BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Noreen Evans, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
SB 154 (Wolk)
As Introduced
Hearing Date: March 29, 2011
Fiscal: No
Urgency: No
EDO:rm
SUBJECT
Marriage Licenses: Vital Records: Fees:
Domestic Violence: Solano County
DESCRIPTION
Existing law authorizes Solano County, until January 1, 2012, to
increase fees for certified copies of vital records by up to $2
for domestic violence prevention, intervention and prosecution
efforts. This bill would delete the January 1, 2012 sunset date
thereby extending the operation of this authority indefinitely.
BACKGROUND
AB 2010 (Hancock, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2004) authorized the
Counties of Alameda and Solano to raise the fees for marriage
licenses and for certified copies of vital records for each
county to provide for oversight and coordination of domestic
violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution efforts in
each respective county. These efforts include coordination
among the court system, the district attorney's office, the
public defender's office, law enforcement, the probation
department, mental health, substance abuse, child welfare
services, adult protective services, and other agencies and
community-based organizations in the counties. AB 2010
authorized a fee increase of up to $2 for each county, with
further increases permitted on an annual basis, using the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the San Francisco metropolitan
area. AB 2010 contained a sunset of January 1, 2010, and
required a report on each county's program to the Legislature by
July 1, 2009. SB 635 (Wiggins, Chapter 356, Statutes of 2009)
extended the sunset for the pilot program in Solano County for
(more)
SB 154 (Wolk)
Page 2 of ?
an additional year to January 1, 2011.
Last year, SB 1222 (Wolk, Chapter 520, Statutes of 2010)
extended Solano County's pilot program originally created by AB
2010 until January 1, 2012. The introduced version of the bill
had a sunset of January 1, 2014. When this bill was heard in
this Committee, it was amended to shorten this sunset because
there were concerns about the amount of revenue raised and the
proposed use of the funds. (See Comment 2.)
The Family Justice Center (FJC) model was originally developed
in San Diego, which opened a center in 2002. The idea behind
the FJC model is to create a coordinated, single-point-of-access
center offering comprehensive services for victims of domestic
violence, thereby reducing the number of locations a victim must
visit in order to receive critical services. The United States
Department of Justice, through its Office on Violence Against
Women (OVW), has identified the Family Justice Center model as a
best practice in the field of domestic violence. According to
the OVW, documented and public FJC outcomes include a reduction
in the rate of homicide; increased victim safety; improved
offender prosecution; reduced fear and anxiety for victims and
their children; increased efficiency among service providers
through the provision of collaborative victims; and increased
community support for the provision of services and their
children. (Casey Gwinn and Gael Strack, Hope for Hurting
Families: Creating Family Justice Centers Across America,
Volcano Press, 2006.)
This bill would remove the existing sunset date for Solano
County, thereby extending the fee authorization indefinitely.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law authorizes the Solano County Board of Supervisors,
upon making specified findings and declarations, to increase the
fees for marriage licenses and confidential marriage licenses,
as well as certified copies of marriage, birth, and death
certificates, by up to $2, with further increases permitted on
an annual basis, based on the Consumer Price Index for the San
Francisco metropolitan area for the preceding year. Existing
law provides that the authorization for the fee increases will
sunset on January 1, 2012. (Gov. Code Sec. 26840.11; Health &
Saf. Code Sec. 103628.)
Existing law directs that these fees be deposited into a special
SB 154 (Wolk)
Page 3 of ?
fund to be used for governmental oversight and coordination of
domestic violence and family violence prevention, intervention,
and prosecution efforts. (Wel. & Inst. Code Sec. 18309.5.)
Existing law provides that the Solano County Board of
Supervisors must submit to the Assembly and Senate Judiciary
Committees, by July 1, 2009, a report regarding such fee
increases. The report must provide the amounts of fees received
and expended as well as the outcomes achieved as a result of the
expenditures. (Gov. Code Sec. 26840.11; Health & Saf. Code Sec.
103628.)
This bill would extend the authorization for the Solano County
Board of Supervisors to increase fees for the purposes specified
above, indefinitely.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
According to the author, the fees collected by the Solano County
Board of Supervisors through this pilot program are an important
source of domestic violence program funding for the county, and
are deposited into a fund to be used for a Solano County Family
Justice Center (SFJC). The author explains that Solano County
would like to continue this effort.
