California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB971

Introduced
2/14/23  
Introduced
2/14/23  
Refer
2/23/23  
Report Pass
4/11/23  
Report Pass
4/11/23  
Refer
4/12/23  
Refer
4/12/23  
Report Pass
4/18/23  
Report Pass
4/18/23  
Engrossed
4/24/23  
Engrossed
4/24/23  
Refer
4/24/23  
Refer
4/24/23  
Refer
5/3/23  
Report Pass
6/1/23  
Report Pass
6/1/23  
Refer
6/1/23  
Refer
6/1/23  
Report Pass
6/14/23  
Report Pass
6/14/23  
Enrolled
9/7/23  
Enrolled
9/7/23  
Chaptered
10/10/23  
Passed
10/10/23  

Caption

Vehicles: transit-only traffic lanes.

Impact

The enactment of AB 971 is poised to have significant implications for state traffic laws related to public transit. It mandates that both the agency overseeing the highway and public transit agencies collaborate on the placement and maintenance of visible signs and traffic control devices that designate these transit-only lanes. This requirement aims to enhance public awareness and adherence to the regulations concerning transit-only lanes, thereby supporting public transit as a viable transportation option, which could subsequently reduce traffic congestion and environmental impact.

Summary

Assembly Bill 971, introduced by Assembly Member Lee, amends Section 21655.1 of the Vehicle Code to expand existing laws regarding traffic lanes designated specifically for public transit. The bill aims to clarify and enforce regulations around transit-only traffic lanes, which are now defined to include lanes restricted to mass transit vehicles, taxis, and vanpools during specified hours. By placing this emphasis on transit-only lanes, the bill seeks to increase the efficiency of public transportation systems and promote their usage over private vehicles.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 971 appears to be largely positive among proponents of enhanced public transit measures. Supporters view the bill as a critical step toward improving public transportation accessibility and efficiency. However, there may be some reservations among stakeholders concerned about the implementation and the potential need for adequate compliance measures for the signage and public education. The overall response from legislators has been supportive, as evidenced by the unanimous voting record in favor of the bill.

Contention

Although the bill received broad support, discussions may still surface regarding the resource allocation necessary to implement its provisions effectively. There are concerns about how the changes will fit within existing frameworks of traffic management and whether local authorities will have the capability to adapt to these regulatory changes. Additionally, while the intent is to streamline traffic for public transport, some may argue about the necessity for additional regulations that could further complicate traffic patterns.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB980

High-occupancy vehicle lanes.

CA SB406

Vehicles: high-occupancy vehicle lanes: exceptions.

CA AB333

State Highway Route 185: relinquishment: County of Alameda.

CA SB989

State highways: Route 84: relinquishment.

CA AB2473

State Highway Route 185: relinquishment: City of San Leandro.

CA SB52

State Route 39.

CA AB261

Authorized emergency vehicles.

CA AB2272

State highways: relinquishment.