AB 289: State highway work zone speed safety program.
- Session Year: 2025-2026
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2025-10-13
Current Status:
Passed
(2025-10-13: Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 684, Statutes of 2025.)
Introduced
In Committee
Awaiting First Chamber Vote
Passed First Chamber
In Committee
Awaiting Second Chamber Vote
Passed Second Chamber
Enacted
What does this bill do?
This bill lets the California Department of Transportation operate up to 35 automated speed‑enforcement cameras in state highway construction and maintenance work zones to issue civil fines when drivers speed while workers are present. It requires warning signs and public notice, bans facial recognition, keeps photos and records confidential, sets fixed fine amounts with low‑income payment options, adds a $25 appeal filing fee, and directs citation money into a state account for work‑zone enforcement and legislative reporting.
The summary is provided by generative AI which can make mistakes. For original language, please view the details in the table below.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 35 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with relevant state agencies and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program, and would require any remaining funds to be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by SB 720 to be operative only if this bill and SB 720 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 35 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with relevant state agencies and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program, and would require any remaining funds to be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by SB 720 to be operative only if this bill and SB 720 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 35 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with relevant state agencies and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program, and would require any remaining funds to be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by SB 720 to be operative only if this bill and SB 720 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 75 35 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol relevant state agencies and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program, and would require any remaining funds to be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 75 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 75 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph, video recording, other visual image, photograph or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes an undetermined maximum number of up to 75 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 125 an undetermined maximum number of speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be allocated, upon appropriation by the Legislature, continuously appropriated to the department for administration of the program. program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program. By authorizing moneys to be continuously appropriated to the department for these purposes, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the City of Malibu to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law requires the city to administer a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations. Existing law requires the city to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 60 calendar days of the program. Existing law also requires the city to develop guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. Existing law requires photographic or administrative records made by a system to be confidential, except as specified, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes.
This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the Department of Transportation to establish a similar program for speed enforcement that utilizes up to 125 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas, as specified. The bill would require the department to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program, and would require the department, in developing the guidelines, to consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and other relevant stakeholder organizations. The bill would only authorize the Department of Transportation to use and allow access to the photograph, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records for specified purposes.
Existing law requires a violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to civil penalties, as specified. Existing law requires, among other things, the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under the speed safety pilot program.
This bill would require the department to also implement similar provisions if it establishes the state highway work zone speed safety program on state highway construction or maintenance areas.
Existing law requires the city to submit a report to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the systems impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. Existing law requires revenues derived from a program to first be used to cover program costs, such as the installation of speed safety systems, the adjudication of violations, and reporting requirements.
This bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety no later than 2 years after the commencement of the program, and annually thereafter. The bill would require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would require moneys in the account to be allocated, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the department for administration of the program.
Existing law establishes a $25 filing fee for specified appeals and petitions.
This bill would require a $25 filing fee for an appeal challenging a notice of violation issued as a result of the departments speed safety program until January 1, 2032.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 631 of the Statutes of 2024, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 2.5.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 631 of the Statutes of 2024, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 21455.9 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated traffic enforcement violation, as defined in Section 21455.9 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(i)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway construction zones.
(3)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(4)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(5)Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway maintenance project zones.
(6)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photographic image of a rear vehicle license plate. Speed safety system is also known as an automated speed enforcement system.
(7)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 35 speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, between 500 feet and one mile, inclusive, before the placement of the system, as determined by the department. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(5)A speed safety system records speed violations and actively issues citations only when workers from the Department of Transportation, including persons contracted to perform construction, maintenance, or repair of a highway, are present in the state highway work zone.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the relevant state agencies and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained is limited to the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program only.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photographic evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic image or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photographic evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by a court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture rear license plate photographs of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photo radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A phone number that the recipient may use to request additional information about the State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program.
(8)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be continuously appropriated to the department for the administration of this program. Any remaining funds shall be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that speed safety systems complement traffic enforcement by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones, including the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. There shall be no additional charge for this hearing. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner or the department shall offer violation recipients who are indigent or who otherwise provide evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full, the option to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments not to exceed twenty-five dollars ($25). Any processing fee to participate in a payment plan shall not exceed five dollars ($5).
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
SEC. 5.Section 2.5 of this bill incorporates amendments to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Senate Bill 720. That section of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2026, (2) each bill amends Section 70615 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Senate Bill 720, in which case Section 2 of this bill shall not become operative.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 631 of the Statutes of 2024, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 2.5.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 631 of the Statutes of 2024, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 21455.9 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated traffic enforcement violation, as defined in Section 21455.9 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(i)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway construction zones.
(3)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(4)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(5)Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway maintenance project zones.
(6)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photographic image of a rear vehicle license plate. Speed safety system is also known as an automated speed enforcement system.
(7)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 35 speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, between 500 feet and one mile, inclusive, before the placement of the system, as determined by the department. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(5)A speed safety system records speed violations and actively issues citations only when workers from the Department of Transportation, including persons contracted to perform construction, maintenance, or repair of a highway, are present in the state highway work zone.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the relevant state agencies and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained is limited to the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program only.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photographic evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic image or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photographic evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by a court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture rear license plate photographs of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photo radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A phone number that the recipient may use to request additional information about the State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program.
(8)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be continuously appropriated to the department for the administration of this program. Any remaining funds shall be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that speed safety systems complement traffic enforcement by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones, including the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. There shall be no additional charge for this hearing. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner or the department shall offer violation recipients who are indigent or who otherwise provide evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full, the option to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments not to exceed twenty-five dollars ($25). Any processing fee to participate in a payment plan shall not exceed five dollars ($5).
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
SEC. 5.Section 2.5 of this bill incorporates amendments to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Senate Bill 720. That section of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2026, (2) each bill amends Section 70615 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Senate Bill 720, in which case Section 2 of this bill shall not become operative.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 808 of the Statutes of 2023, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 631 of the Statutes of 2024, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 2.5.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 631 of the Statutes of 2024, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 21455.9 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated traffic enforcement violation, as defined in Section 21455.9 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)(i)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway construction zones.
(3)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(4)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(5)Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway maintenance project zones.
(6)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photographic image of a rear vehicle license plate. Speed safety system is also known as an automated speed enforcement system.
(7)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 35 speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, between 500 feet and one mile, inclusive, before the placement of the system, as determined by the department. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(5)A speed safety system records speed violations and actively issues citations only when workers from the Department of Transportation, including persons contracted to perform construction, maintenance, or repair of a highway, are present in the state highway work zone.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the relevant state agencies and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained is limited to the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program only.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photographic evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic image or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photographic evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by a court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture rear license plate photographs of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photo radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A phone number that the recipient may use to request additional information about the State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program.
(8)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be continuously appropriated to the department for the administration of this program. Any remaining funds shall be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that speed safety systems complement traffic enforcement by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones, including the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. There shall be no additional charge for this hearing. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner or the department shall offer violation recipients who are indigent or who otherwise provide evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full, the option to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments not to exceed twenty-five dollars ($25). Any processing fee to participate in a payment plan shall not exceed five dollars ($5).
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
SEC. 5.Section 2.5 of this bill incorporates amendments to Section 70615 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Senate Bill 720. That section of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2026, (2) each bill amends Section 70615 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Senate Bill 720, in which case Section 2 of this bill shall not become operative.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 808 of the Statutes of 2023, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway construction zones.
(3)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(4)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(5)Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway maintenance project zones.
(6)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photographic image of a rear vehicle license plate. Speed safety system is also known as an automated speed enforcement system.
(7)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 75 35 speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than between 500 feet and one mile, inclusive, before the placement of the system. system, as determined by the department. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(5)A speed safety system records speed violations and actively issues citations only when construction or maintenance workers workers from the Department of Transportation, including persons contracted to perform construction, maintenance, or repair of a highway, are present in the state highway work zone.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol relevant state agencies and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained is limited to the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program only.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photographic evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic image or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photographic evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by a court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture rear license plate photographs of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photo radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A phone number that the recipient may use to request additional information about the State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program.
(8)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be continuously appropriated to the department for the administration of the program, this program. Any remaining funds shall be used by the department for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that speed safety systems complement traffic enforcement by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones, including the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. There shall be no additional charge for this hearing. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner or the department shall offer violation recipients who are indigent or who otherwise provide evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full, the option to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments not to exceed twenty-five dollars ($25). Any processing fee to participate in a payment plan shall not exceed five dollars ($5).
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 808 of the Statutes of 2023, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway construction zones.
(3)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(4)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(5)Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway maintenance project zones.
(6)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photographic image of a rear vehicle license plate.
(7)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 75 speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(5)A speed safety system records speed violations and actively issues citations only when construction or maintenance workers are present in the state highway work zone.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained is limited to the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program only.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photographic evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic image or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photographic evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by a court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture rear license plate photographs of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photo radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A phone number that the recipient may use to request additional information about the State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program.
(7)(8)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be continuously appropriated to the department for the administration of the program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that speed safety systems complement traffic enforcement by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones, including the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. There shall be no additional charge for this hearing. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner may, consistent with the written guidelines established by the department, allow payment of the civil penalty in installments, or the department may allow for deferred payment or payments in installments, if the person provides evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department, as the case may be, of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full. or the department shall offer violation recipients who are indigent or who otherwise provide evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full, the option to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments not to exceed twenty-five dollars ($25). Any processing fee to participate in a payment plan shall not exceed five dollars ($5).
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 808 of the Statutes of 2023, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway construction zones.
(3)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(4)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(5)Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway maintenance project zones.
(6)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photograph, video recording, or other visual photographic image of a rear vehicle license plate.
(7)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 75 speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(5)A speed safety system records speed violations and actively issues citations only when construction or maintenance workers are present in the state highway work zone.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained, including maintained is limited to the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program and compliance with state or federal law, court order, or subpoena in an individual case or proceeding. only.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photograph, video recording, or other visual image photographic evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic, video recording, other visual image, photographic image or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photograph, video recording, or other visual image photographic evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by state or federal law, a court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence photograph of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture photographs, video recordings, or other visual images rear license plate photographs of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photographic, video recording, or other visual image photo radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be continuously appropriated to the department for the administration of the program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that speed safety systems complement traffic enforcement by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones, including the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner may, consistent with the written guidelines established by the department, allow payment of the civil penalty in installments, or the department may allow for deferred payment or payments in installments, if the person provides evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department, as the case may be, of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full.
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph, video recording, other visual image, photograph or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 808 of the Statutes of 2023, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway construction zones.
(3)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(4)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(5)Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway maintenance project zones.
(6)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photograph, video recording, or other visual image of a vehicle license plate.
(7)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to____ 75 speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(5)A speed safety system actively issues citations only when construction or maintenance workers are present in the state highway work zone.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained, including the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program and compliance with state or federal law, court order, or subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by state or federal law, court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture photographs, video recordings, or other visual images of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photographic, video recording, or other visual image radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be continuously appropriated to the department for the administration of the program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that speed safety systems complement traffic enforcement by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones, including the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner may, consistent with the written guidelines established by the department, allow payment of the civil penalty in installments, or the department may allow for deferred payment or payments in installments, if the person provides evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department, as the case may be, of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full.
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
REVISIONS: HeadingLine 2.The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 808 of the Statutes of 2023, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway construction zones.
(2)(3)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(3)(4)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(5)Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program refers to a program whereby the Department of Transportation contracts with the Department of the California Highway Patrol to reimburse the actual and incurred costs for supplemental California Highway Patrol Units to assist in the management of traffic passing through state highway maintenance project zones.
(4)(6)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photograph, video recording, or other visual image of a vehicle license plate.
(5)(7)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 125____ speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(5)A speed safety system actively issues citations only when construction or maintenance workers are present in the state highway work zone.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained, including the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program and compliance with state or federal law, court order, or subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by state or federal law, court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture photographs, video recordings, or other visual images of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photographic, video recording, or other visual image radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be allocated, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the department for administration of the program in accordance with this article. continuously appropriated to the department for the administration of the program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that speed safety systems complement traffic enforcement by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, and that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones. zones, including the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner may, consistent with the written guidelines established by the department, allow payment of the civil penalty in installments, or the department may allow for deferred payment or payments in installments, if the person provides evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department, as the case may be, of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full.
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Speed is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in worker fatalities or injuries in state highway work zones.
(b)California should do everything possible to protect the safety and well-being of construction workers who build and maintain our states vital infrastructure systems. While contractors, unions, and agencies are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be hazardous areas, where workers are at high risk of injury or death due to fast-moving vehicles.
(c)Construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our states roads and highways. Yet, that is the reality for thousands of women and men who go to work on our highways every day.
(d)Automated speed enforcement is a proven, sensible, and effective strategy to improve the safety and health of workers and roadway users as they navigate roadway construction work zones. It will help save lives, reduce injuries, and provide a safer environment for our highway construction workers and drivers.
SEC. 2.Section 70615 of the Government Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 808 of the Statutes of 2023, is amended to read:70615.The fee for filing any of the following appeals to the superior court is twenty-five dollars ($25):
(a)An appeal of a local agencys decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4.
(b)An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agencys decision regarding a parking violation.
(c)An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officers determination regarding an administrative penalty for fare evasion or a passenger conduct violation.
(d)A petition under Section 186.35 of the Penal Code challenging a law enforcement agencys inclusion of a persons information in a shared gang database.
(e)An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22425 of the Vehicle Code.
(f)An appeal under Section 22438 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22435 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)An appeal under Section 22445.3 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officers determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated speed violation, as defined in Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code.
(g)(h)This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.Article 5 (commencing with Section 22445) is added to Chapter 7 of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code, to read:5.State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program22445.(a)As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(1)Automated speed violation means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system operated pursuant to this article.
(2)Department means the Department of Transportation.
(3)A person is indigent if either of the following conditions is met:
(A)The person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(B)The person receives public benefits from a program listed in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code.
(4)Speed safety system means a fixed or mobile radar or laser system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a violation of speeding laws and is designed to obtain a clear photograph, video recording, or other visual image of a vehicle license plate.
(5)State highway work zone means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367.
(b)The department may establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 125 speed safety systems, to be operated by the department in state highway work zones.
(c)The speed safety system may be utilized pursuant to subdivision (b) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
(1)Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating Photo Enforced, along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
(2)Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the departments internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
(3)Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
(4)Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
(d)Prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, the department shall do both of the following:
(1)Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and the departments internet website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
(2)(A)Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program.
(B)A vehicles first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
(e)The department shall adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department shall consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups. The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
(1)A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
(2)An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
(3)The allowable uses for information collected and maintained, including the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program and compliance with state or federal law, court order, or subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(4)Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
(5)Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
(6)Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements.
(f)The development and adoption of guidelines pursuant to this article are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).
(g)Notices of violation issued pursuant to this section shall include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
(h)The photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
(i)(1)Notwithstanding any provision of the California Public Records Act, or any other law, any photographic, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records made by a system shall be confidential. The department shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article or to assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
(2)Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with Section 1808.47.
(3)Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (4), the confidential records and evidence described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to 60 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. The department may retain information that a vehicle has been cited and fined for a violation for up to three years. The department may adopt a retention period of less than 60 days. Administrative records described in paragraph (1) may be retained for up to 120 days after final disposition of the notice of violation. Notwithstanding any other law, the confidential records and evidence shall be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the record or evidence.
(4)The photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made. The use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system shall be prohibited.
(5)Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by state or federal law, court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
(j)Notwithstanding subdivision (i), the registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph, video recording, or other visual image evidence of the alleged violation.
(k)A contract between the department and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems shall allow the department to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor. The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system. The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized in this article. The department shall oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
(l)Notwithstanding subdivision (k), the department may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
(m)The speed safety system, to the extent feasible, shall be angled and focused so as to only capture photographs, video recordings, or other visual images of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
(n)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 21455.6, the department may use automated enforcement systems and photographic, video recording, or other visual image radar for speed enforcement consistent with this article.
22445.1.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, a violation of any speed law pursuant to this chapter that is recorded by a speed safety system authorized pursuant to Section 22445 shall be subject only to a civil penalty, as provided in subdivision (c), and shall not result in the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending or revoking the privilege of a violator to drive a motor vehicle or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
(b)The speed safety system shall capture images of the rear license plate of vehicles that are traveling 11 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit and notices of violation shall only be issued to registered owners of those vehicles based on that evidence.
(c)A civil penalty shall be assessed as follows:
(1)Fifty dollars ($50) for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(2)One hundred dollars ($100) for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
(3)Two hundred dollars ($200) for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, unless paragraph (4) applies.
(4)Five hundred dollars ($500) for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more.
(d)A civil penalty shall not be assessed against an authorized emergency vehicle.
(e)The notice of violation shall be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include all of the following information:
(1)The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred, and verification of the most recent calibration of the system in accordance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 22445.
(2)The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
(3)The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
(4)A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of the notice of violation, or that the violation may be contested pursuant to Section 22445.2.
(5)The amount of the civil penalty due for that violation and the procedures for the payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
(6)An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a written lease or rental agreement between a bona fide rental company, as defined in Section 1939.01 of the Civil Code, or a personal vehicle sharing program, as defined in Section 11580.24 of the Insurance Code, and its customer that identifies the renter or lessee, the department shall serve or mail a notice of violation to the renter or lessee identified in the affidavit of nonliability. If the affidavit of nonliability is returned to the department within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the notice of violation, together with proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, the department shall not subject the registered owner to a civil violation.
(7)A proof of service consistent with Section 1013a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(f)(1)Moneys generated from the issuance of citations pursuant to the state highway work zone speed safety program shall be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account shall be allocated, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the department for administration of the program in accordance with this article.
(2)It is the intent of the Legislature that the program authorized by Section 22445 shall supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the department expend for purposes of enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 202324 fiscal year.
(g)A person shall not be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
(h)A speed safety system may only be in operation for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever date is sooner.
22445.2.(a)No later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, the recipient may request an initial review of the notice by the department. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the department is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the department shall cancel the notice of violation. The department shall mail the results of the initial review to the person contesting the notice within 60 days of receipt of the recipients request for an initial review, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures adopted by the department for the administrative hearing, including for waiving prepayment of the civil penalty based upon an inability to pay pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).
(b)(1)If the person contesting the notice of violation is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review, the person may, no later than 21 calendar days following the mailing of the results of the departments initial review, request an administrative hearing of the violation. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person.
(2)The person requesting an administrative hearing shall pay the amount of the civil penalty to the department. The department shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of a request for an administrative hearing. The person requesting the hearing may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days.
(c)The administrative hearing process shall include all of the following:
(1)The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person. An in-person hearing shall be conducted within the department district where the violation was issued.
(2)If the person requesting a hearing is an unemancipated minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at a hearing or admit responsibility for the automated speed violation without the appointment of a guardian. The department may proceed against the minor in the same manner as against an adult.
(3)The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the department. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated speed violations.
(4)(A)The department shall appoint or contract with qualified independent examiners or administrative hearing providers that employ qualified independent examiners to conduct the administrative hearings. Examiners shall demonstrate the qualifications, training, and objectivity necessary to conduct a fair and impartial review, and shall meet the minimum requirements specified in subparagraph (B). The examiner shall be separate and independent from the notice of violation issuing and processing functions. An examiners continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits shall not, directly or indirectly, be linked to the amount of civil penalties upheld by the examiner or the number or percentage of violations upheld by the examiner.
(B)(i)Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training. The examiner, unless an employee of the department, is responsible for the costs of the training. The department may reimburse the examiner for those costs. Training may be provided through any of the following:
(I)An accredited college or university.
(II)A program conducted by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(III)A program conducted by the American Arbitration Association or a similar organization.
(IV)Any program approved by the department, including a program developed and provided by, or for, the department.
