BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 576
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 22, 2009

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Kevin De Leon, Chair

                    AB 576 (Torres) - As Amended:  April 21, 2009 

          Policy Committee:                              Public  
          SafetyVote:  7-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:              

           SUMMARY  

          This bill expands the definition of a victim for purposes of  
          restitution to include any governmental entity responsible for  
          repairing public and privately owned property defaced with  
          graffiti, as specified, which has sustained economic loss as a  
          result.      
           
           FISCAL EFFECT  

          Increased restitution revenue to local governments, potentially  
          in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. 

          It is difficult to estimate the number of graffiti convictions  
          and sustained petitions, but for order of magnitude purposes:   
          based on an average of about 500 arrests per year by the L.A.  
          P.D., if a similar number of arrests were made by the L.A.  
          Sheriff's Department, and if those 1,000 arrests are offset by  
          50% for cases that do not result in a conviction, L.A. County  
          alone would have about 500 annual convictions/sustained  
          petitions. Assuming an average restitution order of $400,  
          statewide restitution to local governments for graffiti  
          abatement would potentially be in the hundreds of thousands of  
          dollars. 

           COMMENTS

          Rationale.  The intent of the author and sponsor (the L.A. City  
          Attorney's Office) is to (a) expand the definition of victim to  
          allow local governments who spend considerable sums on graffiti  
          abatement to qualify as victims for purposes of receiving  
          restitution from offenders. 








                                                                  AB 576
                                                                  Page  2


          According to the author, "Graffiti is a costly and pervasive  
          problem affecting all residents, property owners, businesses,  
          and public agencies across the state. The California Research  
          Bureau estimates that the statewide cost of graffiti abatement  
          is potentially upwards of $350 million annually.  The majority  
          of these costs are borne entirely by local governments.  One of  
          the main reasons local governments continue to shoulder the  
          economic impact of graffiti is because cost recovery procedures  
          are too cumbersome and ineffective."

          The L.A. City Attorney's Office states, "Existing law only  
          permits restitution to a business or governmental entity when it  
          is a direct victim of crime.  This bill would expand the  
          definition of 'direct victim' to include government entities  
          that abate graffiti on public and private property."

           
          Analysis Prepared by  :    Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081