BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: AB 348 SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: BUCHANAN VERSION: 4/27/11 Analysis by: Michelle Leinfelder FISCAL:NO Hearing date: July 5, 2011 SUBJECT: Vasco Road: double fine zone DESCRIPTION: This bill allows, until January 1, 2017, the designation of a Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zone (DFZ) on a segment of Vasco Road in Alameda and Contra Costa counties, upon approval of resolutions by the boards of supervisors in both counties. ANALYSIS: Existing law establishes that the conditions for designating DFZs are: The segment is part of the state highway system. The segment has a rate of total collisions per mile per year that is at least 1.5 times the statewide average for similar roadway types during the most recent three-year period for which data are available. The segment has a rate of head-on collisions per mile per year that is at least 1.5 times the statewide average for similar roadway types during the most recent three-year period for which data are available. Additionally, existing law requires the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), every two years, in consultation with the California Highway Patrol (CHP), to certify that a road segment meets the aforementioned criteria. SB 3 (Torlakson), Chapter 179, Statutes of 2006, designated a segment of Vasco Road between the Interstate 580 junction in Alameda County and the Walnut Boulevard intersection in Contra Costa County, upon approval of county resolutions, as a DFZ until January 1, 2010. The bill required Caltrans, one year prior to the termination of the DFZ, to evaluate the AB 348 (BUCHANAN) Page 2 effectiveness of the DFZ to reduce traffic accidents, injuries, and fatalities and to recommend to the Legislature whether the DFZ should be reauthorized. This bill: Allows the counties of Contra Costa and Alameda to designate the segment of county highway known as Vasco Road, between the SR 580 junction in Alameda County and the Walnut Boulevard intersection in Contra Costa County, as a DFZ upon the approval of resolutions by both counties' boards of supervisors. Requires the local governing bodies, prior to designating the DFZ, to do each of the following: o Undertake a public awareness campaign to inform the public of the DFZ, its location, purpose, and consequences. o Implement increased traffic safety enhancements, enforcement, and other roadway safety measures. Requires the local authority to place the signage at the DFZ beginning and end points. Requires the counties jointly to conduct an evaluation of the effectiveness of the DFZ and report the findings to the Assembly Committee on Transportation and the Senate Committee on Transportation and Housing one year prior to the termination of the DFZ. The report must include a recommendation on whether the zone should be reauthorized by the Legislature, as well as a comparative evaluation of the volume and speed of traffic, the number and severity of collisions, and the contributing factors that led to collisions prior to and following the establishment of the double fine zone. Requires that only the base fine be doubled. Specifies that the DFZ remains in effect until January 1, 2017. COMMENTS: 1. Purpose . This bill reauthorizes the DFZ along Vasco Road in Contra Costa and Alameda counties that was originally created by SB 3 (Torlakson) in 2006. According to the author, the DFZ will act as a tool to prevent unsafe driving practices that, along with dangerous conditions, contribute to a high collision rate. The counties of Contra Costa and Alameda are in the process of making road improvements but lack the AB 348 (BUCHANAN) Page 3 funds to complete all phases. This bill is needed because the DFZ acts as a deterrent to unsafe driving practices that contribute to the high accident rate. 2. Uncertain efficacy . As part of an earlier DFZ program, statute required Caltrans to report to the Legislature by January 1, 2003, on the impact and effectiveness of DFZs, with a DFZ being deemed successful if there was a "significant decrease in the number of accidents, traffic injuries, and fatalities in the project areas." In its December 2002 report, Caltrans explained that, while some reductions in the number and severity of collisions did occur in some of the DFZs, the reductions were not statistically significant. Caltrans also noted that, a number of uncontrolled variables, such as physical improvements to roadway segments, changes in enforcement levels, and the initiation of public awareness campaigns made it virtually impossible to ascertain how much, if any, of the decrease in collisions was attributable to the doubling of fines. Caltrans, therefore, concluded that the benefits of increased fines alone could not be proven. Upon expiration of various DFZ authorizations, legislators introduced several bills to reinstate previously authorized DFZs. The efforts were largely unsuccessful due to concerns that the DFZs had not been proven to be effective and that they could be misused as a tool to generate revenue. 3. Base fine only . This bill doubles only base fines for traffic infractions. As an example, the base fine for speeding (up to 15 MPH over the posted speed limit) is $35. On top of a base fine, a driver who is cited for a traffic violation (and does not contest or is convicted) pays penalty assessments of $198. Thus, a $35 speeding ticket is really a $233 total fine. Increasing that by another $35 to $268 is very unlikely by itself to influence driver behavior, but it would generate a small amount of local revenue. 4. Reporting accident statistics and effectiveness . It remains unclear what impact the original DFZ had on reducing accidents on Vasco Road. SB 3 charged Caltrans with the responsibility to report on the impact of the original designation but, because Vasco Road is a county road and not a state highway, Caltrans did not complete the study. In response to this bill, Caltrans used CHP data to determine accident rates for Vasco Road. Caltrans staff analyzed collision and head-on collision rates on Vasco Road from AB 348 (BUCHANAN) Page 4 2000-2009 and compared those with rates from conventional two and three lane roads on the state highway system. The analysis shows that the annual collision rate declined from 2004-2008, increased in 2009, but for all years was significantly higher than the statewide average. For head-on collisions from 2007-2009, however, the average for Vasco Road was 0.14 head-on collisions/mile/year was lower than the statewide average of 0.15 head-on collisions/mile/year. For the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of the DFZ that this bill authorizes, and to ensure consistency with the parameters Caltrans uses to evaluate DFZ efficacy, the committee may wish to consider an amendment that would require the counties of Contra Costa and Alameda to consult with Caltrans when evaluating efficacy of the Vasco Road DFZ. 5. Sunset . Because this bill is reinstating the Vasco Road DFZ, and thus, because data already exist for this DFZ, in order to sooner understand the efficacy of the DFZ designation, the committee may wish to consider amending the sunset date to January 1, 2014. Assembly Votes: Floor: 71-0 Trans: 12-0 POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on Wednesday, June 29, 2011) SUPPORT: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (Sponsor) Alameda County Board of Supervisors Alameda County Deputy Sheriffs' Association American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees California State Sheriffs' Association City of Brentwood Mayor, Robert Taylor City of Livermore Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriffs Association Contra Costa County Supervisor Mary Nejedly Piepho Contra Costa Transportation Authority OPPOSED: None received. AB 348 (BUCHANAN) Page 5