BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1443
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 28, 2009
Counsel: Kimberly A. Horiuchi
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Jose Solorio, Chair
AB 1443 (Water, Parks & Wildlife) - As Introduced: February
27, 2009
As Proposed be Amended in Committee
REVISED
SUMMARY : Authorizes the director, or a designated
representative of the Department of Fish and Game (DFG), to
enter into reciprocal operational agreements with authorized
representatives of any Oregon, Nevada, or Arizona state law
enforcement agency, including, but not limited to, the Oregon
State Police, the Nevada Department of Wildlife, and the Arizona
Game and Fish Department, to promote expeditious and effective
law enforcement service to the public, and assistance between
DFG members and those agencies, in areas adjacent to the borders
of California and each of the adjoining states, as specified.
Specifically, this bill :
1)States the reciprocal operational agreement shall be in
writing and may include the reciprocal exchange of law
enforcement services, resources, facilities, and any other
necessary and proper matters between the department and the
respective agency.
2)Requires any agreement to specify all of the following:
a) The involved departments, divisions, or units of the
agencies.
b) The duration and purpose of the agreement.
c) Responsibility for damages.
d) The method of financing any joint or cooperative
undertaking.
AB 1443
Page 2
e) The methods to be employed to terminate an agreement.
3)Provides that the DFG director may establish operational
procedures in implementation of any reciprocal operational
agreement that are necessary to achieve the purposes of the
agreement.
4)States any regularly employed law enforcement officer of an
Oregon, Nevada, or Arizona state law enforcement agency,
including, but not limited to, the Oregon State Police, the
Nevada Department of Wildlife, or the Arizona Game and Fish
Department, is a peace officer in this state if all of the
following conditions are met:
a) The officer is providing, or attempting to provide, law
enforcement services within this state, within a distance
of up to 50 state miles of the contiguous border of
California and the state employing the officer, or within
waters offshore of California in the Exclusive Economic
Zone.
b) The officer is providing, or attempting to provide, law
enforcement services in response to a request for services
initiated by a DFG member and in response to a reasonable
belief that emergency law enforcement services are
necessary for the preservation of life, and a request for
services by a DFG member is impractical to obtain under the
circumstances. In those situations, the officer shall
obtain authorization as soon as practical.
c) The officer is providing, or attempting to provide, law
enforcement services for the purpose of assisting a DFG
member in response to misdemeanor or felony criminal
activity, pursuant to the authority of a peace officer as
specified or, in the event of emergency incidents or other
similar public safety problems, whether or not a member of
the department is present at the scene of the event.
d) An agreement specified in provisions of this bill is in
effect between the DFG and the agency of the adjoining
state employing the officer, the officer acts in accordance
with that agreement, and the agreement specifies that the
officer and employing agency of the adjoining state shall
be subject to the same civil immunities and liabilities as
a peace officer and his or her employing agency in
AB 1443
Page 3
California.
e) The officer receives no separate compensation from
California for providing law enforcement services within
this state.
f) The adjoining state employing the officer confers
similar rights and authority upon DFG member who renders
assistance within that state.
5)States that notwithstanding any other provision of law, any
person who is acting as a peace officer in California in the
manner described in this section shall be deemed to have met
the requirements of specified in existing law, and the
selection and training standards of the Commission on Peace
Officer Standards and Training if the officer has completed
the basic training required for peace officers in his or her
state.
6)Prohibits a peace officer of an adjoining state from providing
services within a California jurisdiction during any period in
which officers of the department are involved in a labor
dispute that results in a formal work slowdown or stoppage.
7)States it is unlawful to violate any provision existing law
related to unauthorized fishing and that violation of such a
provision may be charged as a violation of this provision or
shall be punished pursuant to existing Fish and Game Code
provisions.
8)States after the expiration of the time period to appeal an
administrative penalty imposed or any other provision of this
code, the DFG may apply to the clerk of the appropriate court
for a judgment to collect the administrative civil penalty.
The application, including a certified copy of the order
imposing the civil penalty, a hearing officer's decision, if
any, or a settlement agreement, if any, shall constitute a
sufficient showing to warrant issuance of the judgment. The
court clerk shall enter the judgment immediately in conformity
with the application. The judgment so entered has the same
force and effect as, and is subject to all the provisions of
law relating to, a judgment in a civil action, and may be
enforced in the same manner as any other judgment of the court
in which it is entered.
AB 1443
Page 4
EXISTING LAW :
1)States that notwithstanding any other provision of law, a
violation relating to the sale, purchase, or receipt of fish
taken by a person required to be licensed pursuant to existing
law is punishable by a fine of not less than 2,000 or more
than $7,500, except as specified. [Fish and Game Code Section
12002.3(a).]
2)States if the violation in question involved the illegal sale
or purchase of abalone taken by a person required to be
licensed pursuant to existing law, the violation is punishable
by a fine of not less than $15,000 or more than $40,000.
[Fish and Game Code Section 12002.3(b).]
3)Requires every person 16 years of age or older who takes any
fish, reptile, or amphibian for any purpose other than profit
shall first obtain a valid license for that purpose and shall
have that license on his or her person or in his or her
immediate possession or where otherwise specifically required
by law or regulation to be kept when engaged in carrying out
any activity authorized by the license. In the case of a
person diving from a boat, the license may be kept in the
boat, or in the case of a person diving from the shore, the
license may be kept within 500 yards of the shore. [Fish and
Game Section 7145(a).]
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : According to the author, "This bill seeks to improve
effective enforcement of California's fish and game laws and to
facilitate cost recovery to the state in the following ways:
"In rural areas near the borders of California and other
contiguous states it is often the case that watersheds and roads
do not follow state boundaries. There are emergency situations
where fish and game wardens, often working in remote and rugged
terrain, need assistance from fish and game law enforcement
personnel in adjoining states in responding to criminal activity
such as poaching, or for emergency rescue operations. This bill
addresses this need by authorizing the DFG to enter into
reciprocal agreements with law enforcement agencies from these
adjoining states under the limited circumstances specified in
the bill.
AB 1443
Page 5
"Existing law makes it unlawful to violate fish and game laws
that are contained in the California Code of Regulations, and
provides that violations of these laws shall be punished as
specified in Fish and Game Code Section 12000. However, there
have been cases where local prosecutors have been reluctant to
prosecute violations of these laws because the perpetrator was
cited under a regulatory section rather than statute. This bill
clarifies that it is unlawful to violate fish and game
regulations, and provides that a violation may be charged as a
violation of this code section or the specific Title 14 CCR
section.
"In some cases administrative civil penalties authorized by
existing law have gone unpaid because DFG's collection authority
was unclear. This bill clarifies DFG's authority by authorizing
DFG to apply to a court to collect the penalty after the time
for appeal has expired."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None
Opposition
None
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Horiuchi / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744