BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2320
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB
2320 (Calderon and Low)
As Enrolled August 31, 2016
2/3 vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |76-0 |(May 19, 2016) |SENATE: |38-0 |(August 18, |
| | | | | |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |80-0 |(August 24, | | | |
| | |2016) | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: P. & C.P.
SUMMARY: Prohibits the operation of unmanned aircraft systems
(UAS) in a manner that violates a protective order, constitutes
stalking, interferes with emergency response personnel, or
facilitates delivery of contraband into a jail or prison; and
AB 2320
Page 2
also allows a judge to prohibit a sex offender from using a UAS.
The Senate amendments:
1)Remove from the bill the intent language pertaining to flight
restrictions adjacent to a critical infrastructure facility.
2)Make various technical and nonsubstantive changes.
EXISTING LAW: In 2012, Congress required the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to establish a framework for safely
integrating commercial UAS into the national airspace. Under
new FAA rules, UAS flight is authorized without special
permission over unpopulated areas if the UAS operator meets
certain training and safety requirements.
UAS operators who wish to operate over populated areas for a
business, academic or research purpose must still apply for a
commercial use exemption and an FAA Certificate of Authorization
to operate. The FAA's rules require recreational UAS operators
to register with the FAA all UAS weighing between half a pound
and 55 pounds.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
1)State prisons: Potential minor future increase in state costs
(General Fund) to the extent the restrictions imposed on the
use or operation of a UAS result in felony convictions and
commitments to state prison. To the extent two cases are
impacted due to the provisions of this bill would cost $58,000
in any one year based on the contract bed rate of $29,000 per
AB 2320
Page 3
inmate per year.
2)Local jails: Potential minor future increase in
non-reimbursable local costs (Local Funds) to the extent the
added factor in aggravation for felony convictions would
result in longer jail sentences.
COMMENTS: This bill seeks to protect personal privacy and
public safety by amending a variety of existing laws to clarify
that a violation of those laws can be committed by use of a UAS.
Using UAS to violate protective orders or stalk someone. A
protective order is a court-issued directive to stop a person
who has harassed or abused another person from getting within a
specified distance of that person for a certain time period.
Since UAS can be used to bother or capture images of a person,
this bill specifies that using a UAS to enter the prohibited
distance specified in a protective order is a violation of the
order and subject to the same penalties as other violations of
protective orders. Similarly, stalking laws prohibit a person
from repeatedly following or harassing another person in a way
that puts that person in fear. While a future court might find
that a UAS can be used to violate any of California's specific
privacy laws, the author contends that statutory updates are
needed in order to ensure that people's privacy and personal
safety is protected. This bill specifies that using a UAS to
stalk someone constitutes a violation of stalking laws and is
subject to the same penalties that apply when a person stalks a
person by physically following or harassing someone.
Sex offenders and UAS. This bill authorizes a judge to prohibit
a person who is a registered sex offender from using a UAS if
doing so would be in the public interest. Under current law, a
person convicted of any felony is prohibited from possessing a
AB 2320
Page 4
firearm. However, unlike firearms, UAS have numerous commercial
and recreational uses that a person who is a registered sex
offender might lawfully pursue without posing a danger to
others.
Emergencies and UAS interference. California law prohibits
people from stopping at an emergency in order to view the scene
if doing so interferes with emergency personnel. Nevertheless,
in 2015, California experienced a number of UAS interferences
with emergency responses to wildfires throughout the state.
Aerial firefighting aircraft, such as air tankers and
helicopters, must fly at very low altitudes in order to be
effective. Hobbyists who fly UAS near fires create the
potential for a mid-air collision that could injure or kill
aerial and ground firefighters as well as innocent bystanders on
the ground below. Because of this risk, when firefighters
detect a UAS flying over or near a wildfire, air operations must
be suspended until all drones flying in a fire area are removed.
This delay allows wildfires to grow, and in some cases like the
North Fire in San Bernardino County, such a delay can pose an
immediate threat to human lives and property. This bill
explicitly prohibits any use of a UAS that interferes with
police, fire, medical, or other emergency or military personnel
as they respond to natural or manmade emergencies.
Prisons and UAS. Concerns have been raised about drone
overflights of prisons, and there are multiple examples of
people attempting to use UAS to introduce contraband to prisons.
The author aims to improve prison and jail security by making
it a felony to use a UAS to deliver contraband to a prison or
jail.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:
I am returning Assembly Bill 2320 without my signature.
AB 2320
Page 5
This bill prohibits the operation of a drone in a manner that
violates a protective order, constitutes stalking, interferes
with emergency response personnel, or facilitates delivery of
contraband into a jail or prison. The bill also allows a court
to bar a registered sex offender from operating a drone.
Current law is sufficient to prosecute the violations referenced
in this bill. There is no need to add special reference to
drones in multiple places in the penal code.
Analysis Prepared by:
Jennie Bretschneider / P. & C.P. / (916)
319-2200
FN: 0005125