AB 2372 (Vehicle Code §23301.5) establishes a statutory toll exemption for California-authorized emergency vehicles when certain vehicle markings, license plates, mission status, and operational judgments are met. The exemption covers toll roads, bridges, vehicular crossings, and high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, but the bill limits that exemption in specific return-trip HOT-lane scenarios and creates a formal certification and records process to resolve billing disputes.
Why this matters: the bill codifies when and how emergency responders may use tolled facilities without payment, shifting the administrative burden for disputes onto public safety chiefs and toll operators while preserving the operator’s ability to request dispatch logs. That matters for emergency fleet managers, toll authorities (public and private), and legal/compliance teams that handle interagency agreements and data requests.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill creates an exemption from tolls and charges for 'authorized emergency vehicles' that display an exempt California plate and required markings, are engaged in an emergency or 'urgent' response, and when the driver reasonably determines toll use will improve response times. It also requires toll operators to accept written certification from a public safety chief in lieu of payment, permits toll operators to request dispatch records on a showing of noncompliance, and allows parties to negotiate broader agreements.
Who It Affects
Fire departments, sheriffs, police departments, ambulance corporations, and other local emergency service providers that operate California-authorized exempt vehicles; public and private toll facility owners and operators who bill and enforce tolls; and agency legal and records staff who must certify incidents or produce dispatch logs.
Why It Matters
The bill standardizes a toll-exemption pathway and an administrative dispute process across California, changing how toll operators handle exemption claims and how emergency agencies document and certify vehicle use. It creates new operational, recordkeeping, and interagency negotiation obligations that will affect budgeting, compliance, and lane-management practices.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 2372 spells out when an emergency vehicle may lawfully avoid paying a toll and how that exemption is administered. To qualify, a vehicle must carry an exempt California license plate and visible agency markings or the word "Ambulance," and must be engaged in a defined emergency or "urgent" activity.
The bill draws a line between "emergency" (which implies use of warning lights) and "urgent" (an immediate public-safety response that does not justify lights), and it authorizes drivers to use toll facilities only when they determine it will likely speed response or arrival.
The bill creates a practical substitute for payment: if a toll operator bills a public agency for an exempt vehicle, the agency's fire chief, police chief, sheriff, ambulance CEO, or their designee may issue a written certification that the vehicle was on an exempt mission; the toll operator must accept that letter instead of payment. But the statute also gives toll operators a tool to challenge claims: if the operator reasonably believes a vehicle was not compliant, the operator can request relevant dispatch records or log books from the agency to verify the exemption.AB 2372 also compels toll facility owners or operators to negotiate a bilateral agreement with any local emergency service provider who requests one, covering terms for toll use and exemptions, and clarifies that such an agreement does not broaden exemptions to other providers not named in the agreement.
The bill explicitly excludes returning emergency vehicles from a HOT-lane exemption in at least one return-from-incident scenario, preserves the operator’s discretion to adopt stronger policies, and states that statutory Sections 23302 and 23302.5 do not apply to vehicles exempt under this new provision.Operationally, the statute shifts administrative friction: public safety agencies must be prepared to certify missions and to produce dispatch records on request, while toll operators must incorporate a certification-acceptance workflow and a records-review process into their billing and enforcement systems. The definition of "toll facility" in the bill is broad — covering toll roads, HOT lanes, bridges, and vehicular crossings — so the obligations reach most tolled infrastructure in the state.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires an exempt California license plate and visible public-agency identification (or 'Ambulance') for a vehicle to qualify for the toll exemption.
AB 2372 defines 'urgent' as an immediate public-safety response that does not warrant emergency warning lights and excludes commuting, training, or administrative uses.
Authorized emergency vehicles returning from an urgent or emergency response are not exempt from tolls charged while traveling on a HOT lane (subsection (a)(2)(C)).
A toll operator may send a bill to a public agency, but the agency chief or designee can certify in writing the vehicle's exempt status; the operator must accept that letter in lieu of payment.
If a toll operator reasonably believes a vehicle failed to meet the exemption, the operator can request dispatch records or log books from the agency, which must provide or make them accessible on written request.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Toll exemption conditions for authorized emergency vehicles
This provision sets the core exemption rules: to avoid a toll, a vehicle must display an exempt California plate, be properly identified or marked (agency name or 'Ambulance'), be engaged in an emergency or defined 'urgent' activity, and the driver must reasonably determine toll use will improve response. Practically, that makes the vehicle markings and the driver's judgment central to immediate compliance, not just after-the-fact certification.
