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