BILL ANALYSIS
AB 286
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 27, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Mike Eng, Chair
AB 286 (Salas) - As Introduced: February 13, 2009
SUBJECT : Vehicle registration fees
SUMMARY : Extends the sunset date on provisions authorizing
county-adopted vehicle registration fee surcharges.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Extends by eight years, until July 1, 2018, the sunset date on
the statute that authorizes counties to adopt an annual $1
vehicle registration service charge for passenger vehicles and
an annual $2 vehicle registration service charge for
commercial vehicles where that charge is used exclusively to
fund programs that enhance the capacity of local police and
prosecutors to deter, investigate, and prosecute vehicle theft
crimes.
2)Expands the existing annual reporting requirement for counties
that adopt these service charges to include an accounting of
expenditures for salaries and expenses, purchase of equipment
and supplies, and any other expenditure listed by type, with
an explanatory comment.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires a vehicle registration fee of $31 to be paid for the
registration of every motor vehicle, except those expressly
exempt.
2)Authorizes a variety of additional fees that are related to
the operation of motor vehicles to be paid with the
registration, most particularly to address certain air quality
and law enforcement issues. These fees support, among other
things, service authorities for freeway emergencies,
California Highway Patrol (CHP) staffing, and fingerprint
identification programs.
3)Allows counties, upon the adoption of a resolution, to impose
a $1 vehicle registration fee, until January 1, 2010, to fund
programs that enhance the capacity of local police and
prosecutors to deter, investigate, and prosecute vehicle theft
AB 286
Page 2
crimes. Requires, in those counties, all commercial motor
vehicles registered to an owner with an address in the county
to pay an additional service fee $2.
4)Provides that resulting revenues are continuously
appropriated, without regard to fiscal years, for the
administrative costs of the California State Controller
(Controller), and for disbursement by the Controller to each
county that has adopted such a resolution, based upon the
number of vehicles registered, or whose registration is
renewed, to an address within that county.
5)Requires revenues so allocated to be expended exclusively to
fund programs that enhance the capacity of local police and
prosecutors to deter, investigate, and prosecute vehicle theft
crimes. However, in any county with a population of 250,000
or less, the money must be expended exclusively for those
vehicle theft crime programs and for the prosecution of crimes
involving driving while under the influence of alcohol or
drugs, or both, or vehicular manslaughter, or any combination
of those crimes.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee's analysis of similar legislation last year, this bill
could result in annual revenue gains of $30 million during the
eight-year extension of the surcharge.
COMMENTS : Existing law establishes a basic vehicle registration
fee of $31, plus a $10 surcharge for additional personnel for
the CHP, for the new or renewal registration of most vehicles or
trailer coaches. Existing law also authorizes local agencies to
impose separate vehicle registration fee surcharges in their
respective jurisdictions for a variety of special programs, such
as abating abandoned vehicles and deterring, investigating, and
prosecuting vehicle theft.
The vehicle theft program may be established through a
resolution by a county board of supervisors imposing a $1
surcharge on every new or renewal vehicle registration, plus
another $2 on commercial vehicles. Smaller counties adopting
vehicle theft programs (those with a population of less than
250,000) may also use the resulting funds to prosecute specified
driving under the influence and vehicular manslaughter crimes.
Each quarter, participating counties must submit to CHP a report
on the expenditures and activities as well as submitting a
AB 286
Page 3
fiscal year end report to the State Controller.
This bill extends the sunset date on the vehicle theft
prevention fee from January 1, 2010 to January 1, 2018, and
makes minor changes to an associated year-end report that
counties submit to the Controller.
The author reports that 48 of the state's counties operate
vehicle theft prevention and prosecution programs. San Diego
County, for instance, operates the Regional Auto Theft Taskforce
(RATT), a multi-agency law enforcement team of detectives and
prosecutors. In 2008, RATT recovered 319 stolen vehicles valued
at over $3 million. Los Angeles County operates the Taskforce
for Regional Auto-theft Prevention (TRAP), a multi-agency
taskforce that has recovered over 20,000 vehicles with a value
of nearly $350 million since 1993.
Without action by the Legislature, existing vehicle theft
deterrence and recovery programs in the 48 participating
counties, including RATT and TRAP, will lose funding at the end
of the year. AB 286 will ensure that law enforcement agencies
have the most valuable tool to combat vehicle theft.
Opponents of this bill believe it violate Articles XIII (A) and
(C) of the California Constitution by defining what they believe
is a tax, which would require a 2/3 vote of the electorate,
instead as a fee, which only requires a majority legislative
vote.
Legislative history : In 2007, the Los Angeles County Sheriff
sponsored AB 878 (Davis), which Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed.
AB 878 would have allowed any county to increase the surcharge
within its jurisdiction from $1 to $2 to fund vehicle theft
prevention, investigation, and prosecution programs.
Additionally, AB 878 would have extended the sunset on this
program until 2013. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 878
noting that "on numerous previous bills attempting to raise
registration fees, I have held that fees such as these should be
approved by a vote of the people. This measure does not include
such a provision."
In response to the Governor's veto of AB 878, last year's AB 860
(Salas), like this bill, would have simply extended the sunset
date of the vehicle theft program without increasing the fee, in
order to ensure that funding did not cease altogether for local
AB 286
Page 4
vehicle theft deterrence programs. AB 860 was vetoed by the
Governor with the boilerplate language of, "The historic delay
in passing the 2008-2009 State Budget has forced me to
prioritize the bills sent to my desk at the end of the year's
legislative session. Given the delay, I am only signing bills
that are the highest priority for California. This bill does
not meet that standard and I cannot sign it at this time."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office (sponsor)
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (sponsor)
San Diego County District Attorney's Office (sponsor)
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
Automobile Club of Southern California
California State Automobile Association
California District Attorneys Association
California State Association of Counties
California State Sheriffs' Association
City Police Departments of: Alhambra, Azusa, Inglewood, La
Verne, Long Beach, Monrovia, Pomona, Torrance
County Sheriff's Offices of: Alameda, Amador, Butte, Contra
Costa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego,
Santa Barbara, Shasta, Tuolumne, Ventura, Yolo
League of California Cities
LoJack Corporation
Los Angeles County
Opposition
Cal-Tax
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Stop Hidden Taxes Coalition
Analysis Prepared by : Howard Posner / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093