BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair S
2013-2014 Regular Session B
7
8
2
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
As Introduced February 22, 2013
Hearing date: April 30, 2013
Health and Safety, Penal, and Revenue and Taxation Codes
AA:mc
SEXUAL ASSAULT:
TREATMENT AND PREVENTION
HISTORY
Source: Alameda County District Attorney; CalCASA
Prior Legislation: AB 2441 (Williams) - died in Assembly
Appropriations, 2012
Support: Crime Victims United of California; Crime Victims
United of California
CA Police Chiefs Association; Yreka Police Department;
Crime Victims Action Alliance; Alameda County Board of
Supervisors; North Coast Rape Crisis Team;Center for
Community Solutions; Coalition for Family Harmony; Plumas Crisis
Intervention and Resource Center; Napa Emergency Women's
Services; Project Sanctuary; Riverside Area Rape Crisis
Center; Sexual Assault Recovery and Prevention Center of San
Louis Obispo County; North County Women's Shelter and
Recovery Center; Santa Barbara Rape Crisis CenterThe Resource
Connection; Antelope Valley Domestic Violence Council; Valley
Trauma Center; The Women's Center Youth and Family Services;
Resource Center for Survivors of Sexual Assault and Family
Violence; Kene Me-Wu Family Healing Center; Family and Children
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageB
Services; United Way of Kern County; Community Overcoming
Relationships Abuse; CA Crime Victims Assistance Association; CA
National
Organization for Women; The Center Against Sexual Assault of
Southwest Riverside County; Rape Trauma Services of San Mateo
County; The Center for Violence-free Relationships; Community
Service Programs - Sexual Assault Victim Services; Family
Services of Tulare County; Women's Crisis Support- Defensa de
Mujeres; Haven Women's Center of Stanislaus; East Los Angeles
Women's Center; Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Center; The
Monterey County Rape Crisis Center; North County Rape
Crisis and Child Protection Center; Peace Over Violence; Rape
Crisis Intervention and Prevention- Butte, Glenn and Tehama
Counties; Safequest Solano; Tri- Valley Haven; Siskiyou Domestic
Violence and Crisis Center; Center for the Pacific Asian
Family; Community Action Partnership of Madera County; Stand Up
Placer; Alliance Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault;
Tahoe Safe Alliance; Wild Iris Women's Services of Bishop,
Inc.; Verity, Sonoma County's Rape Crisis, Trauma and Healing
Center; YWCA Greater Los Angeles; Kings Community Action
Organization; Mountain Crisis Services; WEAVE, Inc.; San
Bernardino County Sexual Assault Services; Project
Sanctuary; The Pink Cross Foundation; numerous individuals
Opposition:
CalSmallBiz; Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety; Association
of Club Executives of California; several letters from
individuals
KEY ISSUE
SHOULD A "SEXUAL ASSAULT TREATMENT AND PREVENTION FUND" BE
ESTABLISHED FOR PURPOSES RELATING TO THE PREVENTION, INTERVENTION
AND RELATED SERVICES FOR VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND FINANCED
THROUGH A "SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESS TAX," AS SPECIFIED?
PURPOSE
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageC
The purpose of this bill is to establish a "Sexual Assault
Treatment and Prevention Fund," to be administered by the Office
of Emergency Services, allocated for purposes relating to
prevention, intervention and related services for victims of
sexual assault, and financed through a "Sexually Oriented
Business Tax," as specified.
Current law requires the California Emergency Management Agency
to establish a protocol for the examination and treatment of
victims of sexual assault and attempted sexual assault,
including child molestation, and the collection and preservation
of evidence therefrom, as specified. (Penal Code � 13823.5.)
Current law authorizes the agency to "secure grants, donations,
or other funding for the purpose of funding any statewide task
force on sexual assault of children that may be established and
administered by the Department of Justice." (Penal Code �
13823.6)
Current law requires minimum standards for the examination and
treatment of victims of sexual assault or attempted sexual
assault, as specified. (Penal Code � 13823.11.)
