BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 1310
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 8, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 1310 (Simitian) - As Amended: August 6, 2012
Policy Committee:
TransportationVote:9-3
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill increases penalties for driving while using a cell
phone without the assistance of a hands-free device or texting.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Increases, from $20 to $30 for a first offense and from $50 to
$60 dollars for subsequent offenses, the base fine for driving
while using a cell phone without a hands-free device or while
texting.
2)Authorizes law enforcement to stop a vehicle to determine the
age of a driver using a cell phone, with or without a
hands-free device, which existing law prohibits for a person
less than 18 years of age.
3)Allows assignment of a violation point for using a cell phone
without the assistance of a hands-free device or texting while
driving only for second or subsequent offenses.
4)Prohibits the use of a cell phone without the assistance of a
hands-free device or texting while riding a bicycle, provides
a fine of $20 for the first violation of either prohibition
and $50 for subsequent violations, and disallows additional
penalties, assessments, surcharges, fees or charges or the
assignment of violation points.
5)Requires the driver license exam to include a test of the
applicant's understanding of the distractions and dangers of
handheld cellular phone use and text messaging while driving.
6)Creates the Distracted Driver Education Fund, to receive $10
SB 1310
Page 2
from each violation described above and to fund an education
program on the dangers of using cell phones and texting while
operating a vehicle, to be administered by the Office of
Traffic Safety.
7)Authorizes the Controller to a withhold portion of fine monies
to reimburse costs to local courts for processing violations.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Unknown increase in fine and penalty revenues, with the
magnitude depending on the deterrent effect of the stiffer
penalties for hand-held device use. (While the bill increases
base fines by only $10, the effective bail increase will be
$40, after state penalty assessments, fees and surcharges are
added.)
In 2010, CHP issued about 12,000 to 14,000 citations for cell
phone violations per month. (No comparable data are available
for citations issued by local police or sheriff departments).
Assuming that (a) the increased penalties result in improved
compliance and a 30% reduction in citations, and (b) the CHP
accounts for about two-thirds of total cell phone citations
statewide, the bill would increase annual revenues as shown in
the figure below.
----------------------------------------------------------
|Estimated Annual Revenue Generated by $10 Base Fine | |
|Increase | |
----------------------------------------------------------
|-----+----------+-------------+------------+------------+-|
| | Annual | Annual |Annual Base | Annual | |
| |Hand-Held | Hand-Held | Fine | Overall | |
| | Device | Device Use | Revenue | Revenue | |
| | Use | Citations | Increase | Increase | |
| |Citations | After SB | ($10 per | ($40 per | |
| | ^ | 1310 | citation)* | citation) | |
| | | (30% | | | |
| | | reduction) | | | |
|-----+----------+-------------+------------+------------+-|
| | 216,216 | 151,351 | | $6,054,054 | |
| (low) | | | $1,513,514 | | |
|-----+----------+-------------+------------+------------+-|
| | 252,252 | 176,577 | | $7,063,063 | |
SB 1310
Page 3
| (high) | | | $1,765,766 | | |
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
|^ Based on 12,000 to 14,000 monthly | | |
|citations, as reported by CHP. | | |
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
|* Distracted Driver Education | | | |
|Fund | | | |
----------------------------------------------------------
2)Redirection of funds, approximately $1.5 million annually,
from the General Fund to the Distracted Driver Education Fund.
3)Costs, likely minor and absorbable, to Department of Motor
Vehicles to modify its driving test. (Motor Vehicle Account.)
4)Minor costs to county courts, which could be reimbursed from
fine revenue.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author contends laws prohibiting cell phone
use and texting while driving save lives and prevent injuries.
The author notes that, despite these prohibitions, many
people continue to use cell phones and to text while driving.
The author asserts increasing penalties for cell phone use and
texting while driving, and creation of lesser penalties for
cyclists engaged in these activities, will better discourage
such activities and further increase public safety.
