BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2011|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2011
Author: Arambula (I)
Amended: 6/30/10 in Senate
Vote: 27 - Urgency
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/15/10
AYES: Leno, Cogdill, Cedillo, Hancock, Huff, Steinberg,
Wright
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 10-0, 6/28/10
AYES: Kehoe, Cox, Alquist, Corbett, Denham, Leno, Price,
Walters, Wolk, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Wyland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 74-0, 4/22/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Domestic violence: mandatory minimum fine
SOURCE : Governors Office of Planning and Research
DIGEST : This bill increases the mandatory minimum fine
imposed on persons granted probation for a domestic
violence offense from $200 to $400.
ANALYSIS : Existing law imposes mandatory terms of
probation on persons convicted of domestic violence, as
specified.
Existing law provides that one of these mandatory terms of
probation is a minimum payment by the defendant of $200, to
CONTINUED
AB 2011
Page
2
be disbursed as specified. Current law further provides
that if, after a hearing in court on the record, the court
finds that the defendant does not have the ability to pay,
the court may reduce or waive this fee.
This bill increases this minimum payment from $200 to $400.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12
2012-13 Fund
Raises minimum fine increased revenue,
likely more
General*/Special**
than $1,000 annually
potentially significant increased
revenue Local
*A portion of the fine is distributed to the Domestic
Violence Restraining Order Reimbursement fund, which
reimburses local law enforcement for specified
state-mandated local costs. In the absence of sufficient
fines, the General Fund would be used for reimbursements.
**Domestic Violence Training and Education Fund
This bill would result in increased revenues to the state
and counties, compared to the current $200 minimum fine and
its funding allocation formula. Appropriations staff notes
that this bill does not, however, simply restore the
provisions of AB 352 which were in effect until January 1.
This bill raises the minimum fine to $400, and allocates
two-thirds of the funds to local domestic violence special
funds and one-third to the state.
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/30/10)
Governor's Office of Planning and Research (source)
Crime Victims United of California
CONTINUED
AB 2011
Page
3
State Public Affairs Committee, Junior Leagues of
California
California District Attorneys Association
National Association of Social Workers - California Chapter
Crime Victims Action Alliance
California Partnership to End Domestic Violence
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/30/10)
California Public Defenders Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office:
Since 2003, domestic violence offenders on probation
have been required to pay a fee, minimum of $400,
unless the court found that he or she was unable to
pay. However, last year no legislation was enacted to
extend the sunset, so the fee reduced to $200.
While the state and local governments struggle to
rebound from the economic recession and meet their
existing obligations, it is premature to reduce an
appropriate source of domestic violence funding. The
probation fee must be reinstated to its previous
amount of $400.
While the state and local governments struggle to
rebound from the economic recession and meet their
existing obligations, it is premature to reduce an
appropriate source of domestic violence funding. The
fee collected from perpetrators allows victims, who
escape abusive relationships, the opportunity to
access programs and services that help guide them to a
new start.
Domestic violence programs provide victims a support
system that assures them it is acceptable to abandon
an abusive relationship for the sake of themselves and
their children. It is important to decrease domestic
violence, especially in the presence of children who
can grow up to continue with the
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The California Public Defenders
Association, which opposes this bill, argues in part:
CONTINUED
AB 2011
Page
4
Currently, defendants in domestic violence cases are
already subject to the mandatory 52-week batterers
intervention program, which they must pay for or face
violation of the court's orders. Defendants must also
report to court and to their probation officer for
regular progress reports and must pay for the cost of
supervised probation, which can total well over
$1,000. These obligations have the practical effect
of limiting employment income and hours. Such
batterers intervention programs offer limited fee
reduced slots.
Increasing fines to be paid by defendants in domestic
violence cases will have the unintended but
predictable consequence of less overall fines being
paid, current program funding being depleted, and less
completion of batterers intervention programs. AB
2011 presupposes a wealthy clientele with bottomless
funding reserves instead of acknowledging the reality,
that many defendants in domestic violence cases are
struggling financially to meet the already numerous
obligations imposed in every domestic violence case.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro,
Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore,
Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes,
Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore,
Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Jeffries,
Jones, Knight, Lieu, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello,
Nielsen, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas,
Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra
Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran,
Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Blumenfield, Caballero, Huber, Huffman,
Norby
RJG:nl 6/30/10 Senate Floor Analyses
CONTINUED
AB 2011
Page
5
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED