BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1054
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 21, 2016
Counsel: Sandy Uribe
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair
SB
1054 (Pavley) - As Amended April 6, 2016
As Proposed to be Amended in Committee
SUMMARY: Clarifies the collection process for fines and
restitution by county collection agencies, and mitigates issues
of duplicate collection. Specifically, this bill:
SB 1054
Page 2
1)Authorizes the agency designated to collect restitution fines
and orders from sentenced felony jail inmates to retain an
administrative fee to cover the actual costs of collection up
to 10% of monies collected, rather than a flat 10% of the
monies collected.
2)Clarifies that the agency designated by the county to collect
restitution fines and orders from sentenced felony jail
inmates may retain the administrative fee at the time the
restitution order or fine is collected.
3)Provides that if a county agency has been designated to
collect restitution orders from sentenced felony jail inmates,
persons on post-release community supervision (PRCS) or
mandatory supervision, and the county agency objects to
referral of the order to Franchise Tax Board (FTB) for
collection, neither CDCR nor the county shall refer the order
to FTB.
4)Provides that the victim entitled to the restitution may
designate the agency that will collect the restitution.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Authorizes the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (CDCR) to collect restitution fines and
restitution orders from prisoners. (Pen. Code, § 2085.5,
subds. (a) & (c).)
SB 1054
Page 3
2)Allows the Secretary of CDCR to collect money from parolees
with an outstanding balance on a restitution fine or a victim
restitution order. (Pen. Code, § 2085.5, subds. (g) & (h).)
3)Requires CDCR to withhold an administrative fee totaling 10%
of money collected from the prisoner or parolee to be held in
a special deposit account for the purposes of reimbursing
administrative and support costs of the restitution program.
(Pen. Code, § 2085.5, subd. (i).)
4)Authorizes the agency designated by the board of supervisors
in the county of incarceration to deduct 20% to 50% from the
wages and trust account deposits of a county-jail inmate
serving a sentence under realignment and owing a restitution
fine or restitution order. (Pen. Code, § 2085.5, subds.
(b)(1) & (c).)
5)Allows the agency designated by the board of supervisors in
the county of incarceration to withhold an administrative fee
totaling 10% of money collected to be held in a special
deposit account for the purposes of reimbursing administrative
and support costs of the restitution program, as specified.
(Pen. Code, § 2085.5, subd. (i).)
6)Allows the agency designated by the board of supervisors to
collect money from inmates released from jail after serving a
sentencing under realignment who has an outstanding balance on
a restitution fine or a victim restitution order. (Pen. Code,
§ 2085.5, subds. (g) & (h).)
7)Authorizes the agency designated by the board of supervisors
to collect unsatisfied restitutions fines and victim
restitution order from persons released on PRCS or mandatory
supervision. (Pen. Code, § 2085.6, subds. (a) & (b).)
8)Gives the board of supervisors discretion to impose an
administrative fee not to exceed 10% of the amount collected,
the proceeds of which shall be deposited into the county's
SB 1054
Page 4
general fund. (Pen. Code, § 2085.6, subd. (d).)
9)Requires the Judicial Council to adopt guidelines for a
comprehensive program concerning the collection of moneys owed
for fees, fines, forfeitures, penalties, and assessments
imposed by court order. (Pen. Code, § 1463.010, subd. (a).)
10)Specifies that a restitution order is enforceable as a civil
judgment. (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (i).)
11)Prioritizes the order in which delinquent court-ordered debt
received is to be satisfied. The priorities are 1) victim
restitution, 2) state surcharge, 3) restitution fines, penalty
assessments, and other fines, with payments made on a
proportional basis to the total amount levied for all of these
items, and 4) state/county/city reimbursements, and special
revenue items. (Pen. Code, § 1203.1d.)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1)Author's Statement: According to the author, "SB 1054
addresses legal ambiguities in the collection of victim
restitution fines from inmates sentenced to county jail
pursuant to Penal Code Section 1170(h) and inmates released
from state prison to Post-Release Community Supervision
(PRCS). Because of statutory inconsistencies, it is unclear
when a county sheriff is authorized to collect a state
authorized administrative fee. Consequently, sheriffs may be
unable to collect administrative fees to pay for restitution
SB 1054
Page 5
collection from PC 1170(h) inmates. In addition, because of
an anomaly in current law, an individual on PRCS can be
referred to the state Franchise Tax Board for collection of
restitution, despite being on local supervision. This dual
state-local authority could lead to unfair restitution
collection from an individual released to PRCS. SB 1054 would
specify that counties that supervise criminal populations can
collect the restitution and related administrative costs and
thus help victims receive restitution. The bill provides
fairness in collecting restitution from criminal offenders
released to PRCS, who at the present time may be overcharged
restitution fines from both the state and the county.
