I Oppose AB-382 Which Makes Unnecessary and Unreasonable Changes to School Zone Speed Limits

AB-382 Creates 20 mph School Zone Speed Traps 24/7 Regardless of Whether or Not School is in Session.

1. Broad and Unenforceable Definition of “Children Are Present”
AB-382 expands the definition of “children are present” to include any individual under 18 who is within 500 feet of school grounds at any time—including during nights, weekends, holidays, and summer breaks. This overly broad standard creates an impossible compliance burden for drivers and invites inconsistent and arbitrary enforcement.

2. Arbitrary Expansion of School Zone Hours
The bill allows local jurisdictions to establish school zones with 20 mph speed limits for any time of day or night by simply posting a sign or activating a flashing beacon. This could result in 24/7 year-round school zones, even when schools are not in session or no children are present. No other state in the country allows such unrestricted authority.

3. Reduced Effectiveness of School Zones
Data and best practices show that school zones are most effective when they are targeted to the times when children are arriving at or leaving school. Research by the Texas Transportation Institute and policy guidelines in cities like Seattle and Colorado Springs recommend school zones be active for no more than 30 to 50 minutes before and after school hours. Expanding the duration dilutes driver attention, decreases compliance, and ultimately reduces safety for students.

4. Over-Enforcement, Economic Burden, and Strain on Law Enforcement Resources
By enabling 24-hour enforcement and lowering speed limits on major roadways, AB-382 would dramatically expand the scope of school zone enforcement—leading to a significant increase in citations issued for minor, non-dangerous violations. Cities, particularly those participating in automated speed enforcement pilot programs, would be incentivized to keep flashing beacons on all day, issuing tickets to otherwise safe drivers even when no children are present.

This would result in massive ticketing volumes for infractions that are unlikely to pose actual safety risks, such as driving slightly over 20 mph on wide, multi-lane arterials during off-hours. These fines—often hundreds of dollars per violation—would impose a substantial economic burden on working families and individuals with limited financial means. For those unable to pay, penalties may quickly escalate, leading to late fees, driver’s license suspensions, or other long-term consequences that compound financial hardship.

Additionally, law enforcement agencies would be tasked with enforcing complex and ambiguous rules, including school zone speed limits triggered by the mere presence of a child in the area—regardless of visibility, proximity to the road, or whether school is in session. This would make enforcement less predictable, less effective, and more resource-intensive, diverting limited public safety personnel away from higher-priority traffic safety and criminal enforcement efforts.

In short, AB-382 would create enforcement conditions that are difficult to apply fairly, expensive to uphold, and ultimately counterproductive to both traffic safety and responsible use of public resources.

5. Lack of Demonstrated Need
Despite the sponsor’s assertions, statewide data does not show a widespread safety problem involving school-aged children being injured near schools due to unsafe speed. In one cited study in Los Angeles, only two collisions (0.004% of total incidents) near schools involved speed and resulted in no visible injuries. Current protocols, which already allow for lower school zone speed limits when justified, are adequate.

6. Engineering Decisions Should Remain with Experts
Speed limits and school zone protocols should be based on sound engineering judgment, not blanket legislative mandates. The California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CTCDC), after extensive study, previously recommended no changes to existing standards for school zone length, speed, or timing. AB-382 overrides those expert recommendations without new evidence.

Recommendation

We urge the Legislature to reject AB-382 in its current form. If changes to school zone enforcement protocols are to be considered, they should be based on engineering standards and implemented with clear, evidence-based guidelines—such as the adoption of limited-use flashing beacon systems tied to school start and dismissal times.

Absent such amendments, please Vote NO on AB-382.