BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



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

          AB 2607 (Ting) - Firearm restraining orders
          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                                                                 |
          |                                                                 |
          |                                                                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Version: March 17, 2016         |Policy Vote: PUB. S. 5 - 2      |
          |                                |                                |
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Urgency: No                     |Mandate: No                     |
          |                                |                                |
          |--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
          |                                |                                |
          |Hearing Date: June 20, 2016     |Consultant: Jolie Onodera       |
          |                                |                                |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

          This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. 

          Bill  
          Summary:  AB 2607 would expand the population of individuals  
          eligible to petition the court for a gun violence restraining  
          order (GVRO), as specified.


          Fiscal  
          Impact:  
              GVRO petitions  :  Potentially significant increase in court  
             costs (General Fund*) to the extent expanding the population  
             of individuals eligible to petition the court for a GVRO  
             results in additional petitions filed, subsequently prompting  
             new hearings and the issuance of warrants and GVROs. Actual  
             costs would be dependent of the volume of petitions filed by  
             the expanded population. The number of additional petitions  
             filed cannot be known with certainty, but to the extent even  
             one or two petitions are filed in each county per year,  
             estimated costs to the courts could be in the low hundreds of  
             thousands of dollars annually statewide.
              APPS enforcement/administration  :  Potential increase in  
             costs (Special Fund**) to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for  
             administration and enforcement of the Armed Prohibited  







          AB 2607 (Ting)                                         Page 1 of  
          ?
          
          
             Persons System (APPS) list to the extent expanding the  
             population of individuals eligible to petition for GVROs  
             increases workload to monitor changes to the APPS list based  
             on new GVROs issued, renewed, dissolved, or terminated.
              Misdemeanor violations  :  Potential non-reimbursable local  
             enforcement and incarceration costs (Local Funds) offset to a  
             degree by fine revenue for (1) violations of GVROs, (2)  
             violations of the subsequent five-year firearms/ammunition  
             prohibition due to violating a GVRO, and (3) filing GVRO  
             petitions with false information or with the intent to  
             harass. 
              Mandated law enforcement activities :  Potential increase in  
             local law enforcement agency costs, potentially  
             state-reimbursable (General Fund) to retain surrendered  
             firearms and ammunition during the restraining order period,  
             issue a receipt to the restrained person at the time of  
             surrender, and serve ex parte restraining orders. 
           
          *Trial Court Trust Fund
          **Dealers Record of Sale (DROS) Account - Staff notes the DROS  
          Account is structurally imbalanced, with an estimated reserve  
          balance of less than $1 million by year-end FY 2016-17. Current  
          revenues to the DROS Account may be insufficient to cover the  
          additional costs resulting from this bill in conjunction with  
          the numerous other legislative measures requiring funding from  
          the DROS Account, should they be enacted.


          Background:  Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte gun  
          violence restraining order (GVRO) prohibiting the subject of a  
          petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning,  
          purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase  
          or receive, a firearm or ammunition when it is shown that there  
          is a substantial likelihood that the subject of the petition  
          poses a significant danger of harm to himself, herself, or  
          another in the near future by having in his or her custody or  
          control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm,  
          and that the order is necessary to prevent personal injury to  
          himself, herself, or another, as specified. Existing law  
          requires the ex parte GVRO to expire no later than 21 days after  
          the date on the order. (Penal Code § 18150.)

          Existing law additionally authorizes a court to issue a GVRO  
          prohibiting the subject of the petition from having in his or  








          AB 2607 (Ting)                                         Page 2 of  
          ?
          
          
          her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or  
          receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or  
          ammunition for a period of one year when there is clear and  
          convincing evidence that the subject of the petition, or a  
          person subject to an ex parte GVRO, as applicable, poses a  
          significant danger of personal injury to himself, herself, or  
          another by having in his or her custody or control, owning,  
          purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm, and that the  
          order is necessary to prevent personal injury to himself,  
          herself, or another, as specified. Existing law authorizes  
          renewal of a GVRO within three months of the order's expiration.  
          (Penal Code §§ 18170, 18190)

          Under existing law, petitions for ex parte, one-year, and  
          renewed GVROs may only be filed by an immediate family member of  
          the person or by a law enforcement officer. (Penal Code §§  
          18150(a)(1), 18170(a), 18190(a)(1).)