2. Concerns raised last year have been addressed
Last year, after receiving Solano County's statutorily required
report, this Committee raised concerns about the amount of fees
received ($284,500) and the estimated amount required to open
and operate the SFJC during the first year ($475,500).
Specifically, this Committee stated:
While the establishment of a Family Justice Center is a
laudable goal, the revenue raised thus far (as indicated in
Solano County's report) through the increased fees is not
nearly sufficient to fund the construction and operation of an
FJC. Solano County began collecting AB 2010 fees on January
1, 2005 and, as of last year, had approximately $284,500 in
fund balance. According to a feasibility study conducted by
Solano County, the Family Justice Center Project will need
another $475,500 to cover operating and capital costs in the
SB 154 (Wolk)
Page 4 of ?
first year of operation. In addition, a minimum of $428,500
in resources would be needed to operate the center on an
annual basis. However, the report lacks detail as to how
Solano County plans to leverage the funds currently in the
account to obtain additional funding for the FJC. Further, if
the funds are currently being deposited into an account for
the FJC, then consequently, they are not currently being used
for other domestic violence prevention efforts. In light of
these concerns, this Committee may wish to consider whether a
shorter sunset with a new report requirement is appropriate in
order to provide Solano County an opportunity to assess and
demonstrate whether the FJC is a feasible goal, and
alternatively, what other ways the funds will be used to
accomplish the purposes set forth in statute.
As a result of these concerns, the bill was amended in Committee
to shorten this sunset. As discussed in more detail below, it
appears that Solano County has revised its original plan to
construct a new SFJC and has leveraged additional funding for
the project through federal and private grants.
3. Deleting the sunset for Solano County to increase fees for
vital records for the prevention of domestic violence now
seems appropriate
This bill would delete the January 1, 2012 sunset for Solano
County's vital records fee increase pilot program and allow the
program to continue on indefinitely. As discussed below, this
is the appropriate course of action based on the new report
provided by Solano County and the progress that has been made
towards their efforts to implement a SFJC over the last year.
a. Solano County seeks to address domestic violence through
the implementation of a Family Justice Center
This year, Solano County no longer plans to construct a new
SFJC and has allocated vital records fees for direct services
for victims of domestic violence. The SFJC Steering Committee
is chaired by a member of the Solano County Board of
Supervisors (the Board) and has been meeting since October
2010. The goals of the steering committee are to identify an
ideal space for the SFJC, to identify potential funding and to
make recommendations to the Board. Final recommendations are
proposed to be made in May or June 2011. Last year, the
county was focused on using the vital records fees to build a
new structure for the SFJC. The steering committee now
SB 154 (Wolk)
Page 5 of ?
recognizes that the most cost effective way to obtain space
for the project would not be to construct a new SFJC.
However, there is the potential that the steering committee
will recommend acquiring an already existing site with
renovations beginning before the end of the year. Currently,
a three phase process has begun to relocate the SFJC partners.
Five staff members including social workers, a victim
empowerment coordinator, a confidential advocate and the SFJC
coordinator have been relocated. In May, they will move into
a new larger space within the District Attorney's office and
eight more staff members will move over. Finally, by the end
of 2011 an ideal space will have been identified and acquired
and will accommodate at least 23 partners.
At this time, funding collected from the Vital Records Fees
originally authorized by AB 2010 has been used to provide
direct services to victims of domestic violence, sexual
assault, stalking, and dating violence. These services have
been provided by a social worker who is part of the SFJC team.
b. Funding sources
Since this bill was heard last year, Solano County has secured
additional grant funds. In addition to the revenues generated
from the vital records fees Solano County, through the
county's Office of Family Violence and Prevention, has
received three grants from the United States Department of
Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW). This grant
money will be used for the SFJC project. The first grant, in
the amount of $400,000 will be used to fund a full-time victim
advocate, a full time SFJC coordinator and a part time victim
resource specialist as members of the SFJC team. The second
grant, also for $400,000 is to develop and implement a
supervised visitation and exchange center for families
experiencing domestic violence. This center will be in
partnership with the SFJC and is slated to open in 2012. The
third grant from OVW is for $100,000 to fund a domestic
violence court room. Solano County also received a one year
$50,000 grant from the AVON foundation for Women to fund a
victim empowerment coordinator for 2011. All of this grant
money was secured within the last year.
Additionally, through Solano's currently operating domestic
violence shelter, LIFT3, SFJC will participate in Solano
County's Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process. Solano
SB 154 (Wolk)
Page 6 of ?
