BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1824
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 6, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Lorena Gonzalez, Chair
AB
1824 (Chang) - As Introduced February 8, 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Public Safety |Vote:|7 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable:
No
SUMMARY:
Expands the situations in which an individual can be charged
with causing injury to, or the death of, any guide, signal, or
service dog. Specifically, this bill:
AB 1824
Page 2
1)Expands the application of specified crimes against guide,
signal, or service dogs to also apply when the dog is not
discharging its duties, and would make these crimes applicable
to the injury or death of dogs that are enrolled in a training
school or program for guide, signal, or service dogs, as
specified.
2)Requires the defendant, convicted of either crime, to also
make restitution to the person for medical or medical-related
expenses, or for loss of wages or income, incurred by the
person as a direct result of the crime. These costs are
required to be paid prior to any fines.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Moderate loss of revenue to the Penalty Assessment Fund to the
extent the additional victim restitution to the disabled
person for medical expenses and wages or income losses, and
expanded situations, reduce the ability of the defendant to
pay fines and penalties.
2)Minor additional costs to the California Victim Compensation
and Government Claims Board (board) by including dogs injured
or killed while not in discharging its duties, and dogs
enrolled in a training school or program. There may be one or
two incidents per year.
3)Minor nonreimbursable local costs for incarceration, may be
offset to a degree by fee revenue if revenue is available
after restitution is paid.
COMMENTS:
AB 1824
Page 3
1)Background. Current law defines: 1) a "guide dog" as any
guide dog that was trained by a licensed person, as specified:
2) a "signal dog" as any dog trained to alert an individual
who is deaf or hearing impaired to intruders or sounds; and 3)
a "service dog" as any dog individually trained to the
requirements of the individual with a disability including,
but not limited to, minimal protection work, rescue work,
pulling a wheelchair, or fetching dropped items. Current
law also provides that it is a crime for any person to permit
any dog which is owned, harbored, or controlled by him or her
to cause injury to or the death of any guide, signal, or
service dog, while the guide, signal, or service dog is in
discharge of its duties, or for a person to intentionally
cause such harm on these dogs.
A defendant who is convicted is required to make restitution
to the person with a disability who has custody or ownership
of the guide, signal or service dog for veterinary bills or
replacement of the dog if the dog is killed,
2)Purpose. According to the author, "California took a positive
step forward when they adopted legislation to make it a crime
to attack a service dog while in performance of its duties.
Unfortunately, there are still situations that leave guide
dogs and their owners vulnerable. AB 1824 will make it a
crime to attack a service dog regardless of if it is in
discharge of its duties."
Members of the disabled community are likely to miss work or
even get injured while trying to get through their day to day
life without their service animal. AB 1824 provides for
restitution for these losses.
1)Argument in Support: According to the California Council of
the Blind, "Under existing law, it is an infraction or a
misdemeanor for any person to permit any dog which is owned,
harbored, or controlled by him or her to cause injury to or
the death of any guide, signal, or service dog while the dog
is not engaged in these duties. Under these circumstances, it
is very difficult for guide, signal, or service dog users to
AB 1824
Page 4
recover the costs incurred due to these attacks. This bill
would expand these provisions by eliminating the requirements
that the guide, signal, or service dog be in discharge of its
duties, thus allowing recovery in those situations? This bill
would expand these restitution provisions to cover medical or
medical-related expenses and loss of wages or income."
2)Prior Legislation: AB 2264 (Levine), Statutes of 2014,
Chapter 502, allows a person with a disability who has
ownership or custody of a guide, signal, or service dog that
has been injured or killed due to the intentional actions of
another individual, as specified, to seek reimbursement from
the board for veterinary bills, replacement costs, or other
costs deemed reasonable by the court, if the defendant is
unable to pay restitution.
Analysis Prepared by:Pedro Reyes / APPR. / (916)
319-2081