BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                     SB 271  


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  August 19, 2015


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                                 Jimmy Gomez, Chair


          SB 271  
          (Gaines) - As Amended July 16, 2015


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Privacy and Consumer           |Vote:|11 - 0       |
          |Committee:   |Protection                     |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |Education                      |     |7 - 0        |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  YesReimbursable:   
          No


          SUMMARY:


          This bill:










                                                                     SB 271  


                                                                    Page  2





          1)Makes it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate  
            an unmanned aircraft system (UAS, or drone) less than 350 feet  
            above the grounds of a public K-12 school, or to capture  
            images of the school, during school hours without written  
            permission from a school official. A first violation is  
            subject to a warning and subsequent violations are subject to  
            a fine of up to $200.


          2)Stipulates that the above does not apply to:


             a)   A publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected  
               with or employed by a newspaper, magazine, or other  
               periodical publication when gathering information to  
               provide to the public, or by a radio or television station,  
               or by a press association or wire service, unless requested  
               by a school official to cease using the UAS. 



             b)   Law enforcement agencies.
          


          FISCAL EFFECT:


          Minor nonreimbursable costs to cities and counties for  
          enforcement, offset to some extent by fine revenues.


          COMMENTS:


          1)Purpose. This bill seeks to protect the privacy of public  
            school students and to protect students from potential injury,  
            harassment, stalking, kidnapping or other harm that could stem  
            from the use of UAS to capture students' images or movements  








                                                                     SB 271  


                                                                    Page  3





            on public school campuses.  According to the author,  
            "Currently, California has few laws governing drone use and  
            data capture.  As drone usage becomes more common, the  
            potential for misuse and abuse of them will expand as well.   
            This bill is intended to stay ahead of the technological curve  
            by providing safeguards for our children while they are at  
            school.  By prohibiting drone flights over public schools  
            grades K-12 and prohibiting data capture (video footage or  
            photographs, e.g.) of activity on school grounds, this bill  
            would provide an important layer of privacy to our students at  
            a place that should be a sanctuary."


          2)Related Legislation. AB 56 (Quirk), pending in Senate  
            Appropriations, regulates the use of unmanned aircraft systems  
            by public agencies. 



            AB 170 (Gaines), also on today's committee agenda, makes it a  
            misdemeanor to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned  
            aircraft system (drone) on or above the grounds of a state  
            prison or jail.





            SB 142 (Jackson), pending in the Assembly, makes it a trespass  
            to operate an unmanned aircraft system less than 350 feet  
            above ground over private property without the consent of the  
            owner.


          Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081











                                                                     SB 271  


                                                                    Page  4