BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 5 Page 1 Date of Hearing: May 15, 2013 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Mike Gatto, Chair AB 5 (Ammiano) - As Amended: April 30, 2013 Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:7-3 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: Yes SUMMARY This bill establishes specific rights for homeless persons. Specifically, this bill: 1)Provides that every homeless person in the state shall have a right to: a) Move freely, rest (as defined, and including sleeping), solicit donations, pray, meditate, or practice religion, and eat, share, accept, or give food or water in state or local public spaces (as defined) in the same manner as any other person; occupy a motor vehicle or recreational vehicle either to rest, sleep, or use for the purposes of shelter, provided that the vehicle is legally parked on public property; decline admittance to a public or private shelter or any other accommodation, including social services programs, for any reason he or she sees fit; b) Do any activity in (a) without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, harassment or arrest by law enforcement, public or private security personnel, or Business Improvement District (BID) agents because he or she is homeless. c) Engage in lawful self-employment, in the same manner as any other person, including, but not limited to, the right to seek self-employment in junk removal and recycling, without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, harassment, or arrest because he or she is homeless. d) Receive assistance of counsel, at county cost, if a county chooses to initiate judicial proceedings under any AB 5 Page 2 laws prohibiting specified activities, such as loitering. 2)Provides that law enforcement may enforce existing local laws regarding resting in a public place only if all of the following conditions are met: the person's county of residence provides General Assistance 12 months per year for employable, able-bodied adults compliant with county program rules; the jurisdiction is not an area of high unemployment, as defined; and the county's public housing waiting list contains fewer than 50 persons. 3)Prohibits the civil sanction, arrest, or harassment of any person or organization offering food or water in a public space to a homeless person. 4)Prohibits retaliation by an employer against a public employee for offering available public resources to a homeless person to protect the person from harm. 5)Provides that every local government and disadvantaged unincorporated community within the state shall have sufficient health and hygiene centers available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for use by homeless people. Requires the health and hygiene centers, at a minimum to contain bathroom and shower facilities, to be funded by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), and requires the department to provide notices identifying these facilities. 6)Requires law enforcement agencies to: a) Annually compile and review the number of citations, arrests, and other enforcement activities under laws prohibiting 16 enumerated activities, such as loitering, obstructing a sidewalk, lying down, camping, bathing in public spaces, etc. b) Make public the records of citations, arrests and other enforcement activities under laws that are alleged to be selectively enforced against homeless people, and to report these records to the Attorney General's (AG's) office annually. AB 5 Page 3 7)Provides that any person whose rights have been violated under this part may enforce that right in a civil action in which the court may award appropriate relief and damages, including restitution for loss of property or personal effects and belongings as well as reasonable attorneys' fees and costs to a prevailing plaintiff. FISCAL EFFECT 1)Hygiene Centers . It is unclear how many hygiene centers would be needed statewide, as the bill requires every local government and certain unincorporated areas to have a sufficient number of such facilities. It is assumed that the total cost to site, design, and construct a facility with two showers and two restrooms, and including providing utility service and other necessary infrastructure, would be around $400,000. (According to the Department of Parks and Recreation, the basic construction cost for such a unit is around $285,000.) If every city and county (about 540 jurisdictions) developed one facility, the one-time cost would be $216 million. This amount would be reduced to the extent some jurisdictions have existing facilities available for this purpose, though some larger jurisdictions would likely need multiple facilities. Ongoing operating costs associated with the centers, including 24/7 staffing (assuming one staff), maintenance and repair, and utility service. Assuming a cost of $150,000 per year per center, the statewide cost would be $81 million annually. Should more than one staff be needed, the cost would be significantly higher. The above are assumed to be General Fund costs, as the bill requires the centers to be funded by CDPH. To the extent homeless persons who are currently not making use of existing restroom and shower facilities use these centers, the above annual costs would be partially offset by public health and sanitation-related cost savings. 