a speed safety system in specified areas, if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law prescribes specified requirements for a notice of violation issued pursuant to these provisions, and requires a violation of a speed law that is recorded by a speed safety
system to be subject only to a specified civil penalty.
This bill would additionally authorize a city, county, or city and county to establish an automated traffic enforcement system program to use those systems to detect a violation of a traffic control signal, if the system meets specified requirements. The bill would require a violation of a traffic control signal that is recorded by an automated traffic enforcement system to be subject to escalating civil penalties, as specified. The bill would, among other things, provide for the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under this program. The bill would clarify that a local jurisdiction may utilize an automated traffic enforcement system pursuant to these provisions or the above-described provisions authorizing the utilization of an automated traffic enforcement system. The bill would require a local jurisdiction
utilizing the above-described provisions to take into account the relative risk to traffic and pedestrian safety posed by prohibited right turns on red compared to proceeding through the intersection against a red signal.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of an automated traffic enforcement system.
Existing provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by AB 289 to be operative only if this bill and AB 289 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Current Bill Text

Download Bill PDF