Bill Commons

CA SB 671

enacted

Pedestrian crossing signals.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper

Quick answers

Did CA SB 671 pass?

Yes. CA SB 671 has been enacted into law as of 2025-10-03. Latest recorded action (2025-10-03): Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 326, Statutes of 2025.

What is CA SB 671 about?

Under existing law, a pedestrian control signal showing a "WALK" or approved "Walking Person" symbol means a pedestrian may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal. Under existing law, a pedestrian facing a flashing "DON'T WALK" or "WAIT" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol with a "countdown" signal, as specified, means a pedestrian may start crossing the roadway in the direction of the signal but requires the pedestrian to finish crossing prior to the display of the steady "DON'T WALK" or "WAIT" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol, as specified. Upon the first placement or replacement of a traffic-actuated signal, as specified, existing law requires that traffic-actuated signal to be installed and maintained to detect bicycle or motorcycle traffic on the roadway. For these purposes, existing law defines a traffic-actuated signal as an official traffic signal, as specified, that displays one or more of its indications in response to traffic detected by mechanical, visual, electrical, or other means. Upon the first placement or replacement of a state-owned or -operated traffic-actuated signal, existing law requires that the traffic-actuated signal to be installed and maintained to have a leading pedestrian interval (LPI) and include the installation, activation, and maintenance of an accessible pedestrian signal (APS) and detector that complies with certain sections of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) . At crosswalks with state-owned or -operated traffic-actuated signals and pedestrian hybrid beacons with pedestrian signal heads, this bill would require the walk indication and other visual signals to comply with CA MUTCD. The bill would require these pedestrian signal heads to have an APS pushbutton or touch-free APS that activates "WALK" or "DON'T WALK" intervals and other visual signals at signalized intersections in nonvisual formats. The bill would require touch-free APS to be installed at new signalized pedestrian crossings on capital projects on the state highway system, encroachment projects, and highway maintenance-funded projects, as specified. The bill would require, as soon as practicable, all existing state-owned or -operated traffic signals located in certain areas to be identified and recorded in the Department of Transportation management system (TMS) inventory database to assist future annual operational review requirements and coordination with local agencies for delegated signals. The bill would require LPIs to be implemented at these existing state-owned or -operated traffic signals locations at the next opportunity for regularly scheduled operational reviews. The bill would require local agencies to report the implementation of LPIs at locations where local agencies are operating state-owned traffic-actuated signals so these locations can be included in the TMS inventory database. By placing new requirements on local agencies, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Who sponsors CA SB 671?

Cervantes is the primary sponsor of CA SB 671.

Description

Under existing law, a pedestrian control signal showing a "WALK" or approved "Walking Person" symbol means a pedestrian may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal. Under existing law, a pedestrian facing a flashing "DON'T WALK" or "WAIT" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol with a "countdown" signal, as specified, means a pedestrian may start crossing the roadway in the direction of the signal but requires the pedestrian to finish crossing prior to the display of the steady "DON'T WALK" or "WAIT" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol, as specified. Upon the first placement or replacement of a traffic-actuated signal, as specified, existing law requires that traffic-actuated signal to be installed and maintained to detect bicycle or motorcycle traffic on the roadway. For these purposes, existing law defines a traffic-actuated signal as an official traffic signal, as specified, that displays one or more of its indications in response to traffic detected by mechanical, visual, electrical, or other means. Upon the first placement or replacement of a state-owned or -operated traffic-actuated signal, existing law requires that the traffic-actuated signal to be installed and maintained to have a leading pedestrian interval (LPI) and include the installation, activation, and maintenance of an accessible pedestrian signal (APS) and detector that complies with certain sections of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) . At crosswalks with state-owned or -operated traffic-actuated signals and pedestrian hybrid beacons with pedestrian signal heads, this bill would require the walk indication and other visual signals to comply with CA MUTCD. The bill would require these pedestrian signal heads to have an APS pushbutton or touch-free APS that activates "WALK" or "DON'T WALK" intervals and other visual signals at signalized intersections in nonvisual formats. The bill would require touch-free APS to be installed at new signalized pedestrian crossings on capital projects on the state highway system, encroachment projects, and highway maintenance-funded projects, as specified. The bill would require, as soon as practicable, all existing state-owned or -operated traffic signals located in certain areas to be identified and recorded in the Department of Transportation management system (TMS) inventory database to assist future annual operational review requirements and coordination with local agencies for delegated signals. The bill would require LPIs to be implemented at these existing state-owned or -operated traffic signals locations at the next opportunity for regularly scheduled operational reviews. The bill would require local agencies to report the implementation of LPIs at locations where local agencies are operating state-owned traffic-actuated signals so these locations can be included in the TMS inventory database. By placing new requirements on local agencies, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Introduced
2025-02-20
Latest action
2025-10-03 — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 326, Statutes of 2025.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Cervantesauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

  1. 2025-02-20

    Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

  2. 2025-02-21

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 23.

  3. 2025-03-05

    Referred to Com. on TRANS.

    referral-committee

  4. 2025-04-01

    Set for hearing April 8.

  5. 2025-04-09

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 15. Noes 0. Page 711.) (April 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  6. 2025-04-10

    Set for hearing April 21.

  7. 2025-04-21

    From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to consent calendar.

    committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2

  8. 2025-04-22

    Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

    reading-1,reading-2

  9. 2025-04-24

    Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 887.) Ordered to the Assembly.

