You have 30 calendar days from the mailing of a speed camera notice to request a free initial review from the agency that issued it. If the review goes against you, you have 21 calendar days from the mailing of that result to request an administrative hearing — the penalty must be paid first, unless you show you are unable to pay. If the hearing goes against you too, you can appeal to superior court within 30 days for a $25 filing fee, and the court hears the case over from the start. Every deadline and dollar figure in this guide comes from the statute — Vehicle Code sections 22427 to 22429, added by AB 645 — and from the published process pages of the agencies already issuing citations.
First, what this guide is
This is the process the law sets out, with each step sourced, because the notice itself compresses it into fine print. It is not legal advice, and it takes no view on whether you should contest a citation or what argument to make — that depends on facts we cannot know. What we can do is make the machinery and the deadlines plain.
Step 1 — the initial review: free, 30 days
Section 22427(a) of the Vehicle Code gives the recipient of a notice 30 calendar days from its mailing date to request an initial review by the issuing agency. There is no charge, and the agency must respond within 60 days. In San Francisco — the first programme to issue citations — SFMTA takes review requests online through the processor’s site printed on the notice, by mail, or in person, and is explicit about one thing worth repeating: do not pay the ticket if you intend to protest it, because payment closes the case.
Step 2 — the administrative hearing: 21 days, penalty deposited
If the initial review goes against you, section 22427(b) allows a hearing request no later than 21 calendar days after the review result is mailed. The civil penalty must be paid before the hearing — with one exception the statute itself requires: an agency must have a written procedure for waiving the deposit for anyone who demonstrates they cannot pay. If the hearing decides in your favour, the deposit is returned. The hearing must be held within 90 days of the request, and section 22427(c) requires a choice of formats: by written declaration, by video conference, or in person.
Step 3 — superior court: 30 days, $25
A hearing decision is not the end of the road. Section 22428 allows an appeal to superior court within 30 days of the decision being delivered or mailed, for a filing fee of $25. The court hears the case de novo — over again from the start, not merely reviewing whether the hearing was conducted properly.
If the fine itself is the problem
The statute builds in relief that the notice may not make obvious. Section 22429 requires payment plans with instalments of no more than $25 a month and a processing fee of $5 or less, and it cuts the fine itself by 50 percent for anyone with income up to 250 percent of the federal poverty level and by 80 percent for indigent persons. San Francisco publishes its reduced schedule: the $50 fine becomes $25 for lower-income drivers and $10 for recipients of public benefits such as CalFresh, CalWORKS or Medi-Cal, with the same proportions up the scale.
Where to start, city by city
Only two agencies under AB 645 are issuing citations today: San Francisco, since August 5, 2025, and Oakland, since March 15, 2026 — so theirs are the only live contest processes. In both, the notice itself carries the review instructions, and each agency’s programme page is linked from our city pages. Los Angeles, San José, Glendale and Long Beach are not issuing citations yet; when they start, the law requires the first notices to be warnings, and the same three-step process will apply to the real ones that follow.
Malibu is the different case: its PCH cameras run under SB 1297 rather than AB 645, with citations expected from late November 2026. Its statute sets the same $25 fee for taking an appeal to court, and the City’s adopted Use Policy describes its appeals process — we cover the details on our Malibu pages.