BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 882|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 882
Author: Hertzberg (D), et al.
Amended: 5/31/16
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 5-1, 4/12/16
AYES: Hancock, Glazer, Leno, Liu, Monning
NOES: Stone
NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 5/27/16
AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza
NOES: Bates, Nielsen
SUBJECT: Crimes: public transportation: minors
SOURCE: Children's Defense Fund
Western Center on Law and Poverty
Youth Justice Coalition
DIGEST: This bill provides that minors shall not be subject to
an infraction or misdemeanor for evading a transit fare.
ANALYSIS: Existing law states that every person who avoids fare
payment on a public transit system, including the misuse of
transfer passes, tickets and tokens when a transit system
representative asks for proof of fare payment, shall be punished
by an infraction or misdemeanor. (Penal Code § 640.)
This bill states that a minor shall not be charged with an
infraction or a misdemeanor for evading a transit fee, as
SB 882
Page 2
specified. However, this bill does not limit the ability of
public transportation agencies to charge youth evading transit
fares up to $250 upon a first or second violation and up to $400
upon a third or subsequent violation.
Background
The inability to afford transportation to and from school is one
of the most frequently cited barriers that low-income youth face
in attending school, which equates to about tens of thousands of
youth each year across California, particularly those who
usually do not have the few dollars requisite to ride
transportation, receive fare citations and experience the
hardships of heavy fines (up to $250) and/or court appearances.
SB 882 prevents youth under 18 from being charged with a penal
code infraction for a fare evasion citation and reduces the
likelihood that they will enter the criminal justice system
alongside reducing the expenses of both trying and detaining
them. This bill will not impact the ability of transit
authorities to charge and collect a financial penalty.
In San Francisco, the criminal penalty for juveniles costs up to
$123.97 in fare evasion fines, including court fees. The fare
evasion fine for youth escalates with each offense. It is also
useful to look at the effects of the San Francisco Municipal
Transportation Agency's (SFMTA) decriminalization of fare
evasion for adults in February 2008 in order to reduce fare
evasion citations on traffic court dockets and to increase SFMTA
fine revenue collections. Prior to the transition, the adult
fine, with court fees, totaled $123.97, and the bulk of the fine
was kept by the court. By instituting a $50 administrative fine
in its place, the SFMTA keeps 100 percent of all citation
revenue. The change also effectively lowered the penalty for
adult fare evasion by up to 60 percent. The same report
recommended that in order to dissuade fare evasion and decrease
the gap between an adult and juvenile penalty, the Board of
Supervisors should either revert fare evasion a criminal
citation (only because of the current law criminalizing youth
fare evasion) or increase the base fine for adult fare evasion
to be closer to the city's juvenile fine and also create an
SB 882
Page 3
escalating penalty for repeat offenders.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:NoLocal: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Criminal fine/fee/surcharge revenues: Unknown, potentially
significant reduction in criminal penalty collections
statewide (General/Special/Local Funds) to the extent local
agencies continue to issue criminal citations in lieu of
levying administrative penalties upon minors as recently
authorized pursuant to SB 413 (Chapter 765/2015). The
magnitude of the impact on the state and local jurisdictions
would be dependent on various factors including but not
limited to the number of minors who would have been cited for
the offense, the number of counties imposing administrative
penalties in lieu of criminal fines, the level of enforcement
by local entities, and the collection efforts in each
jurisdiction.
Criminal justice system: Potentially significant future cost
savings resulting from reduced involvement with the courts,
local law enforcement agencies including county probation
departments, and child welfare services.
SUPPORT: (Verified5/31/16)
Children's Defense Fund (co-source)
Western Center on Law and Poverty (co-source)
Youth Justice Coalition (co-source)
Aspiranet HQ
California Assocation of Local Conservation Corps
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Coalition for Youth
California PAN-Ethnic Health Network
California Public Defenders Association
Californians United for a Responsible Budget
Children's Advocacy Institute
SB 882
Page 4
Children Now
Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations, Inc.
Comite Civico del Valle
Community Asset Development Redefining Education
Courage Campaign
El Rancho Unified School District
Ella Baker Center for Human Rights
First Place for Youth
Larkin Street Youth Services
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay
Area
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
Los Angeles Conservation Corps
National Association of Social Workers
National Center for Youth Law
A New Way of Life Re-entry Project
PolicyLink
Public Counsel Children's Rights Project
Root & Rebound
Rubicon Programs
OPPOSITION: (Verified5/31/16)
California Police Chiefs Association Inc.
California State Sheriffs' Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The sponsors of this bill, Children's
Defense Fund, Western Center on Law & Poverty, and Youth Justice
Coalition, state in part:
According to data from the L.A. County Probation
Department, riding transit without fare is the number
one reason why youth are cited in L.A. County, and
youth of color receive a disproportionate number of
citations in L.A. County. These citations can result
in heavy fines or count appearances, which can
require students, take time out of school to attend
court and can create stress for students and
families. First-time count appearance during high
SB 882
Page 5
school quadruples a student's odds of dropping out.
Ending criminal prosecution for riding transit
without fare will greatly reduce the criminalization
of young people and give them a better shot at
success in life?A survey of Oakland youth found that
61% of students reported they sometimes use their
lunch money to ride the bus, and nearly half of
low-income students reported that it was harder to
get to school, to jobs, or to after-school programs
without a free transit pass.
Unlike California, many states guarantee
transportation to and from school for public school
students who live beyond a certain distance from
their school and a diverse array of cities and
communities provide free transit passes - including
San Francisco - to children and youth. Until
California ensures access to transportation for every
child, criminally charging children for not paying
the fare on transit is unfair and undermines
opportunity for our poorest youth.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The California State Sheriffs'
Association opposes this bill, stating in part:
We understand the desire to eliminate the impacts
that unlawful fare evasion can have on minors. That
said, we do not agree that simply saying that a minor
cannot be held accountable for an act still deemed to
be illegal is the appropriate way to achieve this
goal.
Perhaps transit agencies could be encouraged or
compelled not to charge a fare to riders under a
certain age. Schools could contract with transit
providers to cover the costs of transporting
school-bound children. However, simply allowing one
cohort of individuals to escape liability for
something that remains illegal will frustrate law
enforcement and encourage bad behavior
SB 882
Page 6
Prepared by:Molly Lao / PUB. S. /
6/2/16 8:38:40
**** END ****