BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1047|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1047
Author: Jeffries (R)
Amended: 5/30/12 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMM. : 8-0, 6/12/12
AYES: DeSaulnier, Gaines, Harman, Kehoe, Lowenthal, Rubio,
Simitian, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Pavley
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 55-5, 1/17/12 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Vehicles: motorcycle safety
SOURCE : ABATE of California
DIGEST : This bill prohibits state and local law
enforcement agencies from conducting motorcycle-only
checkpoints.
ANALYSIS : Existing law authorizes a local jurisdiction,
by ordinance and only on highways under its jurisdiction,
to establish vehicle inspection checkpoints to look for air
emissions violations or sobriety checkpoints to identify
drivers who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Drivers of motor vehicles must stop and submit to an
inspection at a checkpoint when signs are displayed
requiring a stop.
In its effort to reduce negative outcomes associated with
CONTINUED
AB 1047
Page
2
motor vehicle crashes, the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) administers traffic safety grants to
state and local governments to conduct local highway safety
programs. Among the grant funding NHTSA provides are funds
to states through the Motorcyclist Safety Grant program.
Federal law provides that these motorcycle safety funds are
available only for two purposes:
motorcyclist safety training
motorcyclist awareness programs.
Comments
Purpose . This bill prohibits law enforcement from
conducting motorcycle-only checkpoints. The author
introduced this bill in response to other states setting up
roadside checkpoints and stopping and citing only
motorcyclists. The author contends that it is important to
prohibit these motorcycle-only checkpoints because they
have resulted in motorcyclists feeling singled out and
profiled for stops by police.
California law enforcement does not conduct motorcycle
safety checkpoints. The author claims this bill is
important to protect Californian motorcyclists' rights.
According to the California Highway Patrol (CHP), however,
neither it nor any local law enforcement agencies conduct
motorcycle-only checkpoints. Some have described an
example of a motorcycle-only checkpoint that occurred in
Citrus Heights, California; however, in this instance the
local law enforcement agency was conducting a targeted
enforcement effort rather than a motorcycle-only
checkpoint.
Targeted enforcement efforts and checkpoints are often
confused . The distinguishing feature of a checkpoint is
that drivers are required to pull over and stop in a
designated area when requested to do so by law enforcement
personnel. Once a driver has pulled into the designated
area, he/she is required to submit to an inspection
conducted by a law enforcement officer. Drivers are
notified that the checkpoint is in place by posted signs
that require drivers to pull over and stop. Drivers who
fail to stop may be cited.
CONTINUED
AB 1047
Page
3
Targeted enforcement programs, on the other hand, call for
the deployment of additional law enforcement officers in a
given area to look for and cite drivers for specific
violations. One common example of a targeted enforcement
effort is the recent Click It or Ticket campaign to
increase compliance with seatbelt laws. An example of a
targeted enforcement effort involving motorcyclists was
CHP's enforcement campaign to increase patrols on a 33-mile
stretch of State Route 74 near Temecula focused on traffic
violations made by motorcyclists. In addition to increased
enforcement, targeted enforcement programs can also include
public awareness media efforts designed to reduce the
overall incidence of specific violations.
Are motorcycle-only checkpoints fair? Proponents for this
bill argue that it is unfair to single out motorcycles for
safety inspections. If CHP were to conduct other safety
checkpoints to look for proper seat belt and child
restraint use, these would effectively single out
automobiles. In such checkpoints, CHP would wave
motorcyclists through because motorcycles have no seat belt
requirements. If the CHP conducts a helmet checkpoint, it
stands to reason the officers would wave through automobile
drivers because they are not required to wear helmets. It
is unclear why one checkpoint or the other would be
considered more or less fair to the drivers being stopped.
In fact, several motorcycle riders that were stopped at the
motorcycle-only checkpoints in New York sued the state in
2009, claiming that the main purpose of the checkpoints was
to look for criminals and that the practice was intrusive
and unfair to riders (Wagner, et al. v. The County of
Schenectady, NY, et al.). A federal judge dismissed the
case in November 2011, rejecting the motorcyclists' claims
that the New York State Police violated their
constitutional rights and concluding that the checkpoints
were enacted to promote motorcycle safety and were
effective in addressing this interest.
Other states and legislation . To date, only New York,
Georgia, and Virginia have conducted motorcycle-only
checkpoints. In response to their growing use, motorcycle
advocacy groups are urging lawmakers across the country to
ban these checkpoints. New Hampshire and North Carolina
have passed laws banning the use of federal grant funds for
CONTINUED
AB 1047
Page
4
motorcycle-only checkpoints. In addition, Virginia has
passed a law which prohibits motorcycle-only checkpoints
regardless of funding source. At the federal level,
Wisconsin Congressmen Jim Sensenbrenner, Tom Petri, Paul
Ryan, and Sean Duffy have introduced H.R. 904 that, if
enacted, would prohibit the United States Secretary of
Transportation from providing funds to state and local
governments for the creation of motorcycle-only
checkpoints.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/14/12)
ABATE of California (source)
American Motorcyclist Association
Sacramento Outrider Motorcycle Association
Thunder Roads Magazine - Northern California
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 55-5, 1/17/12
AYES: Achadjian, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bill Berryhill,
Bonilla, Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon,
Carter, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eng,
Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Beth Gaines, Garrick, Gatto,
Gordon, Grove, Hagman, Halderman, Hall, Hayashi, Hill,
Huber, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal,
Ma, Mansoor, Mendoza, Miller, Mitchell, Monning, Morrell,
Nestande, Nielsen, Norby, Olsen, Perea, Portantino,
Silva, Solorio, Valadao, Wagner, Wieckowski, Yamada
NOES: Alejo, Lara, Pan, Swanson, Torres
NO VOTE RECORDED: Beall, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford,
Campos, Cedillo, Davis, Fletcher, Furutani, Galgiani,
Gorell, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez, Hueso, Huffman, V.
Manuel P�rez, Skinner, Smyth, Williams, John A. P�rez
JJA:k 6/14/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED
AB 1047
Page
5
CONTINUED