Current law generally provides for the development of a course
of training relating to the examination and treatment of victims
of sexual assault. (Penal Code � 13823.13.)
Current law requires the agency to "establish an advisory
committee which shall develop a course of training for district
attorneys in the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault
cases, child sexual exploitation cases, and child sexual abuse
cases and shall approve grants awarded pursuant to Section
13837. The courses shall include training in the unique
emotional trauma experienced by victims of these crimes."
(Penal Code � 13836.)
Current law requires that this advisory committee "shall consist
of 11 members. Five shall be appointed by the secretary, and
shall include three district attorneys or assistant or deputy
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageD
district attorneys, one representative of a city police
department or a sheriff or a representative of a sheriff's
department, and one public defender or assistant or deputy
public defender of a county. Six shall be public members
appointed by the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls,
and shall include one representative of a rape crisis center,
and one medical professional experienced in dealing with sexual
assault trauma victims. The committee members shall represent
the points of view of diverse ethnic and language groups."
(Penal Code � 13836.1.)
This bill would establish the "Sexual Assault Treatment and
Prevention Fund," as specified, with the following features and
requirements:
Administration
This bill would require that the Office of Emergency Services
use funds transferred from the Sexual Assault Treatment and
Prevention Fund.
This bill would require that no more than 10 percent annually of
the funds deposited in the Sexual Assault Treatment and
Prevention Fund may be used for the administration by the Office
of Emergency Services of these grant programs.
Allocations
This bill would require that funding allocations "be determined
by the Office of Emergency Services, in collaboration with the
State Advisory Committee on Sexual Assault Victim Services, . .
. no later than June 20, 2014."
This bill would provide that funds transferred from the Sexual
Assault Treatment and Prevention Fund shall be used only for the
following purposes:
(1) To award grants for intervention services related to sexual
assault survivors and rape prevention programs provided by rape
crisis centers, as specified.
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageE
(2) To award grants to, and contracts with, a statewide
organization organized and operated as described in Section
501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code that has the primary
purpose of ending sexual violence in this state, for programs
for the intervention and prevention of sexual violence, outreach
programs, training, and technical assistance to and support of
California rape crisis centers, as specified, and other
organizations funded by the Sexual Assault Treatment and
Prevention Fund to prevent and intervene in sexual violence in
underserved communities. This bill would require that funds
awarded pursuant to this paragraph be administered by the Office
of Emergency Services and approved by the State Advisory
Committee on Sexual Assault Victim Services, as authorized in
Section 13836 of the Penal Code.
(3) Civil legal services to sexual assault survivors.
(4) Coordination of sexual assault response teams that provide
multidisciplinary response services to sexual assault survivors.
(5) Culturally and linguistically appropriate intervention
services to sexual assault survivors from underrepresented or
underserved communities.
(6) To award grants to reimburse the payment of adult and
adolescent sexual assault forensic exams.
(7) To award grants to nonprofit, community-based organizations
to support intervention and treatment services for victims of
sexual exploitation of human trafficking. Eligible programs for
these grants include, but are not limited to, community-based
organizations that provide services for victims of sexual and
domestic violence and work to end and prevent sexual and
domestic violence.
(8) To award grants to nonprofit, community-based organizations
to support the intervention and treatment services for victims
of sexual assault as part of dating or domestic violence,
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageF
including, but not limited to, sexual assault services programs,
as defined in Section 13837 of the Penal Code, or domestic
violence victim service organizations, as defined in Section
1037.1 of the Evidence Code. Funds awarded pursuant to this
paragraph shall be administered by the Office of Emergency
Services and approved by the State Advisory Committee on Sexual
Assault Victim Services, as stipulated in Section 13836 of the
Penal Code.
This bill would require that grants awarded pursuant to
paragraphs 3 to 8 above, inclusive, be awarded as a result of a
competitive request for proposal process.
Reporting
This bill would provide that $200,000 shall be appropriated
biennially by the Legislature to the Office of Emergency
Services from the Sexual Assault Treatment and Prevention Fund
to fund a report created by the Office of Emergency Services to
the Governor and the Legislature reporting the following:
(A) The deficiencies with respect to research, prevention,
response, victim services, adjudication, and incarceration,
related to sexual assaults at state and local levels.
