BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1417
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 4, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 1417 (Cox) - As Amended: August 2, 2010
Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:9-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill increases the professional standards and oversight
regarding the appointment of humane officers. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Repeals the requirement that a humane society's articles of
incorporation must be endorsed either by the Department of
Justice (DOJ) or by the judge of the superior court and
instead permits a corporation for the prevention of cruelty of
animals (humane society) to form under the Nonprofit Public
Benefit Corporation Law.
2)Eliminates the requirement that a city or county pay up to
$500 per month to a society actively engaged in enforcing
state laws for the prevention of cruelty to animals or
children, and instead authorizes local governments to enter
into contracts with humane societies for the enforcement of
laws for the prevention of cruelty to animals, but also
permits these societies to enforce these laws without a
contract.
3)Requires a humane society seeking to appoint a humane officer
to file a Petition for Order Confirming Appointment of a
Humane Officer, including specified information, with the
superior court of the county in which its principal office is
located, in compliance with the specified rules, including
requiring the society to:
a) Obtain criminal record offender information regarding
the appointee from the Department of Justice (DOJ).
b) Serve a copy of the petition on the following, each of
SB 1417
Page 2
whom may file an opposition to the petition: (1) the local
police department; (2) the local sheriff's department; (3)
the CHP; (4) the State Humane Association of California;
(5) and DOJ.
4)Specifies certain conditions upon which the court is required
to deny the petition without further consideration if the
society cannot demonstrate in its submitted materials that:
a) In the case of a petition to appoint a level 1 humane
officer, at least five years have elapsed between the date
the society filed its articles of incorporation and filed
the petition. In the case of a petition to appoint a level
2 humane officer, at least one year must have elapsed.
(Current law only requires six months for level 1 and level
2 officers.)
b) The society has a written agreement with another entity
that provides for the humane care and treatment of any
animals seized by the society and meets other specified
requirements, or the society may operate its own animal
shelter and meet the other requirements.
5)Requires the court to determine whether or not to confirm the
humane officer appointment.
6)Provides that any humane officer confirmed prior to January 1,
2012 shall not be required to seek a new court order
confirming his or her appointment, but that a level 2 humane
officer shall file a certificate of compliance with criminal
background requirements, as specified, with the DOJ on or
before January 1, 2012, or that humane officer's appointment
will be immediately revoked.
7)Requires that all level 1 and level 2 humane officers complete
the background checks and physical and mental evaluations
currently required only of level 1 officers, and requires a
level 2 humane officer to provide proof of compliance with
criminal background check requirements, as specified, by
filing a certificate of compliance with the DOJ by January 1,
2012, or that humane officer's appointment will be immediately
revoked.
8)Requires humane officers to complete continuing education and
training requirements during each three-year period following
SB 1417
Page 3
his or her appointment. Requires Level 1 humane officers to
complete additional weapons training and range qualifications
every six months. Requires all humane officers to file
certificates of compliance with the Department of Justice at
the end of the three-year or six-month period. Failure to
comply with the ongoing training requirements shall result in
revocation of the humane officer's appointment at the end of a
three-year term.
9)Authorizes the DOJ to charge a reasonable fee sufficient to
cover costs of maintaining various records of Orders,
certificates of compliance, and other documents.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)For at least the first few years following enactment, the DOJ
would require one-half position, at an annual cost of about
$40,000 to establish a database, ensure timely compliance by
existing and new humane officers with the background check and
other certification requirements, and maintain all relevant
records. Given the relatively small numbers of humane officers
statewide, over time these costs should decline. In addition
to the standard $32 fee for a criminal background check, the
department, in order to cover its staffing costs, would have
to charge each humane officer a fee of around $1,000 for a
certificate of completion in the first two years. (This
assumes around 40 officers would seek the certification during
this period.) After two years, the fee for a certificate,
assuming 20 per year, would have to be around $2,000 to cover
DOJ's staff costs. Given that the human officers are
volunteers, these fee levels may be unreasonably high, thus
requiring the General Fund to instead bear some portion of
DOJ's costs.
2)The courts, recognizing the limited number of humane officers,
believes that the bill will only result in minor additional
workload, and more importantly, will provide a cost-effective
alternative to improve the existing process for approving new
humane officers.
3)Any costs for local governments, such as sheriffs or police,
are non-reimbursable because they are afforded the
opportunity, but not required, to file an opinion with the
court regarding a pending petition for a humane officer
position.
SB 1417
Page 4
COMMENTS
1)Background . Humane officers work to enforce the state's animal
welfare laws, but may be appointed only by a private
non-profit humane society formed under California's
Corporations Code. Appointment must be followed by judicial
confirmation of the appointment petition before a person
enjoys humane officer authority under the law. Existing law
explicitly provides that "a humane officer is not a peace
officer, but may exercise the powers of a peace officer at all
places within the state." A humane officer's scope of powers
can vary, depending on the level of training and animal
welfare education, but can include the ability to exercise the
powers of a peace officer in order to prevent animal cruelty,
make arrests, serve search warrants, and, for level 1
officers, to carry firearms. According to the SHAC, there are
approximately 75 humane officers statewide, the majority of
which work for a humane society that is a member of SHAC and
are level 2 officers (not authorized to carry firearms).
2)Purpose . This bill is sponsored by the Placer County Board of
Supervisors, the California State Sheriffs' Association, and
the State Humane Association of California (SHAC), a
non-profit membership association of humane societies with
over 130 member organizations in the state. This bill
significantly revises current law by imposing new procedures
and requirements for the appointment of humane officers by
non-profit corporations formed for the purpose of preventing
cruelty to animals (customarily referred to as "humane
societies.")
According to supporters, the overall purpose of this bill is
to strengthen inadequate existing law and "raise the
professional bar" for the formation of humane societies and
the appointment of humane officers. Because humane officers
have certain search, seizure, and arrest powers under existing
law, the author believed this bill is needed to "increase the
standards for humane officers." The most recent amendments
represent an effort by the author, sponsors and Assembly
Judiciary Committee to meet the objectives of quality and
oversight, while simultaneously attempting to address concerns
from the opposition that new requirements would effectively
deter new humane officers from being appointed.
SB 1417
Page 5
3)Opposition . The League of Placer County Taxpayers is concerned
that the bill will increase costs to humane societies for the
appointment of humane officers, and argues that the current
process has worked well.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081