(ii)Training programs shall include topics relevant to the administrative hearing, including, but not limited to, applicable laws and regulations, enforcement procedures, due process, evaluation of evidence, hearing procedures, and effective oral and written communication. Upon the approval of the department, up to 12 hours of relevant experience may be substituted for up to 12 hours of training. Up to eight hours of the training requirements described in this subparagraph may be credited to an individual, at the discretion of the department, based upon training programs or courses described in this subparagraph that the individual attended within the last five years.
(5)The employee of the department who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the department shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicles license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the department meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
(6)The examiners final decision following the administrative hearing may be personally delivered to the person by the examiner or sent by first-class mail within 60 days of the date of the conclusion of the administrative hearing.
(7)Following a determination by the examiner that a person has committed the violation, the examiner may, consistent with the written guidelines established by the department, allow payment of the civil penalty in installments, or the department may allow for deferred payment or payments in installments, if the person provides evidence satisfactory to the examiner or the department, as the case may be, of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full.
(8)If a notice of violation is dismissed following an administrative hearing, any civil penalty, if paid, shall be refunded by the department within 30 days.
22445.3.(a)Within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision described in subdivision (c) of Section 22445.2, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the departments file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the department at its expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by certified first-class mail with return receipt upon the department by the appellant. For purposes of computing the 30-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. A proceeding under this subdivision is a limited civil case.
(b)The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be as provided in Section 70615 of the Government Code. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the department shall lodge its administrative record for the case with the court within 15 calendar days. The court shall notify the appellant of the appearance date by mail or personal delivery. The court shall retain the fee under Section 70615 of the Government Code regardless of the outcome of the appeal. If the appellant prevails, this fee and any payment of the civil penalty shall be promptly refunded by the department in accordance with the judgment of the court.
(c)The conduct of the hearing on appeal under this section is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
(d)If a notice of appeal of the examiners decision is not filed within the period set forth in subdivision (a), the decision shall be deemed final.
(e)If the civil penalty has not been paid and the final decision is adverse to the appellant, the department may, promptly after the decision becomes final, proceed to collect the civil penalty under Section 22445.1.
22445.4.(a)The department shall offer the ability for indigent speed safety system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments of no more than twenty-five dollars ($25) and shall limit the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to five dollars ($5) or less.
(b)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the department shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.
(c)The person may demonstrate that they are indigent or make up to 250 percent above the poverty level or less by providing either of the following information, as applicable:
(1)Proof of income from a pay stub or another form of proof of earnings, such as a bank statement, that shows that the person meets the income criteria set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, subject to review and approval by the department or its designee. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
(2)Proof of receipt of benefits under the programs described in subdivision (a) of Section 68632 of the Government Code, including, but not limited to, an electronic benefits transfer card or another card, subject to review and approval by the department. The department or its designee shall not unreasonably withhold its approval.
22445.5.(a)No later than two years after the commencement of the state highway work zone speed safety program, and annually thereafter, the department shall prepare and submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety. The report shall be made available on the departments internet website and shall include all of the following information:
(1)Data on the number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, inclusive, from 26 miles per hour over the legal speed limit, and for every violator traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. Data shall also be collected on the average speed of vehicles and 85th percentile speed of vehicles in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were deployed.
(2)The number of notices of violation issued under the program by month and year, the state highway work zones where violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period.
(3)Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to data in all state highway work zones. The data on traffic collisions shall be categorized by collision type and injury severity, such as property damage only, complaint of pain, other visible injury, or severe or fatal injury.
(4)The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested. For the violations in which an initial review was requested, the report shall indicate the number of violations that went to initial review, administrative hearing, and de novo hearing, the number of notices that were dismissed at each level of review, and the number of notices that were not dismissed after each level of review.
(5)The costs associated with implementation and operation of the speed safety systems, and revenues collected.
(6)The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in each California ZIP Code.
(b)The report required by this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
22445.6.This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4.The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 22445 of the Vehicle Code, imposes a limitation on the publics right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
To protect the privacy interests of persons who are issued citations under a state highway work zone speed safety program, the Legislature finds and declares that the photograph, video recording, other visual image, or administrative records generated by the program shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to alleged violators and to governmental agencies solely for the purpose of enforcing these citations and assessing the impact of the use of the speed safety systems, as required by this act.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Oct 13, 2025 | Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 684, Statutes of 2025. |
| Oct 13, 2025 | Approved by the Governor. |
| Sep 22, 2025 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m. |
| Sep 10, 2025 | Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 69. Noes 1. Page 3214.). |
| Sep 9, 2025 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. |
| Sep 9, 2025 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 36. Noes 3. Page 2665.). |
| Sep 8, 2025 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Sep 4, 2025 | Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading. |
| Sep 2, 2025 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Aug 29, 2025 | Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading. |
| Aug 29, 2025 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (August 29). |
| Aug 25, 2025 | In committee: Referred to suspense file. |
| Aug 13, 2025 | In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. |
| Jul 17, 2025 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Jul 17, 2025 | Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Jul 16, 2025 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (July 15). |
| Jul 9, 2025 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 13. Noes 2.) (July 8). Re-referred to Com. on JUD. |
| Jun 25, 2025 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on TRANS. |
| Jun 18, 2025 | Referred to Coms. on TRANS. and JUD. |
| Jun 4, 2025 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| Jun 3, 2025 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 71. Noes 3. Page 1968.) |
| May 27, 2025 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| May 23, 2025 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 1.) (May 23). |
| May 21, 2025 | Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 1627.) |
| May 21, 2025 | In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file. |
| May 14, 2025 | In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. |
| May 6, 2025 | Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| May 5, 2025 | Read second time and amended. |
| May 1, 2025 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 2.) (May 1). |
| Apr 8, 2025 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on P. & C.P. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (April 7). Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P. |
| Apr 8, 2025 | Coauthors revised. |
| Mar 25, 2025 | Re-referred to Com. on TRANS. |
| Mar 24, 2025 | Re-referred to Com. on TRANS. |
| Mar 24, 2025 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. Read second time and amended. |
| Mar 20, 2025 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. Read second time and amended. |
| Mar 13, 2025 | In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. |
| Feb 10, 2025 | Referred to Coms. on TRANS. and P. & C.P. |
| Jan 23, 2025 | From printer. May be heard in committee February 22. |
| Jan 22, 2025 | Read first time. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10, 2025 | AB 289 Haney Concurrence in Senate Amendments | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Sep 9, 2025 | Assembly 3rd Reading AB289 Haney et al. By Cortese | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| Aug 29, 2025 | Do pass as amended | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Aug 25, 2025 | Placed on suspense file | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Jul 15, 2025 | Do pass | Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary |
Passed |
|
| Jul 8, 2025 | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Judiciary] | Senate Standing Committee on Transportation |
Passed |
|
| Jun 3, 2025 | AB 289 Haney Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| May 23, 2025 | Do pass. | Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| May 1, 2025 | Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Assembly Standing Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection |
Passed |
|
| Apr 7, 2025 | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Privacy and Consumer Protection] | Assembly Standing Committee on Transportation |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah | ** Support | |
| Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety | ** Support | |
| American Automobile Association Of Northern California Nevada Utah | ** Support | |
| AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, NEVADA & UTAH | ** Support | |
| Associated General Contractors Of California | ** Support | |
| Automobile Club of Southern California | ** Support | |
| Blue Line Solutions, LLC | ** Support | |
| California Alliance for Jobs | ** Support | |
| California Asphalt Pavement Association | ** Support | |
| CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION & INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS ASSOCIATION | ** Support | |
| California State Council of Laborers (co-source) | ** Support | |
| California State Treasurer | ** Support | |
| California State Treasurer Fiona Ma | ** Support | |
| California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers (Source) | ** Support | |
| Madera County Transportation Commission | ** Support | |
| National Motorist Association | ** Against | |
| National Motorists Assoc | ** Against | |
| Peace Officers Research Association Of California | ** Support | |
| Rebuild Socal Partnership | ** Support | |
| SMART Transportation Division—CA State Safety and Legislative Board | ** Support | |
| Southern California Contractors Association | ** Support | |
| State Building and Construction Trades Council of California | ** Support | |
| Streets Are For Everyone | ** Support | |
| The National Motorists Association | ** Against | |
| Transportation Authority Of Marin | ** Support | |
| Transportation California | ** Support | |
| United Contractors (co-source) | ** Support |
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
CSA1 Bill Id:AB 289
Author:(Haney)
As Amended Ver:September 04, 2025
2/3 vote
SUMMARY
Authorizes the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a work zone speed safety pilot program to enforce speeding violations in highway maintenance and construction work zones using speed safety systems until January 1, 2032.
Senate Amendments
- Require a phone number for a recipient of a ticket to request additional information about the State Highway Work Zone Speed Safety Program (Program).
- Prohibit an additional charge for an administrative hearing to contest the violation.
- Require, instead of permits, Caltrans to offer payment plans for individuals who have an inability to pay.
- Remove the requirement for Caltrans to consult with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) on developing guidelines for implementing the Program and instead requires them to work with relevant state agencies.
- Require a “Photo Enforced” sign with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs between 500 feet and one mile of a speed camera instead of within 500 feet of a speed camera.
- Clarify that a speed safety system may only record speed violations and actively issue citations when Caltrans workers, including specified contractors, are present in the work zone, rather than when construction or maintenance workers are present.
- Make technical, clarifying changes.
COMMENTS
AB 645 (Friedman) Chapter 808, Statues of 2023 established a speed safety system program in California and authorized the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to operate a limited number of speed safety systems for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner. AB 645 explicitly prohibited cities from operating cameras on roads where the CHP had jurisdiction, and limited camera placement to the cities high injury networks, school zones and streets with a high number of calls for motor vehicle exhibitions of speed and speed contests. SB 1297 (Allen), Chapter 631, Statutes of 2024 created a separate pilot program for the city of Malibu to operate five speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway.
As of the writing of this analysis, only San Francisco has begun to pilot speed cameras. San Jose was recently awarded nearly $9 million from a federal grant to purchase speed safety systems under a program created by the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). San Jose has indicated that their program will likely start this year.
Between March and the end of June of this year San Francisco’s speed camera program has issued 132,000 warning citations. Over 27,000 of those tickets were issued by the cameras at one location on Fulton St. San Francisco began issuing citations in August.
This bill allows Caltrans to use speed cameras in work zones where maintenance and construction crews are actively working. This bill is nearly identical to AB 645 and SB 1297, and authorizes the use of up to 75 speed safety systems, or around 10% of the total number of active construction zones in the state. Unlike AB 645 which authorizes speed cameras on local streets and roads, this bill authorizes speed cameras on a state highway.
Speed safety systems can save lives. According to The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), a 2010 review of 28 studies of automated speed enforcement (ASE) in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand determined a lower number of crashes after ASE implementation. These studies reported reductions of 8% to 49% for all crashes and reductions of 11% to 44% for crashes causing serious injuries or fatalities.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) “Crash-based evaluations from the United States and Canada have also reported safety benefits from speed safety cameras programs in urban areas. Shin et al. (2009) examined effects of a fixed camera enforcement program applied to a 6.5-mile urban freeway section through Scottsdale, Arizona. The speed limit on the enforced freeway was 65 mph; the enforcement trigger was set to 76 mph. Total target (off-peak/free-flow)crashes were reduced by an estimated 44 to 54%, injury crashes by 28 to 48%, and property damage only crashes by 46 to 56% during the nine month program period.”
Fourteen states currently have permanent or pilot programs authorizing the use of speed safety cameras in work zones. According to a report issued by the Delaware Department of Transportation, the speed safety cameras resulted in a 46% reduction in total crashes and a 38% reduction in injury crashes. The average speed was reduced by nearly six mph. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, in the three years prior to the implementation of their pilot program, an average of 1,800 crashes occurred annually in works zones. By 2022 and 2023, three and four years into the program, the number crashes were reduced to below 1,300. The total percentage of speeding vehicles in camera enforced work zones dropped 29%. In July of 2022 only 15% of drivers were going over the speed limit.
The New York Department of Transportation notes that “According to the Fatality Analysis Reporting Systems (FARS) from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in 2020, 863 people died in 780 fatal crashes in work zones nationally, marking a 10-year high for deaths and crashes in road construction areas. These deaths occur not only to workers within the work zone, but also to the motorists involved in the crash.”
According to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), from 2005-14, crashes in which a law enforcement officer indicated a vehicle's speed was a factor resulted in 112,580 fatalities, representing 31% of all traffic fatalities. NTSB notes that speeding increases the risk of a crash and the severity of injuries.
According to the Author
“AB 289 is a significant step toward safeguarding the lives of construction workers on our highways, where speeding vehicles pose a significant risk to both workers and motorists. By harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will save lives by reducing construction zone crashes and creating a safer environment for California’s highway construction workers and drivers.”
Arguments in Support
Transportation California, California Alliance for Jobs, and the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, writing in support of this bill, argue “Highway construction and maintenance work is one of the most hazardous occupations in the United States. In 2021, more than 9,500 collisions occurred in construction zones on California highways. This resulted in an estimated 2,971 injuries and 73 fatalities, including both construction workers and drivers.
While contractors, labor unions, state agencies, and law enforcement are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be dangerous for our workers who risk injury and death by speeding vehicles.
National data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show that construction and extraction and transportation and material moving— both sectors which are involved in highway construction work—are among the most dangerous occupations, trailing only farming, fishing and forestry in the rate of work-related deaths. BLS data also demonstrate the disproportionate rate of workplace fatalities, with Black and Latino workers experiencing a higher rate of fatal injuries than workers at large.
Notably, transportation incidents were the highest cause of fatalities for both groups, accounting for the deaths of 278 Black workers and 439 Latino workers in 2022. While these statistics include occupations beyond those which are directly involved in highway construction projects, they demonstrate the unique risks faced by California’s diverse construction industry workforce.
While numerous safety initiatives have been proposed and implemented in highway work zones over the last two decades, one proven safety countermeasure has been unavailable in California. Automated speed enforcement is proven to reduce speeds, increase driver safety, and save lives.”
Arguments in Opposition
The National Motorists Association, writing in opposition to this bill, argues “Notwithstanding the claims made by the bill’s author and proponents, severe injuries and fatalities involving highway construction and maintenance workers due to motorists speeding in state highway work zones are, thankfully, relatively rare.
Proponents of work zone ticketing cameras make the erroneous assumption that motorists driving at excessive speeds in work zones cause a significant number of injuries and fatalities to highway construction workers. We have shown this assumption to be false. However, one should not entirely discount concerns regarding highway worker safety due to motorists traveling within the work zone. If officials desire closer adherence to the work zone speed limit, Caltrans should employ additional engineering countermeasures to gain greater compliance. These engineering solutions are at least as effective, if not more effective, than sending a ticket in the mail weeks after an alleged violation, and they have the added benefit of providing real-time protection to workers.”
FISCAL COMMENTS
According to Senate Appropriations Committee:
- Caltrans would incur one-time costs for additional staff resources for up to two years to conduct “phase I” activities, including development and adoption of program guidelines and regulations, conducting stakeholder outreach and engagement, implementing a public information campaign, and evaluating the most cost-effective way to implement and operate the speed safety program. While these costs are unknown, staff estimates initial costs are likely to be at least in the high hundreds of thousands annually over two years, prior to the deployment of automated enforcement systems. (State Highway Account).
- Caltrans anticipates significant ongoing costs through 2031-32, to implement and administer the pilot program. Staff estimates that Caltrans contracting and staffing costs would likely be in the millions annually from 2028-29 through 2031-32, depending on the scale of the program, and whether Caltrans opts to procure and deploy all 35 systems throughout the state, or rolls out a more limited program on a regional basis. Caltrans indicates it would evaluate options for administering the pilot during the first phase of the program to determine whether to conduct certain operational duties in-house or through vendor contracts. For illustrative purposes, a similar program established in New York reported $6.83 million in vendor expenses in 2023 to operate 30 enforcement units. (State Highway Account, Safe Highway Work Zone Account, and potentially federal funds)
- Unknown, likely significant civil penalty revenues, beginning in 2028-29, which would at least partially offset Caltrans costs to administer the speed safety program. Actual revenues would depend upon the number of systems that are operational, the volume of citations issued, and the number of violations for each level of fines imposed. To the extent the citation revenues fully offset Caltrans costs to administer the program, any remaining funds would be available for expenditure on specified enhanced enforcement program costs in construction and maintenance zones. (Safe Highway Work Zone Account)
- Unknown, potentially significant court workload cost pressures for superior courts to hear and adjudicate appeals of hearing officer determinations that are brought under the provisions of this bill. These costs would be partially offset by the $25 fees for filing appeals. Staff notes that it generally costs about $10,500 to operate a courtroom for one eight-hour day. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased staff time and resources may create a need for additional support from the General Fund to support court operations. The 2025-26 Budget includes $38 million in ongoing support from the General Fund to backfill the current fund imbalance in the Trial Court Trust Fund and help pay for court operations, (Trial Court Trust Fund, General Fund).
VOTES:
ASM TRANSPORTATION: 15-0-1
YES: Wilson, Davies, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Carrillo, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Jackson, Lowenthal, Macedo, Papan, Ransom, Rogers, Ward
ABS, ABST OR NV: Lackey
ASM PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION: 11-2-2
YES: Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Bryan, Flora, Irwin, Lowenthal, Ortega, Petrie-Norris, Ward, Wicks, Wilson
NO: DeMaio, Patterson
ABS, ABST OR NV: Dixon, Pellerin
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 13-1-1
YES: Wicks, Arambula, Calderon, Caloza, Dixon, Elhawary, Fong, Mark González, Hart, Pacheco, Pellerin, Solache, Tangipa
NO: Ta
ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-3-5
YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Kalra, Krell, Lee, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Patel, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Ransom, Celeste Rodriguez, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Blanca Rubio, Schiavo, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Stefani, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Ward, Wicks, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas
NO: DeMaio, Patterson, Sanchez
ABS, ABST OR NV: Bains, Gallagher, Hadwick, Lackey, Ta
UPDATED
VERSION: September 04, 2025
CONSULTANT: David Sforza / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093 FN: 0001925
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB 289 |
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 289
Author: Haney (D), et al.
Amended: 9/4/25 in Senate
Vote: 27
SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: 13-2, 7/8/25
AYES: Cortese, Archuleta, Arreguín, Blakespear, Cervantes, Dahle, Gonzalez, Grayson, Limón, Menjivar, Richardson, Umberg, Valladares
NOES: Strickland, Seyarto
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 12-0, 7/15/25
AYES: Umberg, Allen, Arreguín, Ashby, Caballero, Durazo, Laird, Stern, Valladares, Wahab, Weber Pierson, Wiener
NO VOTE RECORDED: Niello
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 8/29/25
AYES: Caballero, Cabaldon, Dahle, Grayson, Richardson, Wahab
NOES: Seyarto
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-3, 6/3/25 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: State highway work zone speed safety program
SOURCE: United Contractors
California State Council of Laborers
California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers
DIGEST:
This bill authorizes the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a five year work zone speed safety pilot program to enforce speeding violations in highway maintenance and construction work zones using speed safety systems.
Senate Floor Amendments of 9/4/25 make technical and clarifying changes and resolve chaptering out conflicts with SB 720.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Authorizes the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to establish a five-year speed safety system pilot program. (Vehicle Code (VEH) Section 22425)
- Authorizes the City of Malibu to establish a five-year speed safety system pilot program on Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). (VEH 22435)
- Authorizes the use of automated traffic enforcement systems (i.e., red light cameras) at railroad crossings and intersections to record violations of unlawful grade crossings and running of red lights. (VEH 21455.5)
This bill:
- Authorizes Caltrans to deploy 35 speed safety systems, identified as automated speed enforcement systems, to enforce speed limits in state highway work zones.
- Provides that a speed safety system may only issue citations when workers from the Department of Transportation, including persons contracted to perform construction, maintenance, or repair of a highway, are present.
