Report Title:

Traffic-Control Signal Monitoring Systems; Red Light Violations

Description:

Provides for the implementation of a traffic-control signal monitoring system to produce recorded images of motor vehicles entering an intersection against a red signal indication. Establishes a 3-year pilot project in the city and county of Honolulu at five intersections.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

H.B. NO.

57

TWENTY-SECOND LEGISLATURE, 2003

 

STATE OF HAWAII

 


 

A BILL FOR AN ACT

 

relating to traffic enforcement.

 

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:

SECTION 1. The legislature finds that the traffic enforcement demonstration project, also known as the "van cam" law, was repealed by Act 58, Session Laws of Hawaii 2002, after a brief but contentious implementation period. The legislature noted that the system had caused "numerous disruptions to drivers and pedestrians in the State, and the legislature finds that the photo traffic enforcement system should be discontinued as soon as possible so that further review of the system can occur."

Upon further review, although the legislature finds that there is continuing opposition to the use of photo speed imaging detector systems, or "photo radar" systems, there is public support for one aspect of the pilot project that was repealed by Act 58, namely, the red light imaging system, also known as a traffic-control signal monitoring system.

In a traffic-control signal monitoring system, a camera is positioned at an intersection where red light violations are common. Rather than placing an officer at the intersection full-time, the traffic-control signal monitoring system serves as a twenty-four hour deterrent to running a red light. Buried vehicle sensors are connected to traffic signals and to a self-contained camera system that is mounted on a nearby pole. When a vehicle enters the intersection against a red light, the camera takes a telephoto color picture of the car as it rolls over the stop bar, capturing the license plate as evidence. A second wide-angle photograph takes in the entire intersection, including other traffic.

Among the benefits of such a system are safer streets, freeing police officers from time-consuming traffic stops thus giving them more time to make priority calls, and a change in driver behavior. Installation of this type of system has had an immediate effect on the behavior of drivers and has significantly reduced violations in other jurisdictions.

The legislature believes that the implementation of a traffic-control signal monitoring system will result in an increase in driver awareness, leading to a reduction in red light violations and an overall reduction in crashes, injuries, and deaths. This in turn will result in lower costs for motor vehicle insurance, workers' compensation, and public assistance. Moreover, with use of a traffic-control signal monitoring system, traffic laws will be enforced without discrimination, and safety and efficiency will be increased by reducing the number of personnel required for traffic accident clean-up, investigation, and court testimony.

The legislature further finds that the State of Maryland's experience with red light violations, and their response to that problem, is instructive for Hawaii. In 1995, red light violations led to more than three thousand five hundred traffic crashes in Maryland, resulting in injuries to 4,256 people and thirty-four deaths.

In particular, state traffic safety officials and residents of Howard County, Maryland, located in the Baltimore-Washington, D.C. corridor, were becoming increasingly concerned about the escalation in red light and other violations. A public opinion survey revealed that existing enforcement efforts were less than adequate, and most respondents believed that red light violations were either not enforced or enforced only occasionally.

The challenges for Howard County enforcement officials were to correct public perception about the seriousness that the county viewed (and enforced) red light violations, and to reduce red light violations without endangering the public during typical enforcement activities, such as pursuits. The goal of the Howard county police department's automated enforcement program was to reduce fatalities and injuries resulting from non-compliance with automated traffic signals.

The preparatory activities of the program, which were supported by seed money from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, involved establishing a baseline of information with which to measure progress in meeting program goals and objectives. Baseline activities included measuring public opinion regarding red light violations, collecting data on violation rates, and determining collision data related to red light violations. After baseline data were collected and analyzed, the intersections that comprised the majority of junctures where collisions were caused by red light violations were identified.

Using Federal Highway Administration funds, the county next embarked on a two-year campaign of public awareness and technology trials beginning in 1996. Having conducted team enforcement operations for several years, it was concluded that, although a valuable tool in reducing red light violations, team enforcement was cost-prohibitive for continuous use. Moreover, enforcement personnel found team enforcement to have limited results.

The most valuable enforcement tool appeared to be installation of automated cameras positioned at the most critical locations. A six-month trial was conducted, with warnings sent to violators of automated signals. The results of this trial were sufficient to garner support from the Maryland legislature, leading to enactment of a new state law in October 1997, which allowed law enforcement officials to issue citations from observations by automated cameras. The new automated enforcement program was designed to be self-supporting through the payment of fines for red light violations.

