BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 2311 (Brown) - Emergency services: access and functional
needs in emergencies
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: May 27, 2016 |Policy Vote: G.O. 13 - 0 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: Yes |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: August 1, 2016 |Consultant: Mark McKenzie |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: AB 2311 would require a local agency to integrate
access and functional needs into its emergency plan by
addressing the emergency communications, evacuation, and
sheltering requirements of specified populations with special
functional and access needs.
Fiscal
Impact: Unknown, likely significant, reimbursable mandate costs
for all cities, counties, and special districts to adopt or
update emergency plans to identify how the access and functional
needs population is served. Actual costs would depend upon a
determination by the Commission on State Mandates, and the
number and amount of individual claims that are deemed
reimbursable. Staff notes that the bill would apply to over
2,500 local agencies, and it is unclear how many currently have
an emergency plan that would be in compliance with the bill. If
AB 2311 (Brown) Page 1 of
?
half of these entities submitted a successful reimbursement
claim, one-time costs would likely be in the low millions.
Background: Existing law makes the California Governor's Office of
Emergency Services (OES) responsible for overseeing and
coordinating emergency preparedness, response, recovery, and
homeland security efforts within the state. Existing law
requires the Governor to coordinate the State Emergency Plan
(SEP) necessary for the mitigation of the effects of an
emergency within the state. The SEP includes proposed best
practices for local governments and nongovernmental entities to
use to mobilize and evacuate disabled persons and others with
access and functional needs during an emergency or natural
disaster. Existing law also requires OES to work with specified
entities to improve communication with deaf and hearing-impaired
persons during an emergency.
The Office for Access and Functional Needs (OAFN) was created
within OES to identify the needs of people with disabilities and
others with access and functional needs before, during, and
after a disaster and to integrate disability needs and resources
into all aspects of emergency management systems. The OAFN
created a guidance document for integrating the needs of people
with disabilities and other access and functional needs into
emergency management in 2009, and has also developed training
programs, an evacuation and transportation plan template, and
coordinated services for use by other governmental and
nongovernmental entities when planning for a disaster.
Proposed Law:
AB 2311 would require a local agency to integrate access and
functional needs into its emergency plan by addressing, at a
minimum, how the "access and functional needs population," as
defined, is served by the following:
Emergency communications, including the integration of
interpreters, translators, and assistive technology.
Emergency evacuation, including the identification of
transportation resources and resources that are compliant with
the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) for
individuals who are dependent on public transportation.
Emergency sheltering, including ensuring that designated
shelters are ADA-compliant or can be made compliant with
modification and that showers and bathrooms are fully
AB 2311 (Brown) Page 2 of
?
accessible to all occupants.
The bill defines "access and functional needs population" as
consisting of persons who have developmental or intellectual
disabilities, physical disabilities, chronic conditions,
injuries, no or limited English proficiency, older adults,
children, people living in institutionalized settings, or those
who are low-income, homeless, or transportation disadvantaged,
including those who are dependent on public transit or pregnant.
Related
Legislation: AB 918 (Cooley), Chap. 187/2013, required OES to
update the State Emergency Plan by July 31, 2015 to include
proposed best practices for local governments and
nongovernmental entities to use to mobilize and evacuate
disabled persons and others with access and functional needs
during an emergency.
Staff
Comments: The potential state costs of this bill would depend
upon how many local agencies have adopted emergency plans that
are compliant with the provisions of the bill, and the
documented costs incurred by those local agencies who have not
adopted an emergency plan that is compliant with the bill.
Staff notes that many local agencies prepare an emergency plan
or emergency operations plan as a requirement for eligibility
for federal funds under the Homeland Security Grant Program
(HSGP). Furthermore, both the HSGP and the federal Emergency
Management Program Grant (EMPG) include components that allow
funds to be used for planning purposes, including emergency
preparedness planning that engages the "whole community,"
including children, individuals with disabilities, others with
access and functional needs, and individuals with limited
English proficiency. As such, most counties are likely already
adopting emergency plans that are inclusive of the needs of
those populations. County recipients of federal HSGP and EMPG
funding are authorized, at their discretion, to pass-through
some of their allocations to other local agencies within their
boundaries for those purposes.
AB 2311 (Brown) Page 3 of
?
Current law, however, does not mandate that cities, counties, or
special districts adopt an emergency plan. Those entities that
do adopt plans may not account for all of the populations
included in the bill's definition of "access and functional
needs population," or address the communications, evacuation,
and sheltering needs of those groups in the same manner that is
specified in the bill. In sum, local costs to comply are
unknown, and the degree to which some local agencies would
currently be in full compliance is also unknown. However, if
half of these agencies submitted a successful claim to
incorporate the needs of those specified populations, costs
would likely be in the low millions.
-- END --