Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Jestin D. Johnson FROM: Josh Rowan
City Administrator Director, Department of
Transportation
SUBJECT: Speed Safety Cameras
Implementation Update
DATE: July 10, 2024
City Administrator Approval Date:
RECOMMENDATION
Staff Recommends That The City Council Receive An Informational Report Regarding Implementation Of Speed Safety Cameras Under Authorization From Assembly Bill 645.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Assembly Bill (AB) 645, a state law passed in October 2023, authorizes Oakland and five other California cities – San Francisco, San Jose, Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Glendale – to implement and oversee a five-year pilot of automated speed safety cameras. Oakland has identified 18 candidate locations for camera placement and anticipates beginning camera operation in the second half of 2025. This informational report outlines key provisions of AB 645 and the next steps for implementation.
BACKGROUND / LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
The Safe Oakland Streets (SOS) Initiative aims to prevent severe and fatal traffic crashes, eliminate injury inequities, and carefully assess and mitigate equity impacts resulting from safety measures. Speeding is a leading cause of serious injuries and fatalities in Oakland. Every week, two Oaklanders, on average, are killed or seriously injured by traffic violence, and these crashes disproportionally impact Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC), seniors, children, and people with disabilities. Speeding is a primary factor in approximately 1 in 4 traffic collisions that kill or seriously injure Oaklanders. Pedestrians are especially vulnerable to speeding vehicles – while a pedestrian hit by a car traveling 20 miles per hour (MPH) is 90% likely to survive, a pedestrian hit by a car traveling 40 MPH is only 10% likely to survive.
Jestin Johnson (Jul 11, 2024 20:04 PDT)
Jul 11, 2024
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 2
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
Speed safety cameras, or SSC, have proven highly effective at preventing traffic deaths and injuries in cities across the United States and around the world.1 Some examples include significant reductions of vehicles traveling more than 10 MPH over the posted speed limit in Portland, OR, Washington, DC and Montgomery County, MD.2 SSC have also shown significant injury reductions in New York City and Chicago.3 Both the National Transportation Safety Board and the California State Transportation Agency have acknowledged the effectiveness of SSC in reducing speeding and enhancing road safety. SSC are also an important supplement to traditional traffic enforcement because they operate 24 hours a day, reduce the potential for harmful interactions between officers and members of the public, and free limited law enforcement resources for other purposes.
Oakland’s leadership has supported the multi-year effort to implement speed cameras through changes to state law. The Mayor and City Council adopted a supportive position for proposed legislation in 2021 (AB 550, Chiu), and the Mayor, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission (BPAC) adopted support positions in 2022 (AB 2336, Friedman and Ting). In 2023, automated speed enforcement was included on the city’s state and federal legislative agenda and supported by the Bicyclist and Pedestrian Advisory Commission at their April 20, 2023 meeting. In addition, Mayor Sheng Thao submitted a letter supporting AB 645, and the Privacy Advisory Commission PAC adopted a motion on May 4, 2023, declaring that it did not find significant privacy intrusion sufficient to oppose AB 645. The full text of AB 645 is included as Attachment 3 of this memo.
1 See https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SS1701.pdf for a survey of automated speed enforcement in the United States. SSC discussion begins on page 34 (PDF page 46). 2 Portland – 94% reduction of vehicles traveling 11 mph or more over the speed limit based on four corridors where PBOT had speed safety cameras installed. https://www.portland.gov/transportation/news/2023/10/5/pbot-begins-installing-new-safety-cameras- across-portland-milestone?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery.
Washington DC, 82% decrease as observed at seven sites selected randomly from 60 targeted enforcement zones in Washington DC, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3141/1830- 05?journalCode=trra
Montgomery County, 64% decrease of vehicles traveling >10MPH over the speed limit. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2016.1189076
3 NYC – 17% reduction in total injuries. **USDOT, ITS Joint Program Office. See https://www.itskrs.its.dot.gov/2021-b01580
Chicago – over a two-year period, 36 fewer fatal and severe-injury crashes, 68 fewer moderate injury crashes, and 100 fewer minor-injury crashes over a two-year period. See https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts/cdot/Red%20Light%20Cameras/2022/Sutton+Tilahun_C hicago-Camera-Ticket_Exec%20Summary-Final-Jan10.pdf
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 3
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
ANALYSIS AND POLICY ALTERNATIVES
Below are some of the key provisions of Assembly Bill 645 as they pertain to Oakland.
