SB720 - Automated traffic enforcement system programs.

Senate Bill No. 720 CHAPTER 782 An act to amend Section 70615 of the Government Code, and to amend Sections 21455.5 and 21455.7 of, and to add Section 21455.9 to, the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles. [ Approved by Governor October 13, 2025. Filed with Secretary of State October 13, 2025. ] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 720, Ashby. Automated traffic enforcement system programs. Existing law authorizes the limit line, intersection, or other places where a driver is required to stop to be equipped with an automated traffic enforcement system if the governmental agency utilizing the system meets certain requirements, including identifying the system with signs and ensuring that the system meets specified criteria on minimum yellow light change intervals. Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2032, the Cities of Los Angeles, San Jose, Oakland, Glendale, and Long Beach, and the City and County of San Francisco to establish a speed safety system pilot program for speed enforcement that utilizes a speed safety system in specified areas, if the system meets specified requirements. Existing law prescribes specified requirements for a notice of violation issued pursuant to these provisions, and requires a violation of a speed law that is recorded by a speed safety system to be subject only to a specified civil penalty. This bill would additionally authorize a city, county, or city and county to establish an automated traffic enforcement system program to use those systems to detect a violation of a traffic control signal, if the system meets specified requirements. The bill would require a violation of a traffic control signal that is recorded by an automated traffic enforcement system to be subject to escalating civil penalties, as specified. The bill would, among other things, provide for the issuance of a notice of violation, an initial review, an administrative hearing, and an appeals process, as specified, for a violation under this program. The bill would clarify that a local jurisdiction may utilize an automated traffic enforcement system pursuant to these provisions or the above-described provisions authorizing the utilization of an automated traffic enforcement system. The bill would require a local jurisdiction utilizing the above-described provisions to take into account the relative risk to traffic and pedestrian safety posed by prohibited right turns on red compared to proceeding through the intersection against a red signal. 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 an automated traffic enforcement system. Existing 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 AB 289 to be operative only if this bill and AB 289 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. Digest Key Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NO Bill Text The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) Red light running is a major factor in traffic collisions that result in fatalities or injuries. (b) State and local agencies employ a variety of methods to reduce red light running, including traffic engineering, education, and enforcement. (c) Red light running enforcement is critical to efforts in California to reduce factors that contribute to traffic collisions that result in fatalities or injuries. (d) However, traditional enforcement methods have had a well-documented disparate impact on communities of color, and implicit or explicit racial bias in police traffic stops puts drivers of color at risk. (e) Additional tools, including automated traffic enforcement systems, are available to assist cities and counties in addressing red light running and related crashes. (f) Automated traffic enforcement systems offer a high rate of detection, and, in conjunction with education and traffic engineering, can significantly reduce red light running, improve traffic safety, and prevent traffic-related fatalities and injuries, including motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist fatalities. (g) Multiple automated traffic enforcement system programs implemented in other states and cities outside of California have proven successful in reducing red light running and addressing traffic safety concerns. (h) The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) reports that 1,149 people were killed and more than 107,000 people were injured in red light running crashes in 2022. An IIHS study found that cameras reduced the fatal red light running crash rate of large cities by 21 percent, and the rate of all types of fatal crashes at signalized intersections by 14 percent. (i) The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports the use of camera systems for the enforcement of red light violations at signalized intersections is increasingly widespread in the United States. State and local agencies have found that the use of red light camera systems can reduce red light running by motorists and, more importantly, reduce the number of crashes attributable to red light violations. (j) Automated traffic enforcement systems can advance equity by improving reliability and fairness in traffic enforcement while making enforcement of violations of traffic control signals more predictable, effective, and broadly implemented, all of which help change driver behavior. (k) Enforcing violations of traffic control signals at intersections where drivers create dangerous roadway environments is a reliable and cost-effective means to prevent further fatalities and injuries. 