California 2021-2022 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB1079

Introduced
2/15/22  
Introduced
2/15/22  
Refer
2/23/22  
Report Pass
3/28/22  
Report Pass
3/28/22  
Refer
3/29/22  
Refer
3/29/22  
Report Pass
5/4/22  
Report Pass
5/4/22  
Engrossed
5/26/22  
Engrossed
5/26/22  
Refer
6/2/22  
Refer
6/2/22  
Report Pass
6/21/22  
Report Pass
6/21/22  
Refer
6/22/22  
Report Pass
6/28/22  
Report Pass
6/28/22  
Refer
6/29/22  
Refer
6/29/22  
Report Pass
8/11/22  
Report Pass
8/11/22  
Enrolled
8/30/22  
Enrolled
8/30/22  
Chaptered
9/19/22  
Passed
9/19/22  

Caption

Vehicles: sound-activated enforcement devices.

Impact

The bill is designed to improve noise control by providing law enforcement with advanced technology capable of detecting muffle violations effectively. It also intends to inform future policy regarding the appropriateness and application of such technology in ensuring compliance with California's noise standards. Additionally, it seeks to explore the effectiveness of these devices in accurately identifying vehicles not equipped with adequate mufflers or other legitimate sound sources that may trigger noise violations.

Summary

Senate Bill 1079, authored by Senator Portantino, seeks to enhance the enforcement of existing noise regulations for vehicles in California. Specifically, it adds Section 27150.4 to the Vehicle Code, mandating the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to evaluate the efficacy of sound-activated enforcement devices from at least three different manufacturers. The CHP is tasked with compiling the findings and recommendations of this evaluation and submitting it to the Legislature by January 1, 2025. This initiative aims to address excessive vehicle noise and improve compliance with existing muffler requirements.

Sentiment

While there seems to be broad support for addressing vehicle noise pollution, there are concerns about the potential implications for privacy and the effectiveness of the technology itself. Advocates of the bill argue that using sound-activated devices can lead to more effective enforcement and improved public safety. However, skepticism exists about the accuracy and reliability of technology in determining noise violations, leading to a debate on whether this might result in false positives and unfair penalties for drivers.

Contention

The bill introduces particular limitations related to privacy, as it ensures the confidentiality of recordings made by these devices. This aspect could create contention among privacy advocates who are concerned about surveillance and data collection implications. The legislative findings required to justify these limitations reflect a careful balance between enforcing noise regulations and protecting individual privacy rights, which may be a point of contention in legislative discussions.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB1331

California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework.

CA SB660

California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework.

CA AB3001

Zero-emissions buildings and sources of heat energy.

CA AB1122

Health data: County of Ventura: super user pilot project.

CA SB1488

San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District: Office of the BART Inspector General.

CA SB905

Carbon sequestration: Carbon Capture, Removal, Utilization, and Storage Program.

CA AB2418

Crimes: Justice Data Accountability and Transparency Act.

CA SB942

California AI Transparency Act.