BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                  SB 1320|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  SB 1320
          Author:   Hancock (D)
          Amended:  4/26/10
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMM  :  7-1, 4/20/10
          AYES:  Lowenthal, Huff, DeSaulnier, Kehoe, Oropeza, Pavley,  
            Simitian
          NOES:  Ashburn
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Harman


           SUBJECT  :    Administrative adjudication of transit  
          violations

           SOURCE  :     Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District


           DIGEST  :    This bill allows the Alameda-Contra Costa  
          Transit District to adopt an adjudication process and  
          impose an administrative penalty for transit-related  
          offenses committed by non-minors, and prohibits the City  
          and County of San Francisco, the Los Angeles County  
          Metropolitan Transportation Authority, and the  
          Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District from establishing  
          administrative penalties that exceed the maximum criminal  
          fine set forth in current law.

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law, Section 640 of the Penal Code,  
          makes it a criminal infraction for a person to engage in  
          any of the following activities in a transit vehicle or  
          facility:
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               SB 1320
                                                                Page  
          2


          1. Fare evasion.
          2. Misuse of a transfer, pass, ticket, or token with the  
             intent to evade the payment of a fare.
          3. Playing sound equipment.
          4. Smoking, eating, or drinking where those activities are  
             prohibited by the transit provider.
          5. Expectorating.
          6. Willfully disturbing others by engaging in boisterous or  
             unruly behavior.
          7. Carrying an explosive or acid, flammable liquid, or  
             toxic or hazardous material.
          8. Urinating or defecating except in a lavatory. 
          9. Willfully blocking the free movement of another person  
             unless permitted by first amendment rights.
          10.Skateboarding, roller skating, bicycle riding, or  
             rollerblading except as necessary for utilization of the  
             transit facility by a bicyclist.
          11.Unauthorized use of a discount ticket or failure to  
             present acceptable proof of eligibility to use a  
             discount ticket.

          The standard process for enforcing these criminal  
          infractions is for the transit officer citing the offense  
          to give the alleged violator a citation with a court date,  
          which the alleged violator signs promising to appear.  The  
          court later sends a notice to the alleged violator,  
          reminding him or her of the court date, listing the bail  
          amount, and stating that he or she must appear unless the  
          bail is paid.  On the day the case is set for a hearing in  
          court, the defendant enters a plea.  If the plea is  
          "guilty" or "no contest," the judge or magistrate fixes the  
          penalty amount.  If the plea is "not guilty," the court  
          generally assigns a later trial date.  At the trial, the  
          officer is subpoenaed and must appear.  In some counties,  
          the defendant may enter a plea with the court clerk or even  
          online, instead of in court.  In some counties, the plea  
          hearing and trial may be held at the same time.  

          State law provides that these criminal offenses are  
          punishable by a maximum base fine not to exceed $250 (which  
          becomes $950 when mandatory assessments are added on) and  
          48 hours of community service.  The judges in each county,  
          however, set the bail schedule annually.  In Los Angeles  







                                                               SB 1320
                                                                Page  
          3

          County, the actual base fines range from $25 for a first  
          offense to $100 for repeated offenses for most violations  
          and from $100 to $250 for defecating/urinating and carrying  
          explosives.  Once collected, the base fine monies are  
          distributed between both state and local governments on a  
          roughly 50/50 basis.  The assessments flow to various state  
          and local entities for things such as court construction,  
          emergency medical services, peace and corrections officer  
          training, victim-witness assistance, victim restitution,  
          and traumatic brain injury services.  A 20 percent  
          assessment goes directly to the state's General Fund.  

          Since the enactment of SB 1749 (Migden), Chapter 258,  
          Statutes of 2006, state law also allows for an alternative  
          civil infraction process in San Francisco and Los Angeles  
          Counties.  Under these provisions, the City and County of  
          San Francisco (the overseer of the city's transit system)  
          and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation  
          Authority (LAMTA) may adopt and impose an administrative  
          penalty and adjudication process for these same violations  
          committed by non-minors.  Similar to the process for  
          issuing and enforcing parking tickets, the issuing officer  
          serves the alleged violator with a "notice of fare evasion  
          or passenger misconduct violation," which includes the  
          date, time, location, and nature of the violation, the  
          administrative penalty amount, the date by which the  
          penalty must be paid, and the process for contesting the  
          citation.  If the alleged violator contests the citation,  
          then the issuing agency or its contracted processing agency  
          must provide an initial review.  If the citation is not  
          dismissed after the initial review, then the issuing agency  
          or its contracted processing agency must provide an  
          impartial administrative hearing at which the citing  
          officer is not required to appear.  If the alleged violator  
          is unsatisfied with the results of the administrative  
          hearing, then he or she may still file an appeal in  
          Superior Court, which hears the case de novo.  All  
          penalties collected are deposited in the General Fund for  
          Los Angeles or San Francisco County, as applicable.  