AB 645:
• Authorizes a city of Oakland’s population size (between 300,000 and 800,000) to install a maximum of 18 speed safety systems;
• Authorizes OakDOT as the city’s department of transportation to operate, maintain, and oversee the program (not OPD);
• Establishes that citations are issued to vehicle owners, not the driver, at the time of citation;
• Directs excess revenue beyond the cost of program operations to be reinvested into traffic calming and spent within three years of collection.
AB 645 has several provisions related to equity, including:
• A 60-day no-fee warning period once the cameras are turned on; • Ticket fee reductions between 50% and 80% for low-income populations, based on state definitions, as well as a diversion program;
• Defines penalties under AB-645 as civil penalties, not moving violations (i.e., there is no impact to insurance or points on license);
• Establishes a fine violation structure that accounts for income starting at 11MPH (1-10MPH doesn’t get a ticket), as detailed in the table below.
Figure 1. Citation structure under AB-645
Speed Violation
AB 645
Fine Indigent4 200% above
poverty level
4 An applicant who is receiving public benefits under one or more of the following programs:
(1) Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and State Supplementary Payment (SSP) (Article 5 (commencing with Section 12200) of Chapter 3 of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code). (2) California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Act (CalWORKs) (Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 11200) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code) or a federal Tribal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (Tribal TANF) grant program (Section 10553.25 of the Welfare and Institutions Code). (3) Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Chapter 51 (commencing with Section 2011) of Title 7 of the United States Code) or the California Food Assistance Program (Chapter 10.1 (commencing with Section 18930) of Part 6 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code).
(4) County Relief, General Relief (GR), or General Assistance (GA) (Part 5 (commencing with Section 17000) of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code).
(5) Cash Assistance Program for Aged, Blind, and Disabled Legal Immigrants (CAPI) (Chapter 10.3 (commencing with Section 18937) of Part 6 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code). (6) In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) (Article 7 (commencing with Section 12300) of Chapter 3 of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code).
(7) Medi-Cal (Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 14000) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code). OR:
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 4
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
0-10 mph $0 $0 $0
11-15 mph $50 $10 $25
16-25 mph $100 $20 $50
26 mph and over $200 $40 $100
Speed greater
than 100 mph
$500 $100 $250
Prior to implementing speed cameras, AB 645 requires that cities adopt a Speed Camera Impact Report (Attachment 1) and Speed Camera System Use Policy (Attachment 2). The Speed Camera Impact Report defines the purpose of the system, how it functions, how it will be paid for, and how the program affects civil liberties . The System Use Policy outlines what data is collected and other key provisions around data security and retention. Both policies are attached in draft form as appendices to this report and will be reviewed in detail by Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Commission at their August meeting. Each policy must also be formally adopted by the Oakland City Council prior to speed cameras commencing operation. DOT staff will request formal adoption through a subsequent Council action in 2025.
Figure 2. Speed Camera Impact Report Summary
State Law Specification OakDOT’s Response
What is the purpose of the
system?
To enforce speed limits 24/7 at 18 locations to slow vehicle speeds
How does the system work? Fixed camera system with radar to detect speeding violations, mailed notices of violation with messaging and fines
How much will this cost, and
where is the money coming
from?
OakDOT’s Operating Budget will fund the program, and
the cost of staff labor and contract could be up to $1.75 million annually (see Fiscal Impact section for additional detail)
b) An applicant whose monthly income is 125 percent or less of the current poverty guidelines updated periodically in the Federal Register by the United States Department of Health and Human Services under the authority of paragraph (2) of Section 9902 of Title 42 of the United States Code.
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 5
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
How will this program affect
civil rights, and how will those
rights be safeguarded?
Minimal (or positive) impacts to civil rights:
Unbiased enforcement reduces exposure to discrimination; focus on license plate number minimizes the collection of personally identifiable information
Figure 3. Privacy Provisions & System Use Policy Summary State Law Specification OakDOT’s Response
What data is collected? Rear license plate images for speeding vehicles only. No video or facial recognition is allowed.
Who can access the data? Individuals in authorized City of Oakland job classifications and those specifically authorized by the vendor to provide technical support. All data collected is confidential and will be maintained in compliance with applicable laws,
including but not limited to AB-645 and the Oakland
Municipal Code.
Who is the data shared with? No one outside of OakDOT (without a court order). System security and data compliance will be monitored by internal safeguards and vendor-maintained industry standard
practices for data management.
