BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 508
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 508 (Ian Calderon)
As Amended April 9, 2013
Majority vote
JUDICIARY 9-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Wieckowski, Wagner, |Ayes:|Gatto, Harkey, Bigelow, |
| |Alejo, Chau, Dickinson, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Garcia, Maienschein, | |Calderon, Campos, |
| |Muratsuchi, Stone | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| | | |Hall, Holden, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, Wagner, |
| | | |Ammiano |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Prohibits courts from garnishing the wages or levying a
bank account of a homeless veteran for outstanding unpaid
citations related to loitering, curfew violations, or illegal
lodging for a period of up to five years, as provided.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes Legislative findings about homeless veterans, the
garnishment of their wages and savings for offenses inevitably
associated with being homeless; and the negative effect these
debt collection practices have on the ability of homeless
veterans to escape the cycle of homelessness.
2)Provides that, notwithstanding any other provision of law, if a
court, during the course of its routine efforts to collect
delinquent court-ordered debt, obtains information indicating
that a person who has been issued a citation for loitering,
curfew violations, or illegal lodging that is outstanding or
unpaid, served in the military within the last eight years and
is homeless or has no permanent address, the court shall not
garnish the wages or levy against bank accounts of that person
for five years from the date the court obtained the information.
3)Provides, for the purposes of this act, that a person is
considered to be "homeless" or as having "no permanent address"
AB 508
Page 2
if that person does not have a fixed, regular, adequate
nighttime residence, or has a primary nighttime residence that
is one of the following:
a) A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter
designed to provide temporary living accommodations,
including, but not limited to, welfare hotels, congregate
shelters and transitional housing for the mentally ill;
b) An institution that provides a temporary residence for
individuals intended to be institutionalized; or,
c) A public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily
used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.
4)Provides that nothing in this act shall be construed to:
a) Prevent a court from engaging in any other lawful debt
collection activities;
b) Require a court to perform any further investigation or
financial screening into any matter beyond the scope of its
regular duties;
c) Prevent the Judicial Council from altering any best
practices or recommendations for collection programs pursuant
to Penal Code Section 1463.010; and,
d) Prevent a court from garnishing a person's wages or
levying against a person's bank accounts if the court
subsequently obtains evidence that the person is no longer
AB 508
Page 3
homeless, or that the court had on a previous occasion
suspended garnishment of that person's wages or levying
against that person's bank accounts pursuant to these
provisions.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, 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 : According to the author, homeless veterans are often
caught in a catch-22 situation where their homelessness inevitably
results in citations for offenses like loitering or illegal
lodging, but wage garnishment to collect unpaid fines makes it
more difficult for these veterans to escape the cycle of
homelessness - virtually ensuring that further citations for the
same type of offenses will continue to occur. To address this
problem cycle, this bill seeks to prohibit courts from wage
garnishment of homeless veterans for outstanding unpaid citations
related to loitering, curfew violations, or illegal lodging for a
period of five years from the date the court obtains information
indicating the veteran is homeless in the course of its routine
efforts to collect fines.
The author contends that wage garnishment of homeless veterans to
collect unpaid citations for infractions associated with living on
the street perpetuates the cycle of homelessness, making escape
more difficult for veterans trying to legitimately work and
establish stable housing. The author states "By making it harder
for homeless veterans to save money to end their homelessness,
such garnishments paradoxically also increase the likelihood that
the public safety offenses the tickets are meant to dissuade will
in fact occur."
Sadly, the problem of homelessness among veterans who have proudly
served our country is not a minor one. According to the United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development's most recent
annual survey for point-in-time estimates of homelessness, there
were 16,461 homeless veterans in California in January 2012, of
whom 11,949 were considered unsheltered and living on the streets.
