California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB390

Introduced
2/3/25  
Refer
2/18/25  
Report Pass
3/11/25  
Refer
3/12/25  
Report Pass
3/25/25  
Refer
3/25/25  
Report Pass
4/9/25  
Engrossed
4/28/25  
Refer
4/29/25  
Refer
5/7/25  
Report Pass
5/20/25  
Refer
5/20/25  
Report Pass
6/10/25  
Refer
6/10/25  
Enrolled
7/10/25  
Chaptered
7/28/25  

Caption

Vehicles: highway safety.

Impact

The bill imposes additional responsibilities on drivers approaching stationary maintenance or emergency vehicles, mandating them to change lanes or slow down significantly if changing lanes is not safe. Violations of these requirements are classified as infractions, subject to a fine of up to $50. While this bill aims to improve road safety, it may result in enforcement challenges as more vehicles fall under its purview, necessitating increased driver awareness to comply with the new regulations.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 390, enacted in 2025, amends Section 21809 of the California Vehicle Code to expand existing traffic safety regulations concerning stationary vehicles. Previously, the law required motorists to exercise caution when approaching a stationary marked Caltrans vehicle displaying flashing lights. This bill broadens that requirement to encompass all marked highway maintenance vehicles and any stationary vehicle displaying flashing hazard lights or warning devices, such as cones or flares. The goal of this amendment is to enhance safety measures for highway workers and prevent accidents on the road.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 390 appears to be generally positive, emphasizing safety for highway workers and road users alike. Supporters highlight the necessity of the bill in reducing injuries and fatalities due to vehicular incidents near work zones. However, some critics argue that expanding the scope of the law creates complexity in traffic regulations, potentially leading to confusion among drivers about their obligations when encountering stationary vehicles with flashing lights.

Contention

One notable point of contention regarding AB 390 is the issue of state-mandated local programs. The bill states that no reimbursement is required by the state for costs incurred by local agencies, which might raise concerns about the financial implications for local governance in implementing these regulations. This aspect has sparked debates about funding and the potential strain on local resources to ensure compliance with the new safety measures.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA AB2744

Vehicles: pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle safety.

CA SB50

Vehicles: enforcement.

CA AB1773

Vehicles: electric bicycles.

CA AB825

Vehicles: bicycles on sidewalks.

CA AB752

State highways: worker safety.

CA AB73

Vehicles: required stops: bicycles.

CA AB1777

Autonomous vehicles.

CA AB2583

School zones: speed limits.

CA SB961

Vehicles: safety equipment.

CA AB436

Vehicles.

Similar Bills

WV SB795

Relating generally to traffic safety

WV HB2344

Relating generally to traffic safety

WV HB5287

Relating generally to traffic safety

TX HB3726

Relating to the offense of passing certain vehicles on a highway.

CA AB2285

Transportation.

CA AB3191

Utility workers and vehicles.

KY HB19

AN ACT relating to the operation of a motor vehicle.

KY HB386

AN ACT relating to the operation of a motor vehicle.