BILL ANALYSIS
SB 676
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 1, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Anna Marie Caballero, Chair
SB 676 (Wolk) - As Amended: June 25, 2009
SENATE VOTE : 22-15
SUBJECT : Local fees.
SUMMARY : Increases or eliminates the statutory limits on 12
fees. Specifically, this bill :
1)Federal lien certificates . Existing law allows county
recorders to impose fees of up to $15 to cover the costs of
furnishing a copy of any notice of federal lien, or notice or
certificate affecting a federal lien. The $15 maximum has not
changed since 1983. SB 676 deletes the $15 limit, allowing
county recorders to set the fee in an amount that covers
actual costs.
2)Environmental Quality Act filings . Existing law allows county
clerks to charge a $50 per filing documentary handling fee for
specified filings under the California Environmental Quality
Act. The $50 amount was set in 1992. SB 676 increases the
maximum charge for a documentary handling fee from $50 to $75.
3)Recorded documents . Existing law allows county recorders to
charge a filing fee for recording and indexing every
instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to
be recorded. The maximum charge is $4 for the recording of
the first page and $3 for each additional page, with the
ability to charge additional fees as specified. The $4
maximum has not changed since 1985. SB 676 increases the
maximum charge for the recording of the first page of a
document from $4 to $10.
4)Court-appointed counsel . Existing law allows a county board
of supervisors to assess a registration fee of up to $25 on
every defendant represented by appointed counsel. No fee is
required of any defendant who is financially unable to pay.
The $25 maximum has not changed since 1997. SB 676 increases
the maximum amount of the fee from $25 to $50.
SB 676
Page 2
5)Restitution . If a court orders that restitution be made to a
crime victim, a county board of supervisors may add a fee to
cover the actual administrative cost of collecting restitution
not to exceed 10% of the total amount ordered to be paid. The
fees are paid into the county general fund. The 10% maximum
has not changed since 1986. SB 676 increases the maximum fee
to cover the costs of collecting restitution from 10% to 15%
of the total amount ordered to be paid.
6)County probation department payments . Existing law requires
some defendants to pay for the reasonable cost of any
probation supervision or a conditional sentence, of conducting
any pre-plea investigation and preparing of any pre-plea
report, of conducting any pre-sentence investigation and
preparing any pre-sentence report, and of processing a
jurisdictional transfer or of processing a request for
interstate compact supervision. A county board of supervisors
may establish a fee of up to $50 to cover the administrative
and clerical costs of collecting the defendants' payments.
The $50 maximum has not changed since 1996. SB 676 deletes
the $50 maximum, allowing counties to charge fees to cover the
administrative and clerical costs of collecting the
defendants' payments.
7)Change of plea, setting aside of a verdict . Under existing
law, a person who petitions for a change of plea or setting
aside of a verdict may be required to reimburse the court, the
county, and the city for the actual costs of services
rendered, whether or not the petition is granted and the
records are sealed or expunged. The court, the county board
of supervisors, and the city may determine a rate of up to
$120 to reimburse the actual costs. The $120 maximum has not
been changed since 1995. SB 676 deletes the $120 maximum,
allowing courts, counties, and cities to require reimbursement
for the actual costs of services rendered.
8)Sealing of records . Under existing law, a person who was
convicted of a misdemeanor when he or she was a minor at the
time of the offense and who petitions for an order sealing his
or her record may be required to reimburse the court, the
county, and the city for the actual costs of services rendered
whether or not the petition is granted and the records are
sealed or expunged. The court, the county board of
supervisors, and the city may determine a rate of up to $120
to reimburse the actual costs. The $120 maximum has not
SB 676
Page 3
changed since 1995. SB 676 deletes the $120 maximum, allowing
courts, counties, and cities to require reimbursement for the
actual costs of services rendered.
9)Installment payments . Under existing law, a person who is
convicted of a misdemeanor and required to pay a fine may pay
the fine in specified installments. A board of supervisors
may require defendants to pay to the clerk of the court or the
collecting agency a fee of up to $35 to pay for the
administrative and clerical costs of processing installment
accounts. The $35 maximum has not changed since 1993. SB 676
deletes the $35 maximum, allowing a board of supervisors to
require a fee sufficient to pay for the administrative and
clerical costs of processing installment accounts.