Definition of 'urgent' and HOT lane limit on return trips
The bill distinguishes 'urgent' responses from full 'emergency' responses by saying they don't require emergency lights, which creates a lower threshold that still qualifies for exemption. However, the statute carves out a specific limitation: when returning from an urgent or emergency call (or related fire-station coverage), an authorized emergency vehicle shall not be exempt from tolls imposed while traveling on a HOT lane. That targeted restriction preserves some HOT-lane tolling integrity during return legs.
Certification in lieu of payment
If a toll operator bills an agency for an exempt vehicle's use, the bill authorizes a named agency chief or designee to certify in writing that the vehicle was responding to or returning from a qualifying incident; the toll operator must accept that certification as a public document instead of payment. This clause creates a low-friction dispute resolution path that relies on agency sign-off rather than judicial or administrative adjudication.
Records disclosure on reasonable belief of noncompliance
If the toll operator reasonably believes the vehicle did not meet the exemption, subsection (c) requires the agency to provide or otherwise make accessible dispatch records or log books relevant to the time period on written request. That places a records-production obligation on public agencies when a toll operator challenges an exemption and ties enforcement to documentary verification.
Mandatory negotiation of toll-use agreements
An owner or operator of a toll facility must enter into an agreement with a requesting local emergency service provider to set mutually agreed terms for toll use, including exemption practices. The section also preserves the operator’s right to maintain more generous internal policies and makes clear that a bilateral agreement applies only to the named parties, not automatically to other providers.
Interaction with existing law and definitions
The bill states that Vehicle Code Sections 23302 and 23302.5 do not apply to vehicles exempt under this section, and it defines 'toll facility' broadly to include toll roads, HOT lanes, toll bridges, and vehicular crossings. That ensures the exemption is interpreted to cover nearly all tolled infrastructure while sidestepping potential conflicts with existing statutory provisions.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Local fire departments and emergency medical services: They gain statutory clarity that properly marked and licensed vehicles can use toll facilities without payment when responding to or returning from qualifying incidents, potentially shortening response times and reducing per-trip costs for high-volume emergency fleets.
- Police departments and county sheriffs: The exemption simplifies operational decisions at the vehicle level and provides a predictable administrative path (chief certification) to dispute toll bills instead of protracted billing disputes.
- Ambulance corporations and private EMS providers with exempt plates: The bill gives them an explicit route to avoid toll charges during eligible calls, which can lower operating costs and billing complexity for patient-transport services.
Who Bears the Cost
- Public and private toll operators: They bear lost toll revenue for eligible trips, must accept agency certifications, and must create procedures to request and review dispatch logs when they suspect noncompliance, increasing administrative workload.
- Local public-safety agencies' records and legal staff: Agencies must maintain accessible dispatch logs and be prepared to certify missions and respond to records requests, imposing document-retention, staffing, and potential privacy review burdens.
- HOT-lane managers and congestion-pricing programs: The HOT-lane exemption (with a narrow return-trip exclusion) complicates pricing integrity and revenue forecasting, and operators may need to modify enforcement and lane-access controls to handle exempt vehicles.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances two legitimate priorities—speeding emergency response by removing toll barriers versus protecting toll-revenue integrity and preventing misuse—and it does so by delegating much of the verification work to agency certifications and records production; that trade-off reduces immediate friction for responders but increases compliance, privacy, and enforcement burdens for both agencies and toll operators.
AB 2372 builds a workable exemption framework but creates several implementation frictions. First, the statute relies heavily on visual cues (exempt plates and markings) and a subjective driver judgment about whether toll use "will likely improve" response time; that creates room for inconsistent on-road application and post-event disputes.
Second, the records-disclosure requirement shifts the burden of proof to public agencies to produce dispatch logs on request, raising operational and privacy concerns—agencies will need clear retention policies and secure, timely disclosure mechanisms to comply without compromising sensitive information.
Third, the bill's carve-out for HOT-lane return trips introduces an asymmetry that could produce gaming or perverse routing: drivers may take tolled routes inbound but avoid HOT lanes outbound, or conversely avoid HOT lanes entirely to minimize later dispute exposure. Finally, while subsection (d) requires toll operators to negotiate agreements with emergency providers, it leaves many details — cost-sharing, indemnities, data formats, and dispute-resolution procedures — to bilateral negotiation, which could lead to uneven treatment across jurisdictions and smaller agencies that lack negotiating leverage.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.