County utilizes a non-competitive RFQ process for any agency
that can demonstrate that they are providing services as
outlined in the Domestic Violence Shelter-Based Programs Act
(Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 18294) and scores at least a 70
percent through a review process. Through the LIFT3 shelter
partnership, SFJC plans to participate in the RFQ process this
year.
Also, through LIFT3, SFJC applied for funding through CalEMA.
LIFT3 meets all of the qualifications for CalEMA funding from
the Equality in Prevention and Services for Domestic Abuse
Fund which targets grant money for domestic violence shelters
servicing the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender
communities. (Pen. Code Sec. 13823.17.) Funding from CalEMA
has been frozen for the last nine years for any new shelters
applying for grants. In February of this year, CalEMA
announced that they will be accepting proposals from qualified
applicants. It is estimated that $824,840 of state and
federal funds will be available to fund an additional four
projects.
Not including the RFQ and CalEMA funding, the federal and AVON
grant money currently totals $950,000 and will be used in
conjunction with the vital records fees, which to date have
generated over $300,000. It is important to note that the
vital records fees were critical in drawing down federal grant
money. Solano County has also applied for a number of
additional grants, both federal and private. Further,
additional direct support will come from the county by
staffing the SFJC with currently employed county workers.
While this grant money is critical to the implementation and
on-going support of the SFJC, Solano County notes that it is
necessary for them to be authorized to continue the fee
authority due to the unstable nature of federal and state
funding. Solano County also notes that in order to be
eligible to continue to receive funding and to be eligible to
apply for future grant funding they must be able to show a
consistent flow of income through the vital records fees.
Based on the progress made, it would appear to be appropriate
to delete the sunset provision to allow Solano County to
continue its fee authority to fund domestic violence
prevention programs. However, based on concerns raised last
year regarding the total amount and proper usage of the vital
records fees, it also is appropriate to require the Solano
County Board of Supervisors to report to the Assembly and
SB 154 (Wolk)
Page 7 of ?
Senate Committees on Judiciary by July 1, 2014. Existing law
requires the report to outline the amount of fees received and
expended as well as the outcomes achieved as a result of the
expenditures. The following amendment would achieve this:
Suggested amendment:
a. On page 2, line 25, between "a" and "report" insert
"preliminary"
b. On page 2, line 25, after "report" insert "and a follow
up report no later than July 1, 2014,"
Support : Solano County Board of Supervisors
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Author
Related Pending Legislation : SB 557 (Kehoe) would, among other
things, authorize local governments to establish a family
justice center. This bill is currently in the Senate Public
Safety Committee.
Prior Legislation :
SB 1222 (Wolk, Chapter 520, Statutes of 2010) (See Background.)
AB 1883 (Evans, 2010) would have authorized, as a pilot program,
county boards of supervisors to increase specified fees to fund
domestic violence prevention programs and direct services. This
bill was held in the Senate Local Government Committee.
AB 1770 (Galgiani, Chapter 578, Statutes of 2010) established a
similar domestic violence prevention funding pilot program in
Stanislaus County.
AB 2348 (Yamada, 2010) would have establish a similar domestic
violence prevention funding pilot program in Yolo County. This
bill was held in the Assembly Judiciary Committee.
AB 73 (Hayashi, Chapter 215, Statutes of 2009) deleted the
sunset for the pilot programs in Alameda and the City of
Berkeley.
SB 154 (Wolk)
Page 8 of ?
AB 2231 (Hayashi, 2008) would have extended the sunset date for
pilot programs in Alameda and Solano Counties, and the City of
Berkeley that authorizes increased fees in specified vital
records and marriage licenses from January 1, 2010, to January
1, 2015. This bill was vetoed by the Governor.
AB 1712 (Hancock, Chapter 545, Statutes of 2005) authorized the
City of Berkeley to increase the fees for certified copies of
birth certificates, fetal death records, and death records by up
to $2.
AB 2010 (Hancock, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2004), authorized
Alameda and Solano Counties to increase the fees for marriage
licenses, and for certified copies of marriage certificates,
birth certificates, fetal death records, and death records.
SB 425 (Torlakson, Chapter 90, Statutes of 2001) authorized a
pilot program in Contra Costa County, allowing the county to
provide governmental oversight and coordination of domestic
violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution efforts
within the county.
**************