BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                             Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
                            2015 - 2016  Regular  Session

          AB 164 (Gomez) - Claims against the state: payment.
          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                                                                 |
          |                                                                 |
          |                                                                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Version: September 2, 2015      |Policy Vote:                    |
          |                                |                                |
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Urgency: Yes                    |Mandate: No                     |
          |                                |                                |
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Hearing Date: September 4, 2015 |Consultant: Mark McKenzie       |
          |                                |                                |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the  
          Suspense File.  Pursuant to the committee's rules, the Suspense  
          File rule does not apply to the provisions of this bill as  
          judgments and settlement are considered valid obligations of the  
          state.  Additionally, judgments and settlements may have time  
          sensitivity.



          Bill  
          Summary:  AB 164, an urgency measure, would appropriate  
          $2,217,255 from the General Fund, and $517,255 from the  
          Dungeness Crab Account, to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for  
          the payment of two settlements.  Any funds appropriated in  
          excess of the amounts required for payment of these claims shall  
          revert to the respective funds.


          Fiscal  
          Impact:  
           One-time appropriation of $1,700,000 in 2015-16 from the  
            General Fund to DOJ to pay the settlement in Humphries v.  
            County of Los Angeles, et al.







          AB 164 (Gomez)                                         Page 1 of  
          ?
          
          

           One-time appropriation of $1,034,510 ($517,255 from the  
            General Fund and $517,255 from the Dungeness Crab Account in  
            the Fish and Game Preservation Fund) in 2015-16  to DOJ to pay  
            the settlement in Kevin Marilley, et al. v. California  
            Department of Fish and Game.


          Background:  This bill is one of several annual bills carried by the chairs  
          of the Appropriations Committees to provide appropriation  
          authority for legal settlements approved by DOJ and the  
          Department of Finance (DOF). These settlements were entered into  
          lawfully by the state upon advice of counsel (DOJ). They are  
          binding state obligations.


          Proposed Law:  
            This bill would appropriate special fund and General Fund  
          revenues to DOJ to pay the following settlements:
           Humphries v. County of Los Angeles, et al.  


          (United States District Court, Central District of California,  
          Case No. SACV 03-0697-JVS)  $1,700,000 settlement, payable from  
          the General Fund.
          The California Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act (CANRA)  
          formerly provided for the reporting of child abuse allegations  
          that were "not unfounded" to the DOJ for inclusion in its Child  
          Abuse Central Index (CACI).  Plaintiffs in the Humphries case  
          were parents of a child who accused them of child abuse, but the  
          courts found the allegations to be untrue and charges against  
          the parents were dismissed.  The CANRA statutes did not include  
          a process for removal of exonerated individuals accused of child  
          abuse from the CACI, and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's  
          Department did not agree to remove them.  Plaintiffs filed a  
          case against the Attorney General and the County of Los Angeles,  
          claiming that their constitutional due process rights had been  
          violated because they had been deprived the right to challenge  
          their inclusion in CACI.  The district court dismissed their  
          claims, but the Ninth Circuit reversed that holding on appeal  
          and found that the continued listing of the plaintiffs in CACI  
          violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.   
          Plaintiffs are entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, and filed  
          a motion seeking over $3 million from the State.  This claim for  








          AB 164 (Gomez)                                         Page 2 of  
          ?
          
          
          $1.7 million represents a settlement for attorneys' fees  
          negotiated through mediation in federal court.


           Kevin Marilley, et al. v. California Department of Fish and  
          Game.
           (United States District Court, Northern District of California,  
          Case No.11-cv-2418)
          $1,034,510 settlement, half payable from the General Fund, half  
          payable from the Dungeness Crab Account within the Fish and Game  
          Preservation Fund.

          This case involved a group of commercial fishermen who were not  
          California residents but fished in California waters.  One of  
          these fishermen, Kevin Marilley, filed a class action suit in  
          the United States District Court in May of 2011 against the  
          Director of the California Department of Fish and Game (later  
          appeals were filed against the Director of the Department of  
          Fish and Wildlife), alleging that California's fishing license  
          statutes, which charge nonresident fishermen two to three times  
          more than the fees assessed on resident competitors, are  
          unconstitutional.  The fishermen and the state filed  
          cross-motions for summary judgment.

          The US District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the  
          plaintiffs, finding that the differential fees violate the  
          Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the US  
          Constitution, and concluding that the state failed to  
          demonstrate a substantial state interest.  On December 10, 2013,  
          the plaintiffs moved for an award of attorney's fees and court  
          costs.  After negotiations, and upon recommendation from the  
          Department of Justice, the Department of Fish and Wildlife  
          accepted the proposed settlement of fees accrued by the  
          plaintiffs though April 18, 2014, in the amount of $1,034,570.   
          This settlement represents the final disposition of the case, as  
          all appeals have been exhausted.  The Department of Finance  
          approved an appropriation of the settlement amount to be split  
          between the General Fund and the Dungeness Crab Account within  
          the Fish and Game Preservation Fund.


          Related  
          Legislation:  
           SB 302 (Lara), Chap 5/2015, appropriated $24.1 million to  








          AB 164 (Gomez)                                         Page 3 of  
          ?
          
          
            specified state entities for the payment of four settlements.


           AB 1615 (Gatto), Chap142/2014, appropriated $2.86 million to  
            DOJ for the payment of two settlements.


           AB 234 (Gatto), Chap 449/2013, appropriated $20.7 million to  
            DOJ for the payment of two settlements. 


           SB 371 (De Leon), Chap 9/2013, appropriated $15.6 million to  
            DOJ for the payment of two settlements.




                                      -- END --