          Under existing law, the court is required to notify the DOJ when  
          a GVRO is issued, renewed, dissolved, or terminated. (Penal Code  
          § 18115.)


          Proposed Law:  
           This bill would expand the population of individuals (beyond  
          immediate family members and law enforcement officers) eligible  
          to petition the court for an ex parte, one-year, or renewed GVRO  
          to include the following persons:
               An employer or coworker.
               A mental health worker who has seen a person as a patient  
              in the prior six months.
               An employee of a secondary or postsecondary school that a  
              person has attended in the last six months.

          This bill would provide that nothing in the GVRO statutes shall  
          be construed to require a person eligible to petition the court  
          for a GVRO to seek a GVRO.


          Prior  
          Legislation:  AB 1014 (Skinner) Chapter 872/2014 established the  
          GVRO process, which authorizes a law enforcement officer or  
          immediate family member of a person, to seek, and a court to  
          issue, a GVRO, as specified, prohibiting a person from having in  








          AB 2607 (Ting)                                         Page 3 of  
          ?
          
          
          his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing,  
          or receiving any firearms or ammunition, as specified.


          Staff  
          Comments:  By expanding the population of individuals eligible to  
          petition the court for a GVRO, this bill could result in  
          increased costs to the courts to process and review a greater  
          number of petitions, provide notice, conduct hearings, and  
          issue, renew, dissolve, or terminate GVROs. Data from the DOJ  
          indicates less than 40 GVROs have been issued since the  
          inception of the GVRO process on January 1, 2016, however, data  
          on the number of petitions filed and hearings held was not  
          available at the time of this analysis. 
          While it is unknown how many petitions will be filed by the  
          expanded population, the potential workload to hold hearings,  
          issue warrants and GVROs could result in significant additional  
          workload to the courts. The number of additional petitions that  
          will be filed cannot be known with certainty, but to the extent  
          even one or two petitions are filed in each county per year,  
          estimated costs to the courts could be in the low hundreds of  
          thousands of dollars annually statewide based on the hourly  
          court cost of $837.

          The DOJ could incur additional costs to facilitate the process  
          of submittal, recording, and tracking of GVRO status, resulting  
          in an increase in APPS enforcement costs. These costs would  
          likewise be dependent on the volume of GVROs issued as a result  
          of the revised and expanded population of individuals eligible  
          to file GVRO petitions.

          Under existing law, any person filing a petition for a GVRO  
          knowing the information in the petition to be false or with the  
          intent to harass is guilty of a misdemeanor. Additionally,  
          violations of GVROs are punishable as a misdemeanor and subject  
          the individual restricted by the GVRO to a five-year prohibition  
          from the possession or purchase of firearms or ammunition.  
          Misdemeanor violations of this measure could result in  
          non-reimbursable local law enforcement agency costs for  
          enforcement and incarceration, offset to a degree by fine  
          revenue.

          Under existing law, local law enforcement officers are required  
          to serve ex parte restraining orders that have been requested by  








          AB 2607 (Ting)                                         Page 4 of  
          ?
          
          
          family members, retain surrendered firearms and ammunition  
          during the restraining order periods, and issue receipts for the  
          firearms/ammunition surrendered to restrained persons. By  
          expanding the population of individuals eligible to request ex  
          parte GVROs, this bill could likewise increase potentially  
          state-reimbursable local law enforcement agency costs for these  
          activities, the magnitude of which would be dependent on the  
          number of GVROs required to be served, the volume of firearms  
          and ammunition to be retained and the length of time required  
          for storage, and workload/time involved with providing receipts  
          to the restrained persons.

          To the extent the provisions of this bill serve to reduce the  
          incidence of firearms-related injuries and death, potential  
          future cost savings could be substantial. A study by the  
          non-profit Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE)  
          reported over 105,000 incidences of firearm injury and death in  
          2010 nationally, with an estimated societal cost of over $174  
          billion in work lost, medical care, insurance, criminal justice  
          expenses, and pain and suffering.  At a unit level, the study  
          reported a governmental cost of $187,000 to $582,000 per firearm  
          fatality in medical and mental health care, emergency services,  
          and administrative and criminal justice costs. The estimated  
          societal cost per firearm injury or fatality, including lost  
          work productivity and quality of life was reported at nearly  
          $430,000 to $5 million, respectively. 


                                      -- END --