Where is the data stored? Locally & on the Software As a Service (SAAS) platform
Site Selection
OakDOT based its speed camera site selection off the specifications in AB 645. The chart below explains the agency’s response to the bill’s criteria.
Figure 4. Speed camera site selection
State Law Specification OakDOT’s Response
Cameras shall be located on a
high-injury street, a school zone
street, or a street with
documented speed racing
All proposed camera locations are on the high-injury network; additionally, several proposed locations are adjacent to schools and in locations with speed-related collisions
Cameras cannot be located on
state highways, freeways, or
expressways
All cameras will be located on city-owned streets. This restriction primarily excludes freeways and segments of International and San Pablo Blvd owned by Caltrans.
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 6
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
Cameras should be located in
areas that are “geographically
and socioeconomically diverse”
Camera locations will be spread throughout Oakland, with at least 1 camera per City Council district
To keep a camera location after
18 months, there must be
measurable reductions in
speeding behavior
Proposed camera locations are prioritized in locations with vehicle speeds exceeding 10 MPH over the speed limit
Building off state law as specified above, OakDOT initiated its site selection process with the 2024 High Injury Network (HIN), or street segments in Oakland with the highest density of fatal and severe collisions. The HIN is determined based on three separate mode-specific HINs:
pedestrian, bicyclist, and motor vehicle. Creating separate HINs allows the pedestrian and bicyclist crash networks to be analyzed distinct from the motorist network, which might otherwise dominate the map. For speed camera site selection, the agency prioritized camera placement on streets with two or three overlapping modes. As another prioritization factor, OakDOT also identified street segments with high concentrations of serious and fatal injuries, with speed as a primary factor.
Following this analysis, OakDOT collected data at 43 potential locations for speed cameras in the form of 72-hour tube counts to collect traffic speeds and volumes. These 43 locations were narrowed down to 18 proposed locations based on the following criteria:
• Number and percentage of daily vehicles traveling greater than 10 MPH over the speed limit
• Proximity to sensitive land uses (i.eschools, senior centers, parks, commercial districts, uncontrolled crosswalks)
• Geography (i.eavoiding concentrating too many cameras in one neighborhood as per AB 645 requirements)
• Planned capital projects
• Initial technical review for installation feasibility
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 7
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
Figure 5. OakDOT 2024 High Injury Network Weighted By Mode
The proposed list of 18 potential speed camera locations and justification for SSC is outlined below. Additional study and detailed site review will be needed prior to implementation to ensure all locations are technically feasible. After installation, OakDOT will continuously monitor number of citations issued and the speed and number of vehicles traveling more than 10 MPH over the speed limit. In addition, under AB 645, there must be measurable reductions in speeding behavior to keep a camera location after 18 months. OakDOT is also required to issue a racial and economic justice evaluation at the end of the five-year operations period.
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
Figure 6. List of potential automated speed enforcement locations Location
(Main Street)
Location (Cross
Streets)
Speed
Limit
85th
Percentile
Speed
Number of Daily
Vehicles >10 MPH
Over Posted Limit
% of Daily Vehicles
> 10 MPH Over
Posted Limit
Additional Reasoning for SSC
73rd Avenue Between Fresno and
Krause 35 MPH 41 MPH 1,514 6.2% High observed speed from vehicles adjacent to Markham Elementary and Eastmont Transit Center
7th St. Between Adeline St
and Linden St 30 MPH 39 MPH 1,760 14.6% Speeding from vehicles traveling to and from freeways; uncontrolled crossings; proximity to As-Salam Mosque
7th St. Between Broadway
and Franklin Streets 20 MPH 27 MPH 662 5.2% Concentration of seniors, children, and pedestrians in Chinatown
98th Avenue Between Blake Drive
and Gould Street 30 MPH 37 MPH 1,340 6.6% Proximity to speed related injury collisions; speeding observed from vehicles traveling to and from I-880
98th Avenue Between Cherry and
Birch 30 MPH 34 MPH 469 3.10% Adjacent to Elmhurst United Middle School; proximity to speed related injury collisions
Bancroft Ave Between 86th Ave
and Auseon Ave 30 MPH 38 MPH 1,247 8.10% Uncontrolled crosswalks; proximity to schools, churches Bancroft Ave Between 65th and
66th 30 MPH 34 MPH 266 2.90% Uncontrolled crosswalks; proximity to schools, churches Broadway Between 26th and
27th St 20 MPH 27 MPH 1,136 9.20% Concentration of speed related injury collisions; concentration of pedestrians on Broadway commercial corridor