The legislature finds that there is a similar need to provide for the implementation of an automated traffic-control signal monitoring system at dangerous intersections in Hawaii. Accordingly, the purpose of this Act is to improve traffic enforcement by establishing a three-year pilot project to install traffic-control signal monitoring systems at five of the most dangerous intersections in the city and county of Honolulu, to be selected by the Honolulu police department in consultation with the state department of transportation. The legislature finds that the implementation of traffic-control signal monitoring systems in accordance with this Act will help to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people of this State.

SECTION 2. The Hawaii Revised Statutes is amended by adding a new chapter to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

"Chapter

TRAFFIC-CONTROL SIGNAL MONITORING SYSTEM

§ -1 Definitions. As used in this chapter, unless the context clearly requires otherwise:

"Agency" means:

(1) For a traffic-control signal operated and maintained at an intersection under the control of the State, the law enforcement agency primarily responsible for traffic control at that intersection; or

(2) For a traffic-control signal operated and maintained at an intersection under the control of a county, the police department or other law enforcement agency of the county that is authorized to issue citations for a violation of applicable laws.

"Owner":

(1) Means the registered owner of a motor vehicle or a lessee of a motor vehicle under a lease of six months or more; and

(2) Does not include a motor vehicle rental or leasing company.

"Recorded images" means images recorded by a traffic-control signal monitoring system:

(1) On:

(A) Two or more photographs;

(B) Two or more microphotographs;

(C) Two or more electronic images;

(D) Videotape; or

(E) Any other medium; and

(2) Showing:

(A) The rear of a motor vehicle and, on at least one image or portion of tape, clearly identifying the plate number of the motor vehicle; and

(B) The face of the driver.

"Traffic-control signal" has the same meaning as defined in section 291C-1.

"Traffic-control signal monitoring system" means a device with one or more motor vehicle sensors working in conjunction with a traffic-control signal to produce recorded images of motor vehicles entering an intersection against a red signal indication.

§ -2 Applicability of chapter; designation of appropriate locations. (a) This chapter applies to a violation of section 291C-32(a)(3) at an intersection monitored by a traffic-control signal monitoring system.

(b) A traffic-control signal monitoring system shall be installed and operated at a maximum of five intersections in counties having populations of greater than five hundred thousand persons. The intersections shall be selected by the police department of the county, in consultation with the department of transportation, and shall include the intersections that the police department considers to be the most dangerous for vehicles and pedestrians, including those having the most collisions, injuries, and deaths each year.

§ -3 Violations; civil penalties; district court reimbursement. (a) Unless the driver of the motor vehicle received a citation from a police officer at the time of the violation, the owner or, in accordance with section -6(e), the driver of a motor vehicle is subject to a civil penalty if the motor vehicle is recorded by a traffic-control signal monitoring system while being operated in violation of section 291C-32(a)(3).

(b) A civil penalty under this section may not exceed $100.

(c) For the purposes of this section, the district court shall prescribe:

(1) A uniform citation form consistent with section     -4(a); and

(2) A civil penalty, which shall be indicated on the citation, to be paid by persons who choose to prepay the civil penalty without appearing in district court; provided that the civil penalty shall be established, and may be adjusted from time to time, to provide sufficient funds to allow the traffic-control signal monitoring system established by this chapter to be self-supporting through the payment of fines for violations.

(d) The district court shall be reimbursed from the traffic-control signal monitoring revolving fund established in section -12 for all necessary expenses incurred in the implementation of the traffic-control signal monitoring system, including without limitation the manufacture of citations prescribed in subsection (c)(1).

§ -4 Citations; warning notice. (a) Subject to subsections (b) to (d), an agency shall mail to the owner liable under section -3 a citation that shall include:

(1) The name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle;

(2) The registration number of the motor vehicle involved in the violation;

(3) The violation charged;

(4) The location of the intersection;

(5) The date and time of the violation;

(6) A copy of the recorded image;

(7) The amount of the civil penalty imposed and the date by which the civil penalty should be paid;

(8) A signed statement by a technician employed by the agency, based on inspection of recorded images, that the motor vehicle was being operated in violation of section 291C-32(a)(3);

(9) A statement that recorded images are evidence of a violation of section 291C-32(a)(3); and

(10) Information advising the person alleged to be liable under this section:

(A) Of the manner and time in which liability as alleged in the citation may be contested in the district court; and

(B) Warning that failure to pay the civil penalty or to contest liability in a timely manner is an admission of liability and may result in refusal or suspension of motor vehicle registration.

