BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  SB 514
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  June 18, 2013
          Counsel:       Stella Choe


                         ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                                 Tom Ammiano, Chair

             SB 514 (Committee on Public Safety) - As Amended:  April 23,  
                                        2013


           SUMMARY  :  Makes technical and corrective changes, as well as  
          non-controversial substantive changes, to various code sections  
          relating to criminal justice laws.  Specifically,  this bill  :

          1)Clarifies that a term of imprisonment cannot satisfy a  
            restitution fine.

          2)Defines a "joint powers agency" as any agency, entity, or  
            authority formed pursuant Government Code sections relating to  
            joint powers agreements.

          3)Clarifies that a joint powers agency may apply to the  
            Commission on Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST) to  
            receive state aid from the Peace Officers' Training Fund.

          4)Makes technical corrections to various other sections in the  
            Penal Code and Welfare and Institutions Code.

           EXISTING LAW  : 

          1)Provides that all days of a defendant's custody, including  
            days served as a condition of probation in compliance with a  
            court order, shall be credited upon his or her term of  
            imprisonment, or credited to any fine on a proportional basis,  
            including, but not limited to, base fines and restitution  
            fines, which may be imposed, at the rate of not less than $30  
            per day, or more, in the discretion of the court imposing the  
            sentence.  [Penal Code Section 2900.5(a).]

          2)Entitles a defendant held in custody for nonpayment of a fine  
            to be credited on the fine for each day he or she is held in  
            custody, at the rate specified in the judgment.  Specifies  
            that this custody credit does not apply to nonpayment of  
            restitution fines.  [Penal Code Section 1205(a) and (f).]








                                                                  SB 514
                                                                  Page  2


          3)Requires POST to annually allocate, and the State Treasurer to  
            periodically pay, from the Peace Officers' Training Fund, at  
            intervals specified by POST, to each city, county, and  
            district which has applied and qualified for aid pursuant to  
            this chapter an amount determined by the commission pursuant  
            to standards set forth in its regulations.  POST shall grant  
            aid only on a basis that is equally proportionate among  
            cities, counties, and districts. State aid shall only be  
            provided for training expenses of full-time regularly paid  
            employees, as defined by POST, of eligible agencies from  
            cities, counties, or districts.  In no event shall any  
            allocation be made to any city, county, or district which is  
            not adhering to the standards established by the commission as  
            applicable to such city, county, or district.  (Penal Code  
            Section 13523.)
          4)States if authorized by their legislative or other governing  
            bodies, two or more public agencies by agreement may jointly  
            exercise any power common to the contracting parties, even  
            though one or more of the contracting agencies may be located  
            outside this state.  (Government Code Section 6502.)

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Unknown

           COMMENTS  :   

           1)Author's Statement  :  According to the author, "SB 514 is the  
            annual public safety omnibus bill.  It makes technical and  
            minor changes to the law affecting public safety.  There is no  
            opposition by any member of the Legislature or recognized  
            group to any of the proposals."  
           
           2)Clarification That Jail Time Does Not Satisfy Restitution  :   
            This clarification was suggested by the Office of Governmental  
            Affairs of the Judicial Council.  

          According to the background materials provided by the sponsor of  
            this bill, "Penal Code section 1205(f), which was added in the  
            2012 legislative session by Senate Bill 1371 (Anderson) states  
            that restitution fines and orders may not be satisfied by the  
            time a defendant is confined.  In contrast, Penal Code section  
            2900.5 states that confinement time shall satisfy any fine,  
            'including ? restitution fines.'

          "SB 1371, which was passed without opposition, amended Penal  








                                                                  SB 514
                                                                  Page  3

            Code section 1205 by adding (f).  Newly enacted 1205(f)  
            appears to be in direct and unintentional conflict with Penal  
            Code section 2900.5.  The author of SB 1371, Senator Joel  
            Anderson, was unaware of Penal Code section 2900.5 when his  
            bill language was drafted to amend Penal Code section 1205.   
            Legislative Council also believes this was a drafting  
            oversight.

          "Under general rules of statutory interpretation, if two  
            statutes conflict, the specific and more recently enacted  
            statute usually controls over the general statute.  Thus, new  
            Penal Code section 1205(f) would likely be considered  
            controlling law.  Practically speaking, however, it is  
            possible that prosecutors, defense attorneys and/or judicial  
            officers may not be aware of the conflict.  It is further  
            possible that Penal Code section 2900.5 might be used rather  
            than Penal Code section 1205 for purposes of 'time served'  
            calculations.  Invariably, this will lead to inconsistent and  
            contrary results.  Therefore, it is recommended that Penal  
            Code 2900.5 be amended to be consistent with Penal Code  
            section 1205."

           3)Authorizing Joint Powers Authority to Apply for POST Funds  :   
            This change was suggested by POST.  The sponsor of this bill  
            provides the following justification for this amendment:

          "On January 30, 1980, the Town of Corte Madera and the City of  
            Larkspur, executed a joint powers agreement (JPA), creating  
            the Twin Cities Police Authority (TCPA) to provide  
            consolidated police services to Larkspur and Corte Madera. 

