BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: ab 2247
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: lowenthal
VERSION: 6/11/12
Analysis by: Mark Stivers FISCAL: yes
Hearing date: June 19, 2012
SUBJECT:
Unauthorized sale of goods on a public transportation system
DESCRIPTION:
This bill makes it a criminal infraction for a person to sell
any goods, merchandise, property, or services in a public
transportation system without the express written consent of the
system operator and adds this violation to the list of
violations which specified transit districts may enforce through
an alternative civil infraction process.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law makes it a criminal infraction for a person to
engage, among other things, in any of the following activities
in a vehicle or facility of any transit district:
Fare evasion.
Misuse of a transfer, pass, ticket, or token with the intent
to evade the payment of a fare.
Unauthorized use of a discount ticket or failure to present
acceptable proof of eligibility to use a discount ticket.
Eating, drinking, or smoking in areas where the system
operator has prohibited those activities.
Expectorating.
Skateboarding, roller skating, bicycle riding, or roller
blading, except as necessary for utilization of the transit
facility by a bicyclist.
Playing sound equipment.
Willfully disturbing others by engaging in boisterous or
unruly behavior.
Carrying an explosive or acid, flammable liquid, or toxic or
hazardous material.
Urinating or defecating, except in a lavatory.
Willfully blocking the free movement of another person, except
for lawful first amendment activities.
AB 2247 (LOWENTHAL) Page 2
In addition, existing law makes it a criminal infraction for a
person to sell or peddle any goods, merchandise, property, or
services on any property, facility, or vehicle owned by the San
Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District or the Southern
California Rapid Transit District without the express written
consent of the district.
Current law allows the City and County of San Francisco
(operator of SFMuni), the Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority, the Southern California Regional Rail
Authority, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, the
Sacramento Regional Transit District, Long Beach Transit,
Foothill Transit, the North County Transit District, and the
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District to establish an
alternative civil infraction process for the transit violations
specified in the bullets above when they are committed by adults
within their systems.
This bill :
Makes it a criminal infraction for a person to sell or peddle
any goods, merchandise, property, or services on the
facilities, vehicles, or property of any public transportation
system without the express written consent of the system
operator.
Adds this violation to the list of violations which the
specified transit districts may enforce through an alternative
civil infraction process.
Allows an issuing officer to correct errors on and reissue a
notice of violation for any of the civil offenses.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose of the bill . According to the author, this bill seeks
to give transit passengers a more peaceful ride by clearing
platforms and stations of aggressive and unlicensed vendors,
many of whom sell counterfeit and other illegal products. The
Los Angeles County Transit Services Bureau deputies receive
frequent complaints from transit operators and from patrons
who deal with the annoyances caused by unauthorized vendors
during their daily commute. These habitual offenders often
sell consumable items, such as food and drinks, but more often
non-consumable items, such as batteries, flowers, pirated
DVDs, and music CDs. The consumable products can present a
public safety concern, while the counterfeit non-consumable
AB 2247 (LOWENTHAL) Page 3
items are illegal to possess or sell. Moreover, these sales
negatively impact small businesses that play by the rules.
This bill gives deputies of any transit system the ability to
cite persons for illegal vending. By allowing those transit
agencies who have the authority under current law to issue
civil infractions to include this violation within their
programs, the bill also will prevent adding to caseloads in
our already overburdened court system. The bill also makes a
technical change to the statutes relating to the civil
citation program generally to allow an issuing officer to
correct errors on and reissue a notice of violation.
2.Appropriate for a civil process . This bill allows transit
agencies that currently have the authority to cite certain
transit infractions with a civil citation, like a parking
ticket, also to enforce the prohibition on vending in the same
manner. Handling these infractions administratively expedites
the penalty process and reduces court time and expense. The
defendant is unlikely to notice much of a difference in the
process, other than the fact that the citing officer will not
be present at a hearing. To the defendant's benefit, he or
she may be spared the two court dates that a criminal trial
may entail, and those violators issued a civil citation who
fail to address their tickets will no longer be subject to a
bench warrant, arrest, and possible jail time. The transit
districts, on the other hand, may benefit substantially by the
fact that the administrative process does not require the
citing officer to appear. This will allow transit district
officers to spend much less time in court and much more time
on patrol. The seriousness of a vending offense seems on par
with the other types of violations for which the specified
transit districts may issue civil citations and appears to be
an appropriate candidate for civil enforcement.
3.Arguments in opposition . Opponents argue that vending on a
transit system does little harm to society and that our court
system should not be besieged by "thousands of cases each year
for offering to sell a rose to someone on a bus - even if
there is a willing purchaser." They believe that the bill
effectively creates a license requirement without any means of
equal application, which will result in violations of first
amendment free speech rights.
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 75-0
Appr: 17-0
AB 2247 (LOWENTHAL) Page 4
Trans: 13-0
Public Safety: 6-0
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on
Wednesday, June 13,
2012)
SUPPORT: Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (sponsor)
California Transit Association
OPPOSED: California Attorneys for Criminal Justice