- Includes the following provisions that are nearly identical to the existing speed safety pilot program on the PCH in Malibu:
- Requires every speed safety system to have a sign stating ″photo enforced″ along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system.
- Requires a public information program at least 30 days prior to the implementation of the camera program and that for the first 60 days of enforcement only warning notices be issued.
- Requires that Caltrans establish guidelines for the screening and issuing of notices of violation and for the processing and storage of confidential information. The notice shall include a phone number a ticketed individual may use to contact Caltrans, a clear photograph of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, VEH violation, the location, and the date and time the violation occurred.
- Provides for the following fines to the owner of the registered vehicle:
- $50 for a speed violation from 11 to 15 miles per hour (mph) over the posted speed limit;
- $100 for a speed violation from 16 to 25 mph over the posted speed limit;
- $200 for a speed violation of 26 mph or more over the posted speed limit; and,
- $500 for traveling at a speed of 100 mph or greater.
- Stipulates that the fine is a civil penalty and shall not result in a loss of the driving privilege or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
- Requires indigent individuals be offered community service in lieu of the fine, or the fine is reduced by 80%. The fine is reduced by 50% for individuals up to 250% above the federal poverty level.
- The vehicle′s first violation results in a warning, not a fine, if that violation is for driving not more than 15 mph over the posted speed limit.
- Establishes the Safe Highway Work Zone Account and continuously appropriates citation revenue to that account for the administration of the automated speed enforcement program. Remaining funding is directed towards the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
- Requires Caltrans to issue a report two years after the program has been implemented and annually thereafter.
- Provides that the speed safety system under this pilot may operate for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner.
- Resolves chaptering out conflicts with SB 720.
Comments
- Purpose of this bill. According to the author, “AB 289 is a significant step toward safeguarding the lives of construction workers on our highways, where speeding vehicles pose a significant risk to both workers and motorists. By harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will save lives by reducing construction zone crashes and creating a safer environment for all.”
- Work zone safety. A work zone is an area of a highway or roadway with construction, maintenance, or utility-work activities. Work zones are typically marked by signs, cones, barrels, channeling devices, barriers, pavement markings, and/or work vehicles. The zone extends from the first warning sign to the "End of Road Work" sign or the last traffic control device. According to a 2023 Caltrans news release titled Caltrans Honors Fallen Highway Workers with Memorial Signs in State Roadside Rest Areas, “in 2021, more than 9,500 collisions occurred in construction zones on California highways. This resulted in an estimated 2,971 injuries and 73 fatalities, including both construction workers and drivers. Nationally, drivers and passengers account for 85 percent of people who are killed in work zones.”
- California’s speed camera programs. AB 645 (Friedman, Chapter 808, Statutes of 2023), established an automated speed safety system program in California and authorized the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to operate a limited number of speed safety camera systems for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner. AB 645 explicitly prohibited cities from operating cameras on roads where the California Highway Patrol has jurisdiction, and limits camera placement to the cities high injury networks, school zones, and streets with a high number of calls for motor vehicle exhibitions of speed and speed contests. Last year, SB 1297 (Allen, Chapter 631, Statutes of 2024) created a separate pilot program for the City of Malibu to operate five speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway. As of the writing of this analysis, only San Francisco has deployed speed cameras.
The local speed camera pilot programs established by AB 645 and SB 1297 include numerous fairness and equity-oriented provisions, which are included in this bill. For example, the pilot programs have a fine schedule tied to the vehicle’s speed. The fine is $50 for a speed violation from 11 to 15 mph over the posted speed limit, $100 for a speed violation from 16 to 25 mph over the posted speed limit, $200 for a speed violation of 26 mph or more over the posted speed limit, and $500 for traveling at a speed of 100 mph or greater. The fine is a civil penalty issued to the vehicle’s registered owner and does not incur a violation point against their license. Additionally, the vehicle's first violation results in a warning, not a fine, if the violation is for driving not more than 15 mph over the speed limit. Lastly, the fine is reduced by 50% for individuals up to 250% above the federal poverty level. All of these provisions are mirrored in AB 289.
- How does this bill differ from existing programs? Unlike AB 645, which authorizes speed cameras on local streets and roads, this bill authorizes speed cameras on a state highways. Another difference is that this program would be administered by Caltrans, instead of local cities. Additionally, the cameras under the existing programs will be in fixed locations. Prior to launching the cameras for use, the local jurisdiction must administer a public information campaign which includes publicizing the general locations of the cameras. This bill does include a public information requirement, but does not require the locations of the cameras to be included in the public announcements. However, AB 289 requires Caltrans to maintain a website which identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using the speed cameras and the hours of enforcement, which must be updated whenever Caltrans changes locations of enforcement.
- Ticket at 66 mph. In Caltrans’ construction work zones on state highways the speed limit is typically reduced from 65 mph to 55 mph. However, Caltrans has the authority to reduce the speed limit by 15 mph or more under certain work zone conditions. Caltrans considers the amount of truck traffic and number of lanes available for use when determining the construction work zone speed limit reduction. Under this bill, the speed cameras will begin issuing tickets to vehicles traveling 11 mph over the speed limit. This means that, in most cases, tickets generated from this bill will be issued to vehicles going 66 mph.
- Caltrans issuing speeding tickets. This bill marks a significant shift in Caltrans’ scope of work. Although Caltrans currently manages traffic cameras used to verify and assess reported incidents, the department does not issue tickets to drivers for any purpose. One of the factors that may impact the successful implementation of the program is the volume of tickets Caltrans has to manage. New York State implemented their speed camera program in work zones in 2023 with 30 cameras. The cameras could be placed in both construction and maintenance areas, but workers had to be present in the work zone. Between April and December of 2023, the program issued nearly 150,000 tickets. This bill authorizes Caltrans to utilize 35 cameras. Using New York State as a comparison, it is plausible to assume that 150,000 or more tickets could be issued annually. This volume would require Caltrans to establish a large, public-facing operation to address inquiries from ticketed individuals, collect fines, and administer the reviews for individuals contesting tickets. Unlike the AB 645 and SB 1297 pilot programs, the state, rather than local cities, would be responsible for managing this program.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
- Caltrans would incur one-time costs for additional staff resources for up to two years to conduct “phase I” activities, including development and adoption of program guidelines and regulations, conducting stakeholder outreach and engagement, implementing a public information campaign, and evaluating the most cost-effective way to implement and operate the speed safety program. While these costs are unknown, staff estimates initial costs are likely to be at least in the high hundreds of thousands annually over two years, prior to the deployment of automated enforcement systems. (State Highway Account)
- Caltrans anticipates significant ongoing costs through 2031-32, to implement and administer the pilot program. Staff estimates that Caltrans contracting and staffing costs would likely be in the millions annually from 2028-29 through 2031-32, depending on the scale of the program, and whether Caltrans opts to procure and deploy all 35 systems throughout the state, or rolls out a more limited program on a regional basis. Caltrans indicates it would evaluate options for administering the pilot during the first phase of the program to determine whether to conduct certain operational duties in-house or through vendor contracts. For illustrative purposes, a similar program established in New York reported $6.83 million in vendor expenses in 2023 to operate 30 enforcement units. (State Highway Account, Safe Highway Work Zone Account, and potentially federal funds)
- Unknown, likely significant civil penalty revenues, beginning in 2028-29, which would at least partially offset Caltrans costs to administer the speed safety program. Actual revenues would depend upon the number of systems that are operational, the volume of citations issued, and the number of violations for each level of fines imposed. To the extent the citation revenues fully offset Caltrans costs to administer the program, any remaining funds would be available for expenditure on specified enhanced enforcement program costs in construction and maintenance zones. (Safe Highway Work Zone Account)
- Unknown, potentially significant court workload cost pressures for superior courts to hear and adjudicate appeals of hearing officer determinations that are brought under the provisions of this bill. These costs would be partially offset by the $25 fees for filing appeals. Staff notes that it generally costs about $10,500 to operate a courtroom for one eight-hour day. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased staff time and resources may create a need for additional support from the General Fund to support court operations. The 2025-26 Budget includes $38 million in ongoing support from the General Fund to backfill the current fund imbalance in the Trial Court Trust Fund and help pay for court operations, (Trial Court Trust Fund, General Fund).
SUPPORT: (Verified 9/4/25)
United Contractors (co-source)
California State Council of Laborers (co-source)
California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers (co-source)
AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
American Automobile Association of Northern California, Nevada & Utah
Associated General Contractors of California
Automobile Club of Southern California
Blue Line Solutions, LLC
California Alliance for Jobs
California Asphalt Pavement Association
California Construction & Industrial Materials Association
California State Treasurer
Madera County Transportation Commission
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Rebuild Socal Partnership
Southern California Contractors Association
State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
Streets are for Everyone
Transportation Authority of Marin
Transportation California
OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/4/25)
National Motorists Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Writing in support, United Contractors states, “[b]y harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will reduce construction zone crashes and create a safer environment for California’s highway construction workers and for California drivers…Highway construction and maintenance work is one of the most hazardous occupations in the United States. In 2021, more than 9,500 collisions occurred in construction zones on California highways. This resulted in an estimated 2,971 injuries and 73 fatalities, including both construction workers and drivers. While contractors, labor unions, state agencies, and law enforcement are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be dangerous for our workers who risk injury and death by speeding vehicles. National data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show that construction and extraction and transportation and material moving— both sectors which are involved in highway construction work—are among the most dangerous occupations, trailing only farming, fishing and forestry in the rate of work-related deaths. BLS data also demonstrate the disproportionate rate of workplace fatalities, with Black and Latino workers experiencing a higher rate of fatal injuries than workers at large. Notably, transportation incidents were the highest cause of fatalities for both groups, accounting for the deaths of 278 Black workers and 439 Latino workers in 2022. While these statistics include occupations beyond those which are directly involved in highway construction projects, they demonstrate the unique risks faced by California’s diverse construction industry workforce.
“According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), safe speeds are a core principle of the Safe System Approach, which prioritizes the elimination of crashes that result in death and serious injuries, since humans are less likely to survive high-speed crashes. The FHWA includes variable speed limit setting, including within work zones, in its collection of 28 evidence-based safety countermeasures and strategies. Unfortunately, enforcing safe speeds has proven challenging, particularly in work zones where active construction is underway and lane closures and physical barriers designed to protect both motorists and construction workers can impede traditional speed enforcement efforts.”
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Writing in opposition, the National Motorists Association states, “[p]roponents of work zone ticketing cameras make the erroneous assumption that motorists driving at excessive speeds in work zones cause a significant number of injuries and fatalities to highway construction workers. We have shown this assumption to be false. However, one should not entirely discount concerns regarding highway worker safety due to motorists traveling within the work zone.
“If officials desire closer adherence to the work zone speed limit, Caltrans should employ additional engineering countermeasures to gain greater compliance. These engineering solutions are at least as effective, if not more effective, than sending a ticket in the mail weeks after an alleged violation, and they have the added benefit of providing real-time protection to workers.”
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-3, 6/3/25
AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Kalra, Krell, Lee, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Patel, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Ransom, Celeste Rodriguez, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Blanca Rubio, Schiavo, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Stefani, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Ward, Wicks, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas
NOES: DeMaio, Patterson, Sanchez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bains, Gallagher, Hadwick, Lackey, Ta
Prepared by: Isabelle LaSalle / TRANS. / (916) 651-4121
9/8/25 21:08:12
**** END ****
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB 289 |
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 289
Author: Haney (D), et al.
Amended: 8/29/25 in Senate
Vote: 27
SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: 13-2, 7/8/25
AYES: Cortese, Archuleta, Arreguín, Blakespear, Cervantes, Dahle, Gonzalez, Grayson, Limón, Menjivar, Richardson, Umberg, Valladares
NOES: Strickland, Seyarto
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 12-0, 7/15/25
AYES: Umberg, Allen, Arreguín, Ashby, Caballero, Durazo, Laird, Stern, Valladares, Wahab, Weber Pierson, Wiener
NO VOTE RECORDED: Niello
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 8/29/25
AYES: Caballero, Cabaldon, Dahle, Grayson, Richardson, Wahab
NOES: Seyarto
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-3, 6/3/25 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: State highway work zone speed safety program
SOURCE: United Contractors
California State Council of Laborers
California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers
DIGEST:
This bill authorizes the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a five year work zone speed safety pilot program to enforce speeding violations in highway maintenance and construction work zones using speed safety systems.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Authorizes the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to establish a five-year speed safety system pilot program. (Vehicle Code (VEH) Section 22425)
- Authorizes the City of Malibu to establish a five-year speed safety system pilot program on Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). (VEH 22435)
- Authorizes the use of automated traffic enforcement systems (i.e., red light cameras) at railroad crossings and intersections to record violations of unlawful grade crossings and running of red lights. (VEH 21455.5)
This bill:
- Authorizes Caltrans to deploy 35 speed safety systems, identified as automated speed enforcement systems, to enforce speed limits in state highway work zones.
- Provides that a speed safety system may only issue citations when workers from the Department of Transportation, including persons contracted to perform construction, maintenance, or repair of a highway, are present.
- Includes the following provisions that are nearly identical to the existing speed safety pilot program on the PCH in Malibu:
- Requires every speed safety system to have a sign stating ″photo enforced″ along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system.
- Requires a public information program at least 30 days prior to the implementation of the camera program and that for the first 60 days of enforcement only warning notices be issued.
- Requires that Caltrans establish guidelines for the screening and issuing of notices of violation and for the processing and storage of confidential information. The notice shall include a phone number a ticketed individual may use to contact Caltrans, a clear photograph of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, VEH violation, the location, and the date and time the violation occurred.
- Provides for the following fines to the owner of the registered vehicle:
- $50 for a speed violation from 11 to 15 miles per hour (mph) over the posted speed limit;
- $100 for a speed violation from 16 to 25 mph over the posted speed limit;
- $200 for a speed violation of 26 mph or more over the posted speed limit; and,
- $500 for traveling at a speed of 100 mph or greater.
- Stipulates that the fine is a civil penalty and shall not result in a loss of the driving privilege or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
- Requires indigent individuals be offered community service in lieu of the fine, or the fine is reduced by 80%. The fine is reduced by 50% for individuals up to 250% above the federal poverty level.
- The vehicle′s first violation results in a warning, not a fine, if that violation is for driving not more than 15 mph over the posted speed limit.
- Establishes the Safe Highway Work Zone Account and continuously appropriates citation revenue to that account for the administration of the automated speed enforcement program. Remaining funding is directed towards the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (MAZEEP).
- Requires Caltrans to issue a report two years after the program has been implemented and annually thereafter.
- Provides that the speed safety system under this pilot may operate for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner.
Comments
- Purpose of this bill. According to the author, “AB 289 is a significant step toward safeguarding the lives of construction workers on our highways, where speeding vehicles pose a significant risk to both workers and motorists. By harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will save lives by reducing construction zone crashes and creating a safer environment for all.”
- Work zone safety. A work zone is an area of a highway or roadway with construction, maintenance, or utility-work activities. Work zones are typically marked by signs, cones, barrels, channeling devices, barriers, pavement markings, and/or work vehicles. The zone extends from the first warning sign to the "End of Road Work" sign or the last traffic control device. According to a 2023 Caltrans news release titled Caltrans Honors Fallen Highway Workers with Memorial Signs in State Roadside Rest Areas, “in 2021, more than 9,500 collisions occurred in construction zones on California highways. This resulted in an estimated 2,971 injuries and 73 fatalities, including both construction workers and drivers. Nationally, drivers and passengers account for 85 percent of people who are killed in work zones.”
- Efficacy of speed cameras. Research has shown that automated speed cameras effectively reduce incidents of crashes. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, “Crash-based evaluations from the United States and Canada have also reported safety benefits from speed safety cameras programs in urban areas. Shin et al. (2009) examined effects of a fixed camera enforcement program applied to a 6.5-mile urban freeway section through Scottsdale, Arizona. The speed limit on the enforced freeway was 65 mph; the enforcement trigger was set to 76 mph. Total target (off-peak/free-flow) crashes were reduced by an estimated 44 to 54%, injury crashes by 28 to 48%, and property damage only crashes by 46 to 56% during the 9-month program period.”
- California’s speed camera programs. AB 645 (Friedman, Chapter 808, Statutes of 2023), established an automated speed safety system program in California and authorized the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to operate a limited number of speed safety camera systems for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner. AB 645 explicitly prohibited cities from operating cameras on roads where the California Highway Patrol (CHP) has jurisdiction, and limits camera placement to the cities high injury networks, school zones, and streets with a high number of calls for motor vehicle exhibitions of speed and speed contests. Last year, SB 1297 (Allen, Chapter 631, Statutes of 2024) created a separate pilot program for the City of Malibu to operate five speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway. As of the writing of this analysis, only San Francisco has deployed speed cameras.
The local speed camera pilot programs established by AB 645 and SB 1297 include numerous fairness and equity-oriented provisions, which are included in this bill. For example, the pilot programs have a fine schedule tied to the vehicle’s speed. The fine is $50 for a speed violation from 11 to 15 mph over the posted speed limit, $100 for a speed violation from 16 to 25 mph over the posted speed limit, $200 for a speed violation of 26 mph or more over the posted speed limit, and $500 for traveling at a speed of 100 mph or greater. The fine is a civil penalty issued to the vehicle’s registered owner and does not incur a violation point against their license. Additionally, the vehicle's first violation results in a warning, not a fine, if the violation is for driving not more than 15 mph over the speed limit. Lastly, the fine is reduced by 50% for individuals up to 250% above the federal poverty level. All of these provisions are mirrored in AB 289.
- How does this bill differ from existing programs? Unlike AB 645, which authorizes speed cameras on local streets and roads, this bill authorizes speed cameras on a state highways. Another significant difference is that this program would be administered by Caltrans, instead of local cities. Additionally, the cameras under the existing programs will be in fixed locations. Prior to launching the cameras for use, the local jurisdiction must administer a public information campaign which includes publicizing the general locations of the cameras. This bill does include a public information requirement, but does not require the locations of the cameras to be included in the public announcements. However, AB 289 requires Caltrans to maintain a website which identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using the speed cameras and the hours of enforcement, which must be updated whenever Caltrans changes locations of enforcement.
Another area of difference between the existing programs and the program created by this bill are the requirements related to adopting guidelines for the program. AB 645 required the local jurisdiction to adopt guidelines for the speed camera program that included an assessment of the potential impact of the speed safety system on civil liberties and civil rights and any plans to safeguard those public rights. The guidelines must also include information about the programs’ costs and locations, with additional assessments if the cameras are deployed in predominantly low-income neighborhoods. These requirements are not included in AB 289.
- Ticket at 66 mph. In Caltrans’ construction work zones on state highways the speed limit is typically reduced from 65 mph to 55 mph. However, Caltrans has the authority to reduce the speed limit by 15 mph or more under certain work zone conditions. Caltrans considers the amount of truck traffic and number of lanes available for use when determining the construction work zone speed limit reduction. Under this bill, the speed cameras will begin issuing tickets to vehicles traveling 11 mph over the speed limit. This means that, in most cases, tickets generated from this bill will be issued to vehicles going 66 mph.
- Where does the revenue go? AB 645 and SB 1297 direct excess revenue from speeding citations to go towards traffic calming measures. In contrast, this bill directs citation revenues to be deposited into the new Safe Highway Work Zone Account to be continuously appropriated to Caltrans for the administration of the program. Then, any excess revenues go to COZEEP and MAZEEP. These are programs that pay for CHP officers to be present at construction and maintenance zones while workers are present to provide traffic control and improve safety.