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 agency’s decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4. (b) An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agency’s decision regarding a parking violation. (c) An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officer’s 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 agency’s inclusion of a person’s information in a shared gang database. (e) An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officer’s 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 officer’s 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 officer’s determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated traffic enforcement violation, as defined in Section 21455.9 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 agency’s decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4. (b) An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agency’s decision regarding a parking violation. (c) An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officer’s 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 agency’s inclusion of a person’s information in a shared gang database. (e) An appeal under Section 22428 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officer’s 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 officer’s 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 officer’s 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 officer’s 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. Section 70615 of the Government Code, as added by Section 3 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 agency’s decision regarding an administrative fine or penalty under Section 53069.4. (b) An appeal under Section 40230 of the Vehicle Code of an administrative agency’s decision regarding a parking violation. (c) An appeal under Section 99582 of the Public Utilities Code of a hearing officer’s 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 agency’s inclusion of a person’s information in a shared gang database. (e) An appeal under Section 21455.9 of the Vehicle Code of a hearing officer’s determination regarding a civil penalty for an automated traffic enforcement violation, as defined in Section 21455.9 of the Vehicle Code. (f) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2032. SEC. 4. Section 21455.5 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read: 21455.5. (a) The limit line, the intersection, or a place designated in Section 21455, where a driver is required to stop, may be equipped with an automated traffic enforcement system if the governmental agency utilizing the system meets both of the following requirements: (1) Identifies the system by signs posted within 200 feet of an intersection where a system is operating that clearly indicate the system’s presence and are visible to traffic approaching from all directions in which the automated traffic enforcement system is being utilized to issue citations. A governmental agency utilizing this type of system does not need to post signs visible to traffic approaching the intersection from directions not subject to the automated traffic enforcement system. (2) Locates the system at an intersection and ensures that the system meets the criteria specified in Section 21455.7. (b) Before issuing citations under this section, a local jurisdiction utilizing an automated traffic enforcement system shall commence a program to issue only warning notices for 30 days. The local jurisdiction shall also make a public announcement of the automated traffic enforcement system at least 30 days before commencing the enforcement program. (c) Only a governmental agency, in cooperation with a law enforcement agency, may operate an automated traffic enforcement system. A governmental agency that operates an automated traffic enforcement system shall do both of the following: (1) Develop uniform guidelines for screening and issuing violations, including a violation for a prohibited right turn at a steady circular red signal, which shall take into account the relative risk to traffic and pedestrian safety posed by right turns on red compared to proceeding through the intersection against a red signal, and for the processing and storage of confidential information, and establish procedures to ensure compliance with those guidelines. (2) Perform administrative functions and day-to-day functions, including, but not limited to, all of the following: (A) Establishing guidelines for the selection of a location. Before installing an automated traffic enforcement system, the governmental agency shall make and adopt a finding of fact establishing that the system is needed at a specific location for reasons related to safety. (B) Ensuring that the equipment is regularly inspected. (C) Certifying that the equipment is properly installed and calibrated, and is operating properly. (D) Regularly inspecting and maintaining warning signs placed under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a). (E) Overseeing the establishment or change of signal phases and the timing thereof. (F) Maintaining controls necessary to ensure that only those citations that have been reviewed and approved by law enforcement are delivered to violators. (d) The activities listed in subdivision (c) that relate to the operation of the system may be contracted out by the governmental agency, if it maintains overall control and supervision of the system. However, the activities listed in paragraph (1) of, and subparagraphs (A), (D), (E), and (F) of paragraph (2) of, subdivision (c) shall not be contracted out to the manufacturer or supplier of the automated traffic enforcement system. (e) The printed representation of computer-generated information, video, or photographic images stored by an automated traffic enforcement system does not constitute an out-of-court hearsay statement by a declarant under Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code. (f) (1) Notwithstanding Article 1 (commencing with Section 7922.500) and Article 2 (commencing with Section 7922.525) of Chapter 1 of Part 3 of Division 10 of Title 1 of the Government Code, or any other law, photographic records made by an automated traffic enforcement system shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to governmental agencies and law enforcement agencies and only for the purposes of this article. (2) Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration or enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and shall not be used for any other purpose. (3) Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, the confidential records and information described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to six months from the date the information was first obtained, or until final disposition of the citation, whichever date is later, after which [Text truncated for display. Full text available on Congress.gov.]