          "During 2009, the San Anselmo Police Department (SAPD) agreed to  
            temporarily house the dispatch unit of the TCPA, during the  
            construction of a new TCPA headquarters (2010-2113).  During  
            this period, SAPD and TCPA entered into multiple agreements  
            under which they shared services which led to even greater  
            cooperation, coordination, cost savings and higher levels of  
            police services to their services.

          "San Anselmo, Larkspur, and Corte Madera are 'like' public  
            entities.  All three municipalities are in close geographical  
            proximity, have similar police protection needs and a history  
            of coordination and cooperation for the provision of police  
            services.  The City of Larkspur, the Town of Corte Madera, and  
            the Town of San Anselmo agreed to amend their 1-30-1980 joint  








                                                                  SB 514
                                                                  Page  4

            powers agreement to add the Town of San Anselmo as a member,  
            and to provide consolidated police services to the City of  
            Larkspur, the Town of Corte Madera and the Town of San  
            Anselmo.

          "To reflect the expanded jurisdiction of the JPA, and to  
            incorporate a geographical reference into the name of the JPA,  
            the amended agreement changes the name of the agency from TCPA  
            to the Central Marin Police Authority (CMPA).

          "The Town Council of San Anselmo has delegated to the  
            newly-created Central Marin Police Authority its power to  
            appoint sworn peace officers under Penal Code Section 830.1,  
            and all other powers necessary to provide services to the  
            citizens of the San Anselmo.

          "The Amended Joint Powers Agreement became effective January 1,  
            2013.

            "Current law does not explicitly convey the intent of the  
            Legislature to recognize that joint power authorities for the  
            purposes of this chapter, formed pursuant to Government Code  
            section 6500 et seq. be entitled to receive funding from the  
            Peace Officers' Training fund.

            "This change clarifies that it is the intent of the  
            Legislature in adding this section that effect be given to  
            amendments made by Chapter 950 of the Statutes of 1989.  The  
            Legislature recognized those amendments were intended to make  
            Joint power agencies entitled to allocations from the Peace  
            Officers' Training Fund for state aid pursuant to this  
            chapter, notwithstanding the amendments made by Chapter 1165  
            of the Statutes of 1989, which will added Section 13526 to  
            this code.  The proposed amendments are declaratory of  
            existing law." 
             
           4)Argument in Support  :  The  California District Attorneys Office   
            (the sponsor of this bill), states, "[w]e are pleased to be  
            the sponsor of . . . SB 514, which is the annual public safety  
            omnibus bill.

          "As you know, the utility of this measure is to make minor and  
            technical changes to various statutes relating to relating to  
            crime and criminal procedure in a way that results in no  
            opposition. We continue to abide by the custom and practice  








                                                                  SB 514
                                                                  Page  5

            that requires the removal of any provision that draws  
            opposition in order to ensure that this bill remains  
            completely non-controversial."

           5)Prior Legislation  :  

             a)   SB 1144 (Strickland), Chapter 867, Statutes of 2012, was  
               the annual 2012 Public Safety Committee's omnibus bill.

             b)   SB 428 (Strickland), Chapter 304, Statutes of 2011, was  
               the annual 2011 Public Safety Committee's omnibus bill.

             c)   SB 1062 (Strickland), Chapter 708, Statutes of 2010, was  
               the annual 2010 Public Safety Committee's omnibus bill.

             d)   SB 174 (Strickland), Chapter 35, Statutes of 2009, was  
               the annual 2009 Public Safety Committee's omnibus bill.

             e)   SB 1241 (Margett), Chapter 699, Statutes of 2008, was  
               the annual 2008 Public Safety Committee's omnibus bill.

             f)   SB 425 (Margett), Chapter 302, Statutes of 2007, was the  
               annual 2007 Public Safety Committee's omnibus bill.

             g)   SB 1422 (Margett), Chapter 901, Statutes of 2006, was  
               the annual 2006 Public Safety Committee's omnibus bill.

             h)   SB 1107 (Senate Committee on Public Safety), Chapter  
               279, Statutes of 2005, was the annual 2005 Public Safety  
               Committee's omnibus bill.

             i)   SB 1796 (Senate Committee on Public Safety), Chapter  
               405, Statutes of 2004, was the annual 2004 Public Safety  
               Committee's omnibus bill.

             j)   SB 851 (Senate Committee on Public Safety), Chapter 468,  
               Statutes of 2003, was the annual 2003 Public Safety  
               Committee's omnibus bill.

             aa)  SB 1852 (Senate Committee on Public Safety), Chapter  
               545, Statutes of 2002, was the annual 2002 Public Safety  
               Committee's omnibus bill.

             bb)  SB 485 (Senate Committee on Public Safety), Chapter 473,  
               Statutes of 2001, was the annual 2001 Public Safety  








                                                                  SB 514
                                                                  Page  6

               Committee's omnibus bill.

             cc)  SB 832 (Senate Committee on Public Safety), Chapter 853,  
               Statutes of 1999, was the annual 1999 Public Safety  
               Committee's omnibus bill

             dd)  SB 1880 (Senate Committee on Public Safety), Chapter  
               606, Statutes of 1998, was the annual 1998 Public Safety  
               Committee's omnibus bill.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          California District Attorneys Association (Sponsor)
          San Diego District Attorney

           Opposition 
           
          None
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744