BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
AB 1657 (Wieckowski) - Traffic offense penalties: spinal cord
injury research.
Amended: March 22, 2012 Policy Vote: T&H 5-2
Urgency: No Mandate: Yes
Hearing Date: August 6, 2012
Consultant: Mark McKenzie
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary: AB 1657 would impose a new $1 penalty assessment
on specified Vehicle Code violations, except parking offenses,
to fund spinal cord injury research.
Fiscal Impact:
One-time statewide costs to the courts in the range of
$150,000 to $300,000 (Trial Court Trust Fund) for
programming the new $1 assessment into county case
management systems. These costs could be partially or fully
offset if counties opt to withhold a portion of the penalty
assessment revenues sufficient to cover administrative costs
incurred by the courts.
Likely minor costs to county treasurers to transfer penalty
assessment revenues to the State Treasurer (non-reimbursable
mandated costs). County costs could be partially or fully
offset if counties opt to withhold a portion of penalty
assessment revenues sufficient to cover their administrative
costs.
Potential penalty revenue gains in the range of $3.5
million for allocation to the University of California's
Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Penalty Account, upon
appropriation by the Legislature.
Background: Existing law, the Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury
Research Act of 1999 (established by AB 750 (Dutra) Chap
777/2000), creates the Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research
Program within the University of California (UC). The Act
authorizes UC to establish a spinal cord injury research fund,
independent of the State Treasury, to accept public and private
AB 1657 (Wieckowski)
Page 1
funds for expenditure by UC for spinal cord injury research
programs, grants, and peer review and grant administration. The
five-year program established by AB 750 was extended for an
additional five years in 2004, and extended indefinitely in
2010. The program is administered by the Reeve-Irvine Research
Center at UC Irvine, and about $15 million in state funding,
primarily from the General Fund, was allocated to the UC from
2000 through 2009 for expenditure on the program. State funding
has not been provided for the program in recent years.
Existing law imposes the following penalty assessments,
surcharges, and fees, that are added to the base fine for
convictions of traffic violations, except parking fines:
A state penalty assessment of $10 for each $10 of base fine
(Penal Code (PC) 1464), 70% of which is deposited in State
Penalty Fund, for distribution to multiple special funds, and
30% goes to the county General Fund.
A state surcharge of 20% of base fine for deposit into the
state General Fund.
A county penalty assessment of $7 for each $10 of base fine
(Government Code (GC) 76000) for specified local purposes.
A county penalty assessment of $2 for each $10 of base fine
(GC 76000.5) for specified emergency medical services.
A penalty assessment of $4 for each $10 of base fine (GC
76104.6 and 76104.7), 75% of which is deposited into the State
DNA Identification Fund, 25% of which is distributed to the
county for implementation of Proposition 69 (2004).
A state penalty assessment of $5 for each $10 of base fine (GC
70372 (a)), which is deposited into the Court Facilities
Construction Fund.
A state fine of $4 per conviction (GC 76000.10), which is
deposited into the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act
Fund.
A state fee of $40 (PC 1465.8 (a)), which is deposited into
the Trial Court Trust Fund for court security purposes (amount
reduced to $30 on July 1, 2013).
A state conviction assessment fee of $35 (GC 70373), which is
deposited into the State Court Facilities Construction Fund.
For those ordered or permitted to attend a traffic violator
school, there is an additional $49 fee (Vehicle Code 42007.1),
51% of which is deposited into the State Court Facilities
Construction Fund and 49% of which is deposited into the
county General Fund. Courts may adjust this amount to cover
costs to administer the traffic violator school program, and
AB 1657 (Wieckowski)
Page 2
the Department of Motor Vehicles may also assess an
administrative fee to cover its administrative costs related
to the program.
As a result of the numerous penalty assessments imposed upon
convictions, the costs of simple traffic violations can be very
high. For example, the base fine for running a red light is
$100, but when penalty assessments are imposed the total bail
could be as high as $531.
Proposed Law: AB 1657 would impose an additional $1 penalty on
each conviction for a violation of Vehicle Code provisions
related to "rules of the road" (traffic violations), and
violations of local ordinances adopted pursuant to the Vehicle
Code. Penalty revenues would be deposited with the county
treasurer for transfer to the State Treasurer for allocation,
upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the Roman Reed Spinal
Research Account within the University of California, as
specified. The bill would authorize a county treasurer to
withhold a sufficient amount of penalty revenues to reimburse
the county and courts for actual, reasonable, and necessary
costs associated with administering the new penalty assessment.
Related Legislation: AB 190 (Wieckowski) would have authorized
counties to impose an additional $3 penalty assessment on
Vehicle Code violations, except parking offenses, to fund spinal
cord injury research. AB 190 was held under submission on the
Assembly Appropriations Committee's Suspense File in 2011.
Staff Comments: This bill would establish a permanent source of
funding for the Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Program
at UC. According to the Department of Motor Vehicles, there
were 3.4 million convictions for violations that would be
subject to the new fee. The amount of revenue generated would
more than double the average annual amount provided by the state
from 2000 through 2009.
The Judicial Council estimates that one-time costs to program
the 130 variations of 70 different case management systems
statewide would be in the range of $150,000 to $300,000. The
bill includes a provision that authorizes a county to withhold a
portion of the penalty assessment revenue that is sufficient to
reimburse the county and courts for administrative costs
associated with the new penalty assessment. County costs
AB 1657 (Wieckowski)
Page 3
related to transfer revenues to the State Treasury are likely to
be minor, so it is unclear how many counties would exercise the
authority to retain a portion of the funds to cover costs
incurred by the county and courts. To the extent that counties
opt to withhold a portion of the penalty assessment revenues,
one-time programming costs to the courts could be partially or
fully offset.
Staff notes that SB 857 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review)
Chap 720/2010 included a provision requiring the Judicial
Council to convene a task force on court-ordered debt. Among
other things, the task force is required to document recent
annual revenues attributable to the various penalty assessments
and surcharges, and evaluate the extent to which the amount of
each assessment and surcharge impacts total annual revenues,
imposition of criminal sentences, and actual amounts assessed.
Final recommendations of the task force are forthcoming.
Proposed Author Amendments: The author has proposed amendments
to establish a new special fund in the State Treasury to receive
the new penalty funds, and require county treasurers to transfer
the funds collected on March 15 and October 15 each year. The
funds would be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature,
to the Regents of the University of California for the specified
purposes.
Recommended Amendments: Staff suggests that the bill be amended
to require, rather than authorize, the county to withhold an
amount sufficient to reimburse the county and courts for costs
to administer the new fee. Staff notes that this amendment
would alleviate the above noted court costs associated with
programming the new fee.