(Located at:
http://www.hudhre.info/CoC_Reports/2012_ca_pops_sub.pdf ) A recent
national survey of over 23,000 homeless Americans conducted by the
100,000 Homes Campaign found that homeless veterans reported
AB 508
Page 4
having been homeless for an average of 5.77 years as compared to
3.92 years for homeless non-veterans. In addition, the study
found that veterans were 11% more likely than non-veterans to
suffer from at least one health condition linked to increased risk
of death among the homeless population. ("National Survey of
Homeless Veterans in 100,000 Homes Campaign Communities" by the
100,000 Homes Campaign.)
This bill seeks to prohibit courts from wage garnishment of a
homeless veteran for outstanding unpaid citations related to
loitering, curfew violations, or illegal lodging for a period of
five years - a temporary suspension of the court's authority to
garnish the wages or levy the bank account of the veteran. If the
court subsequently obtains evidence that the veteran is no longer
homeless before five years have elapsed, then the court may resume
wage garnishment or bank levy upon the veteran once again.
The author notes that the bill does nothing to absolve the veteran
of the offense, relieve the legal obligation to pay any associated
fine, or prohibit any ticket from being issued. As such, it does
not appear this bill dismisses accountability for so-called
"quality of life" offenses committed by homeless veterans as much
as it represents an effort to give them a better chance of working
to escape homelessness before wage garnishment can resume.
Under this bill, a court is prohibited from garnishing the wages
of a person when "during the course of its routine process to
collect" unpaid fees or fines, the court "obtains information"
indicating that the person meets the criteria for an eligible
homeless veteran. Penal Code Section 1463.007 describes the types
of actions that courts already take to enhance the collection of
delinquent court-ordered debt where the court runs a comprehensive
collections program. In these debt collection cases, the court
will typically attempt to mail an account statement and/or a
warning notice to the debtor's address, if known, and also contact
the debtor by telephone. Among other things, the court may
request a credit report of the debtor or initiate the use of wage
or bank account garnishments. Under this bill, however, if the
court in the process of its ordinary collection efforts (emphasis
added) obtains information indicating the person is: a) a
military veteran who has served within the last eight years; b)
has unpaid citations for offenses associated with homelessness,
like loitering, curfew violations, or illegal lodging; and c) is
homeless or has no valid permanent address, only then would the
AB 508
Page 5
court be prohibited from garnishing the wages of the debtor
because such indicators, in all likelihood, demonstrate that the
debtor is a homeless veteran covered under the bill.
The author also contends that the bill may actually help conserve
judicial resources by reducing debt collection efforts that are
empirically cost-ineffective, because of the difficulty and
expense involved in garnishing the wages of veterans who are
homeless and lack any permanent address. In a study commissioned
by the Judicial Council and published in December 2009,
researchers from Gartner, Inc., examined the relationship between
the "inherent collectability of debt" and factors such as the size
of the debt, age at referral, and validity of address information.
They found, generally, that the rate of study cases where
collection efforts resulted in the debt being paid-in-full was 13
percentage points below the average, and 19 percentage points
lower than cases where there was a valid initial address.
(Judicial Council, Report to Legislature on Statewide Collection
of Court-Ordered Debt (January 2010) p.10.) As a result, this
bill may reduce court debt collection efforts that, according to
the Gartner study, would likely prove cost-ineffective for courts
because homeless persons by definition lack reliable address
information.
Based on Penal Code Section 1463.007 and the findings of the
Gartner study, it appears likely that every court collector, in
the course of current practices, will already obtain information
as to whether a debtor meets the applicable definition of
homeless. In addition, the bill specifically provides that
nothing in its provisions shall be construed to require a court to
perform any further investigation or financial screening into any
matter beyond the scope of its regular duties, nor prevent a court
from engaging in any other lawful debt collection activities. In
addition, suspension of court collection efforts would apply once,
at most, to an individual veteran, even if that individual
unfortunately becomes homeless again more than five years later.
Analysis Prepared by : Anthony Lew / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
FN: 0000216
AB 508
Page 6