(b) The agency may mail a warning notice in lieu of a citation to the owner liable under section -3.

(c) Except as provided in section -6(e), a citation issued under this section shall be mailed no later than two weeks after the alleged violation.

(d) An agency may not mail a citation to a person who is not an owner as defined in section -1.

(e) A person who receives a citation under subsection (a) may:

(1) Pay the civil penalty, in accordance with instructions on the citation, directly to the county or to the district court; or

(2) Elect to stand trial for the alleged violation.

(f) A citation issued pursuant to this section shall provide that the person receiving the citation may elect to stand trial by notifying the issuing agency of the person's intention to stand trial at least five days prior to the date of payment as set forth in the citation. On receipt of the notice to stand trial, the agency shall forward to the district court having venue a copy of the citation and a copy of the notice from the person who received the citation indicating the person's intention to stand trial. On receipt thereof, the district court shall schedule the case for trial and notify the defendant of the trial date under procedures adopted by the chief judge of the district court.

(g) A citation issued as the result of a traffic-control signal monitoring system controlled by a county, in an uncontested case, shall provide that the penalty shall be paid directly to that county. A citation issued as the result of a traffic-control signal monitoring system controlled by a state agency shall provide that the penalty shall be paid directly to the district court.

§ -5 Evidence. (a) A certificate alleging that the violation of section 291C-32(a)(3) occurred, sworn to or affirmed by a duly authorized agent of the agency, based on inspection of recorded images produced by a traffic-control signal monitoring system, shall be evidence of the facts contained therein and shall be admissible in any proceeding alleging a violation under this chapter.

(b) Adjudication of liability shall be based on a preponderance of evidence.

(c) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a traffic-control signal monitoring system is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under section     -4 for a violation of 291C-32(a)(3) without authentication. In any other judicial proceeding, a recorded image produced by a traffic-control signal monitoring system is admissible as otherwise provided by law.

§ -6 Defenses. (a) The district court may consider in defense of a violation:

(1) That the driver of the vehicle passed through the intersection in violation of section 291C-32(a)(3):

(A) In order to yield the right-of-way to an emergency vehicle; or

(B) As part of a funeral procession;

(2) Subject to subsection (b), that the motor vehicle or number plates of the motor vehicle were stolen before the violation occurred and were not under the control or possession of the owner at the time of the violation;

(3) That this chapter is unenforceable against the owner because at the time and place of the alleged violation, the traffic-control signal was not in proper position and legible enough to be seen by an ordinarily observant individual;

(4) Subject to subsection (c), evidence that the person named in the citation was not operating the vehicle at the time of the violation; and

(5) Any other issues and evidence that the district court deems pertinent.

(b) To demonstrate that the motor vehicle or the number plates were stolen before the violation occurred and were not under the control or possession of the owner at the time of the violation, the owner shall submit proof that a police report concerning the stolen motor vehicle or number plates was filed in a timely manner.

(c) To satisfy the evidentiary burden under subsection (a)(4), the person named in the citation shall provide to the district court evidence to the satisfaction of the court of the identity of the person who was operating the vehicle at the time of the violation, including, at a minimum, the operator's name and current address.

(d) (1) This subsection applies only to a citation that involves a truck, trailer, bus, or other vehicle having a registered gross weight of 26,001 pounds or more.

(2) To satisfy the evidentiary burden under subsection (a)(4), the person named in a citation described under paragraph (1) may provide to the district court a letter, sworn to or affirmed by the person and mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, that:

(A) States that the person named in the citation was not operating the vehicle at the time of the violation; and

(B) Provides the name, address, and driver's license identification number of the person who was operating the vehicle at the time of the violation.

(e) (1) If the district court finds that the person named in the citation was not operating the vehicle at the time of the violation or receives evidence under subsection (d)(2)(B) identifying the person driving the vehicle at the time of the violation, the clerk of the district court shall provide to the agency issuing the citation a copy of any evidence substantiating the identity of the person who was operating the vehicle at the time of the violation.

(2) Upon the receipt of substantiating evidence from the district court under paragraph (1), an agency may issue a citation as provided in section -4 to the person that the evidence indicates was operating the vehicle at the time of the violation.

(3) A citation issued under paragraph (2) shall be mailed no later than two weeks after receipt of the evidence from the district court.