2)Annual Law Enforcement Reports . Assuming first-year costs of around $20,000 for each local law enforcement agency to track and compile citations, arrest, and other enforcement activities for each of the 16 enumerated offenses and provide AB 5 Page 4 a report to the AG, statewide costs for 350 police department and 58 county sheriff's departments would total $8.2 million. Ongoing costs would probably be around half of this amount. These costs are state reimbursable. 3)Right to Counsel . Counties could incur unknown, but potentially significant costs to provide defense counsel in cases where the county prosecutes homeless persons charged with the specified infractions. Given the bill's conveying of rights to homeless persons not to be singled out for such actions, the number of such prosecutions for these offenses would likely diminish over time. 4)Right of Action . Cities, counties, and the courts will incur costs to the extent actions are brought by homeless persons alleging violation of the rights conveyed under this bill. These costs are unknown but would be significant statewide. 5)Implementation . Every local jurisdiction will incur one-time costs for training and orientation of personnel, particularly for law enforcement, related to proper practices and procedures in light of the new rights and responsibilities contained in this bill. These costs, which are not state reimbursable, likely would be in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars. 6)Other Impacts . To the extent the bill leads to a reduction in the arrest, prosecution, and incarceration of homeless persons, there will be savings to law enforcement, prosecutors, and the courts. It should be noted, however, that the state's prison realignment, with its diversion of certain offenders from state prisons, has exacerbated county jail overcrowding and therefore reduced the likelihood of jail time for violations of minor offenses. It is unlikely, at least in the short run, that many jurisdictions would meet the requirements (per Summary #2) which would allow enforcement of local laws prohibiting resting, including sleeping, in public spaces. In addition, the bill allows for the offering of food to homeless persons in a public space. If, as a result, significant numbers of homeless persons were to sleep and/or be fed in public spaces, the fiscal impacts on cities and counties would be significant in terms of public health, sanitation, and public safety. AB 5 Page 5 COMMENTS 1)Purpose . According to the author, no state law defines a uniform standard protecting basic civil rights of our most vulnerable citizens. The author asserts that numerous laws "infringe on poor people's ability to exist in public space, to acquire housing, employment, and basic services, and to equal protection under the law. The Homeless Person's Bill of Rights and Fairness Act is a response that can help alleviate poverty and homelessness while protecting people from discrimination and ensuring a right to privacy and personal property." The author contends that cities have enacting "quality of life" or "anti-nuisance" ordinances, mainly targeting the homeless, which "criminalize sleeping, sitting, and even food-sharing in public spaces. Just like discriminatory laws from the past, they deny people their right to exist in local communities." This bill is sponsored by the Western Center on Law and Poverty, JERICHO, and the Western Regional Advocacy Project. The sponsors indicate that, with investments in affordable housing decreasing significantly over the last 30 years, there has been an "uptick in laws that make it illegal to be poor and homeless in public spaces." The East Bay Community Law Center adds, "We have seen firsthand the trend toward criminalization of homelessness, and its ill effects. Our clients are charged with trespassing for standing on a public sidewalk, while nearby housed people are - unsurprisingly - not cited. AB 5 would prohibit that kind of selective enforcement?AB 5 would curtail the government resources spent on giving homeless people citations they cannot afford to pay for acts that should not be criminal to begin with, and will thereby reduce jail and court costs that our state can ill afford to pay." 2)Opposition . This bill is opposed by many local government entities, including numerous individual cities, and by business groups. The League of California Cities, California Downtown Association, and California Special District Associations jointly state, "We recognize the interconnectedness of safe, decent, and permanent housing when addressing other needs of California's homeless population, such as mental health or substance abuse treatment, and unemployment. However, any solution must strike a balance AB 5 Page 6 between promoting health and safety for all residents and respecting the local designation of resources. Unfortunately, AB 5 would create costly mandates, blur the line between local jurisdiction authority, and undermine the local decision making process." Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081