BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2695|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2695
Author: Goldberg (D), et al
Amended: 5/22/06 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/13/06
AYES: Migden, Poochigian, Cedillo, Margett, Perata, Romero
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 13-0, 8/7/06
AYES: Murray, Aanestad, Alarcon, Alquist, Ashburn, Battin,
Dutton, Escutia, Florez, Ortiz, Poochigian, Romero,
Torlakson
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 74-0, 5/4/06 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Domestic violence: various fees and payments
SOURCE : The Womens Foundation of California
Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department
DIGEST : This bill extends, from 2007 to 2010, the sunset
on the statute which, as now operational, provides that (1)
the minimum mandatory payment imposed on persons granted
probation for a domestic violence crime is $400 instead of
$200, (2) the allocation of these payments received by
counties for county domestic violence program special funds
is two-thirds, and (3) the allocation of these payments
received by the state for two domestic violence-related
funds is one-third, except as specified. This bill
additionally provides for the continuation of several
CONTINUED
AB 2695
Page
2
statutes pertaining to waiving fees associated with
restraining orders and injunctions, now set to sunset in
2007.
ANALYSIS :
Penal Code (PEN) Provisions
Current law generally imposes mandatory conditions of
probation for persons granted probation for a domestic
violence crime, as specified. [PEN Section 1203.097] As
enacted by AB 352 (Goldberg) in 2003, the following
provisions in this section are now in effect, to be
sunsetted on January 1, 2007:
1. A minimum payment by the defendant of $400, subject to
ability to pay, to be disbursed as specified (on January
1, 2007, the amount will be reduced to $200, which was
the amount prior to AB 352).
2. Two-thirds of these moneys required to be deposited with
the county treasurer pursuant to this section are
required to be retained by counties and deposited in the
domestic violence programs special fund, as specified
(on January 1, 2007, this will be reduced to one-third,
which was the allocation prior to AB 352).
This bill continues, until January 1, 2010, the changes
made by AB 352 to Section 1203.097 identified above,
essentially extending the sunset in AB 352 for three years.
Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) Provisions
Current law authorizes courts to issue temporary
restraining orders and injunctions prohibiting harassment,
as specified. [CCP Section 527.6]
Current law, operative only until January 1, 2007, provides
there shall be no filing fee for a petition that seeks a
protective or restraining order or injunction under this
section, as specified.
Current law, operative only until January 1, 2007, provides
that "(n)o fee shall be paid for a subpoena filed in
AB 2695
Page
3
connection with a petition alleging these acts?" [CCP
Section 527(p)]
Current law, operative January 1, 2007, repeals these
provisions.
This bill restores this language.
Current law, operative only until January 1, 2007, further
provides that "(n)otwithstanding any other provision of
law, upon the application of the petitioner there shall be
no fee for the service of process of a protective order,
restraining order, or injunction to be issued, if any of
the following conditions apply:
(A) The protective order, restraining order, or
injunction issued pursuant to this section is based
upon stalking, as prohibited by Section 646.9 of the
Penal Code.
(B) The protective order, restraining order, or
injunction issued pursuant to this section is based
upon a credible threat of violence resulting from a
threat of sexual assault. As used in this
subparagraph, 'sexual assault' means the offenses
enumerated in Section 1036.2 of the Evidence Code.
(C) The protective order, restraining order, or
injunction is issued pursuant to Section 6222 of the
Family Code, unless the applicant is eligible for a
waiver of the payment of the fee for serving the order
pursuant to subdivision (b) of that section." [CCP
Section 527(q)(1)]
Current law, operative January 1, 2007, repeals this
provision.
This bill largely restores these provisions and
specifically provides that, as specified, "there shall be
no fee for the service of process of a protective order,
restraining order, or injunction to be issued, if any of
the following conditions apply:
(A) The protective order, restraining order, or
AB 2695
Page
4
injunction issued pursuant to this section is based
upon stalking, as prohibited by Section 646.9 of the
Penal Code.
(B) The protective order, restraining order, or
injunction issued pursuant to this section is based
upon a credible threat of violence.
(C) The protective order, restraining order, or
injunction is issued pursuant to Section 6222 of the
Family Code."
