BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 539
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 4, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Bonnie Lowenthal, Chair
AB 539 (Williams) - As Introduced: February 16, 2011
SUBJECT : Vehicles: speeding: school zones: penalties.
SUMMARY : Increases fines and penalties for speed limit
violations in school zones. Specifically, this bill :
1)Provides for a base fine of $150 for any person who violates
the speed limit in a school zone by 1-15 miles per hour (mph).
2)Provides for a base fine of $200 for any person who violates
the speed limit in a school zone by 16-25 mph.
3)Provides for a base fine of $250 for any person who violates
the speed limit in a school zone by 26 mph or more.
4)Provides that an additional $100 penalty would be added to the
base fine for persons convicted of a second school zone
speeding violation if the violation occurs within three years
of the first violation.
5)Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to suspend the
driver's license for a period of six months for any person
convicted of a third or subsequent violation of speeding in a
school zone within three years of two or more separate
violations.
6)Provides that a person who is fined for speeding in school
zones shall receive one violation point on his or her driving
record.
7)Specifies that a court shall not reduce penalties for school
zone speeding violations, as described.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Sets forth provisions governing speed limits and includes
fines for speeding violations.
AB 539
Page 2
2)Allows local authorities to reduce the prima facie speed limit
of 25 mph in a school zone to 20 mph or 15 mph, under certain,
limited, conditions.
3)Allows for doubling of fines for speed limit violations in
highway construction or maintenance zones, under certain
circumstances.
4)Specifies that a person with 4 or more violation points in a
12 month period, 6 or more violation points in at 24 month
period, or 8 or more violation points in a 36 month period is
presumed to be a negligent motor vehicle operator and is
subject to driver's license suspension.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : Existing law generally provides for a prima facie
speed limit of 25 mph in school zones when children are present.
Recently enacted legislation (AB 321( Nava) Chapter 384,
Statutes of 2007) allows a local authority, by ordinance, to
determine and declare a school zone speed limit of 15 mph or 20
mph, under certain circumstances. To declare a 15 or 20 mph
school zone speed limit, the local jurisdiction must conduct
engineering and traffic surveys to show that the 25 mph speed
limit is more than is reasonable or safe. Also, lowering the
speed limit to 15 mph or 20 mph can only be done on a highway
with a posted speed limit of 30 mph or slower.
AB 321 limited conditions under which the speed limit can be
reduced to avoid creating a significant variation in speed along
the route since traffic studies show that an immediate and
significant drop in speeds can exacerbate traffic tie ups and
result in increased accidents and associated safety issues. For
example, the abrupt slowing of vehicles speeds from 30 mph or
higher to 15 mph to 20 mph could increase the number of rear-end
collisions or cars swerving out to avoid rear-end collisions
which could further jeopardize bicyclists and pedestrians.
According to the author, speeding remains a problem in school
zones where local jurisdictions are unable to effectively reduce
the speed limit to 15mph or 20 mph and that the resources to
maintain a serious enforcement presence to curb speeding in
those school zones are limited. The author notes that in Goleta
alone, at least four schools were unable to lower the speed
limit to 15 mph or 20 mph and, as a result, chronic and
AB 539
Page 3
excessive speeding in these school zones continues. The author
cites surveys that show, at times when children are present,
average speeds of 10 mph to 20 mph over the posted 25 mph speed
limit are the norm. The author contends that by increasing
fines, speeding in school zones would be reduced.
Fines are generally set to be commensurate with the crime. The
Legislature has, however, authorized doubling of fines under
certain circumstances. For example, fines are doubled in
highway construction and maintenance areas (AB 708 (Epple)
Chapter 674, Statutes of 1993), but only during times when
traffic is regulated or restricted through or around the area or
when highway construction or maintenance work is actually being
performed and traffic controls or warning signs are erected to
notify motorists of construction or maintenance workers in the
area.
The Judicial Council annually adopts a uniform traffic penalty
schedule which is applicable to all non-parking infractions
specified in the Vehicle Code. In establishing the uniform
penalty schedule, the Judicial Council classifies offenses into
four or fewer penalty categories, according to the severity of
the offense, so as to permit convenient notice and payment of
the scheduled penalty.
Under current law, the base fine for speeding in a school zone
is set in the uniform penalty schedule as $35 for traveling 1
mph to 15 mph over the speed limit ($154 total fine with fees
and court costs), $70 for traveling 16 mph to 25 mph over the
speed limit ($280 total fine with fees and court costs), and
$100 for traveling 26 mph or more over the speed limit ($400
total fine with fees and court costs).