- Caltrans issuing speeding tickets. This bill marks a significant shift in Caltrans’ scope of work. Although Caltrans currently manages traffic cameras used to verify and assess reported incidents, the department does not issue tickets to drivers for any purpose. One of the factors that may impact the successful implementation of the program is the volume of tickets Caltrans has to manage. New York State implemented their speed camera program in work zones in 2023 with 30 cameras. The cameras could be placed in both construction and maintenance areas, but workers had to be present in the work zone. Between April and December of 2023, the program issued nearly 150,000 tickets. This bill authorizes Caltrans to utilize 35 cameras. Using New York State as a comparison, it is plausible to assume that 150,000 or more tickets could be issued annually. This volume would require Caltrans to establish a large, public-facing operation to address inquiries from ticketed individuals, collect fines, and administer the reviews for individuals contesting tickets. Unlike the AB 645 and SB 1297 pilot programs, the state, rather than local cities, would be responsible for managing this program.
Related/Previous Legislation
SB 1297 (Allen, Chapter 631, Statutes of 2024) – Created a pilot program for the city of Malibu to operate five speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway.
AB 645 (Friedman, Chapter 808, Statutes of 2023) – Established a speed safety system pilot program in six specified cities.
AB 2809 (Haney, 2024) – Would have authorized the California Transportation Agency to establish a speed safety system pilot program in work zones. This bill was held in the Assembly Transportation Committee.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
- Caltrans would incur one-time costs for additional staff resources for up to two years to conduct “phase I” activities, including development and adoption of program guidelines and regulations, conducting stakeholder outreach and engagement, implementing a public information campaign, and evaluating the most cost-effective way to implement and operate the speed safety program. While these costs are unknown, staff estimates initial costs are likely to be at least in the high hundreds of thousands annually over two years, prior to the deployment of automated enforcement systems. (State Highway Account).
- Caltrans anticipates significant ongoing costs through 2031-32, to implement and administer the pilot program. Staff estimates that Caltrans contracting and staffing costs would likely be in the millions annually from 2028-29 through 2031-32, depending on the scale of the program, and whether Caltrans opts to procure and deploy all 35 systems throughout the state, or rolls out a more limited program on a regional basis. Caltrans indicates it would evaluate options for administering the pilot during the first phase of the program to determine whether to conduct certain operational duties in-house or through vendor contracts. For illustrative purposes, a similar program established in New York reported $6.83 million in vendor expenses in 2023 to operate 30 enforcement units. (State Highway Account, Safe Highway Work Zone Account, and potentially federal funds)
- Unknown, likely significant civil penalty revenues, beginning in 2028-29, which would at least partially offset Caltrans costs to administer the speed safety program. Actual revenues would depend upon the number of systems that are operational, the volume of citations issued, and the number of violations for each level of fines imposed. To the extent the citation revenues fully offset Caltrans costs to administer the program, any remaining funds would be available for expenditure on specified enhanced enforcement program costs in construction and maintenance zones. (Safe Highway Work Zone Account)
- Unknown, potentially significant court workload cost pressures for superior courts to hear and adjudicate appeals of hearing officer determinations that are brought under the provisions of this bill. These costs would be partially offset by the $25 fees for filing appeals. Staff notes that it generally costs about $10,500 to operate a courtroom for one eight-hour day. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased staff time and resources may create a need for additional support from the General Fund to support court operations. The 2025-26 Budget includes $38 million in ongoing support from the General Fund to backfill the current fund imbalance in the Trial Court Trust Fund and help pay for court operations, (Trial Court Trust Fund, General Fund).
SUPPORT: (Verified 8/29/25)
AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
American Automobile Association of Northern California, Nevada & Utah
Associated General Contractors of California
Automobile Club of Southern California
Blue Line Solutions, LLC
Calfornia-nevada Conference of Operating Engineers
California Alliance for Jobs
California Asphalt Pavement Association
California Construction & Industrial Materials Association
California State Council of Laborers
California State Treasurer
Madera County Transportation Commission
Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC)
Rebuild Socal Partnership
Southern California Contractors Association
State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
Streets are for Everyone (SAFE) (ORG)
Transportation Authority of Marin
Transportation California
United Contractors
OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/29/25)
National Motorists Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Writing in support, United Contractors states, “[b]y harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will reduce construction zone crashes and create a safer environment for California’s highway construction workers and for California drivers…Highway construction and maintenance work is one of the most hazardous occupations in the United States. In 2021, more than 9,500 collisions occurred in construction zones on California highways. This resulted in an estimated 2,971 injuries and 73 fatalities, including both construction workers and drivers. While contractors, labor unions, state agencies, and law enforcement are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be dangerous for our workers who risk injury and death by speeding vehicles. National data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show that construction and extraction and transportation and material moving— both sectors which are involved in highway construction work—are among the most dangerous occupations, trailing only farming, fishing and forestry in the rate of work-related deaths. BLS data also demonstrate the disproportionate rate of workplace fatalities, with Black and Latino workers experiencing a higher rate of fatal injuries than workers at large. Notably, transportation incidents were the highest cause of fatalities for both groups, accounting for the deaths of 278 Black workers and 439 Latino workers in 2022. While these statistics include occupations beyond those which are directly involved in highway construction projects, they demonstrate the unique risks faced by California’s diverse construction industry workforce.
“According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), safe speeds are a core principle of the Safe System Approach, which prioritizes the elimination of crashes that result in death and serious injuries, since humans are less likely to survive high-speed crashes. The FHWA includes variable speed limit setting, including within work zones, in its collection of 28 evidence-based safety countermeasures and strategies. Unfortunately, enforcing safe speeds has proven challenging, particularly in work zones where active construction is underway and lane closures and physical barriers designed to protect both motorists and construction workers can impede traditional speed enforcement efforts.”
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Writing in opposition, the National Motorists Association states, “[p]roponents of work zone ticketing cameras make the erroneous assumption that motorists driving at excessive speeds in work zones cause a significant number of injuries and fatalities to highway construction workers. We have shown this assumption to be false. However, one should not entirely discount concerns regarding highway worker safety due to motorists traveling within the work zone.
“If officials desire closer adherence to the work zone speed limit, Caltrans should employ additional engineering countermeasures to gain greater compliance. These engineering solutions are at least as effective, if not more effective, than sending a ticket in the mail weeks after an alleged violation, and they have the added benefit of providing real-time protection to workers.”
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 71-3, 6/3/25
AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Kalra, Krell, Lee, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Patel, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Ransom, Celeste Rodriguez, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Blanca Rubio, Schiavo, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Stefani, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Ward, Wicks, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas
NOES: DeMaio, Patterson, Sanchez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bains, Gallagher, Hadwick, Lackey, Ta
Prepared by: Isabelle LaSalle / TRANS. / (916) 651-4121
9/2/25 17:53:09
**** END ****
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Anna Caballero, Chair
2025 - 2026 Regular Session
AB 289 (Haney) - State highway work zone speed safety program
Version: June 25, 2025 | Policy Vote: TRANS. 13 - 2, JUD. 12 - 0 |
Urgency: No | Mandate: No |
Hearing Date: August 29, 2025 | Consultant: Mark McKenzie |
Bill Summary:
AB 289 would require the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a five-year speed safety system pilot program that utilizes up to 75 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas until January 1, 2032.
*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********
The following information is revised to reflect amendments
adopted by the committee on August 29, 2025
Fiscal Impact:
- Caltrans would incur one-time costs for additional staff resources for up to two years to conduct “phase I” activities, including development and adoption of program guidelines and regulations, conducting stakeholder outreach and engagement, implementing a public information campaign, and evaluating the most cost-effective way to implement and operate the speed safety program. While these costs are unknown, staff estimates initial costs are likely to be at least in the high hundreds of thousands annually over two years, prior to the deployment of automated enforcement systems. (State Highway Account).
- Caltrans anticipates significant ongoing costs through 2031-32, to implement and administer the pilot program. Staff estimates that Caltrans contracting and staffing costs would likely be in the millions annually from 2028-29 through 2031-32, depending on the scale of the program, and whether Caltrans opts to procure and deploy all 35 systems throughout the state, or rolls out a more limited program on a regional basis. Caltrans indicates it would evaluate options for administering the pilot during the first phase of the program to determine whether to conduct certain operational duties in-house or through vendor contracts. For illustrative purposes, a similar program established in New York reported $6.83 million in vendor expenses in 2023 to operate 30 enforcement units. (State Highway Account, Safe Highway Work Zone Account, and potentially federal funds)
- Unknown, likely significant civil penalty revenues, beginning in 2028-29, which would at least partially offset Caltrans costs to administer the speed safety program. Actual revenues would depend upon the number of systems that are operational, the volume of citations issued, and the number of violations for each level of fines imposed. To the extent the citation revenues fully offset Caltrans costs to administer the program, any remaining funds would be available for expenditure on specified enhanced enforcement program costs in construction and maintenance zones. (Safe Highway Work Zone Account)
- Unknown, potentially significant court workload cost pressures for superior courts to hear and adjudicate appeals of hearing officer determinations that are brought under the provisions of this bill. These costs would be partially offset by the $25 fees for filing appeals. Staff notes that it generally costs about $10,500 to operate a courtroom for one eight-hour day. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased staff time and resources may create a need for additional support from the General Fund to support court operations. The 2025-26 Budget includes $38 million in ongoing support from the General Fund to backfill the current fund imbalance in the Trial Court Trust Fund and help pay for court operations, (Trial Court Trust Fund, General Fund).
Author Amendments:
- Clarify that a “speed safety system” is also known as an automated speed enforcement system.
- Require specified signage that clearly identifies the presence of a speed safety system to be place between 500 feet and one mile, inclusive, before the placement of the system, as determined by Caltrans.
- Clarify that a speed safety system may only record speed violations and actively issue citations when Caltrans workers, including specified contractors, are present in the work zone, rather than when construction or maintenance workers are present.
- Require Caltrans to consult with relevant state agencies generally, rather than specifically with the California Highway Patrol, when developing program guidelines.
- Clarify that citation revenues deposited into the new Safe Highway Work Zone Account would be continuously appropriated to Caltrans for the administration of the program first, and any remaining funds would be used by Caltrans for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
Committee Amendments:
Reduce the number of speed safety systems that Caltrans may utilize during the speed safety program from up to 75 to up to 35 systems.
-- END --
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Anna Caballero, Chair
2025 - 2026 Regular Session
AB 289 (Haney) - State highway work zone speed safety program
Version: June 25, 2025 | Policy Vote: TRANS. 13 - 2, JUD. 12 - 0 |
Urgency: No | Mandate: No |
Hearing Date: August 25, 2025 | Consultant: Mark McKenzie |
Bill Summary:
AB 289 would require the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a five-year speed safety system pilot program that utilizes up to 75 speed safety systems on state highway construction or maintenance areas until January 1, 2032.
Fiscal Impact:
- Caltrans would incur one-time costs for additional staff resources for up to two years to conduct “phase I” activities, including development and adoption of program guidelines and regulations, conducting stakeholder outreach and engagement, implementing a public information campaign, and evaluating the most cost-effective way to implement and operate the speed safety program. While these costs are unknown, staff estimates initial costs are likely to be at least in the high hundreds of thousands annually over two years, prior to the deployment of automated enforcement systems. (State Highway Account).
- Caltrans anticipates significant ongoing costs through 2031-32, to implement and administer the pilot program. Staff estimates that Caltrans contracting and staffing costs would exceed $10 million annually from 2028-29 through 2031-32, depending on the scale of the program, and whether Caltrans opts to procure and deploy all 75 systems throughout the state, or rolls out a more limited program on a regional basis. Caltrans indicates it would evaluate options for administering the pilot program during the first phase of the program to determine whether to conduct certain operational duties in-house or through vendor contracts. See Staff Comments. (State Highway Account, Safe Highway Work Zone Account, and potentially federal funds)
- Unknown, likely significant civil penalty revenues, which would at least partially offset Caltrans costs to administer the speed safety program. Actual revenues would depend upon the number of systems that are operational, the volume of citations issued, and the number of violations for each level of fines imposed. To the extent the citation revenues fully offset Caltrans costs to administer the program, any remaining funds would be available for expenditure on specified enhanced enforcement program costs in construction and maintenance zones (see background below). (Safe Highway Work Zone Account)
- Unknown, potentially significant court workload cost pressures for superior courts to hear and adjudicate appeals of hearing officer determinations that are brought under the provisions of this bill. These costs would be partially offset by the $25 fees for filing appeals. Staff notes that it generally costs about $10,500 to operate a courtroom for one eight-hour day. Although courts are not funded on the basis of workload, increased staff time and resources may create a need for additional support from the General Fund to support court operations. The 2025-26 Budget includes $38 million in ongoing support from the General Fund to backfill the current fund imbalance in the Trial Court Trust Fund and help pay for court operations, (Trial Court Trust Fund, General Fund).
Background:
Existing law, as enacted by AB 645 (Friedman), Chap. 808/2023, authorizes the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, Oakland, Glendale, Long Beach and San Francisco to establish an automated speed enforcement pilot program for five years until January 1, 2032. Existing law specifies the number of cameras that may be installed in each jurisdiction, and limits their use to school zones, streets that local authorities have determined to have a high number of incidents of speed contests or exhibitions of speed, and streets that are safety corridors, as specified. Existing law requires a participating jurisdiction to do the following:
- Adopt a specified Speed Safety System Use Policy and Speed Safety System Impact Report prior to implementing the program.
- Engage in a specified public information campaign at least 30 days prior to implementation, as specified.
- Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for the first 60 days of the program.
- Develop uniform guidelines for the screening and issuing of notices of violation and for the processing and storage of confidential information.
- Impose a specified graduated scale of civil penalties for violations, depending on the speed recorded over the established speed limit, provide for an appeals process, and offer a specified diversion program for indigent persons who receive a notice of violation.
- Use revenues from automated enforcement violation penalties to first be used to recover program costs, including installation of cameras, adjudication of violations, reporting requirements, and the construction of traffic calming measures.
- Submit an evaluation of the program to its local governing body and the Legislature to determine the system’s impact on street safety and the economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized, as specified.
Subsequently, SB 1297 (Allen), Chap. 631/2024 was enacted to authorize the City of Malibu to join the pilot program and install speed cameras along the Pacific Coast Highway. To date, only the City and County of San Francisco has fully implemented an automated speed enforcement program.
Caltrans has adopted several directives for improving safety for workers in construction and maintenance work zones on the state highway system. Specifically, the Construction Work Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP), and the Maintenance Work Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (MAZEEP) provide traffic control and safety in Caltrans work zones through contracts with the California Highway Patrol to ensure that officers are present during installation and removal of stationary traffic control systems. CHP officers shadow traffic control crews during installation and removal of traffic control components.
Proposed Law:
AB 289 would authorize Caltrans to establish an automated speed enforcement program until January 1, 2032. Specifically, this bill would:
- Authorize Caltrans to establish a program for speed enforcement that uses up to 75 automated cameras to enforce speed limits in state highway work zones (state highway construction or maintenance areas) if the program meets all of the following requirements:
- Identifies the presence of a speed safety system by signs stating “Photo Enforced,” along with speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback, within 500 feet of the placement of the system, as specified.
- Identifies the state highway work zones approved for automated enforcement and the hours of enforcement on the Caltrans website, which must be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
- Ensures that the system is regularly inspected at least every 60 days and certified as properly installed and operating, and calibrated at least once each year, as specified. Documentation of regular inspection, operation, and calibration must be retained for at least 180 days after the system has been permanently removed.
- Utilizes fixed or mobile systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
- Records speed violations and actively issues citations only when construction or maintenance workers are present in the work zone.
- Require that a public information program be commenced for at least 30 days prior to the implementation of the camera program and that for the first 60 days of enforcement only warning notices be issued. A vehicle’s first violation for traveling 11-15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit would also be a warning notice.
- Require Caltrans to develop and adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems before entering into an agreement, purchasing or leasing equipment, or implementing a program that includes the purpose of the system, authorized uses, data or information that can be collected and who can access the information, efforts for protecting that information and data, and procedures for the screening and issuing of citations, as well as storage of confidential information. The written guidelines must be available for public review at least 30 days adoption, and final guidelines must be posted on the Caltrans website. The guidelines would be exempt from the Administrative Procedures Act.
- Require a contract between Caltrans and a speed safety system manufacturer or supplier to allow Caltrans to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services, as specified. The contract must not allow for payment or compensation based on the number notices of violations issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system.
- Require Caltrans to oversee, maintain, control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including when a notice of violation should be issued.
- Authorize Caltrans to contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after a Caltrans employee has issued a notice of violation. The vendor must be a separate legal and corporate entity from the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems, and a contract with a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
- Require notices of violation to include a clear photograph of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, the Vehicle Code violation, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices must not include images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
- Require the notice of violation to be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of violation, and include: the violation, (including reference to the speed law violated, speed of the vehicle, speed limit for the road); the date, time, and location where the violation occurred; the vehicle license number and name and address of the registered owner; a statement that payment is required within 30 days, or that the violation may be contested; the amount of the civil penalty and procedures for payment or contesting the violation; an affidavit of nonliability and instructions for returning the affidavit; a phone number to request additional information about the speed safety program; and proof of service.
- Specify a violation of speed laws captured by an automated speed enforcement system is subject to a civil penalty assessed to the registered owner of the vehicle in the amount of $50 for a speed violation from 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit, $100 for a speed violation from 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit, $200 for a speed violation of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, and $500 for traveling at a speed of 100 miles per hour or greater. The penalty would not result in a loss of the driving privilege or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
- Require Caltrans to offer a payment plan for indigent speed safety violation recipients to pay fines in monthly installments of no more than $25 with a processing fee of no more than $5, and reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80% for indigent persons and by 50% for persons up to 250% above the federal poverty level, as specified.
- Prescribe a process for contesting a violation, including requesting an initial review of the notice of violation by Caltrans, conducting an administrative hearing, and authorization for a violator to file an appeal with the superior court if the person is not satisfied with the results of the administrative hearing, as specified.
- Require moneys generated from the issuance of citations to be deposited into the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, created by the bill, which must be continuously appropriated to Caltrans for program administration, COZEEP, and MAZEEP.
- Require Caltrans to submit a report evaluating the state highway work zone speed safety program and its impact on state highway work zone safety to the Legislature within two years of commencing the automated enforcement program, and annually thereafter. The report must also be posted on the Caltrans website and include specified violation data, the number of traffic collisions in work zones with speed cameras relative to data in all work zones, the costs associated with implementation and operation of the program, among other things.
- Sunset the provisions of the bill on January 1, 2032.
Related Legislation:
SB 720 (Ashby), which is currently pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, would authorize cities and counties to establish a program for traffic control signal enforcement that utilizes an automated traffic enforcement system, and subjects a violation to a civil, rather than criminal, penalty.
SB 1297 (Allen), Chap. 631/2024, authorizes the City of Malibu to establish a five-year Speed Safety System Pilot Program that utilizes up to five speed safety systems for automated enforcement on the Pacific Coast Highway until January 1, 2032.
AB 645 (Friedman), Chap. 808/2023, authorizes the Cities of Glendale, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose to establish a Speed Safety System Pilot Program, which provides for automated speed enforcement on specified streets for up to five years until January 1, 2032.
Staff Comments:
As noted above, Caltrans anticipates that it would incur significant costs to administer the pilot program, which are unknown at this time. Costs would be based upon the following resource needs, which would be identified during the program design phase:
- The acquisition, maintenance, and operation of a speed safety camera system (costs to purchase a mobile camera unit and associated equipment can be up to $100,000; cost-effectiveness of leasing equipment as opposed to purchasing and maintaining equipment will be determined during first phase).
- The issuance of warning notices and citations.
- Developing the necessary accounting systems and the processing of citation payments.
- Processing of appeals, and legal costs associated with defending citations in an appeals process.
- Maintaining a call center to assist customers with questions about citations.
- Developing the necessary information technology and information security systems to operate the program (operating the program entirely in house will require more resources to develop and integrate all necessary systems).
- Continuing coordination with state agency partners through program implementation.
- Conducting a public information and education campaign.
