Vehicles: Speed Safety System Pilot Program.
Summary
Existing law establishes a basic speed law that prohibits a person from driving a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent given the weather, visibility, traffic, and highway conditions, and in no event at a speed that endangers the safety of persons or property. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2027, the Cities of Los Angeles, Oakland, San Jose, one city in southern California, and the City and County of San Francisco to establish the Speed Safety System Pilot Program for speed limit enforcement in certain areas, if the system meets specified requirements, including that the presence of a fixed or mobile system is clearly identified. The bill would require the participating cities or city and county to adopt a Speed Safety System Use Policy and a Speed Safety System Impact Report before implementing the program, and would require the city or city and county to engage in a public information campaign at least 30 days before implementation of the program, including information relating to when the systems would begin detecting violations and where the systems would be utilized. The bill would require the participating cities or city and county to issue warning notices rather than notices of violations for violations detected within the first 30 calendar days of the program. The bill would require the participating cities or city and county to develop uniform guidelines for, among other things, the processing and storage of confidential information. The bill would designate all photographic, video, or other visual or administrative records made by a system as confidential, and would only authorize public agencies to use and allow access to these records for specified purposes. This bill would specify that any violation of a speed law recorded by a speed safety system authorized by these provisions would be subject only to the provided civil penalties. 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 require any program created pursuant to these provisions to offer a diversion program for indigent speed safety system violation recipients, as specified. The bill would require a city or city and county participating in the pilot program to submit reports to the Legislature, as specified, to evaluate the speed safety system to determine the system's impact on street safety and economic impact on the communities where the system is utilized. 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 a speed safety system until January 1, 2027. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Cities of Los Angeles, Oakland, San Jose, and the City and County of San Francisco. 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.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2021
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 10, 2021
Last action Feb 1, 2022
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
17
Key actions
6
Committee
9
Amendments
5
Feb 1, 2022
Lower · Passed
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
lower
May 20, 2021
Lower · Passed
In committee: Held under submission.
lower
May 19, 2021
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
May 10, 2021
Lower · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
lower
May 3, 2021
Lower · Passed
Measure version as amended on April 29 corrected.
lower
May 3, 2021
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 29, 2021
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 28, 2021
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (April 26).
lower
Apr 19, 2021
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
lower
Apr 15, 2021
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 23, 2021
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
lower
Mar 22, 2021
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 18, 2021
Committee
Referred to Com. on TRANS.
lower
Feb 11, 2021
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 13.
lower
1 primary · 5 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 550
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 550. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline