Bills › 90th General Assembly
Relating to the use of automated traffic enforcement systems on the primary road system
Sponsored by the House Public Safety Committee
Where it is now
- Done: IntroducedMarch 6, 2023
- Skipped: SubcommitteeSkipped
- Done: House committeeMarch 30, 2023
- Stopped: Passes the HouseDied when the General Assembly ended
- Next: Senate committee
- Next: Passes the Senate
- Next: To the Governor
- Next: Signed into law
Died when the session ended The General Assembly adjourned on April 19, 2024. Bills that didn’t pass both chambers died. What’s a funnel?
What’s in it
In 2014, the department of transportation (DOT) adopted administrative rules authorizing and regulating the use of automated traffic enforcement (ATE) systems on the primary road system. After judicial review, the Iowa supreme court ruled the DOT did not have authority to adopt rules regulating the use of ATE systems. This bill codifies the previously adopted DOT rules. The bill applies only to automated enforcement used by local jurisdictions on the primary road system. The DOT is prohibited from using automated enforcement or receiving related payments from local jurisdictions.
Read the full explanation
Under the bill, a city or county (local jurisdiction) seeking to use automated enforcement is required to receive approval from the DOT. A local jurisdiction is required to submit a justification report, detailing the need for automated enforcement based on factors described in the bill. The DOT must approve or deny a local jurisdiction’s request within days, unless additional time is needed to gather more data or conduct a speed study. If the DOT approves a request, the DOT must prepare an agreement which must be signed by the department and the local jurisdiction. The bill requires ATE systems to be installed and maintained in a safe manner and limits the locations on or along a roadway where the ATE system is permitted to be installed. The ATE systems must be calibrated quarterly, and if a mobile ATE system is used, it must be calibrated before each use at a new location. Local jurisdictions are required to post signs in advance of locations where ATE systems are used to advise drivers of such systems. Each year, a local jurisdiction that uses automated enforcement must evaluate the effectiveness of the ATE system and report its findings to the DOT on or before May 1. The DOT must review the annual reports and determine whether continued use of automated enforcement is justified. The DOT is authorized to require a local jurisdiction to remove or modify an ATE system in a particular location. A local jurisdiction may appeal a decision made by the DOT by submitting a written explanation of the issue and any supporting information to the director of the DOT. Once the director receives the appeal, the director has days to respond. The director’s decision is final agency action. Automated enforcement must be used in conjunction with conventional law enforcement methods, not as a replacement for law enforcement officer contact.
From the explanation printed with the bill as introduced, written by the Legislative Services Agency. Amendments adopted later aren’t reflected. Full bill text
Fiscal note
Can’t be estimated Compare with other bills
The fiscal impact, if any, to local governments is unknown at this time. Table 3 shows each city’s use of ATE system revenue.
- Automated Traffic Enforcement Systems, Primary Roads · March 23, 2023
Nonpartisan cost estimates from the Legislative Services Agency’s Fiscal Services Division. The newest is first. Reading a fiscal note
Iowa Code it changes
Creates§321P.1§321P.10§321P.11§321P.12§321P.2§321P.3§321P.4§321P.5§321P.6§321P.7§321P.8§321P.9
Read from the bill as introduced. Each links to every bill touching that chapter of the Iowa Code. How the Code works
Lobbying
0 for · 3 against · 7 undecided · Who →
Similar bills
- HF 2681 Relating to automated traffic systems, including for traffic law enforcement and for captu…90th General Assembly · Signed by GovernorNearly identical
Matched by the wording of each bill’s explanation, or an identical title. Companion bills and renumbered versions of this bill aren’t listed; they’re the same bill.