WatchGov

California bills · 2025-2026 Regular Session

California SB 720

Automated traffic enforcement system programs.

  1. Introduced
  2. In committee
  3. Passed Senate
  4. Passed House
  5. To Governor
  6. Became law

Sponsors

Cosponsors (2)

Summary

Official abstract published by the California legislature· summary

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.

Text versions

Roll-call votes

State vote data last updated Oct 16, 2026, 4:04 AM.

DateVoteResultYour legislators
Sep 13, 2025
Senate		Unfinished Business SB720 Ashby et al. ConcurrencepassSet your home in California to see
Sep 13, 2025
House		SB 720 Ashby Senate Third Reading By PellerinpassSet your home in California to see
Aug 29, 2025
House		Do pass as amended.passSet your home in California to see
Jul 16, 2025
House		Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]passSet your home in California to see
Jul 14, 2025
House		Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Privacy and Consumer Protection]passSet your home in California to see
Jun 3, 2025
Senate		3rd ReadingpassSet your home in California to see
May 23, 2025
Senate		Do passpassSet your home in California to see
May 19, 2025
Senate		Placed on suspense filepassSet your home in California to see
Apr 29, 2025
Senate		Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]passSet your home in California to see
Apr 8, 2025
Senate		Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Judiciary]passSet your home in California to see

Actions