2)Background. This bill is a follow up measure to three other
bills carried by the author that place limits on use of
hand-held devises for phoning or texting while driving: SB 28,
Chapter 270, Statutes of 2008, which prohibits the use of
hand-held cell phones by all drivers; SB 33, Chapter 214,
Statutes of 2007, which prohibits the use of any cell phone by
drivers under 18; and SB 1613, Chapter 290, Statutes of 2006,
which prohibits text messaging by all drivers.
SB 1310 is very similar to SB 1475 (Simitian, 2010), which was
held by this committee, and SB 28 (Simitian, 2011) which
passed the Assembly 51-21 but was vetoed by the governor,
SB 1310
Page 4
The governor, in vetoing SB 28, asserted that current
penalties sufficiently deter use of cell phones and handheld
devices while driving. Existing base fines for cell phone use
or texting while driving are only $20 for a first offense and
$50 for a subsequent offense. However, with state penalty
assessments and a variety of fees and surcharges, a driver
cited for using a cell phone or texting pays a total fine of
$159 for a first offense and $279 for subsequent offenses.
Evidence suggests the state's ban on use of cell phones and
texting while driving has increased public safety. According
to analysis by the Safe Transportation Research and Education
Center (SafeTREC) at UC Berkeley, during the period 2005-07,
the percentage of vehicular fatalities and injuries associated
with distracted driving generally increased, whereas such
fatalities and injuries declined during the period 2008-10,
following implementation of the cell phone use prohibition.
Specifically, the SafeTREC analysis finds "a consistent
reduction in fatalities and injuries related to hand-held cell
phone use after implementation of a law banning the use of
hand-held cell phones while driving."
3) Is Biking While Talking (or Texting) Really a Problem?
This bill prohibits the use of a cell phone without the
assistance of a hands-free device or texting while riding a
bicycle. Intuitively, one can conclude that using a cell
phone or texting while biking is not an entirely safe
practice. However, one also can assume that use of a cell
phone or texting while biking poses much less of a risk
than does the same activities while driving: bikes are
significantly smaller, lighter and slower than most
motorized vehicles and cyclists are more directly exposed
to their surrounding environment than are automobile
drivers.
Upon request, the author's office provided data on bicyclist
collisions and cell phone use. According to the data provided
by the author, between 2008 and 2010, handheld cellphone use
was a factor in 12 incidents that resulted in injury-possibly
to the cyclist him or herself-and no fatalities. (The
accident data did not provide information on texting while
biking.)
The author contends that the Vehicle Code generally treats all
vehicles equally and points to the support of this bill by
SB 1310
Page 5
several biking advocacy organizations to justify the bill's
provisions relating to biking and cell phone use and texting.
However, the Vehicle Code regularly treats distinct vehicles
types distinctly. For example, the Vehicle Code authorizes
the designation of lanes for the exclusive use of cyclists.
Moreover, given the paucity of data demonstrating the danger
posed by cyclists using cell phones or texting, it is not
clear either practice needs be prohibited by law.
4) Driving While Young, Maybe. Current law prohibits a
person less than 18 years of age from using a cell phone
while driving, with or without the use of a hands-free
device. Current law, however, does not allow a law
enforcement officer to stop a vehicle to determine the age
of a driver using a cell phone with a hands-free device.
This bill, in contrast, authorizes law enforcement to stop
a vehicle to determine the age of a driver using a cell
phone with a hands-free device.
While most law enforcement officers likely would use the
authority provided by this bill justly, the unscrupulous could
use the authority as a pretext to stop nearly any motorist
legally using a cell phone who could conceivably be thought to
be under 18, based on his or her physical appearance. The
author has provided no data to demonstrate a danger posed by
minor drivers using cell phones with hands-free devices that
would justifies the threat to civil liberties inherent in this
provision of the bill.
5) Support. This bill is supported by the California
Bicycle Coalition, the Peace Officers Research Association
of California and others.
6) At the time this analysis was prepared, there was no
opposition formally registered to this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081