(B) The effectiveness of appropriations made to fund this
chapter and other legislation related to sexual assault
intervention enacted by the Legislature.
(C) Recommendations for appropriate performance measures that
enable the Governor and the Legislature to assess and respond
to the status of sexual assault prevention in this state.
This bill would impose a tax upon all persons who operate a
sexually oriented business at the rate of ten dollars ($10) per
visit by a customer to the business inclusive of admission and
reentry, with proceeds of this tax to be transmitted to the
Treasurer to be deposited in the State Treasury to the credit of
the Sexual Assault Treatment and Prevention Fund, which would be
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageG
created by this bill.<1>
This bill contains uncodified legislative findings and
declarations, as specified.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the last several years, severe overcrowding in California's
prisons has been the focus of evolving and expensive litigation
relating to conditions of confinement. On May 23, 2011, the
United States Supreme Court ordered California to reduce its
prison population to 137.5 percent of design capacity within two
years from the date of its ruling, subject to the right of the
state to seek modifications in appropriate circumstances.
Beginning in early 2007, Senate leadership initiated a policy to
hold legislative proposals which could further aggravate the
prison overcrowding crisis through new or expanded felony
prosecutions. Under the resulting policy known as "ROCA" (which
stands for "Receivership/ Overcrowding Crisis Aggravation"), the
Committee held measures which created a new felony, expanded the
scope or penalty of an existing felony, or otherwise increased
the application of a felony in a manner which could exacerbate
the prison overcrowding crisis. Under these principles, ROCA
was applied as a content-neutral, provisional measure necessary
to ensure that the Legislature did not erode progress towards
reducing prison overcrowding by passing legislation which would
increase the prison population. ROCA necessitated many hard and
difficult decisions for the Committee.
In January of 2013, just over a year after the enactment of the
historic Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011, the State of
California filed court documents seeking to vacate or modify the
federal court order issued by the Three-Judge Court three years
earlier to reduce the state's prison population to 137.5 percent
of design capacity. The State submitted in part that the, ". .
---------------------------
<1> The tax provisions of this bill have been heard by the
Senate Committee on Governance and Finance, and are outside the
scope of this Committee's jurisdiction.
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageH
. population in the State's 33 prisons has been reduced by over
24,000 inmates since October 2011 when public safety realignment
went into effect, by more than 36,000 inmates compared to the
2008 population . . . , and by nearly 42,000 inmates since 2006
. . . ." Plaintiffs, who opposed the state's motion, argue in
part that, "California prisons, which currently average 150% of
capacity, and reach as high as 185% of capacity at one prison,
continue to deliver health care that is constitutionally
deficient." In an order dated January 29, 2013, the federal
court granted the state a six-month extension to achieve the
137.5 % prisoner population cap by December 31st of this year.
In an order dated April 11, 2013, the Three-Judge Court denied
the state's motions, and ordered the state of California to
"immediately take all steps necessary to comply with this
Court's . . . Order . . . requiring defendants to reduce overall
prison population to 137.5% design capacity by December 31,
2013."
The ongoing litigation indicates that prison capacity and
related issues concerning conditions of confinement remain
unresolved. However, in light of the real gains in reducing the
prison population that have been made, although even greater
reductions are required by the court, the Committee will review
each ROCA bill with more flexible consideration. The following
questions will inform this consideration:
" whether a measure erodes realignment;
" whether a measure addresses a crime which is directly
dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there
is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;
" whether a bill corrects a constitutional infirmity or
legislative drafting error;
" whether a measure proposes penalties which are
proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other
reasonably appropriate remedy; and
" whether a bill addresses a major area of public safety
or criminal activity for which there is no other
reasonable, appropriate remedy.
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageI
COMMENTS
1. Amendments
This bill was heard in the Senate Committee on Governance and
Finance on April 24, 2013, where the author agreed to take the
following amendments in this Committee:
Commence allocation of tax revenues only after an
appellate court ratifies the tax.