At least 14 other states have authorized the use of automated speed enforcement systems in highway construction and maintenance zones. Caltrans is unable to estimate the costs associated with administering the speed enforcement pilot program established by this bill until it completes a full assessment of program design during the first phase of program development. For illustrative purposes, however, the department indicates that vendor contract expenditures associated with the program implemented in Pennsylvania have been approximately $4.4 million per year to operate 17 speed cameras. Furthermore, Caltrans notes that New York’s program, which is jointly operated by the state Department of Transportation and the New York State Thruway Authority, reported $6.83 million in vendor expenses in 2023 to operate 30 enforcement units. If Caltrans deployed 75 cameras and costs were comparable to the lower end of the scale of these costs, the department’s vendor expenses would be approximately $17 million annually, which would not include any necessary state operations and personnel costs to administer the program, including review of each individual citation (as required in the bill), conducting administrative hearings for appeals, establishing and maintaining call centers, and developing and maintaining information technology and information security systems.
While this bill is modeled after recent legislation enacted to authorize specified cities to conduct automated speed enforcement pilot projects, this bill presents several significant challenges for Caltrans that would not apply to systems established on the municipal level. First and foremost among these is that, unlike cities, Caltrans does not have the internal operational infrastructure or personnel to issue and process traffic citations. The bill provides authority to contract with vendors for both the procurement of camera systems and for the processing of citations, but the bill requires Caltrans to oversee, maintain, control, and have final decision over all enforcement activities, including a requirement that Caltrans employees issue the actual notices of violation. Another key difference is that Caltrans would be operating cameras throughout the state on a dynamic basis, as construction and maintenance zones are temporary in nature. However, if a person who receives a notice of violation wishes to appeal that notice through the administrative hearing process established by the bill, it is unclear where those hearings would be held, and whether they could feasibly be conducted in each jurisdiction in which citations are issued. Cities, on the other hand, would operate cameras in fixed locations within their jurisdictional boundaries, and can administer those hearings in municipal buildings in the same geographic area as where the enforcement action occurred. The costs for Caltrans to establish the necessary operational infrastructure to administer an automated enforcement program from the ground up, as specified in the bill, would be significant.
-- END --
Senator Thomas Umberg, Chair
2025-2026 Regular Session
Bill No: AB 289 (Author:Haney)
Version: June 25, 2025
Hearing Date: July 15, 2025
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
Consultant: AM
SUBJECT
State highway work zone speed safety program
DIGEST
This bill establishes an automated traffic enforcement program for state highway work zones.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
California has taken an incremental approach at phasing in automated enforcement of certain laws. Starting in 1994, the Legislature authorized automated rail crossing enforcement systems, recognizing the potential fatal consequences of the relevant violations. Over the following years, the trend moved to red-light cameras under a trial basis that was then made permanent. Next, a very limited pilot was authorized in San Francisco to install cameras on public transit vehicles, for the first time explicitly authorizing automated enforcement of parking violations, but limited to transit-only lanes. This law has since been extended state-wide indefinitely. Current law also authorizes cameras on street sweeping vehicles, and just last session, a pilot project was authorized in six cities to deploy automated speed enforcement systems and along the Pacific Coast Highway.
Automated enforcement can provide more thorough enforcement of certain laws and reduce the need for employees conducting such enforcement, a cost savings measure. However, with these benefits come concerns regarding due process, privacy, and equity. Furthering the reach of automated surveillance should arguably be gradual, thoughtful, and done with an understanding of, and countermeasures to prevent, potential unintended consequences. Such enforcement gathers personal data, may reduce the judicious enforcement of relevant laws, and has the ability to create a perverse incentive for governments that stand to financially benefit from increased citations.
This bill establishes an automated traffic enforcement program for state highway work zones. The bill is supported by several labor organizations, including the California State Council of Laborers, the California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers, and United Contractors, advocacy organizations for the construction industry, advocacy organizations for motorists, and Fiona Ma, the California State Treasurer. The bill is opposed by the National Motorists Association. It passed out of the Senate Transportation Committee on a 13 to 2 vote.
PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW
Existing law:
- Authorizes the use of an automated enforcement system for enforcement of red light violations by a governmental agency, subject to specific requirements and limitations. (Veh. Code § 21455.5.)
- Establishes the Active Transportation Program (ATP), a grant program administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation, such as walking and biking. (Sts. & Hy. Code § 2380.)
- Authorizes the designation of “safety corridors” for up to one-fifth of a local jurisdiction’s streets with the highest number of injuries and fatalities. Authorizes jurisdictions to lower speed limits in safety corridors by 5 mph from the existing speed limit established by an engineering and traffic survey. (Veh. Code § 22358.7.)
- Provides that a person is “indigent” for purposes of parking violations if the person meets specified income criteria or the person receives specified public benefits. (Veh. Code § 40220(c).)
- Authorizes a public transit operator to install automated forward facing parking control devices on city-owned or district-owned public transit vehicles for the purpose of video imaging parking violations occurring in transit-only traffic lanes and at transit stops. Existing law defines a “transit-only traffic lane” to mean any designated transit-only lane on which use is restricted to mass transit vehicles, or other designated vehicles including taxis and vanpools, during posted times. (Veh. Code § 40240(a), (h).)
- States that citations shall only be issued for violations captured during the posted hours of operation for a transit-only traffic lane. Existing law requires designated employees to review video image recordings for the purpose of determining whether a parking violation occurred in a transit-only traffic lane, and permits alleged violators to review the video image evidence of the alleged violation during normal business hours at no cost. (Veh. Code § 40240(a), (c), (d).)
- Requires automated forward facing parking control devices to be angled and focused so as to capture video images of parking violations and not unnecessarily capture identifying images of other drivers, vehicles, and pedestrians. Existing law requires the devices to record the date and time of the violation at the same time video images are captured, and provides that video image records are confidential and shall not be used or accessed for any purposes not related to the enforcement of parking violations occurring in transit-only traffic lanes. (Veh. Code § 40240(a), (f).)
- Authorizes the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach, and Glendale to establish a five-year speed safety system pilot program. (Veh. Code § 22425.)
- Authorizes the City of Malibu to establish a five-year speed safety system pilot program on the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). (Veh. Code § 22435.)
This bill:
- Authorizes the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a program for automated speed enforcement that utilizes up to 75 speed safety systems, to be operated by Caltrans in state highway work zones.
- “State highway work zone” means a state highway construction or maintenance area, during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted through or around that area pursuant to Section 21367 of the Vehicle Code.
- Requires the systems to meet the following in order to be utilized:
- Clearly identifies the presence of the speed safety system by signs stating “Photo Enforced,” along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system. The signs shall be visible to traffic traveling on the highway from the direction of travel for which the system is utilized, and shall be posted at locations as may be determined necessary by the department after consultation with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee.
- Identifies the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the department’s internet website, which shall be updated whenever the department changes locations of enforcement.
- Ensures that the speed safety system is regularly inspected no less than once every 60 days, and certifies that the system is installed and operating properly. Each camera unit shall be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, and at least once per year by an independent calibration laboratory. Documentation of the regular inspection, operation, and calibration of the system shall be retained for at least 180 days after the date on which the system has been permanently removed from use.
- Utilizes fixed or mobile speed safety systems that provide real-time notification to the driver when violations are detected.
- A speed safety system records speed violations and actively issues citations only when construction or maintenance workers are present in the state highway work zone.
- Requires Caltrans, prior to enforcing speed laws utilizing speed safety systems, to do both of the following:
- Administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of the program, which shall include public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. The public information campaign shall include the information on when systems will begin detecting violations in state highway work zones, and Caltrans’ website, where additional information about the program can be obtained. Notwithstanding the above, no further public announcement by the department shall be required for additional systems that may be added to the program.
- Issue warning notices rather than notices of violation for violations detected by the speed safety system during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement under the program. A vehicle’s first violation for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit shall be a warning notice.
- Requires Caltrans to adopt written guidelines for the use of speed safety systems prior to entering into an agreement regarding a speed safety system, purchasing or leasing equipment for a program, or implementing a program. In developing the guidelines, the department must consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and relevant stakeholder organizations, including, but not limited to, racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups.
- The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
- A statement of the specific purpose for the speed safety system, the uses that are authorized and uses that are prohibited, and the procedures required prior to that use.
- An identification of the data or information that can be collected by the speed safety system and the individuals who can access or use the collected information, and the processes related to the access, transfer, or use of the information.
- The allowable uses for information collected and maintained is limited to the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program only.
- Procedures for the retention and disposal of data collected by the speed safety system.
- Procedures for the screening and issuing of notices of violation.
- Procedures for the storage of confidential information to ensure compliance with confidentiality requirements. Requires the governing body of the designated jurisdiction to approve an automated traffic enforcement system impact report, which shall be made available to the public at least 30 days before adoption by the governing body at a public hearing. The governing body must collaborate with relevant local stakeholders, including racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups, in developing the report.
- The written guidelines shall be made available for public review at least 30 calendar days prior to adoption. Upon adoption of the guidelines, the department shall post the final adopted guidelines on its internet website. The written guidelines shall include all of the following:
- Requires notices of violation to include a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, identify the specific section of the Vehicle Code violated, the camera location, and the date and time when the violation occurred. Notices of violation shall exclude images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
- Provides that the photographic evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code.
- Requires records made by a system to be confidential. Caltrans can only use and allow access to these records for the purposes authorized by these provisions or assess the impacts of the system. Data about the number of violations issued and the speeds at which they were issued is not considered an administrative record required not to be disclosed by this section.
- Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration of speed safety systems and enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. The department and its contractors and agents shall establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of these records consistent with existing confidentiality protections.
- The photographic evidence that is obtained from a speed safety system that does not result in the issuance of a notice of violation shall be destroyed within five business days after it was first made.
- Information collected and maintained by the department to administer the program shall only be used to administer the program, and shall not be disclosed to any other persons, including, but not limited to, any other state or federal governmental agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by a court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
- The registered owner or an individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review and obtain a copy of the photograph of the alleged violation.
- Prohibits the use of facial recognition technology in conjunction with a speed safety system.
- Requires a contract between Caltrans and a manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems to allow Caltrans to purchase materials, lease equipment, and contract for processing services from the manufacturer or supplier based on the services rendered on a monthly schedule or another schedule agreed upon by the department and contractor.
- The contract shall not allow for payment or compensation based on the number of notices of violation issued, or as a percentage of revenue generated, from the use of the system.
- The contract shall include a provision that all data collected from the speed safety system is confidential, and shall prohibit the manufacturer or supplier of the contracted speed safety system from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data, except as specifically authorized.
- Caltrans is required to oversee, maintain control, and have the final decision over all enforcement activities, including the determination of when a notice of violation should be issued.
- Caltrans may contract with a vendor for the processing of notices of violation after an employee of the department has issued a notice of violation. The vendor shall be a separate legal and corporate entity from, and not related to or affiliated in any manner with, the manufacturer or supplier of speed safety systems used by the department. Any contract between the department and a vendor to provide processing services may include a provision for the payment of compensation based on the number of notices of violation processed by the vendor.
- Requires the speed safety system, to the extent feasible, to be angled and focused so as to only capture rear license plate photographs of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
- Prohibits contractual arrangements with third parties that provide for payment or other compensation based on the number of citations or as a percentage of revenue generated. A designated jurisdiction that proposes to install or operate an automated traffic enforcement system shall not consider revenue generation, beyond recovering its actual costs of operating the system, as a factor when considering whether or not to install or operate a system within its local jurisdiction.
- Requires a designated jurisdiction to publish a report that includes, but is not limited to, all of the following information, if this information is in the possession of, or readily available to, the designated jurisdiction:
- The number of alleged violations captured by the systems they operate.
- The number of citations issued by the issuing agency based on information collected from the automated traffic enforcement system.
- For citations identified, the number of violations that involved traveling straight through the intersection, turning right, and turning left.
- The number and percentage of citations that are dismissed.
- The funds generated from the automated traffic enforcement systems.
- Subjects violations to a $50 civil penalty for driving at a speed of 11 to 15 miles per hour over the posted speed limit, $100 for driving at a speed of 16 to 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit, $200 for driving at a speed of 26 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit, or $500 for driving at a speed of 100 miles per hour or more. The bill prohibits a suspension of license or a violation point as a result of being assessed a violation.
- Requires the notice of violation to be in writing and issued to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days of the date of the violation. The notice of violation shall include specified information, including:
- The violation, including reference to the speed law that was violated, the speed of the vehicle, the speed limit for the road on which the violation occurred.
- The date, approximate time, and location where the violation occurred.
- The vehicle license number and the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle.
- A statement that payment is required to be made no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing, or that the violation may be contested.
- The amount of the civil penalty due and the procedures for payment of the civil penalty or for contesting the notice of violation.
- An affidavit of nonliability, and information of what constitutes nonliability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the processor.
- A phone number that the recipient may use to request additional information about the program.
- A proof of service.
- Provides that a person cannot be assessed a civil penalty if they are subject to criminal penalties for the same act.
- Requires moneys generated from the issuance of the program to be deposited in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, which is created in the State Transportation Fund. Moneys in the account are continuously appropriated to Caltrans for the administration of the program, the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program, and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
- Authorizes a recipient, no later than 30 calendar days from the date of mailing of a notice of violation, to request an initial review of the notice by the issuing agency. The request may be made by telephone, in writing, electronically, or in person. There shall be no charge for this review. If, following the initial review, the issuing agency is satisfied that the violation did not occur, or that extenuating circumstances make cancellation of the notice of violation appropriate in the interest of justice, the issuing agency shall cancel the notice of violation. The results of the initial review shall be mailed to the person contesting the notice within 60 days, and, if cancellation of the notice does not occur following that review, include a reason for that denial, notification of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and notice of the procedures.
- Permits a person contesting the notice of violation who is dissatisfied with the results of the initial review to request an administrative hearing. The person is still required to pay the amount of the civil penalty to the processing agency. The issuing agency shall adopt a written procedure to allow a person to request an administrative hearing without payment of the civil penalty upon satisfactory proof of an inability to pay the amount due. There shall be no additional charge for this hearing.
- Requires the administrative hearing to be held within 90 calendar days of request for a hearing, as provided. The administrative hearing process shall include specified features, including:
- The person requesting a hearing shall have the choice of a hearing upon written declaration, video conference, or in person.
- The administrative hearing shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures established by the issuing agency and approved by the governing body or chief executive officer of the issuing agency. The hearing shall provide an independent, objective, fair, and impartial review of contested automated traffic enforcement violations.
- Examiners shall have a minimum of 20 hours of training, which can be accomplished through a program developed and provided by, or for, the agency.
- Provides that the employee of the designated jurisdiction who issues a notice of violation shall not be required to participate in an administrative hearing. To establish a violation, the issuing agency shall not be required to produce any evidence other than, in proper form, the notice of violation or copy thereof, including the photograph of the vehicle’s license plate, and information received from the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the registered owner of the vehicle. The documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the violation. If the designated jurisdiction meets its initial burden, the recipient of the notice of violation may present any evidence and argument in defense.
- Provides that, within 30 days after personal delivery or mailing of the final decision, the contestant may seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the case shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the processing agency’s file in the case on appeal shall be lodged by the designated agency at the designated agency’s expense and be received into evidence. A copy of the notice of violation shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the notice.
- Provides that the conduct of the hearing on appeal is a subordinate judicial duty that may be performed by a commissioner or other subordinate judicial officer at the direction of the presiding judge of the court.
- Requires the program to offer the ability for indigent automated traffic enforcement system violation recipients to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments and shall limit the processing fee.
- Establishes fees for an appeal of a hearing officer’s determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated traffic enforcement violation.
COMMENTS
- Stated need for the bill
The author writes:
AB 289 is a significant step toward safeguarding the lives of construction workers on our highways, where speeding vehicles pose a significant risk to both workers and motorists. By harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will save lives by reducing construction zone crashes and creating a safer environment for all.
- The history of automated enforcement
While some counties may have installed automated traffic enforcement systems at an earlier date, legislative authorization for automated enforcement procedures relating to traffic violations began in 1994 with SB 1802 (Rosenthal, Ch. 1216, Stats. 1994). That bill authorized the use of “automated rail crossing enforcement systems” to enforce prohibitions on drivers from passing around or under rail crossings while the gates are closed. (Veh. Code § 22451.) Those systems functioned by photographing the front license plate and the driver of vehicles who proceeded around closed rail crossing gates in violation of the Vehicle Code provisions. The drivers of photographed vehicles, in turn, received citations for their violations.
In 1995, the Legislature authorized a three-year trial for red light camera enforcement programs. (SB 833, Kopp, Ch. 922, Stats. 1995.) Using similar technology, that program used sensors connected to cameras to take photographs of the front license plate and driver upon entering an intersection on a red light. That program was permanently extended in 1998 by SB 1136 (Kopp, Ch. 54, Stats. 1998).
In 2007, the Legislature authorized a four-year pilot project where San Francisco was authorized to install video cameras on city-owned public transit vehicles for the purpose of video imaging parking violations occurring in transit-only traffic lanes. (AB 101, Ma, Ch. 377, Stats. 2007.) Three years later, the Legislature authorized a five-year statewide pilot project to allow local public agencies to use automated parking enforcement systems for street sweeping-related violations. (AB 2567, Bradford, Ch. 471, Stats. 2010.) In 2011, the Legislature extended San Francisco’s automated transit-only lane enforcement program for an additional year, and required the City and County to provide a report to the Transportation and Judiciary Committees of the Legislature no later than March 1, 2015, describing the effectiveness of the pilot program and its impact on privacy. (AB 1041, Ma, Ch. 325, Stats. 2011.) Following the receipt of that report, San Francisco’s transit-only lane enforcement program was permanently extended in AB 1287 (Chiu, Ch. 485, Stats. 2015).
The following year, AB 1051 (Hancock, Ch. 427, Stats. 2016) authorized AC Transit to operate an automated transit-only lane enforcement program similar to San Francisco’s with a sunset on January 1, 2022. AC Transit was required to provide to the Transportation, Privacy and Consumer Protection, and Judiciary Committees of the Legislature an evaluation report of the enforcement system’s effectiveness, impact on privacy, cost to implement, and generation of revenue, no later than January 1, 2021. (Veh. Code § 40240.5.) AB 917 (Bloom, Ch. 709, Stats. 2021) expanded automated enforcement of parking violations using forward-facing cameras on transit vehicles to include both transit-only lanes and transit stops and extended the authorization statewide until January 1, 2027.
AB 645 (Friedman, Ch. 808, Stats. 2023) authorized six localities to deploy speed safety systems in designated roadways, namely official “safety corridors,” school zones, and streets a local authority has determined to have had a high number of incidents for motor vehicle speed contests or motor vehicle exhibitions of speed. Last year, AB 1297 (Allen, Ch. 631, Stats. 2024) established a speed safety system pilot project for the PCH that was substantially similar to the one in AB 645.
- Expanding automated enforcement to speed violations to highway work zones
This bill establishes an automated traffic enforcement program for state highway work zones. It closely models recent laws, specifically AB 645 and AB 1297. AB 645 passed this Committee on a vote of 10 to 1. AB 1297 was not heard by this Committee.
The National Motorist Association is opposed unless amended and seeks numerous amendments to the bill to address various concerns. These include, among many others:
- Arguments that there is no demonstrated need for the bill;
- Assertions that additional engineering countermeasures would provide greater compliance with speed laws than automated speed enforcement;
- Concerns that before AB 645’s automated speed enforcement project has even launched, the Legislature is already authorizing more automated speed programs without any data or feedback on how the initial program is working;
- Due process concerns with the owner of the vehicle being responsible for the civil penalty, even if they were not driving;
- Due process concerns with enforcing traffic violations through civil enforcement instead of the traditional model, fairly noting that an administrative hearing affords less process rights than a hearing in superior court;
- Insufficient reporting requirements;
- Insufficient calibration requirements for cameras used under the program; and
- Insufficient limiting of bill’s provisions to active work zones.
