CA SB 1292
in committeeEnhanced curb management system.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper
Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.
Quick answers
Did CA SB 1292 pass?
Not yet. CA SB 1292 is in committee and has not come to a final vote. Latest recorded action (2026-06-29): June 29 set for second hearing canceled at the request of author.
What is CA SB 1292 about?
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2030, a local agency, as defined, to install automated forward facing parking control devices on city-owned or district-owned parking enforcement vehicles for the purpose of taking photographs of parking violations occurring in bicycle lanes. Existing law requires a designated employee of a city, county, city and county, or a contracted law enforcement agency for a special transit district, who is qualified by the city and county or the district to issue parking citations, to review photographs for the purpose of determining whether a parking violation occurred in a bicycle lane and to issue a notice of violation to the registered owner of a vehicle within 15 calendar days, as specified. Existing law requires these photographic records to be confidential and makes these records available only to public agencies to enforce parking violations. Existing law requires any local agency that implements this pilot program to report to specified committees of the Legislature on the system's effectiveness and impact on traffic outcomes, among other things, by December 31, 2028. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the City of Los Angeles, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Inglewood, San Diego, or Long Beach, or the city parking enforcement authority within those cities, to establish an enhanced curb management system (system) that records images of vehicles for the purpose of enforcing parking violations or automating parking payments if certain requirements are met. The bill would require the governing body of the participating city to adopt a public ordinance or resolution that would authorize the use of a system in specified locations, including, among others, passenger loading zones and smart loading zones. The bill would require a participating city that automates parking payments by charging vehicles a fee for access to outline the fee, and any adjusted rates, in an ordinance or resolution. The bill would require the public ordinance or resolution to include an Enhanced Curb Management Use Policy (policy) that sets forth the specific purpose of the system, among other things. The bill would require the policy to be made available for public review, as specified. This bill would require the system to record images of the vehicle and license plate at the time of the violation, and requires, before mailing a notice of parking violation, that the image data be reviewed and approved by a peace officer or person authorized to enforce parking laws. The bill would require the notice of violation to be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days, as specified. The bill would require the image data collected by the system and any identifying information to be confidential, and would require the image data to only be used for the purpose of processing parking violations and charging vehicles a fee for access. This bill would require a participating city to observe a public information campaign for at least 60 days before issuing citations, as specified. The bill would require a participating city to submit a report to its governing body and the transportation committees of the Legislature, as specified. The bill would require the governing body of the participating city to approve an Enhanced Curb Management Impact Report (report) after implementing a system and would require the report to include specified information, including, among other things, the locations where the system was deployed and data for these locations. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Who sponsors CA SB 1292?
Richardson is the primary sponsor of CA SB 1292.
Description
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2030, a local agency, as defined, to install automated forward facing parking control devices on city-owned or district-owned parking enforcement vehicles for the purpose of taking photographs of parking violations occurring in bicycle lanes. Existing law requires a designated employee of a city, county, city and county, or a contracted law enforcement agency for a special transit district, who is qualified by the city and county or the district to issue parking citations, to review photographs for the purpose of determining whether a parking violation occurred in a bicycle lane and to issue a notice of violation to the registered owner of a vehicle within 15 calendar days, as specified. Existing law requires these photographic records to be confidential and makes these records available only to public agencies to enforce parking violations. Existing law requires any local agency that implements this pilot program to report to specified committees of the Legislature on the system's effectiveness and impact on traffic outcomes, among other things, by December 31, 2028. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2032, the City of Los Angeles, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Inglewood, San Diego, or Long Beach, or the city parking enforcement authority within those cities, to establish an enhanced curb management system (system) that records images of vehicles for the purpose of enforcing parking violations or automating parking payments if certain requirements are met. The bill would require the governing body of the participating city to adopt a public ordinance or resolution that would authorize the use of a system in specified locations, including, among others, passenger loading zones and smart loading zones. The bill would require a participating city that automates parking payments by charging vehicles a fee for access to outline the fee, and any adjusted rates, in an ordinance or resolution. The bill would require the public ordinance or resolution to include an Enhanced Curb Management Use Policy (policy) that sets forth the specific purpose of the system, among other things. The bill would require the policy to be made available for public review, as specified. This bill would require the system to record images of the vehicle and license plate at the time of the violation, and requires, before mailing a notice of parking violation, that the image data be reviewed and approved by a peace officer or person authorized to enforce parking laws. The bill would require the notice of violation to be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within 15 calendar days, as specified. The bill would require the image data collected by the system and any identifying information to be confidential, and would require the image data to only be used for the purpose of processing parking violations and charging vehicles a fee for access. This bill would require a participating city to observe a public information campaign for at least 60 days before issuing citations, as specified. The bill would require a participating city to submit a report to its governing body and the transportation committees of the Legislature, as specified. The bill would require the governing body of the participating city to approve an Enhanced Curb Management Impact Report (report) after implementing a system and would require the report to include specified information, including, among other things, the locations where the system was deployed and data for these locations. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
- Introduced
- 2026-02-20
- Latest action
- 2026-06-29 — June 29 set for second hearing canceled at the request of author.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Richardsonauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-06-29
June 29 set for second hearing canceled at the request of author.
2026-06-25
Assembly Rule 56 suspended.
2026-06-22
June 22 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.
2026-06-11
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2026-06-01
Referred to Coms. on TRANS. and P. & C.P.
referral-committee
2026-05-26
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
reading-1
2026-05-26
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 28. Noes 7. Page 4443.) Ordered to the Assembly.
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-05-05
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-05-04
From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2026-04-24
Set for hearing May 4.
2026-04-23
Re-referred to Com. on APPR. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5.
referral-committee
2026-04-22
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-04-21
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 2. Page 3958.) (April 20).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-04-15
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on P., D.T., & C.P. (Ayes 11. Noes 1. Page 3873.) (April 14). Re-referred to Com. on P., D.T., & C.P.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-04-10
Set for hearing April 20 in P., D.T., & C.P. pending receipt.
2026-03-26
Set for hearing April 14.
2026-03-04
Referred to Coms. on TRANS. and P., D.T., & C.P.
referral-committee
2026-02-23
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 23.
2026-02-23
Read first time.
reading-1
2026-02-20
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
introduction,referral-committee
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection]
2026-04-14 · pass · 11-1
Member-level votes (13)
- Arreguín: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Strickland: yes
- Seyarto: no
- Valladares: other
Do pass as amended
2026-04-20 · pass · 7-2
Member-level votes (9)
- Cabaldon: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Reyes: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Jones: no
- Seyarto: no
3rd Reading
2026-05-26 · pass · 28-7
Member-level votes (40)
- Cabaldon: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Wiener: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Stern: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Laird: yes
- Rubio: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Allen: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Reyes: yes
- Becker: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Limón: yes
- Strickland: no
- Valladares: no
- Seyarto: no
- Jones: no
- Choi: no
- Alvarado-Gil: no
- Ochoa Bogh: no
- Gonzalez: other
- Grove: other
- Pérez: other
- Dahle: other
- Niello: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=SB 1292. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.