BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: sb 1534
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: harman
VERSION: 5/1/12
Analysis by: Carrie Cornwell FISCAL: no
Hearing date: May 8, 2012
SUBJECT:
Video recorders in taxicabs
DESCRIPTION:
This bill permits video recorders to block the windshield of a
licensed taxicab.
ANALYSIS:
Existing eavesdropping law prohibits, without the expressed
consent of all parties involved, the audio recording of
communication carried on in circumstances that may reasonably
indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be
confined to the parties.
Existing law prohibits a person from driving any motor vehicle
with any object or material placed, displayed, installed,
affixed, or applied upon the windshield or the side windows
adjacent to the driver. Existing law makes exceptions for the
following:
Rearview mirrors;
Sunvisors that are not mounted on the windshield glass;
Electronic toll communication devices (e.g., FasTrak
transponders) or video event recorders affixed to the center
uppermost portion of the interior of the windshield within
an area that is not greater than five inches square;
Transparent material applied to the top most portion of
the windshield (i.e., tinting);
Stickers (e.g., parking decals), global positioning
SB 1534 (HARMAN) Page 2
systems (GPS), and video event recorders that are placed or
mounted on the windshield in the seven-inch square in the
lower corner farthest removed from the driver or in the
five-inch square in the lower corner nearest the driver but
outside of the airbag deployment zone.
Existing law defines "video event recorders" that can be placed
in small spaces in the two lower windshield corners or at the
center top of the windshield as a video recorder that
continuously records video, audio, and G-force levels, but saves
video only when triggered by an unusual motion or crash or when
operated by the driver. Existing law restricts video event
recorders to storing no more than 30 seconds of footage before
and after an event, permits the registered owner to disable a
video event recorder, and requires posted visible notice in the
vehicle that it is equipped with a video event recorder.
This bill :
1.Permits a video recorder that is installed in a taxicab for
purposes of routine video monitoring to block the windshield
or side windows of that taxi.
2.Defines a "video recorder" as a device that continuously
records both audio and video.
3.Defines "routine video monitoring" as video recording by a
video or electronic imaging system designed to record regular
and ongoing operations, including mobile in-car video systems.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose . The author introduced this bill at the request of
the Taxicab Paratransit Association and the City of Los
Angeles to provide legal authorization to place cameras on the
windshields or partially blocking the windshields of taxicabs.
The author notes that several cities, including Los Angeles,
San Francisco, Santa Monica, and San Diego, have mandated that
taxicab operators licensed to operate in their jurisdiction
install approved security cameras to address and deter
assaults on taxi drivers. Proponents point out the dangerous
position taxi drivers can find themselves in and assert that
these cameras need to record continuously in order to provide
a safer environment for drivers. Existing law's prohibition
on these cameras in taxicabs' windshields puts many hundreds
of taxicab drivers in California at risk of operating without
SB 1534 (HARMAN) Page 3
a significant security device to deter assault.
2.Obstructing the driver's view . This bill authorizes a video
recorder of any size to be placed anywhere on or blocking the
view through the windshield or the front windows of a taxicab.
The bill, therefore, makes it legal to obstruct a taxicab
driver's view of the street, other vehicles, pedestrians, and
other features of his or her driving environment. Due to
traffic safety concerns, existing law restricts other such
devices, including toll collection transponders, video event
recorders, and GPS, to a seven-inch square in the lower corner
farthest removed from the driver, a five-inch square in the
lower corner nearest the driver, or a five-inch square at the
center top of the windshield. In order to minimize driver
distraction and visual obstruction, the committee may wish to
amend this bill to require that the video recorders authorized
by this bill be placed in any of these same locations.
3.These cameras are in use now . As the author notes, these
cameras are currently in use in taxicabs in jurisdictions
around the state, and in most cases are likely placed such
that they violate California law prohibiting any object from
being on or blocking the view through the windshield. This
bill would legalize those existing video recorders, some of
which are mandated under local taxicab regulations.
4.Previous legislation . AB 1942 (Fletcher), Chapter 458,
Statutes of 2010, permitted the placement of video event
recorders in any of three specified locations on the
windshield of a vehicle. Due to concerns about the video and
audio recording of occupants of vehicles, that bill included
various limitations, as follows:
a. AB 1942 limits recordings to 30 seconds before and 30
seconds after an event, such as an accident. This bill
contemplates storing continuous video for an unlimited
amount of time and places no restrictions on who can view
the recordings. Taxi drivers who oppose this bill note
that while security cameras in taxis have traditionally
been for the purpose of protecting taxi drivers from
assaults or robberies, this bill appears designed for the
monitoring of taxi drivers themselves. They describe this
as a recent practice that has been done without the consent
or even the knowledge of most taxi drivers or their
passengers, and further assert that taxi company management
has used this footage to harass and intimidate drivers for
SB 1534 (HARMAN) Page 4
reasons other than safety. They are concerned that this
bill opens the door to further abuse and intimidation by
taxicab company management and possibly regulatory
personnel. The committee may wish to amend this bill to
permit only law enforcement to review the video recorded
and only for public safety purposes, including
investigation of a crime.
b. To address concerns of commercial drivers, AB 1942
requires that an employee may receive unedited copies of
recordings made, prescribes that recordings made are the
property of the registered owner or lessee of the vehicle,
and allows the registered owner of the vehicle to turn off
the video event recorder. Taxi drivers are not typically
employees, but sometimes own the cabs they drive and
sometimes rent or lease them from others. The concerns of
taxi drivers could be addressed through amendments as they
were for commercial drivers in AB 1942. The committee may
wish to consider amendments that permit a taxi driver to
turn off the video recorder and that permit the taxicab
driver to request unedited copies of recordings.
c. Under the Penal Code, audio recording generally requires
the expressed consent of all parties to a conversation.
Such consent is difficult to achieve with passengers in a
vehicle who change with each trip the vehicle makes. To
address this issue, AB 1942 required that a vehicle
equipped with a video event recorder have posted in it
visible notice that it is equipped with a video event
recorder. Such notice inside the taxi may be of little use
to providing a taxi customer with actual notice once he or
she is inside of the taxicab. The committee may wish to
amend this bill to require posting of a notice on the
inside and the outside of the taxicab to inform passengers
that their conversations inside the taxi are recorded.
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday, May 2, 2012)
SUPPORT: Taxicab Paratransit Association of California
(sponsor)
City of Los Angeles (sponsor)
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
One individual
OPPOSED: Los Angeles Taxi Workers Alliance
SB 1534 (HARMAN) Page 5
San Francisco Taxi Cab Drivers Association
Six individuals