Lower fines, safer streets? The Safer Roads Act deserves a green light | Opinion
My regular route to and from home often takes me down the W/X freeway corridor: Those two, long city streets that parallel the elevated portion of Highway 50 through the city. If you time the traffic lights right, you can often hit every green light — and move through town more smoothly than even the cars on the freeway.
Except, you take your life into your own hands when you do so; thanks to the multitude of drivers who run red lights like our city streets are a demolition derby, they’re determined to lose.
So, most drivers pause for a few seconds every time the light changes — a precaution I’m deeply grateful for every time a car blasts through the intersection, long after the light has turned red on their side.
In 2021 alone, 4,258 Californians lost their lives to traffic collisions. More than a quarter of these deaths occurred due to drivers who ran red lights, according to the Governors’ Highway Safety Association.
Every time I drive by a crash, it’s a grim reminder of the dangers of driving in Sacramento when no one seems to care about their own safety… let alone yours.
Compounding the dangers on our streets posed by red-light runners are the inefficiencies in how California uses existing red-light camera technology. A disturbingly large number of red light cameras in Sacramento County, for example, have been turned off because they were cost-prohibitive to maintain.
Senate Bill 720, or the Safer Roads Act, was introduced by Sacramento State Sen. Angelique Ashby, and it proposes a plan to help abate those deadly crashes by lowering — Yes, you read that right: Lowering — the fines for drivers who run red lights. It sits on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk now, awaiting his veto or signature.
If he cares about the lives and safety of Californians on our roads, he should sign it.
California’s red light traffic enforcement system has not been updated since 1995 and imposes some of the highest fines in the nation. Also, we are the only state that still issues automated red light camera moving violations that require a photo of the driver’s face, according to the non-profit group, Streets Are For Everyone. That’s not always possible, making it that much easier to fight tickets in court.
Ashby’s bill would place the responsibility for the fine on the vehicle owner rather than the driver by taking a picture of the license plate, something that’s much easier to catch a clear photo of, and thereby making it harder for drivers to challenge the red light violation tickets. The fines would also be dropped: from a maximum of $500 to as low as $100, not including associated administrative or court fees.
In 2024, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department declined to renew its $898,000 contract with Redflex Traffic Systems, citing costs due to a lack of payment on tickets that were intended to help pay for the contract. More than 20 red light cameras across the county were turned off, including 13 locations in the unincorporated county and 11 inside Sacramento city limits.
“The program was intended to be cost-neutral. It was never meant to generate revenue,” sheriff’s spokesman Sgt. Amar Gandhi told The Bee last year. “The fact that it’s losing money is why we’re shutting it down.”
Many drivers either fought the ticket in court, or refused or were unable to pay the hefty fines. That lack of payment affected the program’s revenue rates, and the Sheriff’s Department shut it down rather than paying the remainder of the contract out of its nearly $9 billion budget.
It’s a similar story across the state: According to Ashby’s office, difficulties in enforcing and recouping funds under the current system have forced many cities to abandon their programs, worsening road safety for all pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. The heavy fines haven’t created more revenue, they’ve actually created less.
SB 720 would also reduce the law’s current criminal penalties for red light camera violations to civil infractions instead, avoiding increased car insurance premiums for drivers. And if the car’s owner still wants to contest a red light ticket, they would need to attend an administrative hearing rather than a court hearing, which would further ease the burden on California’s courts. Any excess revenue from the program would be directed back to local governments for traffic-calming measures, including bike lanes, raised crosswalks and traffic circles.
While it may seem counterintuitive to lower fines and penalties for reckless driving, Ashby’s bill seeks to fine-tune existing law after nearly three decades of road testing, which is always a sound idea. Locally, SB 720 is supported by the city of Sacramento, Slow Down Sacramento and the Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates. Statewide, supporters range from San Diego to Sonoma County. Its main opponents are the National Motorists Association and the Western States Trucking Association.
“SB 720 represents common-sense reform that prioritizes public safety while protecting privacy rights — that’s why the bill passed with bipartisan support,” said Ashby in a text. “This legislation will give California communities the modern tools they need to prevent tragic deaths at our intersections.”
A 2017 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that red light cameras significantly reduced deaths: The rate of fatal crashes went down by as much as 21%, and in cities that ended their red light camera program, crashes increased as much as 30% after cameras were turned off, over what would have been expected had the cameras remained.
If Newsom signs Ashby’s SB 720, then there’ll be no further excuse for drivers to dodge fees, and no excuse for California communities to remove the red light cameras that save so many lives.
This story was originally published October 4, 2025 at 5:00 AM with the headline "Lower fines, safer streets? The Safer Roads Act deserves a green light | Opinion."
