BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2567
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 5, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Bonnie Lowenthal, Chair
AB 2567 (Bradford) - As Introduced: February 19, 2010
SUBJECT : Photo enforcement: parking: street sweepers
SUMMARY : Authorizes local public agencies to use automated
parking enforcement systems for street sweeping-related
violations. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes legislative findings and declarations regarding the
importance of street sweepers in clearing streets and roads of
trash and pollutants.
2)Defines key terms, most notably "automated parking enforcement
system" to mean the installation and use of equipment that
takes digital photographs and is linked with a violation
detection system that synchronizes the taking of the
photograph with the occurrence of a parking infraction.
3)Authorizes local agencies to install and operate automated
parking enforcement systems on local public agency-owned or
-operated street sweeping equipment for purposes of digitally
photographing street sweeping parking violations.
4)Requires the photo enforcement equipment to be angled and
focused so as to capture digital photographs of license plates
and so as not to unnecessarily capture images of drivers,
other vehicles, and pedestrians.
5)Provides that citations can only be issued for violations
captured during designated street sweeping hours.
6)Provides that citations cannot be issued to vehicles that park
in restricted zones after the street has been cleaned by the
street sweeper.
7)Allows a local public agency to contract with a private vendor
for the processing of parking violation notices so long as the
local public agency maintains overall control and supervision
of the automated parking enforcement system.
8)Requires public agencies to give advanced public notice, at
AB 2567
Page 2
least 30 days, of their intent to use automated parking
enforcement systems.
9)Restricts local agencies to issuing only warning notices
during this 30-day period using the automated enforcement
system; specifically provides, however, that local public
agencies may use a manual system to issue citations, before,
during, and after the 30-day warning period.
10)Requires a designated local public agency employee, who is
qualified to issue parking citations for that agency, to
review digital photographs to determine the validity of a
parking citation.
11)Requires that digital image evidence be retained for up to
six months from the date the information was first obtained or
60 days after final disposition of the citation, whichever
date is later, after which time the information must be
destroyed.
12)Provides that digital photographs made by an automated
parking enforcement system are confidential and use of the
photographs is limited.
13)Requires a designated employee to issue a notice of a parking
violation to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15
days of the violation and prescribes specific data to be
included in the violation.
14)Sets forth provisions governing the processing of violations
and appeals.
15)Requires a local public agency that utilizes an automatic
parking enforcement system to report specific information to
the Senate and Assembly Judiciary Committees by January 1,
2015.
16)Sunsets on January 1, 2016.
EXISTING LAW :
17)Authorizes the City and County of San Francisco, until
January 1, 2012, to issue citations based on photo-evidence of
parking violations in transit-only lanes.
AB 2567
Page 3
18)Authorizes the use of automated enforcement systems at rail
or rail transit signals and crossing gates.
19)Authorizes the use of automated enforcement systems at
intersections to detect red light violations.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : According to the author, the intent of this bill is
"to reduce the amount of dirt, oil, and debris being washed into
the storm drains, thereby having a positive environmental
impact."
The California Public Parking Association, sponsor of this bill,
suggests that by allowing automated parking enforcement systems
to be placed on street sweepers, this bill will effectively
complement the work of existing parking enforcement personnel
and help allocate scarce resources.
Currently, Chicago and the District of Columbia (Washington
D.C.) use the automated street sweeper system, which uses
photo-light sensing, character recognition, and global
positioning system technology to spot parking violators.
In California, use of similar automated enforcement technology
is authorized for red light violations by a governmental agency.
Last session, usage of this technology was also authorized on a
pilot project basis for the City and County of San Francisco
(San Francisco) to issue citations based on photo-evidence of
transit-only-lane parking violations. The authority granted to
San Francisco was provided for in AB 101 (Ma), Chapter 377,
Statutes of 2008.
Provisions of this bill are similar to those in AB 101 and
identical to last year's AB 1336 (Eng) that passed the
Legislature but was vetoed by the Governor. In his veto
message, the Governor wrote, "This bill could present a
significant risk of violating an individual's privacy unrelated
to the enforcement of law. It may also lead to the unwarranted
proliferation of camera enforcement in many other arenas."
Interestingly, subsequent to the Governor's veto of AB 1336 for
these reasons, the Governor introduced his budget proposal which
calls for the deployment of a massive statewide speed camera
program to generate nearly $400 million in net profit to state
and local government. As proposed, the camera program is
AB 2567
Page 4
expected to print over two million citations each year.
Committee concerns: The Committee was only able to identify one
company that offers street sweeper photo enforcement services.
That company, Affiliated Computer Services (ACS), is responsible
for the two street sweeper photo enforcement systems employed
elsewhere in the United States-Chicago and Washington D. C. The
Committee is concerned that provisions in the bill defining
"automated parking enforcement system" to mean "the installation
and use of equipment that takes a digital camera-based
photograph and is linked with a violation detection system that
synchronizes the taking of the photograph with the occurrence of
a parking infraction" is unnecessarily restrictive and could
result in precluding other firms from providing similar services
using different technology. (Similar restrictions were not
included in previous legislation authorizing the use of photo
enforcement for transit-only lanes or red light violations.)
The Committee may wish to strike or modify the definition of an
"automated parking enforcement system" to that other
businesses could provide similar services, perhaps using
different technology.
Suggested technical amendment: The bill requires local public
agencies that use the enforcement system authorized in this
bill to report to the Senate and Assembly Committees on
Judiciary data about citations issued, the overall
effectiveness of the program, and an evaluation of
privacy-related complaints about the system. This report
should be submitted to the Assembly Transportation Committee
as well.
Previous legislation : Last year's AB 1336 (Eng) was identical
to this bill.
AB 101 (Ma), Chapter 377, Statutes of 2008, authorized the City
and County of San Francisco to issue citations based on
photo-evidence of transit-only-lane parking violations.
SB 1136 (Kopp), Chapter 54, Statutes of 1998, extended
indefinitely provisions that allow the use of automated
enforcement systems at official traffic control signals.
SB 833 (Kopp), Chapter 922, Statutes of 1995, originally
authorized, for a limited time, the use of automated photo
AB 2567
Page 5
enforcement for all places where a driver is required to respond
to an official traffic control signal (i.e. red light cameras).
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Public Parking Association
California State Association of Counties
League of California Cities
City of San Diego
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Janet Dawson / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093