Current law, operative only until January 1, 2007, requires
the Judicial Council of California to "prepare and develop
application forms for applicants who wish to avail
themselves of the services described in this subdivision."
[CCP Section 527(q)(2)]
Current law, operative January 1, 2007, repeals this
provision.
This bill restores this provision.
Current law provides that any "employer, whose employee has
suffered unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence
from any individual, that can reasonably be construed to be
carried out or to have been carried out at the workplace,
may seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction on
behalf of the employee prohibiting further unlawful
violence or threats of violence by that individual." [CCP
Section 527.8(a)]
This bill additionally authorizes a temporary restraining
order and an injunction under this section for "at the
discretion of the court, any number of other employees at
the workplace, and, if appropriate, other employees at
other workplaces of the employer."
Current law provides that in "the discretion of the court,
and on a showing of good cause, a temporary restraining
order or injunction issued under (the above cited section,
Section 527.8) may include other named family or household
members who reside with the employee." [CCP Section
527.8(e)]
AB 2695
Page
5
This bill expands this provision to include "other persons
employed at his or her workplace or workplaces."
This bill additionally provides that as specified, "there
shall be no fee for the service of process of a temporary
restraining order or injunction to be issued pursuant to
this section if either of the following conditions apply:
(A) The temporary restraining order or injunction
issued pursuant to this section is based upon stalking,
as prohibited by Section 646.9 of the Penal Code.
(B) The temporary restraining order or injunction
issued pursuant to this section is based upon a
credible threat of violence."
This bill requires the Judicial Council to "prepare and
develop application forms for applicants who wish to avail
themselves of the services described in this subdivision."
Family Code (FAM) Provisions
Current law provides that, until the applicable provision
sunsets on January 1, 2007, there "is no filing fee for an
application, a responsive pleading, or an order to show
cause that seeks to obtain, modify, or enforce a protective
order or other order authorized by (the Family Code, as
specified) if the request for the other order is necessary
to obtain or give effect to a protective order. There is
no fee for a subpoena filed in connection with that
application, responsive pleading, or order to show cause."
[FAM Section 6222]
Current law further provides that, until January 1, 2007,
"(f)ees otherwise payable by a petitioner to a law
enforcement agency for serving an order issued under (the
Family Code, as specified) may be waived in any case in
which the petitioner has requested a fee waiver on the
initiating petition and has filed a declaration that
demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the court, the
financial need of the petitioner for the fee waiver. If
the petitioner is not eligible for the fee waiver pursuant
to this subdivision, he or she may be eligible (as
AB 2695
Page
6
specified,)?" [FAM Section 6222]
This bill provides that, there "is no filing fee for an
application, a responsive pleading, or an order to show
cause that seeks to obtain, modify, or enforce a protective
order or other order authorized by (the Family Code, as
specified) when the request for the other order is
necessary to obtain or give effect to a protective order.
There is no fee for a subpoena filed in connection with
that application, responsive pleading, or order to show
cause."
Government Code (GOV) Provisions
Current law generally provides that state and local
governments do not pay fees for the filing of documents,
the performance of official services, or for filing certain
court documents, as specified. [GOV Section 6103]
Current law enumerates circumstances where this section
does not apply. [GOV Section 6103.1 et seq.] Current law
further identified circumstances under which a sheriff or
marshal, in connection with the service of process or
notices, may require that fees be prepaid, as specified.
[GOV Section 6103.2]
Current law, operative until January 1, 2007, provides that
the "requirement for prepayment of a fee deposit does not
apply to the orders or injunctions described in paragraph
(1) of subdivision (q) of Section 527.6 of the Code of
Civil Procedure. However, a sheriff, marshal, or constable
may submit a billing to the superior court for payment of
fees in the manner prescribed by the Judicial Council. The
fees for service, cancellation of service, and making a not
found return may not exceed the amounts provided in
Sections 26721, 26736, and 26738, respectively, and are
subject to the provisions of Section 26731."
Current law, operative January 1, 2007, repeals this
provision.
This bill provides that, as specified, "there shall be no
fee for the service of process of a temporary restraining
order or injunction to be issued pursuant to this section
AB 2695
Page
7
if either of the following conditions apply:
(A) The temporary restraining order or injunction
issued pursuant to this section is based upon stalking,
as prohibited by Section 646.9 of the Penal Code.
