BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 909
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
909 (Quirk) - As Introduced February 26, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Public Safety |Vote:|5 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable:
Yes
SUMMARY:
This bill requires law enforcement agencies responsible for
taking or processing rape kit evidence to annually report to the
Department of Justice (DOJ) specified information pertaining to
AB 909
Page 2
the processing of rape kits. Specifically, this bill:
1)Provides that a law enforcement agency responsible for taking
or processing rape kit evidence shall annually report, by July
1 of each year, all specified information to the DOJ regarding
rape kits the law enforcement agency collects.
2)Requires DOJ, beginning January 1, 2017, and each January 1
after, to submit a report to the appropriate policy committees
of the Legislature summarizing the information DOJ receives
pursuant to this bill.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Moderate reimbursable mandated local costs for providing the
information to the DOJ in excess of $150,000 (GF), if more
than 30 agencies submit claims in excess of $5,000 annually.
Reporting the reason why a rape kit was not tested will be
more resource intensive than providing statistical data.
2)Minor annual absorbable costs to the DOJ for compiling the
data and submitting the annual report.
COMMENTS:
1)Background. Current law specifies that law enforcement should
do one of the following for any sexual assault forensic
evidence received by the law enforcement agency on or after
January 1, 2015:
a) Submit sexual assault forensic evidence to the crime lab
within 20 days after it is booked into evidence; or
b) Ensure that a rapid turnaround DNA program is in place
AB 909
Page 3
to submit forensic evidence collected from the victim of a
sexual assault directly from the medical facility where the
victim is examined to the crime lab within five days after
the evidence is obtained from the victim.
Current law also specifies timelines a crime lab should follow
for any sexual assault forensic evidence received by the crime
lab on or after January 1, 2016.
2)Purpose. According to the author, "Over the last several
years, hundreds of thousands of unanalyzed rape kits have been
discovered nationwide. In response, several states have passed
legislation that sets timelines for analyzing the kits in a
timely manner. Others passed measures to track and report rape
kits.
"An October 2014 California State Auditor report highlighted
the pressing need for California to more adequately track and
report rape kits and recommended that law enforcement agencies
report this information annually.
"Tracking and reporting rape kits is essential to fully
understanding why investigators choose to send some kits to be
analyzed and not others. It is essential to understand how
large the backlog really is in order to tackle the problem
effectively.
"AB 909 will require local law enforcement agencies to track
and report on the number of rape kits they collect, test and
how many go untested. For untested rape kits, law enforcement
agencies will be required to document the reason for not
submitting the kit to be tested. Law enforcement agencies
will also be required to submit this information to the
Department of Justice annually."
3)Argument in Support. The National Association of Social
Workers, California Chapter, in support of AB 909, states
"currently law enforcement agencies are not required to track
or report information about the number of rape kits they
AB 909
Page 4
collect or how many go unanalyzed. Due to the lack of
tracking and reporting requirements, the total number of
unanalyzed kits statewide is unknown. The unknown number of
unanalyzed kits allow perpetrators to walk free and deprive
victims of justice."
4)Argument in Opposition: According to the California State
Sheriffs' Association, "By requiring law enforcement agencies
to provide statistics to DOJ, AB 909 will create another
unfunded mandate and would place significant cost burdens on
these agencies in terms of resources and personnel. Doing so
could inadvertently hamper our ability to process these kits.
"Local law enforcement agencies are still dealing with the
effects of significant budget cuts over the last several years
while trying to maintain critical services. Adding an
additional reporting requirement would divert limited
resources away from providing current services."
5)Prior Legislation:
a) AB 1517 (Skinner), Chapter 874, Statutes of 2014,
established timelines for law enforcement agencies and
crime labs to perform and process DNA testing of rape kit
evidence.
b) SB 978 (DeSaulnier), Chapter 136, Statutes of 2014,
allows the hospital to notify the local rape victim
counseling center when the victim is presented to the
hospital for the medical or evidentiary physical
examination, upon approval of the victim.
c) AB 322 (Portantino), of the 2011-12 Legislative Session,
would have created a pilot project, commencing July 1, 2012
and ending on January 1, 2016, in 10 counties to have DOJ
test all rape kits collected after the start date of the
pilot project in those counties to determine if such
testing increases their arrest rates in rape cases. AB 322
was vetoed, the Governor did not want to mandate
AB 909
Page 5
participation on the 10 counties identified.
d) AB 558 (Portantino), of the 2009-10 Legislative Session,
would have required local law enforcement agencies
responsible for taking or collecting rape kit evidence to
annually report to the DOJ statistical information
pertaining to the testing and submission for DNA analysis
of rape kits, and would have made the reports subject to
inspection under the California Public Records Act. AB 558
was vetoed, the Governor cited the precarious fiscal
conditions of crime laboratories.
e) AB 1017 (Portantino), of the 2009-10 Legislative
Session, would have required that beginning July 1, 2012,
and annually thereafter until July 1, 2016, each local law
enforcement agency responsible for taking or collecting
rape kit evidence shall annually report to the DOJ various
statistical information pertaining to the testing and
submission for DNA analysis of rape kits, as specified. AB
1017 was vetoed, the Governor cited concerns over local
costs and diversion of scare resources to comply with the
provisions of this bill, and pointed out DOJ was not
required to do anything with the additional data.
Analysis Prepared by:Pedro R. Reyes / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
AB 909
Page 6