BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 917
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 6, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 917 (Lieu) - As Amended: May 16, 2011
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote: 5-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill:
1)Increases the misdemeanor penalty from up to six months in the
county jail to up to one year in county jail for specified
animal cruelty or neglect in order to conform to other
provisions of law relating to animal abuse.
2)Prohibits the sale of animals on roadsides or in other outdoor
venues, excluding cattle. Specifically, this bill:
a) Prohibits the sale of animals on any street, highway,
public right-of-way, commercial parking lot, or at any
outdoor special sale, parking lot sale, carnival, or
boardwalk.
b) Makes a violation an infraction punishable by a fine not
to exceed $250 for a first offense.
c) Makes a first offense that results in animal injury or
endangerment a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to
$1,000.
d) Makes subsequent offenses misdemeanors punishable by a
fine of up to $1,000 per violation.
e) Creates a series of exemptions for events held by 4-H
Clubs, Junior Farmers Clubs or Future Farmers Clubs, state
or county fairs, animal shows, livestock consignment sales,
public animal control agencies or shelters, rescue groups,
federally regulated stockyards, or regulated live animal
SB 917
Page 2
markets
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Unknown, likely minor, non-reimbursable local incarceration to
the extent this bill results in longer county jail terms.
2)Unknown, likely minor, non-reimbursable costs for prosecution
offset by fine revenue for misdemeanor violations of
provisions associated with the second and subsequent
violations of prohibitions against selling animals on
roadsides or other outdoor venues.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author contends this bill addresses an anomaly
in current law whereby animal cruelty is punishable by up to
one year in county jail and/or a fine of up to $20,000,
whereas arguably equally egregious instances of animal neglect
are limited to a penalty of up to six months in county jail,
and/or a fine of up to $20,000.
Regarding outdoor sales of animals, the author contends there
is a growing concern with the sale of pets along streets.
Several counties, including Sacramento, Los Angeles, and San
Jose have responded to this concern by passing local
ordinances to restrict their sale. The author is concerned
that many of the animals sold at these venues are mistreated,
ill, and/or diseased. The author contends the considerable
cost of veterinary care for these animals often leads to them
being abandoned or surrendered to animal shelters.
2)Current law requires pet stores that sell pets to abide by
certain animal welfare standards that promote the proper care
and treatment of the animals, thus reducing the risk of
disease. This law, however, does not apply to the sale of
animals along the roadside.
3)Proponents , primarily animal welfare organizations, contend
the absence of effective regulations results in pet animals
being sold in terrible conditions, including unsanitary
crowded cages and without food and/or water. They believe
this bill would alleviate the suffering of these animals while
they are awaiting sale. In addition, this bill makes the
SB 917
Page 3
misdemeanor penalty for animal neglect the same as the
misdemeanor penalty for animal cruelty. According to
proponents, it matters not whether an animal is tortured to
death or instead dies a slow and agonizing death from
starvation, dehydration, and/or disease.
4)Opponents , including the California Federation of Dog Clubs,
contend the bill's assumption that the sale of animals in
outdoor venues is cruel or leads to cruelty is off base.
5)Prior Legislation .
a) AB 2012 (Lieu), 2010, increased the maximum punishment
for misdemeanor animal
neglect from six months to one year in county jail. Gov.
Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 2010, stating, "The misdemeanor
provisions of the animal neglect statutes are intended to
address less serious offenses. While there is no question
that an animal suffers when criminally neglected, an
individual who intentionally maims, tortures, or mutilates
an animal should be treated more harshly by the justice
system."
b) AB 1122 (Lieu), 2009, criminalized the roadside sale of
animals. Gov. Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 1122, stating, "I am
concerned with the scope and unintended consequences of
this bill and that it does not assure the humane and
ethical treatment and welfare of animals. This bill has
unknown costs associated with the enforcement and
implementation of prohibiting the sale of live animals in
specified venues and could drive the selling of animals
underground or to private sites."
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081