BILL ANALYSIS
AB 117
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 117 (Beall)
As Amended March 22, 2007
Majority vote
TRANSPORTATION 8-6 PUBLIC SAFETY 5-2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Nava, Carter, DeSaulnier, |Ayes:|Solorio, De La Torre, |
| |Karnette, Portantino, | |Leno, Ma, |
| |Ruskin, Solorio, Lieber | |Portantino |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Duvall, Galgiani, |Nays:|Aghazarian, Anderson |
| |Garrick, Horton, Houston, | | |
| |Huff | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS
(vote not available)
SUMMARY : Authorizes Santa Clara County to collect an additional
$2 penalty assessment for every $10 in base fines for certain
violations, for purposes of funding local traffic safety
programs. Sunsets the provisions of this bill January 1, 2013.
EXISTING LAW imposes a base fine, assessments, and other
applicable fees and penalties on a person upon a conviction of
an offense involving the unsafe operation of a motor vehicle.
Allows additional penalty assessments to be levied.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Moderate penalty revenue increase, in the range of $500,000
annually from 2007-08 through 2012-13, to Santa Clara County's
proposed Traffic Safety Committee Network (TSCN) Fund to
support traffic safety programs and courthouse construction.
2)Minor one-time costs, probably less than $25,000 in 2007-08,
to Santa Clara County to support the activities of the
countywide community collaboration committee.
AB 117
Page 2
3)Minor ongoing costs, probably less than $50,000 from 2008-09
through 2012-13, to Santa Clara County to annually report to
the Legislature on projects funded from the TSCN Fund.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose and background: According to the author, "Cities and
counties bear the brunt of the cost of motor vehicle
collisions and their aftermath. This bill will provide much
needed funding for a proven community-based approach to
traffic safety that will reduce the morbidity and mortality
associated with motor vehicle accidents and in turn provides
societal cost savings."
2)Penalty assessments: Since 1986, there have been various
studies undertaken by entities such as the Office of the
Legislative Analyst (LAO) and the California Research Bureau
(CRB) to study the statutory penalty assessments that are
levied by the courts on offenders and the state programs that
the funds support. According to CRB, "California now has
dedicated funding streams for over 269 separate court fines,
fees, forfeitures, surcharges and penalty assessments that may
be levied on offenders and violators. These fines, fees,
forfeitures (bail defaults or judgments and damages),
surcharges, and penalties appear in statutes in 16 different
codes in state law and are in addition to the many fees,
fines, and special penalties that local governments may impose
on most offenses. Criminal offenders and traffic violators
pay more than 240% in penalties over the original fine for
their offense."
As an example, for a standard moving vehicle violation, the
base fine is $35. With the addition of various penalty
assessments and court security fee, the total fine for a
violator is $166. For a $100 moving vehicle violation, the
various penalty enhancements plus the $20 court security fee
costs a violator $400.
3)Pending study: AB 367 (De Leon) of 2007, establishes a task
force as specified to evaluate and make recommendations to the
Judicial Council by December 31, 2009, for consolidating and
simplifying the imposition and distribution of court-ordered
debts. That bill passed the Assembly and is awaiting
assignment from the Senate Rules Committee.
AB 117
Page 3
4)Support: Numerous local entities within Santa Clara County
cite their active participation in their TSCN, which has
brought together diverse groups with the common interest in
reducing traffic related injuries and deaths in the county.
The community collaborative includes representatives from
health care, law enforcement, bicycle and pedestrian safety
advocacy groups, engineering, transportation, schools, courts,
and others.
5)Just one more penalty assessment or enough already? The
author cites numerous studies and statistics in support of the
proposal to use traffic fine penalty enhancements to fund
local traffic safety programs. The penalty assessment on
traffic violations would provide a short-term, five-year
funding for TSCN for its local traffic safety programs and is
a viable way to establish program funding. Funding for local
traffic safety programs appears, in fact, to be deserving and
worthwhile.
However, with the introduction of AB 367, the Judicial Council
is aware of the existing situation regarding the plethora of
penalty assessments and surcharges creating the existing
complex system of debt collection and revenue distribution.
And, the bill charges them to comprehensively make
recommendations on simplifying the state's criminal and
traffic fine and penalty assessments. Accordingly, it would
appear that the addition of more penalty enhancements may be
premature in light of the pending AB 367 and would exacerbate
the current complex situation of these court-ordered fines and
penalties.
Analysis Prepared by : Ed Imai / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093
FN: 0001004