BILL ANALYSIS
AB 592
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 592 (Lowenthal) - As Introduced: February 25, 2009
Policy Committee:
TransportationVote:13-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill adds Board of Equalization investigators to the list
of peace officers and other public officials who may request the
DMV to provide enhanced confidentiality to their home addresses.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Given the small number of individuals involved, the direct
costs from this bill are minor, probably absorbable to DMV to
modify its public confidentiality process to include BOE
investigators.
2)However, numerous groups are currently seeking enhanced
confidentiality status. Passage of this bill would create
considerable pressure for the Legislature to approve the
enhanced status to potentially tens of thousands of
individuals, at a substantial cost to DMV - potentially
exceeding several hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
3)Potential reduction in local tolls, parking fees, fines, to
the extent that current law makes it difficult for local
parking and toll agencies to collect tolls and fines from
those protected by the enhanced confidentiality statutes (see
discussion below).
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . This bill has been introduced on behalf of the BOE
due to a perceived threat to their investigators who are
involved in criminal investigations, surveillance, providing
court testimony, and executing search and arrest warrants.
AB 592
Page 2
The author points out that under existing confidentiality
provisions regarding DMV records, the home addresses of these
investigators may be accessed by car dealers, attorneys, or
financial institutions that could potentially be under BOE
investigation.
2)Background . Until 1989, DMV records were generally considered
public records and any person who had a legitimate reason to
seek a home address of a particular person in the DMV files
could obtain it simply by producing the relevant driver's
license number or a license plate number. In 1986,
legislation was enacted creating a list of public officials
whose home addresses were to be kept confidential by the DMV.
Under this legislation, the home addresses of peace officers
and others on the statutory list may only be disclosed to a
court, a law enforcement agency, the BOE, or any governmental
agency legally required to be furnished that information. As a
matter of practice, DMV records for these individuals only
show the individual's employer's address. Home addresses may
be retrieved only through a time consuming manual process.
The original list of persons whose home addresses are to be
kept confidential by the DMV, included the Attorney General
and Department of Justice attorneys, the State Public Defender
and deputy defenders, members of the Legislature, judges or
court commissioners, district attorneys and their deputies,
public defenders, and peace officers and their families.
Since then, the list has expanded to encompass tens of
thousands of other public employees and their families.
In 1989, actress Rebecca Schaeffer was stalked and killed by a
man who obtained her address through a private investigator
who, in turn, obtained her address from the DMV. In response
to this murder, the Legislature enacted AB 1779 (Roos) -
Chapter 1213, Statutes of 1989, which made confidential the
home addresses of all individuals with records at the DMV.
The level of confidentiality is similar to that enjoyed by
public officials protected by the 1986 legislation, except
that disclosures may also be made, in limited circumstances,
to financial institutions, insurance companies, attorneys,
vehicle manufacturers, and persons doing statistical research.
Despite the fact that all home addresses are kept confidential
by the DMV, the Legislature has considered and enacted several
bills since 1990 adding select categories of persons to the
AB 592
Page 3
public official confidentiality process.
3)Opposition . The DMV opposes this bill, stating that given
current protections afforded in law to everyone, such
legislation is not necessary. DMV also contends that (a)
adding new categories will encourage a proliferation of
requests from other occupational group to be included, and (b)
administration of the program is a manual, labor intensive
process and due to the state's fiscal situation and current
furlough program, the resources of the DMV are very limited.
4)Other concerns . A recent investigation by the Orange County
Register revealed thousands of unpaid violations and tolls
accrued by a number of peace officers and other individuals
whose DMV records are afforded enhanced confidentiality.
These unpaid tolls and fines cost agencies in Orange County
over $5 million over the past five years. Parking and toll
agencies throughout the state, including those in San Diego
and San Francisco, have experienced similar abuses. When
parking agencies or toll road operators (who are not exempted
from the enhanced confidentiality statutes) attempt to collect
fines from such individuals, DMV is precluded from providing
the information under the special confidentiality statutes,
and the agencies must then seek information through a request
from law enforcement agencies. Given these hurdles and
statutes of limitations, local agencies have been precluded
from collecting fines and tolls owed by these officials. AB
996 (Spitzer) of 2008 which would have addressed this
situation by allowing toll and parking enforcement agencies
access to records of those covered by the special
confidentiality statutes, was vetoed by the Governor last
year.
5)Alternative action . Since the enactment of AB 1779 in 1989
eliminates the need for the separate home address
confidentiality protections afforded to public officials and
employees under Vehicle Code sections 1808.2, 1808.4, and
1808.6, a more appropriate course of action would be to repeal
these three outdated sections. Most persons seeking
confidential information about others no longer even look to
DMV records for the data since those records are so carefully
protected and much more easily obtainable via the internet.
DMV is not aware of any instance since the enactment of AB
1779 where DMV home address information has been used for a
criminal purpose.
AB 592
Page 4
6)Related legislation . AB 923 (Swanson), also in this committee,
would provide enhanced confidentiality to Board of
Equalization members, as well as zoo veterinarians, code
enforcers, and employees of animal shelters.
Analysis Prepared by : Brad Williams / APPR. / (916) 319-2081