- Right to Privacy
The California Constitution provides that all people have inalienable rights, including the right to pursue and obtain privacy. (Cal. Const., art. I, Sec. 1.) The California Supreme Court writes:
The right of privacy is vitally important. It derives, in this state, not only from the protections against unreasonable searches and seizures guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment and article I, section 13, but also from article I, section 1, of our State Constitution. Homage to personhood is the foundation for individual rights protected by our state and national Constitutions. (In re William G. (1985) 40 Cal.3d 550, 563.)
This Committee has previously expressed concern about the privacy implications of automated imaging that records not only vehicles, but also individuals on sidewalks and commercial and residential property adjacent to the roadway. To provide a layer of protection, the information being collected as part of these programs is deemed confidential and not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act.
There are retention limitations, administrative records and photographs can be kept up to three years in certain circumstances, and this provision provides only to information that the vehicle was cited and convicted of a violation. The bill also requires the speed safety system, to the extent feasible, to be angled and focused so as to only capture photographs of speeding violations and shall not capture identifying images of other drivers, vehicles, or pedestrians.
There are also use limitations placed on the evidence, allowing public agencies to use information collected and maintained through a speed safety system only to administer the program. The bill prohibits disclosure of information collected to any other persons, including any other state or federal government agency or official, for any other purpose, except as required by state or federal law, court order, or in response to a subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
California generally recognizes that public access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental and necessary right. At the same time, the state recognizes that this right must be balanced against the right to privacy. The general right of access to public records may, therefore, be limited where the Legislature finds a public policy reason necessitating the limit on access. In light of the privacy interests implicated by the bill, the bill’s finding on the need for limiting access to public records seems warranted.
- Equity, due process, and effectiveness versus revenue generation
This Committee has also previously expressed concern over the use of automated enforcement programs not as a means to promote roadway safety, but as a mechanism for revenue generation and how that might affect the fairness and equity of the program. Ultimately, there is concern that those paying for whatever revenue generation there is will be disproportionately low-income communities who tend to bear the brunt of the cost of citations. Depending on how authorized local agencies administer this new power, it could lead to an unreasonable or inflexible mode of enforcement that would not necessarily be the case with enforcement by officers present to witness a speeding violation.
Photographic evidence necessarily limits the field of view of an observer, and prevents consideration of relevant facts that would otherwise be available to an officer who sees an event transpire in person. In addition, the holistic assessment that can be performed by an actual person on the ground allows for more thoughtful and judicious enforcement of speeding violations. Ultimately, the technology and process will inevitably lead to errors. Yet, unlike in criminal cases, the civil enforcement regime established by the bill does not afford the same procedural protections. For these reasons, people may be less likely to identify errors in the technology or process that led to their notice of violation. The bill also provides that photographic evidence stored by a speed safety system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant.
In regards to the due process concerns, the opposition writes:
[…] Currently, work zone speeding tickets are dealt with in a Court of Law. This means that there are procedures in place to determine Guilt or Innocence and Discovery of the relevant facts. Decisions of Lower Courts can be reviewed, according to the law, by higher Courts.
An Administrative Hearing is NOT “the same” as a trial in Superior Court. Administrative Hearings operate under rules promulgated by the department issuing the ticket. “Administrative” means that they get to write their own rules, including lowering the standard of proof required for conviction to a “preponderance of the evidence” rather than “beyond a reasonable doubt”. The burden of proof and the burden of producing evidence is place on the defendant essentially turning the assumption of innocence on its head. Tickets under AB-289 are made prima facie evidence, removing any requirement that the government prove their case, the exact opposite of our most cherished principles of law in America.
Once the photo based tickets are jurisdictionally moved out of Court, all the normal rules of a Court of law (such as the Discovery rules) go away. Motions for Discovery, and Subpoenas to compel testimony are no longer permitted. No appeals of the department’s decision are permitted, and ONLY when the department has made a final determination, may a Court review the record and the proceedings. This still is not an Appeal as such is contemplated under the Criminal Code. The only thing the Court may consider is if the department made such determination properly under the rules set up by the department.
AB-289 puts photo-based tickets into an Administrative Forum and re-writes the rules, literally from scratch, in such a way as to make challenge of any photo enforced ticket almost irrelevant. Those ticketed will not be able to demand proof of authentication, challenge whether the work zone speed limit was set properly, or find out when the devices were last serviced.
Civil Citations and Administrative hearings for photo ticket cases is a denial of equal protection, with lesser due process permitted for photo camera tickets than for speeding citations issued by live police officers. […]
The bill does provide for some notice to affected communities. It requires a 30-day public information campaign before a system can be deployed. Additionally, the bill provides that only warning notices may be issued for the first 60 days, and thereafter, a vehicle’s first violation may only be issued a warning notice where the violation is for traveling 11 to 15 miles per hour over the limit.
The civil penalties are also capped depending on the severity of the violation, $50 for violations of 11 to 15 miles per hour above the posted speed limit up to $500 for driving 100 miles per hour or more. In addition, the bill requires Caltrans to offer violation recipients who are indigent, or who otherwise provide evidence satisfactory to the examiner or Caltrans, of an inability to pay the civil penalty in full, the option to pay applicable fines and penalties over a period of time under a payment plan with monthly installments not to exceed $25. Any processing fee to participate in a payment plan is prohibited from exceeding $5. An administrative hearing is provided to contest or appeal any violation.
- Statements in support
A coalition of trade unions, contractors, and other transportation related organizations, including the United Contractors, the California State Council of Laborers, the California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, write in support, stating:
Highway construction and maintenance work is one of the most hazardous occupations in the United States. In 2021, more than 9,500 collisions occurred in construction zones on California highways. This resulted in an estimated 2,971 injuries and 73 fatalities, including both construction workers and drivers. While contractors, labor unions, state agencies, and law enforcement are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be dangerous for our workers who risk injury and death by speeding vehicles. […]
For 20 years, the State of California has identified work zone deaths and serious injuries as a road safety challenge area in its Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The SHSP, which was established as a requirement in federal law in 2005, is a data-driven, multi-year comprehensive plan that establishes statewide goals, objectives, and key emphasis areas and which is developed by the State department of transportation in a cooperative process with public and private sector stakeholders. Despite California’s longstanding focus on the issue of highway work zone safety and its development and implementation of numerous safety countermeasures to address this persistent safety issue, deaths and serious injuries within highway work zones have remained stubbornly and unacceptably high. Worse yet, California is now on the wrong trajectory. Following a small decrease during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, deaths and serious injuries in highway work zones have steadily increased since 2020.
While numerous safety initiatives have been proposed and implemented in highway work zones over the last two decades, one proven safety countermeasure has been unavailable in California. Automated speed enforcement is proven to reduce speeds, increase driver safety, and save lives. In response to the increasing fatal crashes and injuries in work zones, at least 16 other states have implemented ASE through active construction work zones. […]
AB 289 also includes the data privacy protections that mirror or exceed those in the existing city pilot programs, which require warning signs, public awareness campaigns, transparency and accountability, data privacy, and reporting to the Legislature on safety improvements and other outcomes. In addition to these specific statutory requirements, AB 289 requires Caltrans to consult with stakeholders, including privacy and equity groups, to further develop and refine protections for motorists’ privacy through guidelines that must be adopted prior to contracting for the acquisition or operation of automated speed enforcement systems.
California’s construction workers should not have to put their lives at risk to maintain and build our state’s highways; especially when California could authorize an available tool to equitably and effectively slow down drivers, reduce collisions, and ultimately save lives of construction workers and the motoring public alike. […]
- Statements in opposition
The National Motorist Association writes in opposition, stating:
[…] Notwithstanding the claims made by the bill’s author and proponents, severe injuries and fatalities involving highway construction and maintenance workers due to motorists speeding in state highway work zones are, thankfully, relatively rare. The NMA evaluated fatal and severe injury collisions occurring in work zones from 2011 through 2020 from the CHP’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Reporting System (SWITRS) database. As there is no specific data point for collisions involving “highway workers” in the SWITRS database, we used collisions involving “pedestrians” as a proxy. […]
The legislation set precise guidance as to where and how speed cameras could be used in the State. Before that pilot program has even begun, legislators are already attempting to expand the use of ticketing cameras on state highways throughout the State. Either the camera program authorized under AB-645 is actually a pilot, honestly intended to test the use of speed cameras in California, or it is not. Was the entire exercise of promoting and negotiating a pilot program just a ruse to open the door to ever more automated ticketing? Or will we be guided by ethical principles and refrain from approving more speed camera usage until AB-645’s pilot program results are known? There is no urgency to authorize ticketing cameras on California highways, specifically in light of the data provided above, which clearly shows that little is to be gained by rushing to implement this abusive technology. […]
SUPPORT
AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah
Associated General Contractors of California
Automobile Club of Southern California
Blue Line Solutions, LLC
California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers
California Alliance for Jobs
California Asphalt Pavement Association
California Construction & Industrial Materials Association
California State Council of Laborers
California State Treasurer, Fiona Ma
Rebuild SoCal Partnership
Southern California Contractors Association
State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
Transportation California
United Contractors
OPPOSITION
National Motorist Association
RELATED LEGISLATION
Pending Legislation: SB 720 (Ashby, 2025) authorizes the use of red light cameras to issue civil instead of criminal violations for failing to obey a traffic signal. This bill is pending in the Assembly Transportation Committee.
Prior Legislation:
SB 1297 (Allen, Ch. 631, Stats. 2024) authorized a pilot program for the city of Malibu to operate five speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway.
AB 645 (Friedman, Ch. 808, Stats. of 2023) authorized a speed safety system pilot program in six specified cities.
AB 2809 (Haney, 2024) would have authorized the California Transportation Agency to establish guidelines for a work zone speed safety program using automated speed enforcement. That bill was held in the Assembly Transportation Committee.
PRIOR VOTES
Senate Transportation Committee (Ayes 13, Noes 2)
Assembly Floor (Ayes 71, Noes 3)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 13, Noes 1)
Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee (Ayes 11, Noes 2)
Assembly Transportation Committee (Ayes 15, Noes 0)
**************
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 289
Author:(Haney)
As Amended Ver:May 5, 2025
2/3 vote
SUMMARY
Authorizes the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a five year work zone speed safety pilot program to enforce speeding violations in highway maintenance and construction work zones using speed safety systems.
Major Provisions
- Authorizes Caltrans to deploy 75 speed safety systems to enforce speed limits in state highway work zones.
- Provides that a speed safety system may only issue citations when construction or maintenance workers are present.
- Includes the following provisions that are nearly identical to the existing speed safety pilot program on the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) in Malibu, et al.:
- Requires every speed safety system to have a sign stating ″photo enforced″ along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system;
- Requires a public information program at least 30 days prior to the implementation of the camera program and that for the first 60 days of enforcement only warning notices be issued;
- Requires that the local authority establish guidelines for the screening and issuing of notices of violation and for the processing and storage of confidential information. The notice shall include a clear photograph of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, the Vehicle Code violation, the location, and the date and time the violation occurred;
- Provides for the following fines to the owner of the registered vehicle:
- $50 for a speed violation from 11 to 15 mph over the posted speed limit;
- $100 for a speed violation from 16 to 25 mph over the posted speed limit;
- $200 for a speed violation of 26 mph or more over the posted speed limit; and,
- $500 for traveling at a speed of 100 mph or greater.
- The fine is a civil penalty and shall not result in a loss of the driving privilege or in a violation point being assessed against the violator;
- Requires indigent individuals be offered community service in lieu of the fine, or the fine is reduced by 80%. The fine is reduced by 50% for individuals up to 250% above the federal poverty level;
- The vehicle′s first violation results in a warning, not a fine, if that violation is for driving not more than 15 mph over the posted speed limit;
- Continuously appropriates citation revenue to the Safe Highway Work Zone Account. Funding is directed towards the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (MAZEEP)
- Requires Caltrans to issue a report two years after the program has been implemented and annually thereafter.
- Provides that the speed safety system under this pilot may operate for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner.
COMMENTS
AB 645 (Friedman) Chapter 808, Statues of 2023 established a speed safety system program in California and authorized the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to operate a limited number of speed safety systems for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner. AB 645 explicitly prohibited cities from operating cameras on roads where the California Highway Patrol (CHP) had jurisdiction, and limited camera placement to the cities high injury networks, school zones and streets with a high number of calls for motor vehicle exhibitions of speed and speed contests. SB 1297 (Allen), Chapter 631, Statutes of 2024 created a separate pilot program for the city of Malibu to operate five speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway.
As of the writing of this analysis, only San Francisco has begun to pilot speed cameras. San Jose was recently awarded nearly $9 million from a federal grant to purchase speed safety systems under a program created by the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). San Jose has indicated that their program will likely start this year.
This bill allows Caltrans to use speed cameras in work zones where maintenance and construction crews are actively working. This bill is nearly identical to AB 645 and SB 1297, and authorizes the use of up to 75 speed safety systems, or around 10% of the total number of active construction zones in the state. Unlike AB 645 which authorizes speed cameras on local streets and roads, this bill authorizes speed cameras on a state highway.
Speed safety systems can save lives. According to The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), a 2010 review of 28 studies of automated speed enforcement (ASE) in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand determined a lower number of crashes after ASE implementation. These studies reported reductions of 8% to 49% for all crashes and reductions of 11% to 44% for crashes causing serious injuries or fatalities.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) ″Crash-based evaluations from the United States and Canada have also reported safety benefits from speed safety cameras programs in urban areas. Shin et al. (2009) examined effects of a fixed camera enforcement program applied to a 6.5-mile urban freeway section through Scottsdale, Arizona. The speed limit on the enforced freeway was 65 mph; the enforcement trigger was set to 76 mph. Total target (off-peak/free-flow)crashes were reduced by an estimated 44 to 54%, injury crashes by 28 to 48%, and property damage only crashes by 46 to 56% during the 9-month program period.″
Fourteen states currently have permanent or pilot programs authorizing the use of speed safety cameras in work zones. According to a report issued by the Delaware Department of Transportation, the speed safety cameras resulted in a 46% reduction in total crashes and a 38% reduction in injury crashes. The average speed was reduced by nearly six mph. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, in the three years prior to the implementation of their pilot program, an average of 1,800 crashes occurred annually in works zones. By 2022 and 2023, three and four years into the program, the number crashes were reduced to below 1,300. The total percentage of speeding vehicles in camera enforced work zones dropped 29%. In July of 2022 only 15% of drivers were going over the speed limit.
The New York Department of Transportation notes that ″According to the Fatality Analysis Reporting Systems (FARS) from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in 2020, 863 people died in 780 fatal crashes in work zones nationally, marking a 10-year high for deaths and crashes in road construction areas. These deaths occur not only to workers within the work zone, but also to the motorists involved in the crash.″
According to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), from 2005-14, crashes in which a law enforcement officer indicated a vehicle′s speed was a factor resulted in 112,580 fatalities, representing 31% of all traffic fatalities. NTSB notes that speeding increases the risk of a crash and the severity of injuries.
According to the Author
″AB 289 is a significant step toward safeguarding the lives of construction workers on our highways, where speeding vehicles pose a significant risk to both workers and motorists. By harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will save lives by reducing construction zone crashes and creating a safer environment for California′s highway construction workers and drivers.″
Arguments in Support
Transportation California, California Alliance for Jobs, and the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, writing in support of this bill, argue ″Highway construction and maintenance work is one of the most hazardous occupations in the United States. In 2021, more than 9,500 collisions occurred in construction zones on California highways. This resulted in an estimated 2,971 injuries and 73 fatalities, including both construction workers and drivers.
While contractors, labor unions, state agencies, and law enforcement are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be dangerous for our workers who risk injury and death by speeding vehicles.
National data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show that construction and extraction and transportation and material moving— both sectors which are involved in highway construction work—are among the most dangerous occupations, trailing only farming, fishing and forestry in the rate of work-related deaths. BLS data also demonstrate the disproportionate rate of workplace fatalities, with Black and Latino workers experiencing a higher rate of fatal injuries than workers at large.
Notably, transportation incidents were the highest cause of fatalities for both groups, accounting for the deaths of 278 Black workers and 439 Latino workers in 2022. While these statistics include occupations beyond those which are directly involved in highway construction projects, they demonstrate the unique risks faced by California′s diverse construction industry workforce.
While numerous safety initiatives have been proposed and implemented in highway work zones over the last two decades, one proven safety countermeasure has been unavailable in California. Automated speed enforcement is proven to reduce speeds, increase driver safety, and save lives.″
Arguments in Opposition
The National Motorists Association, writing in opposition to this bill, argues ″Notwithstanding the claims made by the bill′s author and proponents, severe injuries and fatalities involving highway construction and maintenance workers due to motorists speeding in state highway work zones are, thankfully, relatively rare.
Proponents of work zone ticketing cameras make the erroneous assumption that motorists driving at excessive speeds in work zones cause a significant number of injuries and fatalities to highway construction workers. We have shown this assumption to be false. However, one should not entirely discount concerns regarding highway worker safety due to motorists traveling within the work zone. If officials desire closer adherence to the work zone speed limit, Caltrans should employ additional engineering countermeasures to gain greater compliance. These engineering solutions are at least as effective, if not more effective, than sending a ticket in the mail weeks after an alleged violation, and they have the added benefit of providing real-time protection to workers.″
FISCAL COMMENTS
″Presuming Caltrans acts on the authority this bill provides to it, Caltrans will face one-time costs to develop program guidelines, conduct training and outreach, procure (Caltrans assumes) up to 75 automated speed enforcement systems and install the systems and related signage and notifications. Caltrans could not estimate a dollar amount associated with these activities, but describes them as ″non-absorbable.″ It is reasonable to expect these one-time costs to be in the millions of dollars (special fund).
Over the longer term, through 2032, Caltrans will experience ongoing cost for activities such as system operations, maintenance, administrative hearings and reporting, with actual costs depending on the scale of implementation and volume of appeals. It reasonable to expect these costs to be in the high hundreds of thousands of dollars to low millions of dollars annually (special fund).
To some unknown extent, citation revenues, to be placed in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account this bill creates, may offset the costs described above.″
VOTES
ASM TRANSPORTATION: 15-0-1
YES: Wilson, Davies, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Carrillo, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Jackson, Lowenthal, Macedo, Papan, Ransom, Rogers, Ward
ABS, ABST OR NV: Lackey
ASM PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION: 11-2-2
YES: Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Bryan, Flora, Irwin, Lowenthal, Ortega, Petrie-Norris, Ward, Wicks, Wilson
NO: DeMaio, Patterson
ABS, ABST OR NV: Dixon, Pellerin
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 13-1-1
YES: Wicks, Arambula, Calderon, Caloza, Dixon, Elhawary, Fong, Mark González, Hart, Pacheco, Pellerin, Solache, Tangipa
NO: Ta
ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez
UPDATED
VERSION: May 5, 2025
CONSULTANT: David Sforza / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093 FN: 0000554
Date of Hearing: May 21, 2025
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Buffy Wicks, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 289
Author:(Haney) – As Amended Ver:May 5, 2025
Policy Committee: | Transportation | Vote: | 15 - 0 |
Privacy and Consumer Protection | 11 - 2 | ||
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill authorizes the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a program for automated speed enforcement in highway work zones through the use of speed safety systems—radar or laser systems or any other device that utilizes automated equipment to detect speeding.
Among other provisions, this bill:
- Authorizes Caltrans to establish a program for automated speed enforcement in highway work zones through the use of speed safety systems—radar or laser systems or any other device that utilizes automated equipment to detect speeding—that utilizes up to 75 speed safety systems, to be operated by Caltrans and to be operational for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner.
