This new California
law went into effect January 1 2004
Red light cameras ó
AB 1022 reforms California's red light camera program by ensuring that local
jurisdictions, rather than red light camera vendors, are responsible for
oversight of these programs. The bill also prohibits vendors from being paid
on a per-ticket basis, removing any incentive for vendors to manipulate the
system to maximize revenue. In addition, cities or counties with red light
camera programs must establish citation-processing guidelines for vendors to
follow and require that law-enforcement personnel review all citations before
they are mailed to violators. The law also clarifies that local governments
must also adhere to standards for minimum yellow light intervals contained in
the Caltrans Traffic Manual.
Author
Assemblywoman Jenny Oropeza
Sponsors
AAA - Auto Clubs
Red Light Camera Programs
Red light violations were responsible for over 25,000
crashes causing 93 fatalities and nearly 15,000 injuries in California in 2000 -
according to a report on red light camera programs released by the State Auditor
last year.
Red light cameras can be an effective tool to reduce red
light crashes, according to the same report. Statewide collision data collected
from 1995 to 2001 showed a 10% decrease in accidents caused by motorists running
red lights in those jurisdictions with the cameras compared to no change in
those jurisdictions without the cameras.
The Problem
The integrity of red light camera programs have been
called into question by the growing public concern that the programs are being
controlled by vendors and manipulated for profit.
Paying red light camera vendors based on the number of
tickets issued undermines the public's trust and raises the concern that these
systems can be manipulated for profit. Existing law does not prohibit such fee
arrangements. Existing law relating to government's responsibility for
controlling the red light camera vendor is vague leaving the program susceptible
to public criticisms and legal challenges. Critics charge that vendors have too
much control, and some courts have thrown out tickets based on such a finding.
The State Auditor's Report on Red Light Camera
Programs
Responding to public concerns and lawsuits challenging
red light camera programs, the Legislature requested the Bureau of State Audit
study the efficacy of red light camera programs statewide. The State Auditor’s
report, released in July 2002, concluded that the cameras are effective at
reducing the number of red light running crashes, but the programs fall short in
government oversight as vendors exercised too much control in some
jurisdictions. The report further notes that remedial traffic safety
improvements are not always considered before employing the use of cameras and,
among other things, confidential records are sometimes mishandled and used for
purposes other than intended by the authorizing legislation. Finally, the report
notes that while most of the cities studied did not show significant profits
from these programs, per ticket fee arrangements may lead to the perception that
vendor motivation is profit driven. The full report can be found at
www.bsa.ca.gov.
The Solution - AB 1022 , Red Light Camera Reform
Codify recommendations made by the state Auditor.
AB 1022 is needed to:
Restore public trust in red light camera programs -
If a local government entity opts to use a red light camera program, the system
should be operated in a manner which restores the public's trust that these
devices are used solely as a traffic safety tool. Further, because citations are
issued based on photo evidence, violations should be carefully screened,
expeditiously handled, and due process protections - such as the requirement for
a photograph of the driver, must never be compromised.
Eliminate the public's perception that camera
programs are profit motivated - Vendor payments predicated on the number of
citations issued should be prohibited.
- AB 1022 prohibits such fee arrangements.
Strengthen confidentiality requirements - The
auditor noted instances where photographs and other confidential data were
inappropriately stored and unnecessarily keep for extended time periods.
- AB 1022 provides that local governments must develop
guidelines for vendors with respect to handling confidential information and
specifies time periods for destroying confidential records after they are no
longer needed.
Specify that certain governmental functions cannot
be delegated to red light camera vendors, thereby, reducing the number lawsuits
challenging such programs - Current law provides that only a government
agency in cooperation with a law enforcement agency can operate a program, but
existing law does not specify what operate means, leaving it open to
interpretation. The State Auditor report notes that the vagueness in the law
could lead to the perception that a program is vendor controlled.
Further, this weakness in existing law makes red light camera programs
vulnerable to legal challenges. The cities of San Diego, San Francisco, Beverly
Hills and West Hollywood have been sued. A 2001 lawsuit brought against the city
of San Diego alleged that the city was not "operating" its red light program.
The court ruled that the city was not performing some of the essential oversight
functions and therefore not complying with the law.
Other jurisdictions have had to suspend operations of their programs because of
similar challenges.
AB 1022 provides that the following functions cannot be
delegated:
Establishing uniform guidelines for screening and
issuing citations and for the storage of confidential information and
establishing procedures to ensure compliance with guidelines
Establishing guidelines for intersection selection - which is intended to
provide that intersections must be selected based on a demonstrated traffic
safety need - not merely because of high traffic volume. (Selecting on traffic
volume alone might suggest a revenue motivation.)
Assuring that only those citations that have been reviewed and approved by law
enforcement are delivered to violators
Intersections should be evaluated before a red light
camera is installed - Improving the safety of an intersection includes
evaluating alternative methods to reduce crashes. Not all intersections are
suited for red light cameras. Some intersections might be better suited to an
improvement in the physical environment or a change to the operating parameters.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) recommends such evaluations.
AB 1022 provides that prior to installing a red light
camera, local governments are to consider and evaluate alternative traffic
safety strategies, including the use of traditional traffic enforcement
measures, among other things.