(B) The temporary restraining order or injunction
issued pursuant to this section is based upon a
credible threat of violence."
This bill requires the Judicial Council to "prepare and
develop application forms for applicants who wish to avail
themselves of the services described in this subdivision."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2006-07 2007-08
2008-09 Fund
Sunset extensions
Local/
Special*
* Domestic Violence Restitution Order Reimbursement
Fund
Domestic Violence Training and Education Fund
The state portion of domestic violence fines are deposited
into two funds: the Domestic Violence Restitution Order
Reimbursement Fund, administered by the Department of
Justice, and the Domestic Violence Training and Education
Fund, administered by the Department of Health Services.
Transfers into the funds from local agencies have remained
relatively steady since AB 352's enactment in 2004. Both
departments indicated they projected no fiscal impact to AB
2695.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/10/06)
AB 2695
Page
8
The Women's Foundation of California (co-source)
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (co-source)
American Association of University Women
Office of the Attorney General
California Family Health Council
California Partnership to End Domestic Violence
California National Organization for Women
California Commission on the Status of Women
Community United Against Violence
Esperanza Community Housing Corporation
Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center
La Raza Centro Legal, Inc.
My Friend's Place
Organizaci?n en California de Lideres Campesinas, Inc.
Esperanza Community Housing Corporation
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office
Families of Incarcerated Loved Ones
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office:
"AB 2695 ensures that a $400 fee imposed on domestic
violence defendants remains. This fee is imposed on
defendants who are granted probation in cases of
domestic violence, unless the fee is lowered for those
unable to pay. AB 2695 will have the effect of
ensuring that fee-generated revenues continue to enable
local shelters to provide needed ancillary services to
survivors of domestic violence.
"This bill also seeks to expand the scope of protective
orders, to better protect and defend workers at their
places of work. This bill will allow employers to seek
orders that protect multiple work sites and orders that
protect multiple employees. As with current law, an
employer could seek a protective order when an employee
has suffered harassment (including stalking) or is
threatened with violence, including domestic violence,
which has been or might be carried out at the
workplace. Under current practice, when a workplace
protective order is issued, it protects only the person
being immediately threatened. Yet, when there is
AB 2695
Page
9
violence in the workplace, all workers may be at risk.
"AB 2695 also deletes the sunset on portions of AB 2030
(Goldberg), Chapter 1009, Statutes of 2002, which
waives sheriff's fees for service of process of a
protective order, restraining order, or injunction
involving stalking, credible threats of violence
resulting from a threat of sexual assault, domestic
violence, marital dissolution, or a child custody
matter. In addition, this proposal will also expand
the types of protective orders service fees that are
waived to also include workplace violence and elder
abuse protective orders. This legislation ensures the
waiver of the service fees that sheriffs charge
litigants, in advance, for service of restraining
orders, and will enable California to comply with the
federal statutory requirements to remain eligible to
receive VAWA STOP funds."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Aghazarian, Arambula, Baca, Bass, Benoit, Berg,
Bermudez, Blakeslee, Bogh, Calderon, Canciamilla, Chavez,
Chu, Cogdill, Cohn, Coto, Daucher, De La Torre, DeVore,
Dymally, Emmerson, Evans, Frommer, Goldberg, Hancock,
Harman, Jerome Horton, Shirley Horton, Houston, Huff,
Jones, Karnette, Keene, Klehs, Koretz, La Malfa, Laird,
Leno, Leslie, Levine, Lieber, Lieu, Liu, Matthews, Maze,
McCarthy, Montanez, Mountjoy, Mullin, Nakanishi, Nation,
Nava, Negrete McLeod, Niello, Oropeza, Parra, Pavley,
Plescia, Richman, Ridley-Thomas, Sharon Runner, Ruskin,
Saldana, Salinas, Strickland, Torrico, Tran, Vargas,
Villines, Walters, Wolk, Wyland, Yee, Nunez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Chan, Garcia, Haynes, La Suer, Spitzer,
Umberg
RJG:mel 8/10/06 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****