BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 508
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 17, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 508 (Ian Calderon) - As Amended: April 9, 2013
Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:9-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill prohibits courts from garnishing wages from homeless
veterans for certain unpaid citations. Specifically, this bill:
1)Prohibits the courts from garnishing wages or levying a bank
account of a homeless veteran for five years for outstanding
unpaid citations regarding loitering, curfew violations, or
illegal lodging.
2)Provides that (1) applies when the court, during its routine
debt collection efforts, obtains information indicating that
the person subject to wage garnishment or levy against a bank
account served in the military within the last eight years and
is homeless.
3)Stipulates that the prohibition does not prevent wage
garnishment if the court subsequently determines that the
person is no longer homeless or that the court had previously
suspended garnishment of the homeless veteran's wages.
FISCAL EFFECT
Minor absorbable costs for the courts to implement the bill's
requirements within the existing scope of its current debt
collection efforts, as required in the bill.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . According to the author, homeless veterans are often
caught in a catch-22 situation where their homelessness
AB 508
Page 2
results in citations for offenses like loitering. Garnishing
their wages to collect unpaid fines makes escaping a cycle of
homelessness more difficult, leading to yet further citations
for similar offenses. This bill temporarily prohibits courts
from garnishing wages or levying against a bank account of
veterans in these circumstances.
It should be noted that the bill does not absolve the homeless
veteran of offense or relieve a legal obligation to pay a
fine, but temporarily suspends court collection methods
against such penalties. Also, the bill does not impose new
collection duties on the courts, stipulating that the bill's
provisions apply only when relevant information is obtained in
the course of routine court collection activities.
2)Prior Legislation . This bill is modeled after AB 1111
(Fletcher and Mitchell)/Chapter 466 of 2011, which prohibits
wage garnishment or levying the bank account of a homeless
person under age 25 for citations related to truancy,
loitering, curfew violations or illegal lodging.
3)Why Apply Only to Homeless Subgroups ? It would seem that wage
garnishment related to quality of life offenses for any
homeless person-not just those encompassed by AB 1111 or this
bill-would hinder that person's ability to break the cycle of
homelessness. This begs the question as to why a more general
statute on this topic would not be the appropriate public
policy.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081