Claremont
Avenue
Hillegass Avenue
and College Avenue ?0 MPH 37 MPH 636 5.8% Vehicles speeding to and from SR 24; new addition (2024) to High Injury Network
Foothill Blvd Between Irving and
24th 25 MPH 29 MPH 252 2.87% Proximity to speed related collisions; uncontrolled crosswalks Foothill Blvd. Between 19th and
20th 30 MPH 33 MPH 203 2.8% Proximity to speed related collisions; uncontrolled crosswalks; proximity to San Antonio Recreation Area
Fruitvale
Avenue
Between Galindo
Street and Logan
Street
25 MPH 30 MPH 458 3.60% Uncontrolled crosswalks; proximity to schools, churches Hegenberger
Road
Between Spencer
and Hawley 40 MPH 57 MPH 10,029 43% Freeway-like segment with four travel lanes in each direction; proximity to speed-related injury collisions
International
Blvd
Between 40th and
41st 25 MPH 29 MPH 767 4.9% High observed speeding from vehicles illegally using the transit lane; concentration of speed-related injury collisions Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 9
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
Location
(Main Street)
Location (Cross
Streets)
Speed
Limit
85th
Percentile
Speed
Number of Daily
Vehicles >10 MPH
Over Posted Limit
% of Daily Vehicles
> 10 MPH Over
Posted Limit
Additional Reasoning for SSC
MacArthur
Blvd.
Between Green Acre
Road and Enos Ave 30 MPH 38 MPH 667 8.0% High observed speeds from vehicles traveling to and from I- 580, long section of MacArthur without a traffic signal MLK Jr. Way Between 42nd and
43rd 30 MPH 37 MPH 540 7.43% High observed speeds with two travel lanes in each direction, uncontrolled crosswalks
San Pablo
Avenue
Between Athens and
Sycamore 25 MPH 32 MPH 585 6.72% Concentration of speed related injury collisions; uncontrolled crosswalks
West Grand Between Chestnut
and Linden 30 MPH 39 MPH 1,538 11.7% High observed speeds from vehicles traveling to and from freeways; preschool on block
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 10
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
Figure 7. Map of potential automated speed enforcement locations
Project Schedule
The next steps towards implementing speed safety cameras are as follows:
• Present Impact Report and Use Policy to the Privacy Advisory Commission (August 2024)
• Release a request for proposals (RFP) for a speed safety camera vendor and citation processing support (July/August)
• Conduct community outreach through various public and one-on-one meetings (July- October)
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 11
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
• Return to Council to award a vendor contract, adopt the impact report and use policy, and take other necessary actions (2025)
• Initiate a wider public outreach campaign in advance of program start (2025) • Begin camera operation with a 60-day warning period (2025)
Speed cameras also support the following citywide priorities:
Holistic community safety: SSC have improved transportation safety for users of all modes (walking, rolling, biking, driving, etc.) where implemented in other cities, and are likely to have similar impacts in Oakland.
Vibrant, sustainable infrastructure: By slowing traffic on Oakland streets, SSC may encourage more people to use sustainable modes such as walking and biking.
Responsive, trustworthy government: SSC respond to a well-documented need for improved traffic safety on Oakland streets. They also provide a method of traffic enforcement that minimizes interaction with law enforcement personnel.
FISCAL IMPACT
Speed camera systems are typically billed by camera vendors to municipalities on a monthly, flat fee basis. This flat fee includes installation, maintenance, and citation processing costs, regardless of how many citations are issued. Based on an estimate of 35 cameras (one per direction of travel on 18 streets, except for one one-way segment on 7th Street), at an average cost of $4,000 per camera per month, the hardware and software for 35 cameras will cost approximately $1.7M annually. Additional costs for program management and citation processing will be incorporated into OakDOT’s operating budget through the biennial budget process.
OakDOT identified an initial $700,000 to support capital and startup costs in the mid-cycle budget (Project to be determined, Organization 35241, Fund 2219). The agency plans to seek additional funding from external sources, in particular a potential $2M grant from the Alameda CTC Comprehensive Investment Program (CIP), in fall 2024. Monthly payments will not commence until the program formally begins in 2025.
OakDOT anticipates that a percentage of the costs described above will be recouped by camera revenue, which will be allocated to a dedicated fund. This percentage will be unknown until cameras begin operation and is likely to fluctuate over time. As per AB 645, any excess revenue beyond the cost of program operations must be dedicated exclusively to traffic calming. Prior to receiving revenue from the cameras, OakDOT will fund camera operation through the biennial budget process, most likely in Funds 2218 and 2219.