- Provides numerous requirements and parameters of the program, including, among other things, that (a) such a system and the work zone in which it is deployed be clearly identified by signs stating “Photo Enforced” and other prominent signals, (b) the system record speed violations only when workers are present, (c) Caltrans run a public information campaign prior to utilizing a speed safety system and issue warning notices instead of notices of violation during the first 60 calendar days of enforcement and (d), a notice of violation provide a clear image of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only.
- Provides the following penalties for speed violations detected by the system: (a) 11 to 15 miles per hour (mph) over the limit—a warning notice for a first violation, then $50 for any violation thereafter; (b) 16 to 25 mph over the limit—$100; (c) 26 mph or more over the limit—$200; and (d) driving 100 mph or faster—$500.
- Provides timeframes within which such a system must send notice of violation and parameters such notification must meet.
- Provides a process for a person to contest a violation, including the ability of a person to appeal the determination of a hearing officer in superior court, and sets the fee for superior court hearing at $25.
- Requires Caltrans to reduce by 80% the penalty of a person who is indigent, as defined, and to offer such a person the ability to pay a speed safety violation through monthly installments of no more than $25 and with a processing fee of no more than $5.
- Similarly, the bill requires Caltrans to reduce by 50% the penalty of a person who makes up to 250% above the poverty level.
- Makes specified requirements regarding the sharing, confidentiality and destruction of records in the program.
- Requires monies generated by the penalties be placed in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account, to be used by Caltrans to administer the program and for specified work zone safety programs.
- Requires Caltrans, two years after the commencement of the program and annually thereafter, to report to the Legislature evaluating the program.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Presuming Caltrans acts on the authority this bill provides to it, Caltrans will face one-time costs to develop program guidelines, conduct training and outreach, procure (Caltrans assumes) up to 75 automated speed enforcement systems and install the systems and related signage and notifications. Caltrans could not estimate a dollar amount associated with these activities, but describes them as “non-absorbable.” It is reasonable to expect these one-time costs to be in the millions of dollars (special fund).
Over the longer term, through 2032, Caltrans will experience ongoing cost for activities such as system operations, maintenance, administrative hearings and reporting, with actual costs depending on the scale of implementation and volume of appeals. It reasonable to expect these costs to be in the high hundreds of thousands of dollars to low millions of dollars annually (special fund).
To some unknown extent, citation revenues, to be placed in the Safe Highway Work Zone Account this bill creates, may offset the costs described above.
COMMENTS:
- Purpose. The author intends this bill to protect construction workers working on the state’s highways. According to the author:
AB 289 is a significant step toward safeguarding the lives of construction workers on our highways, where speeding vehicles pose a significant risk to both workers and motorists. By harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will save lives by reducing construction zone crashes and creating a safer environment for California’s highway construction workers and drivers.
- Background. According to the National Safety Council, vehicle miles traveled dropped 13% in 2020, but the mileage death rate went up 24%. And California’s roadways are especially deadly. According to the California Office of Traffic Safety, in 2018, 893 pedestrians were killed on California roadways, a 26% increase from 2014. Additionally, in 2018, more than 14,000 pedestrians were injured. The total number of pedestrian fatalities between 2009 and 2018 was 7,500, representing a pedestrian fatality rate that is almost 25% higher than the national average.
Many jurisdictions in the United States and in many other parts of the world use automated systems to detect speeding violations and enforce speeding laws. Until recently, California law, however, authorized the use of automated traffic enforcement systems only at railroad crossings and intersections to record violations of unlawful grade crossings and running of red lights. That changed when the Legislature passed AB 645 (Friedman), Chapter 808, Statutes of 2023, to authorize the use of automated speed systems in several California cities on a pilot program basis, so the state could assess the efficacy of speed cameras at reducing speed and collisions, as well as other effects and, possibly, harms resulting from use of such cameras. Notably, AB 645 expressly prohibited operation of automated speed systems on any roadway where the Commissioner of the CHP has full responsibility and primary jurisdiction for enforcement of traffic laws and investigation or traffic incidents.
Last year, the Legislature passed SB 1297 (Allen), Chapter 631, Statutes of 2024, to create another pilot program allowing the city of Malibu to operate five automated speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway.
The Legislature has yet to benefit from the experiences learned from these automated speed system pilot programs. The City and County of San Francisco is the only jurisdiction to install an automated speed system through use of the authority provided by AB 645, and has done so only recently. And the city of Malibu has yet to install such a system on the state highway, as authorized by SB 1297.
Nonetheless, supporters of this bill contend it is appropriation to also allow installation of automated speed safety systems in work zones on the state highway. Writing in support of this bill, a coalition of industry and labor organizations that perform roadwork describes this bill as “a significant step towards safeguarding the lives of construction workers working on our highways” and asserts that, “by harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE),” AB 289 will “reduce construction zone crashes and create a safer environment for California’s highway construction workers and for California drivers.”
In contrast, the National Motorists Association, the lone opponent to this bill, which describes itself as “representing the interests of over 27 million licensed drivers in California,” contends, among other things, that (a) there is no demonstrated safety need for this legislation because “severe injuries and fatalities involving highway construction and maintenance workers due to motorists speeding in state highway work zones are, thankfully, relatively rare,” (b) proper traffic engineering countermeasures are more effective than ticketing cameras and (c) the Legislature, through passage of AB 645 “created a five-year pilot program to test the effectiveness of automated speed ticketing cameras in California,” that has not yet begun and, therefore, the state has yet to learn from the program.
Analysis Prepared by: Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
Date of Hearing: May 1, 2025
Fiscal: Yes
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 289 (
Author:Haney) – As Amended Ver:March 24, 2025
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
SUBJECT: State highway work zone speed safety program
SYNOPSIS
Last session, the Legislature approved two speed camera pilot projects. The first one, authorized by AB 645 (Friedman, et al; Stats. 2023, Ch. 808) authorizes the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach, and Glendale to establish a five year speed safety system pilot program. Last year, SB 1297 (Allen; Stats. 2024, Ch. 631) authorizes the City of Malibu to establish a five-year pilot program on the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH).
Similarly, this bill authorizes the Department of Transportation (CalTrans) to establish a five-year pilot project testing the use of up to 75 speed enforcement cameras in the State’s highway construction zones when workers are present. The question of whether these systems will help to reduce the number of injuries and deaths of highway construction workers and increase traffic safety is within the jurisdiction of the Transportation Committee. For this Committee, the primary consideration is whether this bill contains adequate measures to protect people’s privacy.
The author has included a number of provisions to ensure that the privacy of drivers is protected. For example, the bill requires that photographic or administrative records generated by the speed safety system be confidential, to be used only to administer the program. These records cannot be disclosed to any other person, including any other state or federal government agency or official, except as required by state or federal law, or court order. In addition, the bill includes the same retention requirements contained in the two previous speed camera pilot programs. However, there are other respects in which this bill is not as privacy protective as its predecessors. Proposed Committee amendments in Comment #7 align this bill with the others.
The bill is supported by a number of organizations representing highway construction workers and several automobile associations, among others. It is opposed by the National Motorists Association and seven individuals.
This bill was previously heard by the Transportation Committee, where it passed on a 15-0-1 vote.
THIS BILL:
- Authorizes Caltrans to deploy 75 speed safety systems to enforce speed limits in state highway work zones.
- Defines the following:
- “Automated speed violation” means a violation of a speed law detected by a speed safety system.
- “Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program” means a program whereby CalTrans contracts with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to reimburse them for costs associated with using CHP units to assist with the management of traffic passing through highway construction zones.
- “Department” means the Department of Transportation (CalTrans).
- “Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program” means a program whereby CalTrans contracts with the CHP to reimburse them for costs associated with using CHP units to assist with the management of traffic passing through highway maintenance project zones.
- “Speed safety system” means a fixed or mobile radar or lazer system or any other electronic device that utilizes automated equipment to detect a speeding violation and is designed to obtain a clear photograph, video recording, or other visual image of a vehicle license plate.
- “State highway work zone” means a state highway construction or maintenance area during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted.
- Limits the issuance of citations only to instances in which construction or maintenance workers are present.
- Requires every speed safety system to have a sign stating “photo enforced” along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system.
- Requires CalTrans to identify the state highway work zones approved for enforcement using a speed safety system and the hours of enforcement on the department’s website and conduct a public information program.
- Requires the department to establish guidelines for the screening and issuing of notices of violation and for the processing and storage of confidential information.
- Requires that the violation notice include a clear photograph of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, the Vehicle Code violation, the location, and the date and time the violation occurred.
- Provides for fines to the owner of the registered vehicle from between $50 and $500, dependent upon the speed the vehicle is travelling. Requires that the assessed fine be reduced for people who are indigent.
- Establishes the fine as a civil penalty and prohibits violations from resulting in loss of the driving privilege or in a violation point being assessed against the violator.
- Establishes that the photos, videos and administrative records are confidential, and requires that public agencies use and allow access to these records only for the purposes of the automated speed enforcement system.
- Limits how long the confidential records and evidence may be maintained to no more than 60 days after the final disposition of the notice of the violation.
- Limits the retention of administrative records for up to 120 days after the violation,
- Requires that images or video recordings that are obtained from the system that do not result in the issuance of a notice of violation be destroyed within five business days after the image was taken.
- Provides that a person will not be subject to a civil violation if there is proof the vehicle was being used by someone sharing their vehicle in a personal vehicle sharing program or if proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, in addition to the existing provision for the owner of a rental car.
- Requires, to the extent feasible, for the speed safety system camera to be angled and focused so as to only capture photographs, video recordings, or other visual images of speeding violations and not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
- Continuously appropriates citation revenue to the Safe Highway Work Zone Account. Funding is directed towards the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program.
- Requires Caltrans to issue a report two years after the program has been implemented and annually thereafter.
- Provides that the speed safety system under this pilot may operate for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner.
EXISTING LAW:
- Authorizes the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to establish a five year speed safety system pilot program. (Veh. Code § 22425.)
- Authorizes the City of Malibu to establish a five year speed safety system pilot program on Pacific Coast Highway. (Veh. Code § 22435.)
- Authorizes the use of automated traffic enforcement systems (i.e., red light cameras) at railroad crossings and intersections to record violations of unlawful grade crossings and running of red lights. (Veh. Code § 21455.5.)
- Establishes a “basic speed law” that prohibits a person from driving a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent given the weather, visibility, traffic, highway conditions, and in no event at a speed that endangers the safety of persons or property. (Veh. Code § 22362.)
- Requires a peace officer or “qualified employee” of a law enforcement agency to review the photograph taken by an automated traffic enforcement system and issue a citation, as appropriate. (Veh. Code § 21455.5.)
- Conditions the use of red light cameras on several requirements and procedures, including the following:
- Only a governmental agency in cooperation with a law enforcement agency may operate a system.
- Intersections equipped with the enforcement systems must be identified by signs visible to traffic in all directions or by signs posted at all major entrances to the participating city.
- The city council or county board of supervisors must conduct a public hearing on the proposed use of an automated enforcement system.
- Use of the system must be preceded by public notice by the local jurisdiction at least 30 days in advance, and only warning notices may be issued to violators during the first 30 days of the system’s operation, after which citations may be issued.
- All photographic records are confidential and shall be made available only to the affected governmental agencies for enforcement purposes.
- Any driver alleged to be a violator of the red light provisions or the vehicle’s registered owner is permitted to review the photographic evidence of the alleged violation.
- Citations must be delivered to the driver within 15 days of the alleged violations, with a certificate of mailing obtained as evidence of service, and must include specified information, including how, when, and where the citation may be challenged. (Veh. Code § 21455.5.)
COMMENTS:
1) Author’s statement. According to the author:
AB 289 is a significant step toward safeguarding the lives of construction workers on our highways, where speeding vehicles pose a significant risk to both workers and motorists. By harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will save lives by reducing construction zone crashes and creating a safer environment for California’s highway construction workers and drivers.
AB 289 includes clear guidelines, public awareness campaigns, and safeguards for privacy and fairness, ensuring responsible implementation. Additionally, the bill provides a structured appeals process and financial accommodations for low-income individuals, promoting equitable enforcement. With traffic-related work zone fatalities on the rise, this legislation is a crucial step toward saving lives on California’s highways.
2) Effectiveness of speed safety systems. Based on their review of the data, the Transportation Committee has found that automated speed safety cameras appear to be effective. Specifically, according to their analysis:
According to The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), a 2010 review of 28 studies of automated speed enforcement (ASE) in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand determined a lower number of crashes after ASE implementation. These studies reported reductions of 8% to 49% for all crashes and reductions of 11% to 44% for crashes causing serious injuries or fatalities.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) “Crash-based evaluations from the United States and Canada have also reported safety benefits from speed safety cameras programs in urban areas. Shin et al. (2009) examined effects of a fixed camera enforcement program applied to a 6.5-mile urban freeway section through Scottsdale, Arizona. The speed limit on the enforced freeway was 65 mph; the enforcement trigger was set to 76 mph. Total target (off-peak/free-flow)crashes were reduced by an estimated 44 to 54%, injury crashes by 28 to 48%, and property damage only crashes by 46 to 56% during the 9-month program period.”
As it pertains specifically to road workers, they note:
While numerous safety initiatives have been proposed and implemented in highway work zones over the last two decades, one proven safety countermeasure has been unavailable in California. Automated speed enforcement is proven to reduce speeds, increase driver safety, and save lives. In response to the increasing fatal crashes and injuries in work zones, at least 16 other states have implemented ASE through active construction work zones. In recognition of the well-documented safety benefits of automated speed enforcement, the Federal Highway Administration identified speed safety cameras as a proven safety countermeasure in 2021. This evidence-based designation, as well as related federal statute and guidance, ensures that speed safety cameras can be funded from federal transportation revenues available to the State of California from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Pub. L. 117-58) via the Highway Safety Improvement Program (23 U.S.C. 148).
Fourteen states currently have permanent or pilot programs authorizing the use of speed safety cameras in work zones. According to a report issued by the Delaware Department of Transportation, the speed safety cameras resulted in a 46% reduction in total crashes and a 38% reduction in injury crashes. The average speed was reduced by nearly six mph. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, in the three years prior to the implementation of their pilot program, an average of 1,800 crashes occurred annually in works zones. By 2022 and 2023, three and four years into the program, the number crashes were reduced to below 1,300. The total percentage of speeding vehicles in camera enforced work zones dropped 29%. In July of 2022 only 15% of drivers were going over the speed limit.
In contrast, the National Motorists Association (NMA) argues in opposition that based upon their analysis of OSHA data, very few workers who are injured or killed while working along California’s highways as a result of motorists exceeding the speed limit. They write:
Notwithstanding the claims made by the bill’s author and proponents, severe injuries and fatalities involving highway construction and maintenance workers due to motorists speeding in state highway work zones are, thankfully, relatively rare. The NMA evaluated fatal and severe injury collisions occurring in work zones from 2011 through 2020 from the CHP’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Reporting System (SWITRS) database. As there is no specific data point for collisions involving “highway workers” in the SWITRS database, we used collisions involving “pedestrians” as a proxy.
The total number of “pedestrians” killed in state highway work zones due to a passing motorist traveling too fast for conditions (CVC 22350) during the ten year period was eight, or an average of 0.8 per year. This is an average of less than one fatality per year and represents just 1/50th of 1% (0.02%) of all roadway fatalities and 1.4% of all fatalities occurring in work zones in California. Note that it is undetermined if these “pedestrians” were all highway workers or if the motorist was traveling above the work zone speed limit or just traveling too fast for conditions.
The total number of “pedestrians” seriously injured in state highway work zones due to a passing motorist traveling too fast for conditions was 14, or an average of 1.4 per year. This represents just 1/25th of 1% (0.04%) of all severe injuries and 2.46% of all serious injuries occurring in work zones in California. Note again that it is undetermined if these “pedestrians” were all highway workers or if the motorist was traveling above the work zone speed limit or just traveling too fast for conditions.
3) Privacy concerns related to technology that collects location information. Americans leave a trail of personal data with almost every action they take either in the physical world or online, including every website visited, credit card payment, browser search.[1] As the author notes, Californians are more vulnerable to digital exploitation than ever before.
In the physical world, we cannot step out of our homes without being monitored and tracked. Cars collect location data everywhere we drive. Phones, our constant companions, collect location data everywhere we go. If a car is too old to collect location data and a person leaves their phone at home, license plate readers and traffic cameras are at virtually every intersection, on freeways, at the entrance of parking garages, in store parking lots, and toll roads. These devices are tracking the movement of every single car that passes by. It has become virtually impossible for people to move through the United States without being tracked.
The slow erosion of privacy through the collection of what seem to be relatively small pieces of personal information may not cause people to be overly concerned. However, those pieces of information are being amassed into dossiers that disclose every aspect of the lives of everyone in the United States. The fact that these dossiers are being made available to individuals, private companies, and local, state, and federal government agencies should be cause for alarm. University of Virginia Law Professor Danielle Citron warned in an interview with The Guardian in 2022, “We don’t viscerally appreciate the ways in which companies and governments surveil our lives by amassing intimate information about our bodies, our health, our closest relationships, our sexual activities and our innermost thoughts. Companies are selling this information to data brokers, who are compiling dossiers with about 3,000 data points on each of us.”[2]
As it pertains to this bill, adding up to 75 speed detection cameras along the state’s highways provides yet one more method for tracking people in California because the cameras not only capture the license plate information in a photograph, they also collect the exact time, date, and location where the image was taken. However, if the bill appropriately limits the collection, storage, and retention of the data, the information should be adequately protected from being accessed by data brokers who can combine the information with thousands of other data points related to the registered owner of the vehicle.
4) Privacy protections contained in this bill. The bill currently restricts the collection and use of the data in the following ways:
- Establishes that the photos, videos and administrative records are confidential, and requires that public agencies use and allow access to these records only for the purposes of the automated speed enforcement system.
- Limits how long the confidential records and evidence may be maintained to no more than 60 days after the final disposition of a notice of violation.
- Limits the retention of administrative records for no more than 120 days after the violation.
- Requires that images or video recordings that are obtained from the system that do not result in the issuance of a notice of violation must be destroyed within five business days after the image was taken.
- Requires that any contracts with vendors who manufacture or supply the systems must include a provision that all data collected is confidential and that the contractor is prohibited from sharing, repurposing, or monetizing collected data.
- Requires, to the extent feasible, for the speed safety system camera to be angled and focused so as to only capture photographs, video recordings, or other visual images of speeding violations and not capture identifying images of other drivers or vehicles.
5) Analysis. The question before this Committee is whether gathering additional license plate information using speed cameras constitutes an unnecessary privacy risk for drivers in California. The author has included many of the same privacy protections in this bill as were included in SB 1297 (Allen; Stats. 2024, Ch. 631) and AB 645 (Friedman; Stats. 2023, Ch. 808), which were both passed by this Committee. These provisions ensure that the personal information related to the location of drivers travelling in highway work zones remains protected. For example, the bill makes photographic or administrative records generated by the speed safety system confidential, used only to administer the program. The bill prohibits the information from being disclosed to any other person, including any other state or federal government agency or official for any other purpose, except as required by state or federal law, or court order.
In addition, CalTrans is only permitted to retain speed safety system data and evidence for 60 days and speed safety system administrative records for 120 days following final disposition of a violation, after which the data, evidence, and administrative records must be destroyed in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of any person included in the evidence. The department is also required to destroy any speed safety system data within five days if the data shows no evidence of a speeding violation. The bill also ensures that any vendors are held to these same standards and provides that any speed safety system data collected is confidential and may not be shared, repurposed, or monetized for purposes other than speed safety system enforcement. Finally, the bill prohibits the use of facial recognition software.
However, certain protections contained in prior bills are absent from this bill. Chief among them is a provision restricting the cameras to taking photographs – of the rear license plate only – and prohibiting them from capturing video footage. In addition, the other pilot projects have a strict prohibition against sharing the collected data with any other person, including the state and federal government. As set forth in Comment #7, the author has agreed to add these additional protections.