10)Fingerprinting . Existing law allows a local agency taking
fingerprints of a person who is an applicant for licensing,
employment, or certification to charge up to $10 to cover the
cost of taking the fingerprints and processing the required
documents. The $10 maximum has not changed since 1987. SB
676 deletes the $10 maximum, allowing local agencies to charge
a
fee sufficient to cover the cost of taking the fingerprints and
processing the required documents.
11)Support of a minor . Existing law requires that the father,
mother, spouse, or other person liable for the support of a
minor be liable for the reasonable costs of support of the
minor while the minor is placed, detained in, or committed to
any institution because of delinquency or truancy. Costs of
support mean only actual costs incurred by the county for food
and food preparation, clothing, personal supplies, and medical
expenses, not to exceed a combined maximum of costs of $15 per
day except that the maximum cost of $15 per day must be
adjusted every third year beginning January 1, 1998, to
reflect the percentage change in the calendar year annual
average of the California Consumer Price Index, All Urban
Consumers, published by the Department of Industrial
Relations, for the three-year period. The $15 maximum has not
changed since 1985. SB 676 increases the maximum cost to $45
per day adjusted every third year.
12)Sealing of juvenile records . Existing law allows counties
and courts to require specified people to reimburse them up to
$120 for the costs of services rendered for any investigation
SB 676
Page 4
related to the sealing and for the sealing of any juvenile
court or arrest records whether or not the petition is granted
and the records are sealed or expunged. The $120 maximum has
not changed since 1995. SB 676 deletes the maximum, allowing
counties and courts to require reimbursement for the full
costs of services rendered.
13)Deletes statutory cross-references to statutes in which the
bill proposes to delete limits on fees, thereby allowing the
fees to be set pursuant to the general authorization for
counties to recover the cost of providing any product or
service or the cost of enforcing any regulation for which a
fee or charge is levied.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)County boards of supervisors can levy authorized fees or
charges in amounts reasonably necessary to recover the costs
of providing products or services or the cost of enforcing
regulations. The fees or charges may reflect the average cost
of providing products or services or enforcing regulations
plus limited indirect costs.
Despite generally deregulating county fees 25 years ago, state
law still sets a large number of fees, including civil fees,
county recorder fees, and fees charged by agricultural
commissioners. It has been decades since some of the
statutory limits for these fees have been updated.
2)According to the author, as costs rise and the demand for
services grows, the county fees that are capped by state law
no longer cover the real costs of providing the service. When
fees do not generate enough money to pay for services,
counties' general funds must pay the
difference. County taxpayers have to subsidize the users of
these county services. Programs that depend on money from
counties' general funds, such as law enforcement and
libraries, suffer the fiscal consequences. The author points
out that SB 676 does not allow county supervisors to charge
new fees, but rather allows county governments to charge the
people who use county services fees an amount that reflects
the actual costs of providing those services.
SB 676
Page 5
3)The California Public Defenders Association raises concerns
that, by raising the fees related to probation supervision,
restitution collection, the sealing of juvenile records, and
the housing of children in juvenile delinquency facilities,
the burden is disproportionately placed "on the backs of
indigent defendants in criminal cases and will cause courts to
be clogged with hundreds if not thousands of additional court
appearances litigating numerous provisions of SB 676." The
additional court appearances would be the result of indigent
clients requesting hearings that determine the ability to pay
in these circumstances rather than waiving their rights to
these hearings, as has been the practice. The Committee may
wish to consider whether these changes are appropriate for
these particular fees.
4)The fees that SB 676 adjusts are only a small portion of the
county fees that state law continues to limit. For example,
the Legislature has excluded court-related fees, fees charged
by a county agricultural commissioner, fees collected by a
county sealer of weights and measures, and fees charged by a
county recorder from the deregulation enacted in 1983. These
exemptions guarantee county taxpayers subsidize the operations
of these select government entities. Why should applicants
for public employment pay the full cost for conducting
fingerprint background checks while taxpayers subsidize the
cost of getting grocery store scales tested and inspected?
The Committee may wish to consider whether the Legislature
should completely deregulate county fees by repealing all of
the specific statutory rates.
5)This bill is double-referred to the Committee on Public
Safety.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
County of Yolo [SPONSOR]
CA State Association of Counties
CA Association of Clerks and Elections Officials
Chief Probation Officers of CA
Counties of Contra Costa, Humboldt, Placer, San Joaquin, San
Mateo,
Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Solano
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office
SB 676
Page 6
Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs' Association
State Coalition of Probation Organizations
Opposition
CA Public Defenders Association
CA Public Records Research, Inc.
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer R. Klein / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958