§ -7 Inspection of recorded images. A custodian of recorded images produced by a traffic-control signal monitoring system shall deny inspection of the recorded images except:

(1) By any person issued a citation under this chapter, or an attorney of record for that person;

(2) By an employee or agent of a law enforcement agency in an investigation or proceeding relating to the imposition of or indemnification from civil liability pursuant to this chapter; or

(3) As otherwise required by this chapter.

§ -8 Number plate cover. (a) As used in this section, "number plate cover" means any tinted, colored, painted, marked, clear, or illuminated object that is designed to cover any of the characters of a vehicle's number plate, or otherwise distort a recorded image of any of the characters of a vehicle's number plate, recorded by a traffic-control signal monitoring system.

(b) No person may sell or offer for sale a number plate cover.

(c) No person may advertise for the purpose of promoting the sale of number plate covers.

(d) Any person who knowingly or intentionally violates this section shall be subject to a civil penalty pursuant to section -3. The civil penalty imposed pursuant to this section shall be in addition to any other civil penalty imposed under this chapter.

§ -9 Failure to pay penalty or contest violation. If the civil penalty is not paid and the violation is not contested, the appropriate county agency having jurisdiction over motor vehicle registration may refuse to register or reregister or may suspend the registration of the motor vehicle.

§ -10 Nature of violations. A violation for which a civil penalty is imposed under this chapter:

(1) Is not a moving violation for the purpose of assessing points and may not be recorded on the driving record of the owner or driver of the vehicle;

(2) May be treated as a parking violation; and

(3) May not be considered in the provision of motor vehicle insurance coverage.

§ -11 Procedures. In consultation with local governments, the chief judge of the district court shall adopt procedures for the issuance of citations, the trial of civil violations, and the collection of civil penalties under this section.

§ -12 Traffic-control signal monitoring revolving fund. (a) There is established within the state treasury a revolving fund to be known as the traffic-control signal monitoring revolving fund, which shall be administered and expended by the judiciary.

(b) The proceeds of the fund shall be used to implement the traffic-control signal monitoring system established by this chapter, including funds to the county police department and the district court as may be necessary.

(c) The fund shall consist of funds, appropriations, interest, investment earnings, grants, donations, and contributions, from public and private sources.

(d) The judiciary, in coordination with the county police department, shall submit an annual report to the legislature prior to the convening of each regular session providing an accounting of all transactions, activities, receipts, and expenditures from the fund.

(e) The county police department, in conjunction with the state department of transportation, shall seek all available funding to implement this chapter from the following sources:

(1) The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration;

(2) The Federal Highway Administration; and

(3) Any other applicable source of funds."

SECTION 3. Program evaluation; report. The police department of the city and county of Honolulu, in conjunction with the state department of transportation, shall submit interim and final reports as follows:

(1) The interim report shall present preliminary findings about the effectiveness of the project, and may include any proposed legislation necessary to facilitate the implementation or operation of the project. The interim report shall be submitted to the legislature and the governor no later than twenty days before the convening of the regular session of 2005; and

(2) The final report shall evaluate the effectiveness of the project, including:

(A) An evaluation of the costs and benefits of the program;

(B) Whether the program has resulted in changed driver behavior and fewer collisions, injuries, and deaths at the selected intersections; and

(C) Whether to expand the program to other intersections and other counties and make the program permanent.

The final report shall include findings and recommendations and proposed legislation as may be necessary, and shall be submitted to the legislature and governor no later than twenty days before the convening of the regular session of 2006.

SECTION 4. On July 1, 2006, the director of finance shall transfer to the credit of the state general fund all unexpended or unencumbered funds remaining in the traffic-control signal monitoring revolving fund.

SECTION 5. There is appropriated out of the general revenues of the State of Hawaii the sum of $ , or so much thereof as may be necessary for fiscal year 2003-2004, and the same sum, or so much thereof as may be necessary for fiscal year 2004-2005, to implement the traffic-control signal monitoring system established by this Act, including contracting with a private vendor with regard to chapter 103D, Hawaii Revised Statutes, to install, implement, and maintain the system as may be necessary.

SECTION 6. The sums appropriated shall be expended by the judiciary for the purposes of this Act.

SECTION 7. This Act does not affect rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun, before its effective date.

SECTION 8. This Act shall take effect on July 1, 2003, and shall be repealed on July 1, 2006.

INTRODUCED BY:

_____________________________