BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 140| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: SB 140 Author: Leno (D) and Steinberg (D), et al. Amended: 3/4/13 Vote: 27 - Urgency SENATE BUDGET & FISCAL REVIEW COMMITTEE : 14-0, 3/4/13 AYES: Leno, Emmerson, Anderson, Beall, Berryhill, Block, DeSaulnier, Hancock, Hill, Jackson, Monning, Roth, Wright, Wyland NO VOTE RECORDED: Nielsen, Price SUBJECT : Budget Act of 2012: firearms SOURCE : Author DIGEST : This bill appropriates $24 million from the Dealers Record of Sale (DROS) Special Account to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for costs associated with regulatory and enforcement of illegal possession of firearms by prohibited persons. ANALYSIS : Existing law authorizes the DOJ to utilize the DROS fee, which is imposed upon every transfer or sale of a firearm in California for firearms related regulatory activities, including enforcement activities related to possession. This bill: 1. Appropriates $24 million from the DROS Special Account to the DOJ for costs associated with regulatory and enforcement CONTINUED SB 140 Page 2 of illegal possession of firearms by prohibited persons. 2. Requires the DOJ report to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee no later than March 1, 2015 and no later than March 1, each year thereafter, all of the following: The degree to which the backlog of weapons has been reduced or eliminated. The number of weapons confiscated through Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS) enforcement efforts. The number of agents hired by the DOJ to conduct APPS enforcement. The number of individuals cleared off of the APPS list annually through March 1, 2015 and March 1, 2019. The number of individuals added to the APPS list annually. Breakdown of why each person on the APPS is prohibited from possessing a firearm. Number of contacts made during the APPS enforcement efforts. Information regarding task forces or collaboration with local law enforcement on reducing the APPS backlog. The reason for the individual to have been included on the APPS list. 1. Sunsets the above reporting requirements on March 1, 2019. 2. Makes a series of declarations and findings, including: "California is the first and only state in the nation to establish an automated system for tracking handgun and assault weapon owners who might fall into a prohibited status. The online database, which is currently known as the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS), cross-references all handgun and assault weapon owners SB 140 Page 3 across the state against criminal history records to determine persons who have been, or will become, prohibited from possessing a firearm subsequent to the legal acquisition or registration of a firearm or assault weapon." "The list of armed prohibited persons in California grows by about 15 to 20 people per day. There are currently more than 19,000 armed prohibited persons in California. Collectively, these individuals are believed to be in possession of over 34,000 handguns and 1,590 assault weapons. Neither the Department of Justice nor local law enforcement has sufficient resources to confiscate the enormous backlog of weapons, nor can they keep up with the daily influx of newly prohibited persons." Prior legislation . SB 819 (Leno), Chapter 743, Statutes of 2011, provided that the DOJ may use dealer record of sale funds for costs associated with its firearms-related regulatory and enforcement activities regarding the possession as well as the sale, purchase, loan, or transfer of firearms, as specified. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No According to the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee: This bill appropriates $24 million from the DROS special account to the DOJ for firearms-related regulatory and enforcement activities. The funding in this bill is intended to supplement, not supplant, the $22.9 million from the DROS Special Account included in the 2013-14 Budget Act to be utilized by the DOJ. This bill does not specify a period that the appropriation shall be available for encumbrance. In accordance with Government Code Section 16340, this appropriation is available for three years after the date upon which it first became available for encumbrance. SUPPORT : (Verified 3/6/13) SB 140 Page 4 Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General AFSCME Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence California Statewide Law Enforcement Association Chief Probation Officers of California City of Los Angeles Coalition Against Gun Violence County of Los Angeles Violence Prevention Coalition Women Against Gun Violence OPPOSITION : (Verified 3/6/13) California Association of Firearms Retailers California Rifle and Pistol Association California Sportsman's Lobby, Inc. Crossroads of the West Gun Shows National Rifle Association of America National Shooting Sports Foundation Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California Safari Club International ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the DOJ: Because of a lack of resources, there are currently more than 20,000 armed prohibited persons statewide, including dangerous felons, violent misdemeanor offenders and individuals who have been adjudicated mentally ill. These individuals are believed to hold up to 39,140 handguns and 1,679 assault weapons. Every year there are an additional 3,000 prohibited person added to the list. Despite their best efforts, local and state law enforcement agencies do not have the funding or resources to keep up with this influx. For the vision of APPS to be fully realized, more resources are necessary-SB 140 provides those resources. Specifically, SB 140 will appropriate 24 million dollars in surplus special fund money (Dealer Record of Sales Account) to DOJ, for the specific purpose of hiring more staff to go out and take firearms away from people who cannot legally have them. To this end, SB 140 will help make communities safer by providing funding to take the preventative step of removing firearms from known, dangerous individuals. SB 140 Page 5 ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. (NSSF) writes: While NSSF supports the objective of removing firearms from possession of those on the Armed Prohibited Persons List, we strongly oppose the use of the Dealers Record of Sale (DROS) funds for this purpose. It is clear that there should be more focus on keeping firearms and other weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill, including those with severe emotional problems, persons taking mind altering prescription drugs, and criminals who are already prohibited by law from possessing them. The Department of Justice has stated that it estimates there are about 19,000 people on the California Armed Prohibited Persons list that illegally possess a total 40,000 firearms. It has further estimated that it would take about $25 million, 50 new agents, and about 3 years to disarm the people now on the prohibited persons list. There does, in fact, need to be substantive ongoing improvements in how the prohibited persons list is administered by the Department if it is to be an effective tool in keeping firearms out of the hands of those prohibited from possessing them. In addition, the criminal justice alignment (AB 109) has increased the potential for violence, including that involving the use or possession of a firearm, by allowing the early release of violent persons back into society and by allowing the downgrading of penalties for many firearms offenses for which a person can be incarcerated [Penal Code Section 1170(h)]. This may cause the prohibited persons list backlog to expand even further. Although dealing with these issues is important, it should not be funded by the DROS fees paid by lawful buyers of firearms for the purpose of funding their own firearms eligibility background checks. The behavior of criminals and others that has resulted in them being placed on the prohibited persons list, and the new prohibited list problems created by those released early from SB 140 Page 6 incarceration, or not charged with a serious crime because of AB 109, should not be made the financial responsibility of lawful payers of DROS fees. It would be inappropriate to fund SB 140 by using DROS fees. Financing the administration of the Armed Prohibited Persons list is not the purpose of DROS fees. The fact that the amount of the DROS fees charged to firearms buyers has been excessive resulting in a surplus does not provide justification to use the money for SB 140 or other non-DROS purposes. The Department should have reduced the fee or refunded the fee surplus long ago. Given the foregoing, a different source of funding should be found for SB 140. If a source other than DROS fees is used, NSSF could support the bill. JG:k 3/7/13 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END ****