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