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  10. 2025-04-24

    In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

    reading-1

  11. 2025-04-24

    (Corrected April 25).

  12. 2025-05-12

    Referred to Com. on TRANS.

    referral-committee

  13. 2025-07-15

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (July 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  14. 2025-08-20

    From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (August 20).

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable

  15. 2025-08-21

    Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

    reading-1,reading-2

  16. 2025-08-28

    Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 74. Noes 0. Page 2776.) Ordered to the Senate.

    passage,reading-1,reading-3

  17. 2025-08-28

    In Senate. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

    committee-passage

  18. 2025-09-03

    Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 11 a.m.

    executive-receipt

  19. 2025-10-03

    Approved by the Governor.

    executive-signature

  20. 2025-10-03

    Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 326, Statutes of 2025.

    became-law

Versions

Documents

Votes

  • Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar

    2025-04-08 · pass · 15-0

    Member-level votes (15)
    • Cortese: yes
    • Gonzalez: yes
    • Menjivar: yes
    • Blakespear: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Richardson: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Strickland: yes
    • Dahle: yes
    • Archuleta: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Limón: yes
    • Cervantes: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Valladares: yes

  • Consent Calendar 2nd

    2025-04-24 · pass · 37-0

    Member-level votes (40)
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Cervantes: yes
    • Richardson: yes
    • Menjivar: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Limón: yes
    • Durazo: yes
    • Niello: yes
    • McGuire: yes
    • Blakespear: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Cortese: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Strickland: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Grove: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Allen: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • McNerney: yes
    • Hurtado: yes
    • Jones: yes
    • Padilla: yes
    • Choi: yes
    • Stern: yes
    • Gonzalez: yes
    • Dahle: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Alvarado-Gil: yes
    • Becker: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Valladares: yes
    • Pérez: yes
    • Ochoa Bogh: yes
    • Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
    • Reyes: other
    • Archuleta: other
    • Rubio: other

  • Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar

    2025-07-14 · pass · 16-0

    Member-level votes (16)
    • Papan: yes
    • Hoover: yes
    • Ward: yes
    • Davies: yes
    • Lackey: yes
    • Ransom: yes
    • Wilson: yes
    • Macedo: yes
    • Rogers: yes
    • Ahrens: yes
    • Carrillo: yes
    • Lowenthal: yes
    • Aguiar-Curry: yes
    • Jackson: yes
    • Hart: yes
    • Harabedian: yes

  • Do pass. To Consent Calendar.

    2025-08-20 · pass · 15-0

    Member-level votes (15)
    • Fong: yes
    • Arambula: yes
    • Tangipa: yes
    • Ta: yes
    • Solache: yes
    • Wicks: yes
    • Caloza: yes
    • Dixon: yes
    • Pellerin: yes
    • Jeff Gonzalez: yes
    • Calderon: yes
    • Pacheco: yes
    • Elhawary: yes
    • Hart: yes
    • Mark González: yes

  • SB 671 Cervantes Consent Calendar Second Day

    2025-08-28 · pass · 74-0

    Member-level votes (79)
    • Michelle Rodriguez: yes
    • Zbur: yes
    • Jeff Gonzalez: yes
    • Carrillo: yes
    • Stefani: yes
    • Dixon: yes
    • DeMaio: yes
    • Krell: yes
    • Muratsuchi: yes
    • Ransom: yes
    • Schiavo: yes
    • Ahrens: yes
    • Tangipa: yes
    • Chen: yes
    • Blanca Rubio: yes
    • Bryan: yes
    • Papan: yes
    • Lee: yes
    • Soria: yes
    • Ellis: yes
    • Bonta: yes
    • Addis: yes
    • Aguiar-Curry: yes
    • Garcia: yes
    • Hadwick: yes
    • Hart: yes
    • Ortega: yes
    • Bauer-Kahan: yes
    • Nguyen: yes
    • Mark González: yes
    • Solache: yes
    • Gabriel: yes
    • Bennett: yes
    • Castillo: yes
    • Irwin: yes
    • Pellerin: yes
    • Harabedian: yes
    • Ward: yes
    • Schultz: yes
    • Calderon: yes
    • Ta: yes
    • Alanis: yes
    • Pacheco: yes
    • Macedo: yes
    • Wicks: yes
    • Connolly: yes
    • Bains: yes
    • Flora: yes
    • Sanchez: yes
    • Jackson: yes
    • Lackey: yes
    • Patel: yes
    • Davies: yes
    • Kalra: yes
    • Celeste Rodriguez: yes
    • McKinnor: yes
    • Petrie-Norris: yes
    • Ávila Farías: yes
    • Caloza: yes
    • Sharp-Collins: yes
    • Wilson: yes
    • Hoover: yes
    • Fong: yes
    • Gipson: yes
    • Patterson: yes
    • Quirk-Silva: yes
    • Rivas: yes
    • Rogers: yes
    • Boerner: yes
    • Arambula: yes
    • Ramos: yes
    • Lowenthal: yes
    • Haney: yes
    • Wallis: yes
    • Alvarez: other
    • Berman: other
    • Elhawary: other
    • Valencia: other
    • Gallagher: other

Related bills

No related bills recorded for this bill.

Official source

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB671

Attribution

Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z

Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:

Source and document changesStatus and relationship changes

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 671. 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.