This bill would increase base fines for speeding in a school
zone to $150 for driving 1 mph to 15 mph over the speed limit,
$200 for driving 16 mph to 25 mph over the speed limit, and $250
for exceeding the speed limit by 26 mph or more. According to
the Judicial Council, these base fines, with fees and penalties,
would result in total fines of $728 for driving 1 mph to 15 over
the speed limit, $928 for driving 16 mph to 25 mph over the
speed limit, and $1,128 for traveling 26 mph or higher over the
speed limit, well exceeding fines established for other
violations including, engaging in speed contests, exceeding
maximum speed limits by 26 mph or more, or driving with a
suspended or revoked license.
AB 539
Page 4
Committee Concerns: The author's intent, to make conditions
safer for children in school zones by slowing traffic, is
certainly laudable. Nonetheless, this bill raises a number of
concerns such as:
1)This bill relies on the presupposition that the threat of
increased fines will sufficiently influence driver behavior
and infers that drivers are speeding in school zones because
current fines are insufficient to influence driver behavior.
It is generally accepted in the field of traffic engineering,
however, that effective speed management combines engineering,
enforcement, and education strategies to reduce speed-related
accidents. This bill fails to address any of these three
strategies. For example, consider the following:
a) Engineering: Drivers generally drive at the speed which
they believe is prudent and safe. Engineering solutions
such as flashing yellow lights, warning signs, planted
medians, or even curb bulb-outs are effectively used to
affect the driver's perception of what is a safe and
prudent speed. The committee was unable to ascertain
whether or not any of these solutions have been attempted
to resolve the problem of speeding through school zones in
Goleta;
b) Education: This bill would impose stiff penalties
without the requirement that motorists be informed of the
penalties. Consider by way of contrast provisions in
existing law that provide for increased fines in
construction zones or automated red light enforcement.
These provisions require motorists to be informed of the
increased penalties by signs posted at or near the
construction zone or the intersection. This bill includes
no such requirement; and,
c) Enforcement: The author states that this bill is
necessary, in part, because the resources to maintain a
serious enforcement presence to curb speeding in school
zones are limited. Higher penalties are unlikely to curb
speeding if there is no law enforcement presence to issue
citations.
2)The author specifies that this bill is intended to affect
school zones that could not otherwise be affected by lowering
AB 539
Page 5
speed limits to 15 mph or 20 mph, as authorized under AB 321.
AB 539, however, applies to all school zones. Consequently,
motorists will be subjected to a sort of double-jeopardy-that
is, an artificially low speed limit combined with
extraordinary penalties for exceeding those speed limits.
3)The author offers evidence from four schools in his district
that speeding through school zones is a chronic problem that
needs to be fixed via a statewide solution. However, the
committee was not able to ascertain that speeding in school
zones is, in fact, a chronic statewide problem meriting a
statewide solution, as this bill proposes.
4)Generally, the Vehicle Code assigns higher penalties to
traffic violations with potential for injury or death. Fines
proposed by this bill (up to $250 with the possibility for
additional penalties for repeat offenses) significantly exceed
those of arguably greater offenses such as: passing a school
bus with flashing signals ($150 base fine); overtaking
vehicles stopped for pedestrians ($100 base fine); and
speeding over 100 mph ($120 base fine). Consequently, the
monetary penalties imposed by this bill are not equitable in
the context of other traffic violations.
Previous Legislation : AB 321 (Nava), Chapter 384, Statutes of
2007, authorized local governments, under certain conditions, to
extend school safety zones from 500 feet to 1,000 feet and
authorized the reduction of speed limits from 25 mph to 15 mph
when approaching at a distance of 500 feet and passing a school.
SB 1227 (Denham) of 2006, would have allowed, until January 1,
2010, a prima facie speed limit of 15 miles per hour for
specified school zones in Merced and Monterey counties. That
bill would have also required local authorities in these
counties to report to the California Highway Patrol on the
collisions, citations, average vehicle speed, speed limits, and
use of specified "children are present" signs. SB 1227 was held
under submission in the Senate Committee on Appropriations.
AB 1886 (Jackson) Chapter 590, Statutes of 2001, allowed for the
increase of fines for traffic violations in school zones within
Alameda, Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. That bill sunset
on January 1, 2007.
AB 539
Page 6
AB 708 (Epple) Chapter 674, Statutes of 1993, provided that in
highway construction and maintenance areas, in specified
misdemeanor cases, fines shall be double the amount otherwise
prescribed, and, in the case of an infraction, the fine shall be
one category higher than the penalty otherwise prescribed by the
uniform traffic penalty schedule.
Double referral : This bill has also been referred to the
Committee on Public Safety.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California State PTA
California State Sheriffs' Association (CSSA)
California WALKS
City of Goleta
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Opposition
AAA Clubs
Analysis Prepared by : Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916) 319-
2093