PUBLIC OUTREACH / INTEREST
The development of AB 645 and prior bills related to automated speed enforcement included extensive public outreach and engagement with the public and stakeholders concerned with Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 12
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
traffic violence throughout California. Oakland specific outreach included consultation with the Bicyclist and Pedestrian Advisory Commission, the Privacy Advisory Commission, and various advocacy groups.
To meet the provisions of AB 645, Oakland is required to “consult and work collaboratively with relevant local stakeholder organizations, including racial equity, privacy protection, and economic justice groups.” Throughout the remainder of 2024, OakDOT staff will engage groups meeting these criteria through one-on-one meetings. Staff also plan to present at publicly noticed meetings such as the Privacy Advisory Commission, the Bicyclist and Pedestrian Advisory Commission, Commissions on Aging and Disability, etc.
OakDOT is also required to implement a public information campaign about SSC a minimum of 60-days prior to program rollout. The City will be jointly developing marketing materials with other AB-645 pilot cities, focusing on those in the Bay Area (i.e.; San Francisco and San Jose).
Finally, OakDOT is required to complete several steps prior to March 1 of the fifth year in which the system has been implemented, including data on program implementation, a summary of costs and revenues, and a racial and economic equity impact analysis developed in collaboration with local stakeholder groups. This analysis will inform the potential continuation and/or expansion of the program beyond the fifth year.
COORDINATION
OakDOT is actively coordinating the rollout of speed safety cameras with internal and external stakeholders, including:
• The Parking and Mobility Division within OakDOT on a combined Request for Proposals for parking citation management and speed safety cameras to be released this summer; • The Safe Streets Division within OakDOT to identify parallel investments that can increase the impact of speed cameras (e.g., citywide signage, signal retiming on other corridors, etc.);
• The Safe Oakland Streets (SOS) core team, including the Department of Race and Equity (DRE), the Oakland Police Department (OPD) and the City Administrator’s Office (CAO);
• The Oakland Public Library and Department of Public Works on potential fine diversion programs (e.g., community service); and
• AB 645 pilot cities – San Francisco, San Jose, Los Angeles, Glendale, and Long Beach through monthly calls and frequent check-ins.
SUSTAINABLE OPPORTUNITIES
Economic: Speed-related collisions have tremendous economic costs at the individual and societal levels. Reducing collisions helps to minimize the burdens on individuals (car repair, healthcare costs) and the city (lawsuits).
Environmental: Speeding vehicles disincentivize people from using non-motorized modes, such as walking and biking, due to perceptions around safety. Speeding and the energy Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 13
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
required to accelerate/decelerate from higher speeds are also typically less environmentally efficient than traveling at slower speeds.
Race & Equity: AB-645 contains several provisions that address race and equity, including a 60-day no-fee warning period once the cameras are turned on; ticket fee reductions between 50% and 80% for low-income populations, as well as a diversion program; civil rather than criminal penalties; a fine violation structure starting at 11MPH (1-10MPH doesn’t get a ticket; and requirements to consult with racial and economic justice groups both prior to and after implementation.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
Speed cameras are not considered to be a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Sections 15060(c) and 15378(b). A formal CEQA determination will be adopted in a future resolution.
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Staff Recommends That The City Council Staff Recommends That The City Council Receive An Informational Report Regarding Implementation Of Speed Safety Cameras Under Authorization From Assembly Bill 645.
For questions regarding this report, please contact Craig Raphael, Speed Safety Program Manager, at 510-238-7229.
Respectfully submitted,
JOSH ROWAN
Director, Department of Transportation
Reviewed by:
Jamie Parks, Assistant Director
Megan Wier, Assistant Director
Prepared by:
Craig Raphael, Speed Safety Program
Manager
Administration and Strategic Planning Division
Jestin D, Johnson, City Administrator
Subject: Speed Safety Cameras Implementation Update
Date: July 1, 2024 Page 14
Public Works & Transportation Committee
July 23, 2024
Attachments (4):
Attachment 1: Draft Surveillance Impact Report: Automated Speed Safety System Attachment 2: Draft Surveillance Technology Use Policy: Automated Speed Safety System Attachment 3: Assembly Bill 645 text
Attachment 4: Proposed Speed Camera Locations and 2024 High Injury Network by Mode