"In 2012, the Legislature authorized the collection of
restitution from county jail inmate accounts from prisoners
sentenced pursuant to Penal Code section 1170(h). Since that
time, there has been confusion regarding the collection of
administrative fees by county sheriffs pursuant to this
statute. Because of this confusion, some counties such as
Monterey, San Diego and Sacramento, believe that the
collection of the fee is not authorized until the release of
the inmate. However, inmates may empty out their account to
prevent the county sheriff from collecting their
administrative fee upon their release. The California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has always
interpreted the language to allow for immediate collection of
the administrative fee, but not all counties agree. This
bill is consistent with recent legislation and clarifies the
issue for counties.
"Existing law authorizes the CDCR to refer any former prison
inmate to the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) for collection of
restitution. Currently an individual on Post Release
Community Supervision (PRCS) can be referred to the FTB,
despite the fact that their supervision is local. AB 109
transferred supervision of inmates to local control. It is
inconsistent with AB 109 for the State to continue to collect
restitution from an individual who is being supervised at the
county level. Current law could lead to unfair double
SB 1054
Page 6
collection of restitution, hindering the successful reentry of
an individual back into the community.
"SB 1054 will resolve these issues to clearly express that a
county sheriff can collect the 10% administrative fee at the
time restitution is collected on behalf of the victim, and by
amending the Revenue and Tax Code to allow a county that is
collecting restitution from an individual on PRCS to have
primary authority to do so. After an individual is released
from PRCS, the county would then transfer responsibility to
the FTB to collect remaining restitution."
2)Necessity for this Bill: Because Penal Code section 2085.5,
subdivision (f) states, in part, "Upon release from custody ?
the agency is authorized to charge a fee to cover the actual
administrative cost," several counties have interpreted this
to mean that the administrative fee cannot be collected until
the inmate's release. In fact, this language was intended to
give the county agency continuing authority to collect the
administrative fee after the inmate's release.
In order to clarify this ambiguity, this bill deletes the
confusing language in Penal Code section 2085.5, subdivision
(f) and enacts a statute on collection procedures applicable
when an inmate is released from county jail without a
supervisory tail.
3)Argument in Support: According to the California State
Sheriffs' Association, "The collection of restitution has
become increasingly complex since the enactment of
realignment. Existing law authorizes a county agency to
collect administrative fees for the collection of restitution.
However, current language fails to specify when an
administrative fee may be collected, which leaves counties
perplexed as to when their collection is permissible?.
"It is important that counties have immediate access to
administrative fees because these fees are essential to
maintaining victim collection funds. Victims should continue
SB 1054
Page 7
to have immediate access to restitution and the county should
be timely compensated for ensuring that restitution is
collected."
4)Prior Legislation:
a) SB 419 (Block), Chapter 513, Statutes of 2014, extended
existing restitution collection methods to persons who have
unsatisfied restitution orders and fines after serving a
county jail term which is not followed by a period of
supervised release.
b) SB 1197 (Pavley), Chapter 517, Statutes of 2014,
extended existing restitution collection methods to persons
on post release community supervision and mandatory
supervision.
c) SB 1210 (Lieu), Chapter 762, Statutes of 2012, requires
the court to assess a post-release community supervision
(PRCS) or mandatory-supervision revocation fine in the same
amount as that imposed for the restitution fine and
authorizes local agencies to collect them.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Los Angeles County District Attorney (Sponsor)
SB 1054
Page 8
California District Attorneys Association
California Public Defenders Association
California State Sheriffs' Association
Chief Probation Officers of California
Opposition
None
Analysis Prepared by:Sandy Uribe / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744