BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                             Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          Bill No:    SB 626        Hearing Date:     May 12, 2015    
          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |McGuire                                              |
          |-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
          |Version:   |April 16, 2015                                       |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:    |No               |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|JRD                                                  |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


           Subject:  Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District: Police Force



          HISTORY

          Source:   Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District

          Prior Legislation:AB 2224 (Nation) - Ch.341, Statutes of 2002

          Support:  Sonoma County Sheriff Steve Freitas; Marin County  
          Sheriff Robert Doyle; 
                    Novato Police Chief James Berg; San Rafael Police  
          Chief Diana Bishop;
                    Central Marin Police Authority Chief Todd Cusimano

          Opposition:None known

            
          PURPOSE

          The purpose of this legislation is to authorize the Sonoma-Marin  
          Area Rail Transit District to establish the position of chief of  
          police.
          
          Existing law establishes the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit  
          (SMART) District Act.  (Public Utilities Code § 105000.)

          Under existing law the government of the district shall be  







          SB 626  (McGuire )                                         Page  
          2 of ?
          
          
          vested in a board of directors, which consists of 12 members.  
          (Public Utilities Code § 105020.)

          Under existing law the board has the power to:

                 Own, operate, manage, and maintain a passenger rail  
               system within the territory of the district.

                 Determine the rail transit facilities, including  
               ancillary bicycle and pedestrian pathways, to be acquired  
               and constructed by the district, the manner of operation,  
               and the means to finance them.

                 Adopt an annual budget for the district that provides  
               for the compensation of its officers and employees.

                 Fix rates, rentals, charges, and classifications of rail  
               transit service operated by the district.

                 Adopt an administrative code that prescribes the powers  
               and duties of district officers, the method of appointment  
               of district employees, and the methods, procedures, and  
               systems for the operation and management of the district.

                 Adopt rules and regulations governing the use of rail  
               transit facilities owned or operated by the district.

                 Cause a post audit of the financial transactions and  
               records of the district to be made at least annually by a  
               certified public accountant.

                 Adopt rules and regulations providing for the  
               administration of employer-employee relations.

                 Do any and all things necessary to carry out the  
               purposes of this part.

          (Public Utilities Code § 105032.)

          Existing law lists are peace officers whose authority extends to  
          any place in the state for the purpose of performing their  
          primary duty or when making an arrest as to any public offense  
          with respect to which there is immediate danger to person or  
          property, or of the escape of the perpetrator of that offense,  








          SB 626  (McGuire )                                         Page  
          3 of ?
          
          
          as specified.  Those peace officers may carry firearms only if  
          authorized and under terms and conditions specified by their  
          employing agency.  (Penal Code § 830.33.)

          This legislation authorizes the SMART board to establish the  
          position of chief of police.

          This legislation specifies that the police chief will be a duly  
          sworn police officer and must comply with the standards for  
          recruitment and training of peace officers established in  
          existing law.

          This legislation specifies that, should the SMART board  
          determine that more than one officer is needed, it may contract  
          for those services with Marin and/or Sonoma counties.  
                                          
                    RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
                                          
          For the past eight years, this Committee has scrutinized  
          legislation referred to its jurisdiction for any potential  
          impact on prison overcrowding.  Mindful of the United States  
          Supreme Court ruling and federal court orders relating to the  
          state's ability to provide a constitutional level of health care  
          to its inmate population and the related issue of prison  
          overcrowding, this Committee has applied its "ROCA" policy as a  
          content-neutral, provisional measure necessary to ensure that  
          the Legislature does not erode progress in reducing prison  
          overcrowding.   

          On February 10, 2014, the federal court ordered California to  
          reduce its in-state adult institution population to 137.5% of  
          design capacity by February 28, 2016, as follows:   

                 143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
                 141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,
                 137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016. 

          In February of this year the administration reported that as "of  
          February 11, 2015, 112,993 inmates were housed in the State's 34  
          adult institutions, which amounts to 136.6% of design bed  
          capacity, and 8,828 inmates were housed in out-of-state  
          facilities.  This current population is now below the  
          court-ordered reduction to 137.5% of design bed capacity."(  
          Defendants' February 2015 Status Report In Response To February  








          SB 626  (McGuire )                                         Page  
          4 of ?
          
