BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 517|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 517
Author: Oropeza (D)
Amended: 6/7/04 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE : 9-3, 6/15/04
AYES: Murray, Ashburn, Figueroa, Florez, Karnette, Perata,
Scott, Speier, Torlakson
NOES: McClintock, Brulte, Morrow
NO VOTE RECORDED: Soto
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-0, 1/20/04 - See last page for vote*
*NOTE: The bill has been revised in the Senate and votes
may no longer be relevant.
SUBJECT : Red light camera enforcement systems
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill extends, from six months to 13 months,
the period of time that confidential information and
photographic records from red light camera enforcement
operations may be retained. The bill also provides that
such information is available for judicial purposes and
that law enforcement agencies may audit records for
contract compliance.
ANALYSIS : Existing law defines an "automated enforcement
system" as a photographic system operated by a governmental
agency, in cooperation with a law enforcement agency,
CONTINUED
AB 517
Page
2
designed to obtain a clear photograph of a vehicle's
license plate and the driver of the vehicle when a driver
ignores an official traffic control signal or a rail
transit signal or crossing gate. The system is one which
photographs red light runners or those who ignore railroad
grade crossing signals.
SB 1802 (Rosenthal, 1994) authorized the use of automated
rail crossing enforcement systems (red light cameras) to
record violations occurring at rail crossing signals and
gates. Later, SB 833 (Kopp, Statutes of 1995) authorized a
three-year demonstration period to test the use and
effectiveness of such cameras in reducing the incidence of
drivers running red lights at roadway intersections and in
identifying the drivers committing such violations and the
vehicles involved. After reviewing the operations and
effectiveness of the pilot program, the Legislature enacted
SB 1136 (Kopp, 1998) which authorized the use of automated
enforcement systems at intersections indefinitely.
Under current law, the use of red light cameras is
conditioned on several requirements and procedures,
including that:
1.Intersections equipped with the enforcement systems must
be identified by signs visible to traffic in all
directions, or by signs posted at all major entrances to
the participating city.
2.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, after which
citations may be issued.
3.Only a governmental agency and law enforcement agency may
operate a system.
4.All photographic records from the cameras and related
information obtained from the Department of Motor
Vehicles (DMV) for enforcement are confidential, shall be
made available only to the affected governmental agencies
for enforcement purposes and may be retained up to six
months from first being obtained.
AB 517
Page
3
5.Any driver alleged to be a violator of red light
provisions or the vehicle's registered owner is permitted
to review the photographic evidence of the alleged
violation.
6.Citations must be delivered to the driver within 15 days
of the alleged violations, with a certificate of mailing
obtained as evidence of service, and must include
specified information, including how, when, and where the
citation may be challenged.
Under current law, the base fine for running a red light is
$100, plus substantial penalty assessments for a total fine
exceeding $300. The first 30 percent of the total fine
amount is required to be allocated to the general fund of
the city or county where the offense occurred. The special
penalty and assessment amounts are transferred to various
funds and programs as required by law while base fines
subject to specific distributions are transferred to the
specified state funds or local agencies.
This bill revises provisions governing the retention of red
light camera enforcement records and access to those
records. Specifically, this bill:
1.Extends the period of time that photographic records from
the camera systems can be retained from the current six
months to 13 months. The retention period extension
would apply also to confidential informational obtained
from DMV for administration or enforcement of the red
light camera systems.
2.Declares that the photographic and related confidential
records are available for judicial purposes and require
that photographic and electronic records may be
maintained in a computer or on video digital video
systems according to specified sections of the Evidence
Code. Those sections provide that an accurate printout
of information stored in a computer is an "original" and
that a printed representation of images stored on video
or digital medium is presumed to be an accurate
representation of those images.
AB 517
Page
4
3.Allows a law enforcement agency that operates a red light
camera system to audit records maintained to ensure
compliance with contracts for operation of the system.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/17/04)
State Department of the California Highway Patrol
California State Sheriff's Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, it can
take up to 9 months for the final disposition of citations
in California courts due to a violator's failure to
appear/pay, court processing time, or extended processing
time due to a trial. This is three months beyond the
current 6 month retention period allowed by law for red
light camera records. Although current law does allow for
the retention period to exceed six months until the final
disposition of the case, the custodian of these citation
records needs additional time to sort out those citations
that have been reconciled from those that have not reached
a final disposition. The process of separating those
records is very labor intensive. Extending the retention
period will reduce the workload because the majority of
cases will have reached final disposition and can be
destroyed upon initial review. The duplicative work
required to review pending records more than once because
of the current short retention period will be eliminated by
the bill.
The bill also is intended to clarify that the records
required to be retained are those that are defined by the
Evidence Code as the original records and to clarify the
authority of the law enforcement agency running a program
to audit records to ensure compliance with the requirements
of a contract and the requirements of the section.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Aghazarian, Bates, Benoit, Berg, Bermudez, Bogh,
Calderon, Campbell, Canciamilla, Chan, Chu, Cogdill,
Cohn, Corbett, Correa, Cox, Daucher, Diaz, Dutra, Dutton,
AB 517
Page
5
Dymally, Firebaugh, Frommer, Garcia, Goldberg, Hancock,
Haynes, Jerome Horton, Shirley Horton, Houston, Jackson,
Keene, Kehoe, Koretz, La Malfa, La Suer, Laird, Leno,
Leslie, Levine, Lieber, Liu, Longville, Lowenthal,
Maddox, Maldonado, Matthews, Maze, McCarthy, Montanez,
Mountjoy, Mullin, Nakanishi, Nakano, Negrete McLeod,
Nunez, Oropeza, Pacheco, Parra, Pavley, Plescia, Reyes,
Richman, Ridley-Thomas, Runner, Salinas, Samuelian,
Simitian, Spitzer, Steinberg, Strickland, Vargas,
Wiggins, Wyland, Yee, Wesson
NO VOTE RECORDED: Chavez, Harman, Nation, Wolk
RJG:cm 6/17/04 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****