BILL ANALYSIS
AB 73
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 73 (Hayashi)
As Amended July 8, 2009
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |44-29|(April 2, 2009) |SENATE: |21-17|(September 1, |
| | | | | |2009) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: JUD.
SUMMARY : Eliminates the January 1, 2010, sunset date for
Alameda County and the City of Berkeley to continue to authorize
existing fees to fund domestic violence prevention programs, and
extends the deadline for a final report to the Legislature.
Specifically, this bill :
1)States the findings of the Legislature that, among other
things:
a) In California, 9.2% of women live in homes where
domestic abuse occurs. Domestic violence is ubiquitous,
cutting across all economic and education levels, all age
groups, ethnicities, and other social and community
characteristics;
b) In nearly half of violent crimes where victim and
aggressor are related, the aggressor is either the spouse
or ex-spouse. Marriage license fees collected through this
act would help communities intervene and prevent domestic
violence in these cases;
c) Domestic violence puts children at risk. Children born
into families where domestic violence occurs are physically
abused or seriously neglected at a rate significantly
higher than the national average in the general population.
Birth certificate fees collected through this act would
help communities with costs to ensure that children who are
born into families with domestic violence receive the help
they need; and,
d) Studies show more than 10% of women are victims of
domestic violence during pregnancy. Pregnant women who are
assaulted by their spouses are 50% more likely to
AB 73
Page 2
experience fetal loss than women who were not abused. Women
who are battered during pregnancy are also more likely to
die, or their children are born prematurely with low-birth
weights and intense medical needs. Death certificate fees
would help communities with costs associated with ensuring
that pregnant women with violent spouses receive help and
protection and care for their unborn children and infants.
2)Eliminates the January 1, 2010, sunset date for the Alameda
County Board of Supervisors and the Berkeley City Council to
continue to authorize existing marriage license and birth and
death certificate fees to fund governmental oversight and
coordination of domestic violence and family violence
prevention, intervention, and prosecution programs.
3)Requires the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and the
Berkeley City Council, if they elect to increase fees, to
submit to the Assembly and Senate Judiciary Committees, a
preliminary report regarding such fee increases by July 1,
2009, and a final report by July 1, 2014. Requires the report
to provide the amounts of fees received and expended, as well
as the outcomes achieved as a result of the expenditures.
The Senate amendments clarify that the reports required in 3)
above are only necessary if the Alameda County Board of
Supervisors or the Berkeley City Council elect to increase fees.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes the Alameda and Solano County Boards of
Supervisors, and the Berkeley City Council, upon making
specified findings and declarations, to increase the fees for
marriage licenses and confidential marriage licenses, as well
as certified copies of marriage, birth, and death
certificates, by up to $2, with further increases permitted on
an annual basis, based on the Consumer Price Index for the San
Francisco metropolitan area for the preceding year. Provides
that the authorization for the fee increases will sunset on
January 1, 2010.
2)Directs that these fees be deposited into a special fund to be
used for governmental oversight and coordination of domestic
violence and family violence prevention, intervention, and
prosecution efforts.
AB 73
Page 3
3)Provides that the Alameda and Solano County Boards of
Supervisors and the Berkeley City Council must submit to the
Assembly and Senate Judiciary Committees, by July 1, 2009,
reports regarding such fee increases. The report must provide
the amount of fees received and expended as well as the
outcomes achieved as a result of the expenditures.
4)Provides that part of the existing $4 fee for certified copies
of marriage certificates, birth certificates, and death
records is used to fund governmental oversight and
coordination of domestic violence prevention, intervention,
and prosecution efforts in Contra Costa County.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar
to the version approved by the Senate.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : This bill, sponsored by the Alameda County Board of
Supervisors and the Alameda County Family Justice Center,
permits continued funding of successful programs to combat
domestic violence in Alameda County, as well as in the City of
Berkeley, by eliminating the January 1, 2010, sunset date for an
existing fee for marriage license and birth and death
certificates to fund governmental oversight and coordination of
domestic violence programs. According to the author:
Domestic violence victims may need to seek help from as
many as 25 different agencies - in as many different
locations - police, district attorneys, victim-witness,
social services and other relevant programs. Putting
all these services under one roof, as Alameda County
has done with its Family Justice Center, has helped to
ensure these victims receive all the legal,
psychological, social and financial assistance they
need. That coordination is funded, in part, by money
from the records fees.
Having a one-stop shop for domestic violence services
has helped to reduce some of Alameda County's stark
statistics. Since 2001, the county has seen a 90
percent decrease in domestic violence homicides. It
has reduced dismissals of domestic violence cases by 20
percent, giving victims more faith that the public
system will protect them. Since opening its doors, the
AB 73
Page 4
Alameda County Justice Center has served more than
18,000 adults (including 800 men) and 2,500 children.
In 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 2231 (Hayashi), which
would have extended the sunset date for the pilot programs in
Alameda and Solano Counties to January 1, 2015, stating that the
fee increase constitutes a tax that requires local approval.
While a tax does indeed require two-thirds vote of the
Legislature or of local voters, a bona fide regulatory fee does
not. The California Supreme Court laid out the distinction
between a fee and a tax in Sinclair Paints v. Board of
Equalization (1997) 15 Cal.4th 866. In that case, the Court
found that a fee assessed on paint manufacturers under the
Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Act of 1991 was properly a
bona fide regulatory fee designed to mitigate the effects of
lead poisoning and not a tax. In order to be classified as a
regulatory fee and not a tax, the Court held that the fee must
not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the services
necessary for which the fee is charged, and must not be levied
for an unrelated revenue purpose.
Following the first prong of the Sinclair Paints test, this bill
provides that fees from the program can only be used for
specific domestic violence programs. Thus, the fees cannot
exceed the reasonable cost of the services for which the fee is
charged. Moreover, there is no suggestion that the fees charged
are in excess of the cost of providing the specified services.
Under the second prong of the Sinclair Paints test, the fee
must be levied for a related purpose. The Howard Jarvis
Taxpayers Association states in opposition without further
explanation that "there is absolutely no nexus between
certified certificates and domestic violence prevention."
However, the nexus between the fee and the services it funds is
set forth in this bill's legislative findings. Domestic
violence, which occurs in families and cuts across all
economic, educational, age, and ethnic lines, can result in
injury or death of the victims and is learned generationally.
Thus domestic violence involves marriages, births, and deaths.
Moreover, the fees that this bill seeks to make permanent, and
the specific uses of those fees, are also identical to a program
in Contra Costa County that the Legislature and the Governor
made permanent in 2006. [SB 968 (Torlakson), Chapter 635,
AB 73
Page 5
Statutes of 2006]
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916)
319-2334
FN: 0001896