6) Larger policy questions. As it stands now, the continued proliferation of surveillance technology, including speed safety cameras, red light cameras, public surveillance cameras, public and private security cameras, including cameras built into doorbells, and automated license plate recognition tools means that whenever someone steps out the front door of their home, any expectation of privacy vanishes. Should Californians simply accept the complete loss of privacy as people move through their lives in public and private spaces?
Much like the focus that is being placed on the impact of social media, advancement in artificial intelligence technology, and the collection and sale of personal information for profit, constant surveillance by private individuals, businesses, and government has a profound impact on Californians’ lives. Rather than considering the risks of one device or technological advancement at a time, at some point, it might behoove the Legislature, and this Committee in particular, to explore the larger surveillance policy questions, including the dangers associated with the unchecked proliferation of surveillance tools and their impact on Californians’ privacy rights.
7) Amendments. The author has agreed to the following amendments to align its privacy protections with those contained in AB 645 and SB 1297:
- Removes references to “video recording” and “other visual” throughout the bill ensuring that the speed cameras are only allowed to capture photographs of rear license plates.
- In (c)(5) adds the following clarification:
A speed safety system records speed violations and actively issues citations only when construction or maintenance workers are present in the state highway work zone.
- In (e)(3) limits the sharing of the data in accordance with language in the previous two bills:
The allowable uses for information collected and maintained, including is limited to the administration of the state highway work zone speed safety program only and compliance with state or federal law, court order, or subpoena in an individual case or proceeding.
- In (i)(5) limits the sharing of the data except as required by a court order or subpoena.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: A coalition of highway construction and maintenance workers organizations write:
AB 289 includes the same data privacy protections as the recently enacted pilot programs for the City of Malibu (Ch. 631, Stats. 2024) and six other pilot cities (Ch. 808, Stats. 2023), both of which were heard in the Assembly Privacy & Consumer Protection Committee. Specifically, the bill includes the following provisions:
- Facial recognition technology shall not be used in conjunction with a speed safety system.
- Information collected and maintained by Caltrans shall only be used to administer the program and shall not be disclosed to others, including state and federal agencies, except as required by law.
- Records of citations are exempted from disclosure under the California Public Records Act.
- Records shall only be used and accessed for the purposes authorized by this law or to assess the impact of the program.
- Data about the number of violations issues and speeds are not administrative records required to be disclosed.
- Confidential Department of Motor Vehicles data used for enforcement and administration shall be held confidential and not used for any other purpose.
- Data regarding the total number of violations and speeds may be retained for only up to 120 days.
- Except for court records, confidential data and records related to a notice of violation may be retained for up to 60 days, or five business days for photographic evidence that does not result in a notice of violation.
- Notice of violation shall exclude rear images of the rear window area of the vehicle.
- Speed safety cameras should be angled to capture only speed violations and not images of other drivers, vehicles, or pedestrians, to the extent possible.
Also writing in support, the Automobile Clubs of Southern California and Northern California, Utah & Nevada note:
The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety has studied fatal crashes involving roadside assistance providers, finding that they are killed in crashes nearly four times more than what is reported, and that speed, driver distraction, and impairment are often factors. Moreover, nearly 90 percent of these crashes occurred in location with speed limits of 55 miles per hour or higher (nearly all were on interstate highways). Today, California is one of 37 states that require motorists to slow down and move over a lane when overtaking highway maintenance workers. However, such laws are helpful but not enough in reducing roadside collisions. AAAFTS research findings suggest about 60 percent of tow truck drivers, emergency responders, and road maintenance workers have experienced a near miss while working at the roadside and 15 percent have survived being hit by a passing vehicle.
AB 289 is consistent with most of the recommendations in the Automated Enforcement Program Checklist released by AAA and other national highway safety advocates in 2021, including procedures for stakeholder input, public education and information requirements, vendor payments limits, reasonable fine structure, and more. Combined with a sunset date and thorough program evaluation requirement, we believe AB 289 presents an excellent opportunity to successfully pilot speed cameras in works.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The National Motorists Association argues:
Proponents of work zone ticketing cameras make the erroneous assumption that motorists driving at excessive speeds in work zones cause a significant number of injuries and fatalities to highway construction workers. We have shown this assumption to be false. However, one should not entirely discount concerns regarding highway worker safety due to motorists traveling within the work zone. If officials desire closer adherence to the work zone speed limit, Caltrans should employ additional engineering countermeasures to gain greater compliance. These engineering solutions are at least as effective, if not more effective, than sending a ticket in the mail weeks after an alleged violation, and they have the added benefit of providing real-time protection to workers.
[. . .]
Proponents have referenced Pennsylvania’s work zone speed camera program, parroting the claim of a greater than a 19% reduction in work zone crashes. This statistic is highly misleading. Although the Automated Work Zone Speed Enforcement (AWZSE) report from PA shows a decrease in collisions in 2020 compared to 2019, the likely cause of reduced crashes during this period is the reduction in traffic volume and construction activities during the pandemic. In fact, crashes in 2021 were significantly higher (+17%) than in 2020, likely due to increased highway travel and construction activity as the State emerged from pandemic restrictions. Further, the NMA compiled the monthly Speed Statistics from each AWZSE annual report from the beginning of Pennsylvania’s program in March 2020 through December 2022. There was virtually no change in either the percentage of drivers traveling over the posted speed limit or the percentage of drivers traveling 11+ mph over the speed limit (which the PA program calls excessive speed).
[. . .]
Two years ago, the State enacted AB-645, which created a five-year pilot program to test the effectiveness of automated speed ticketing cameras in California. The legislation set precise guidance as to where and how speed cameras could be used in the State. Before that pilot program has even begun, legislators are already attempting to expand the use of ticketing cameras on state highways throughout the State. Either the camera program authorized under AB-645 is actually a pilot, honestly intended to test the use of speed cameras in California, or it is not. Was the entire exercise of promoting and negotiating a pilot program just a ruse to open the door to ever more automated ticketing? Or will we be guided by ethical principles and refrain from approving more speed camera usage until AB-645’s pilot program results are known? There is no urgency to authorize ticketing cameras on California highways, specifically in light of the data provided above, which clearly shows that little is to be gained by rushing to implement this abusive technology.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
American Automobile Association of Northern California, Nevada & Utah
Associated General Contractors of California
Auto Club of Southern California
Calfornia-nevada Conference of Operating Engineers
California Alliance for Jobs
California Asphalt Pavement Association
California Construction & Industrial Materials Association
California State Council of Laborers
Madera County Transportation Commission
Rebuild Socal Partnership
Southern California Contractors Association
State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
Transportation Authority of Marin
Transportation California
United Contractors
Opposition
7 Individuals
Oppose Unless Amended
National Motorists Assoc
Analysis Prepared by: Julie Salley / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200
Emile Ayoub and Elizabeth Goitein. Closing the Data Broker Loophole, The Brennan Center for Justice (Feb. 13, 2024). ↑
Laurie Clarke. “Interview - Law professor Danielle Citron: ‘Privacy is essential to human flourishing,’” The Guardian (Oct. 2, 2022) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/oct/02/danielle-citron-privacy-is-essential-to-human-flourishing. ↑
Date of Hearing: April 7, 2025
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Lori D. Wilson, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 289 (
Author:Haney) – As Amended Ver:March 24, 2025
SUBJECT: State highway work zone speed safety program.
SUMMARY: Authorizes the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to establish a five year work zone speed safety pilot program to enforce speeding violations in highway maintenance and construction work zones using speed safety systems. Specifically, this bill:
- Authorizes Caltrans to deploy 75 speed safety systems to enforce speed limits in state highway work zones.
- Provides that a speed safety system may only issue citations when construction or maintenance workers are present.
- Includes the following provisions that are nearly identical to the existing speed safety pilot program on the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) in Malibu, et al.:
- Requires every speed safety system to have a sign stating “photo enforced” along with the speed limit signs with flashing beacons and speed feedback signs, no more than 500 feet before the placement of the system;
- Requires a public information program at least 30 days prior to the implementation of the camera program and that for the first 60 days of enforcement only warning notices be issued;
- Requires that the local authority establish guidelines for the screening and issuing of notices of violation and for the processing and storage of confidential information. The notice shall include a clear photograph of the license plate and rear of the vehicle only, the Vehicle Code violation, the location, and the date and time the violation occurred;
- Provides for the following fines to the owner of the registered vehicle:
- $50 for a speed violation from 11 to 15 mph over the posted speed limit;
- $100 for a speed violation from 16 to 25 mph over the posted speed limit;
- $200 for a speed violation of 26 mph or more over the posted speed limit; and,
- $500 for traveling at a speed of 100 mph or greater.
- The fine is a civil penalty and shall not result in a loss of the driving privilege or in a violation point being assessed against the violator;
- Requires indigent individuals be offered community service in lieu of the fine, or the fine is reduced by 80%. The fine is reduced by 50% for individuals up to 250% above the federal poverty level;
- The vehicle’s first violation results in a warning, not a fine, if that violation is for driving not more than 15 mph over the posted speed limit;
- Establishes a process where the registered owner can request a review of the fine by the issuing agency and a hearing on the fine by the issuing agency;
- Establishes that the photos and administrative records shall be confidential, and that public agencies shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes of the automated speed enforcement system. Limits on how long records can be retained are established and disclosures to others prohibited;
- Provides that a person will not be subject to a civil violation if there is proof the vehicle was being used by someone sharing their vehicle in a personal vehicle sharing program or if proof of a copy of a police report indicating the vehicle had been stolen at the time of the violation, in addition to the existing provision for the owner of a rental car;
- Requires speed safety systems to be placed in locations that are geographically and socioeconomically diverse; and,
- Requires, to the extent feasible, for the speed safety system camera to be angled and focused so as to only capture photographs of speeding violations and not capture identifying images of other drivers, vehicles, or pedestrians.
- States that it is the intent of the legislature to supplement, and not supplant, existing traffic enforcement efforts in highway construction and maintenance zones.
- States that it is the intent of the Legislature that Caltrans expend for purposes of the enhanced traffic enforcement in construction and maintenance zones an amount not less than its expenditures for the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program in the 2023-2024 fiscal year.
- Continuously appropriates citation revenue to the Safe Highway Work Zone Account. Funding is directed towards the Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) and the Maintenance Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (MAZEEP)
- Requires Caltrans to issue a report two years after the program has been implemented and annually thereafter with the following information:
- The number and proportion of vehicles speeding in state highway work zones were deployed by the mph over the speed limit;
- The number of notices of violation issues under the program by month and year, where the violations occurred, and the number of vehicles with two or more violations in the same location over a monthly period and a yearly period;
- Data on the number of traffic collisions that occurred in state highway work zones where speed safety systems were used, relative to date in all state highway work zones, as specified;
- The number of violations paid, the number of delinquent violations, and the number of violations for which an initial review is requested, as specified;
- The costs associated with implementation and the revenues collected; and,
- The number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals up to 250% above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to vehicles registered in Each California Zip Code.
- Provides that the speed safety system under this pilot may operate for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner.
EXISTING LAW:
- Authorizes the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to establish a five year speed safety system pilot program. (Vehicle Code (VEH) Section 22425)
- Authorizes the City of Malibu to establish a five year speed safety system pilot program on Pacific Coast Highway. (VEH 22435)
- Authorizes the use of automated traffic enforcement systems (i.e., red light cameras) at railroad crossings and intersections to record violations of unlawful grade crossings and running of red lights. (VEH 21455.5)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: AB 645 (Friedman) Chapter 808, Statues of 2023 established a speed safety system program in California and authorized the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Long Beach and Glendale to operate a limited number of speed safety systems for five years, or until January 1, 2032, whichever is sooner. AB 645 explicitly prohibited cities from operating cameras on roads where the California Highway Patrol (CHP) had jurisdiction, and limited camera placement to the cities high injury networks, school zones and streets with a high number of calls for motor vehicle exhibitions of speed and speed contests. SB 1297 (Allen), Chapter 631, Statutes of 2024 created a separate pilot program for the city of Malibu to operate five speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway.
As of the writing of this analysis, only San Francisco has begun to pilot speed cameras. San Jose was recently awarded nearly $9 million from a federal grant to purchase speed safety systems under a program created by the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). San Jose has indicated that their program will likely start this year.
According to the author, “AB 289 is a significant step toward safeguarding the lives of construction workers on our highways, where speeding vehicles pose a significant risk to both workers and motorists. By harnessing the proven effectiveness of Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE), AB 289 will save lives by reducing construction zone crashes and creating a safer environment for California’s highway construction workers and drivers.”
This bill allows Caltrans to use speed cameras in work zones where maintenance and construction crews are actively working. This bill is nearly identical to AB 645 and SB 1297, and authorizes the use of up to 75 speed safety systems, or around 10% of the total number of active construction zones in the state. Unlike AB 645 which authorizes speed cameras on local streets and roads, this bill authorizes speed cameras on a state highway.
Speed safety systems can save lives. According to The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), a 2010 review of 28 studies of automated speed enforcement (ASE) in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand determined a lower number of crashes after ASE implementation. These studies reported reductions of 8% to 49% for all crashes and reductions of 11% to 44% for crashes causing serious injuries or fatalities.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) “Crash-based evaluations from the United States and Canada have also reported safety benefits from speed safety cameras programs in urban areas. Shin et al. (2009) examined effects of a fixed camera enforcement program applied to a 6.5-mile urban freeway section through Scottsdale, Arizona. The speed limit on the enforced freeway was 65 mph; the enforcement trigger was set to 76 mph. Total target (off-peak/free-flow)crashes were reduced by an estimated 44 to 54%, injury crashes by 28 to 48%, and property damage only crashes by 46 to 56% during the 9-month program period.”
Transportation California, California Alliance for Jobs, and the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, writing in support of this bill, argue “Highway construction and maintenance work is one of the most hazardous occupations in the United States. In 2021, more than 9,500 collisions occurred in construction zones on California highways. This resulted in an estimated 2,971 injuries and 73 fatalities, including both construction workers and drivers.
While contractors, labor unions, state agencies, and law enforcement are doing everything in their power to keep workers safe, highway construction zones continue to be dangerous for our workers who risk injury and death by speeding vehicles.
National data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show that construction and extraction and transportation and material moving— both sectors which are involved in highway construction work—are among the most dangerous occupations, trailing only farming, fishing and forestry in the rate of work-related deaths. BLS data also demonstrate the disproportionate rate of workplace fatalities, with Black and Latino workers experiencing a higher rate of fatal injuries than workers at large.
Notably, transportation incidents were the highest cause of fatalities for both groups, accounting for the deaths of 278 Black workers and 439 Latino workers in 2022. While these statistics include occupations beyond those which are directly involved in highway construction projects, they demonstrate the unique risks faced by California’s diverse construction industry workforce.
While numerous safety initiatives have been proposed and implemented in highway work zones over the last two decades, one proven safety countermeasure has been unavailable in California. Automated speed enforcement is proven to reduce speeds, increase driver safety, and save lives. In response to the increasing fatal crashes and injuries in work zones, at least 16 other states have implemented ASE through active construction work zones. In recognition of the well-documented safety benefits of automated speed enforcement, the Federal Highway Administration identified speed safety cameras as a proven safety countermeasure in 2021. This evidence-based designation, as well as related federal statute and guidance, ensures that speed safety cameras can be funded from federal transportation revenues available to the State of California from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Pub. L. 117-58) via the Highway Safety Improvement Program (23 U.S.C. 148).”
Fourteen states currently have permanent or pilot programs authorizing the use of speed safety cameras in work zones. According to a report issued by the Delaware Department of Transportation, the speed safety cameras resulted in a 46% reduction in total crashes and a 38% reduction in injury crashes. The average speed was reduced by nearly six mph. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, in the three years prior to the implementation of their pilot program, an average of 1,800 crashes occurred annually in works zones. By 2022 and 2023, three and four years into the program, the number crashes were reduced to below 1,300. The total percentage of speeding vehicles in camera enforced work zones dropped 29%. In July of 2022 only 15% of drivers were going over the speed limit.
The National Motorists Association, writing in opposition to this bill, argues “Notwithstanding the claims made by the bill’s author and proponents, severe injuries and fatalities involving highway construction and maintenance workers due to motorists speeding in state highway work zones are, thankfully, relatively rare.
Proponents of work zone ticketing cameras make the erroneous assumption that motorists driving at excessive speeds in work zones cause a significant number of injuries and fatalities to highway construction workers. We have shown this assumption to be false. However, one should not entirely discount concerns regarding highway worker safety due to motorists traveling within the work zone. If officials desire closer adherence to the work zone speed limit, Caltrans should employ additional engineering countermeasures to gain greater compliance. These engineering solutions are at least as effective, if not more effective, than sending a ticket in the mail weeks after an alleged violation, and they have the added benefit of providing real-time protection to workers.”
The New York Department of Transportation notes that “According to the Fatality Analysis Reporting Systems (FARS) from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in 2020, 863 people died in 780 fatal crashes in work zones nationally, marking a 10-year high for deaths and crashes in road construction areas. These deaths occur not only to workers within the work zone, but also to the motorists involved in the crash.”
According to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), from 2005-14, crashes in which a law enforcement officer indicated a vehicle's speed was a factor resulted in 112,580 fatalities, representing 31% of all traffic fatalities. NTSB notes that speeding increases the risk of a crash and the severity of injuries.
COZEEP and MAZEEP: AB 645 and SB 1297 directed excess revenue from speeding citations to go towards traffic calming measures. This bill directs excess revenues to COZEEP and MAZEEP. These programs pay for CHP officers to be present at construction and maintenance zones while workers are present.
According to Caltrans Construction Manual, “Caltrans and the CHP have an interagency agreement that is the basis COZEEP and MAZEEP. It is an enhancement tool for construction zones and is not intended as a replacement for other temporary traffic control measures. Caltrans contracts, procedures, and guidelines form the basis for traffic-control measures throughout its construction projects and establish a baseline for operations statewide. COZEEP is not a baseline measure—an important fact when resources are limited and CHP personnel may not be available when requested. Under the agreement, Caltrans pays the CHP for furnishing officers and cars for construction zones.”
Caltrans engineers are required to consider using COZEEP and MAZEEP under the following circumstances: temporary full freeway closures of all lanes in the same direction of travel, nighttime closures of two or more lanes on a freeway with three or more lanes of travel in the same direction, or other closures determined on a project-specific basis.
Related legislation: AB 1379 (Nguyen) of 2025 adds the city of Sacramento to the pilot program established by AB 645. That bill is pending in this committee.
SB 720 (Ashby) of 2025 authorizes the use of red light cameras to issue civil instead of criminal violations for failing to obey a traffic signal.
SB 1297 (Allen), Chapter 631, Statutes of 2024 created a pilot program for the city of Malibu to operate five speed safety systems on the Pacific Coast Highway.
AB 645 (Friedman) Chapter 808, Statutes of 2023 established a speed safety system pilot program in six specified cities.
AB 2809 (Haney) of 2024 would have authorized the California Transportation Agency to establish a speed safety system pilot program in work zones. That bill was not set for a hearing in this committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
AAA Northern California, Nevada, & Utah
Associated General Contractors of California
Automobile Club of Southern California
California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers
California Alliance for Jobs
California Asphalt Pavement Association
California Construction & Industrial Materials Association
California State Council of Laborers
Peace Officers’ Research Association of California
Rebuild So-Cal Partnership
SMART Transportation Division—CA State Safety and Legislative Board
Southern California Contractors Association
State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
Transportation Authority of Marin
Transportation California
United Contractors
Opposition
National Motorists Association
Analysis Prepared by: David Sforza / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093
Discussed in Hearing
1MIN
Assembly Floor
2MIN
Senate Floor
6MIN
Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary
18MIN
Senate Standing Committee on Transportation
3MIN
Assembly Floor
9MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection
17MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Transportation
Bill Author