          To date, only San Francisco has implemented civil  
          infractions for transit offenses.  San Francisco has set  
          the fines for fare evasion and other passenger misconduct  
          offenses at $75 for a first offense, $250 for a second  







                                                               SB 1320
                                                                Page  
          4

          offense within one year, and $500 for a third offense  
          within one year.  

          This bill:

          1. Allows the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC  
             Transit) to adopt and impose an administrative penalty  
             and adjudication process for these same transit-related  
             offenses committed by non-minors.  The bill requires AC  
             Transit to follow the same procedures that apply to San  
             Francisco and LAMTA, except that the penalties shall be  
             deposited in the General Fund of the county in which the  
             citation is issued.

          2. Prohibits the City and County of San Francisco, the Los  
             Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority,  
             and the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District from  
             establishing administrative penalties that exceed the  
             maximum criminal fine set forth in Section 640 of the  
             Penal Code.
          3. Prohibits a person who receives a notice of fare evasion  
             or passenger conduct violation from also being cited for  
             a violation of Section 640 of the Penal Code.

          4. Requires the issuing agency, following a review of a  
             citation requested by alleged violator which does not  
             result in cancellation of the notice, to provide the  
             alleged violator a reason for that denial, notification  
             of the ability to request an administrative hearing, and  
             notice of the procedure for waiving prepayment of the  
             penalty based upon the ability to pay.

           Comments
           
          AC Transit historically has relied on passengers paying at  
          the farebox when boarding a bus.  With the need for more  
          efficient operations when the smaller, temporary  
          replacement for the Trans-Bay Terminal in San Francisco  
          opens in 2015, those AC Transit riders who board trans-bay  
          buses will be asked to pre-pay tickets and board on the  
          honor system.  In addition, AC Transit is planning the  
          development of rapid-bus lines within Alameda County that  
          will likewise rely on the honor system for fare payment.   
          As a result, AC Transit expects citations for fare evasion  







                                                               SB 1320
                                                                Page  
          5

          to increase.  According to AC Transit, allowing the  
          district to adjudicate any or all of the specified  
          violations through administrative review will free up court  
          dockets to handle more serious offenses and is consistent  
          with the trend to "decriminalize" minor traffic and parking  
          offenses.  Moreover, an administrative process will offer  
          fare evaders and other violators a less confrontational  
          setting while still affording them the right to a full  
          hearing.   AC Transit believes that an administrative  
          process will enhance public safety, increase the payment of  
          transit fares, and improve compliance with conduct rules by  
          transit riders.  

           The experiences in San Francisco and Los Angeles  .  San  
          Francisco is the only jurisdiction to date to adopt civil  
          citations for transit infractions, and its representative  
          reports that transit officers there issued 3600  
          transit-related citations in 2009.  

          LAMTA has studied the feasibility and financial assumptions  
          of an administrative adjudication system, is still  
          considering it, but has yet to adopt one.  One of the  
          agency's key objectives for such a system would be to have  
          access to adequate information on the status of individual  
          citations and the penalties assessed.  Currently, LAMTA is  
          unable to obtain this information from the county courts.  

          Staff contacted the Bus Riders Union in Los Angeles and the  
          San Francisco Organizing Project, two consumer-oriented  
          membership organizations active on transit issues, to  
          inquire about rider complaints or concerns with the actual  
          or prospective administrative enforcement programs in those  
          two jurisdictions.  Though, neither organization was  
          particularly familiar with the program, neither had any  
          concerns or complaints to share.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  No    
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  4/28/10)

          Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (source) 
          California Transit Association








                                                               SB 1320
                                                                Page  
          6


          JA:nl  4/28/10   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****