          
          10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman  
          v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).

          While significant gains have been made in reducing the prison  
          population, the state now must stabilize these advances and  
          demonstrate to the federal court that California has in place  
          the "durable solution" to prison overcrowding "consistently  
          demanded" by the court.  (Opinion Re: Order Granting in Part and  
          Denying in Part Defendants' Request For Extension of December  
          31, 2013 Deadline, NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC), 3-Judge Court,  
          Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (2-10-14).  The Committee's  
          consideration of bills that may impact the prison population  
          therefore will be informed by the following questions:

              Whether a proposal erodes a measure which has contributed  
               to reducing the prison population;
              Whether a proposal addresses a major area of public safety  
               or criminal activity for which there is no other  
               reasonable, appropriate remedy;
              Whether a proposal addresses a crime which is directly  
               dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there  
               is no other reasonably appropriate sanction; 
              Whether a proposal corrects a constitutional problem or  
               legislative drafting error; and
              Whether a proposal proposes penalties which are  
               proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other  
               reasonably appropriate remedy.


          COMMENTS

          1.  Need for This Legislation

          According to the author: 

               Assembly Bill 2224 did not provide the SMART Board of  
               Directors the authority to create and maintain a chief  
               of police. Having a sworn chief of police would  
               provide SMART the framework to provide safety and  
               security for train riders, employees, property,  
               buildings and infrastructure. In addition to providing  
               support in protecting our passengers, having one  
               employee at SMART as a sworn officer, it would allow  
               for unfiltered information sharing between the  








          SB 626  (McGuire )                                         Page  
          5 of ?
          
          
               thirteen local law enforcement agencies, state and  
               local jurisdictions and the SMART Chief of Police.   
               Currently law enforcement agencies are prohibited by  
               Government Code 6254 to release specific law  
               enforcement sensitive information to the general  
               public (SMART). Access to law enforcement information  
               between our safety partners will allow for the SMART  
               Chief of Police to make decisions weighing the needs  
               to our riders with accurate information pertaining to  
               safety and security concerns. With SMART being under  
               federal regulations, SMART reports to Department of  
               Homeland Security (Transportation Security  
               Administration) on transportation safety needs and  
               works in conjunction with the Federal Bureau of  
               Investigations on security and terrorism related  
               concerns.

               This bill is needed because:

               a. Train service is scheduled to start in 2016. 

               b. Without a sworn police chief, sharing sensitive law  
               enforcement intelligence and cases between SMART and  
               other law agencies will diminish if not cease. Without  
               this information, SMART becomes vulnerable and unable  
               to respond to sensitive information pertaining to  
               service disruption, acts of vandalism and violence.   
               SMART would be unable to legally receive information  
               on patients, injuries, suspects or other vital  
               information during an investigation. 

               c. Rail has been designated by federal law enforcement  
               agencies as potential targets because of its open  
               architecture and easy access points. 

               d. SMART will be connecting two major existing means  
               of transportation; the Sonoma County Airport and the  
               Golden Gate Ferry which is direct access for commuters  
               and tourists from San Francisco. 

               e. SMART Chief of Police needs timely, accurate,  
               unfiltered information during incidents along SMART's  
               right of way to make safety related decisions for its  
               passengers and employees. 








          SB 626  (McGuire )                                         Page  
          6 of ?
          
          

               f. This proposal can have cost savings for SMART  
               because it allows them to better plan for their needs  
               without immediately relying on contracted services  
               from local law enforcement agencies. 

          2.  Effect of This Legislation

          There are approximately 250 entities statewide that are eligible  
          to receive state transit funding only four transit operators are  
          statutorily allowed to maintain their own police department.   
          All other transit service providers, including SMART, contract  
          with local law enforcement or private entities to provide their  
          security needs. 

          The author contends that, without a sworn police officer on  
          staff, law enforcement agencies will not share sensitive  
          information with SMART.  Without this information, SMART becomes  
          vulnerable and unable to respond to sensitive information  
          pertaining to service disruption, acts of vandalism, and  
          violence.  The author suggests that this bill solves this  
          problem because, with a sworn police chief, SMART will be able  
          to access sensitive information from other law enforcement  
          agencies.
          

                                      -- END -