Allow BOE 180 days to prepare for the tax to be
administered effectively.
Specify that owners, not operators, are liable for the
tax.
Delete language allowing reimbursement from customers.
Cap any one group's annual allocation of tax proceeds to
20% percent.
Delete the term "community-based."
Add a 10-year sunset.
2. Stated Need for This Bill
The author states:
Over the years, California's Rape Crisis Centers have
been severely impacted by repeated decreases in
funding and increases in the demand of services for
sexual assault victims. Currently, $45,000 is
allocated annually from the state's General Fund for
programs that serve sexual assault survivors. Last
year, more than 30,000 survivors received services
which equates to approximately $1.42 per survivor.
Due to the small amount of funding provided by the
state, these centers are unable to meet the needs of
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageJ
all the survivors.
SB 782, the Sexual Assault Victim Equity Act, seeks to
ameliorate some of the known secondary effects
associated with the connection between alcohol use,
the sexually oriented business experience, and sexual
assault. SB 782 imposes a $10 fee per customer on
California sexually oriented businesses that serve
alcohol or permit alcohol consumption.
We must make a commitment to sexual assault and rape
survivors that they will not be alone as they heal
from any of the physical and emotional trauma they may
suffer.
3. Allocation Under This Bill
As explained in detail above, this bill would provide for the
allocation of the new revenues it would generate for a list of
efforts relating to sexual assault prevention and survivors.
The bill would require competitive grants for all but the
following two categories:
" intervention services related to sexual assault survivors and
rape prevention programs provided by rape crisis centers;
and
" grants and contracts with "a statewide organization organized
and operated as described in Section 501(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code that has the primary purpose of
ending sexual violence in this state, for programs for the
intervention and prevention of sexual violence, outreach
programs, training, and technical assistance to and support
of California rape crisis centers, as stipulated in Section
13837 of Penal Code, and other organizations funded by the
Sexual Assault Treatment and Prevention Fund to prevent and
intervene in sexual violence in underserved communities."
(More)
Members may wish to discuss why competitive grants would be
inappropriate for these two categories of funding recipients.
SHOULD SOME BUT NOT ALL OF THIS FUNDING BE ALLOCATED BY
COMPETITIVE GRANTS?
In addition, members may wish to discuss whether there is more
than one statewide nonprofit organization that fulfills the
category described in the second bullet above. If not, members
may wish to discuss whether designating (essentially by
description) one organization to receive this funding is similar
to the voluntary contribution elections made by taxpayers to
designate amounts on their tax returns to charitable funds. If
not, members may wish to consider the purpose, policy and effect
of directing these funds to one non-profit organization.
WOULD THIS BILL PROVIDE GUARANTEED FUNDING TO ONE NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION? IF SO, WHAT WOULD BE THE PURPOSE, POLICY AND
EFFECT IMPLICATIONS OF THIS PROVISION?
4. Support
The Alameda County District Attorney, who is a co-sponsor of
this bill, submits that this bill "will create a long-term,
sustainable revenue stream to fund California rape crisis center
programs and related intervention and prevention services in the
state. A fee on alcohol-serving sexually-oriented businesses
(strip clubs) would provide vital funding that would increase
the scope and breadth of treatment for rape and sexual assault
victims and prevent violence."
5. Opposition
CalSmallBiz, Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety, and the
Association of Club Executives of California, which oppose this
bill, argue that this measure is unconstitutional, and that
there is no nexus between the activity this bill would tax and
the programs it would fund. They submit in part, "(t)here is no
evidence whatsoever that nudity plus alcohol leads to sexual
(More)
SB 782 (DeSaulnier)
PageL
violence against women." These arguments pertain to the tax
provisions of the bill, which are outside the scope of this
Committee's jurisdiction. In addition, opponents express
concern that this bill would have an adverse effect on women who
work in these clubs by reducing revenues to club owners and
thereby reducing pay or job losses if these clubs close.
Opponents also submit that the bill would create a "sole-source
funding mechanism."
***************