BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE
Senator Lois Wolk, Chair
BILL NO: AB 2151 HEARING: 6/18/14
AUTHOR: Wagner FISCAL: No
VERSION: 5/13/14 TAX LEVY: No
CONSULTANT: Urquiza
COUNTIES: SEARCH AND RESCUE: COSTS
Allows counties to seek reimbursement from residents age 16
or older for search and
rescue costs.
Background and Existing Law
State law allows a county board of supervisors to authorize
the sheriff to search for and rescue persons who are lost
or are in danger of their lives within or in the immediate
vicinity of the county. The expense incurred by the
sheriff for the search and rescue are a proper county
charge. The county or city and county that performed the
search and rescue can bill the county or city and county of
residence of the person searched for or rescued for all the
reasonable expenses exceeding $100.
State law allows public agencies to recover the costs of
emergency response and search and rescue costs under
certain circumstances. Public agencies may recover up to
$12,000 from the driver of a motor vehicle, boat, or plane
under the influence of alcohol or drugs whose negligent
operation of the vehicle resulted in an emergency response.
Any person who intentionally enters into an area that is
closed to the public resulting in a search and rescue also
is liable for search and rescue costs up to $12,000. State
law also allows counties and public agencies to charge a
person who negligently or in violation of the law sets a
fire or allows a fire to be set, for the cost of providing
rescue or emergency medical services.
From 1995 to 1999, state law allowed a county or city and
county that is billed by another county or city and county
for a search and rescue of one of its residents who is 16
years of age or older to seek reimbursement from that
resident for the cost incurred by the county. The law also
AB 2151 -- 5/13/14 -- Page 2
required a person 16 years of age or older living within a
county or city and county who is searched for or rescued to
pay the county or city and county for the actual cost
incurred for the search or rescue within 30 days after
being billed for those charges. In order to recover the
costs, the need for the search and rescue had to
necessitate the use of extraordinary methods and be caused
by one of the following factors:
Any intentional act in knowing violation of any
federal or state law or local ordinance.
Any act or omission by the person searched for or
rescued that shows wanton and reckless misconduct in
disregard for his or her safety.
The law prohibited the county or city and county from
collecting charges from those persons who the county or
city and county determined were unable to pay. The city
and county also could not bill a resident more than $5,000
for a search and rescue.
According to the courts, "wanton misconduct is intentional
wrongful conduct, done either with a knowledge that serious
injury to another will probably result, or with a wanton
and reckless disregard of the possible results." The courts
have found that three essential elements must be present to
raise a negligent act to the level of wilful or wanton
misconduct: (1) actual or constructive knowledge of the
peril to be apprehended, (2) actual or constructive
knowledge that injury is a probable, as opposed to a
possible, result of the danger, and (3) conscious failure
to act to avoid the peril.
Some local officials want to reinstate the statutory
authority to allow counties to recover costs of search and
rescue from residents that break the law or behave
recklessly.
Proposed Law
Assembly Bill 2151 allows a county or city and county that
is billed by another county or city and county, for a
search and rescue of one of its residents who is 16 years
or age or older, to seek reimbursement from that resident
for the actual costs incurred, including, but not limited
to, the cost of operating vehicles or aircraft, the
AB 2151 -- 5/13/14 -- Page 3
salaries of employees, and the cost of providing emergency
medical services.
The bill requires a person 16 years of age or older living
within a county or city and county, who is searched for or
rescued, to pay the county or city and county conducting
the search or rescue for the actual cost incurred,
including but not limited to, the cost of operating
vehicles or aircraft, the salaries of employees, and the
cost of providing emergency medical services.
In order to recover the costs, the need for the search and
rescue has to necessitate the use of extraordinary methods
and any of the following has to be a contributing factor to
the need for the search and rescue:
Any act in violation of any federal or state law or
local ordinance.
Any act or omission by the person searched for or
rescued that shows wanton and reckless misconduct in
disregard for his or her safety.
The bill prohibits the county or city and county from
collecting charges from those persons who the county or
city and county determine are unable to pay.
The bill provides that a county or a city and county may
only seek reimbursement as authorized by the bill if the
board of supervisors adopts an ordinance.
State Revenue Impact
No estimate.
Comments
1. Purpose of the bill . In 2013, two teenagers in Orange
County became lost while hiking, resulting in an extensive
search that cost the responding agencies more than
$160,000. The hikers admitted to being under the influence
of drugs when they became disoriented and lost their way.
Counties find it difficult to bear the financial burdens of
extraordinary search and rescue costs. AB 2151 would hold
individuals who break the law, or who are reckless,
accountable for the costs of an extraordinary search and
AB 2151 -- 5/13/14 -- Page 4
rescue effort to aid them.
2. No liability cap . Existing law limits liability for
any person who causes an accident due to being under the
influence of drugs or alcohol to $12,000. The provision of
prior law that this bill seeks to reinstate also contained
a cap of $5,000. This bill contains no cap on the amount a
person subject to the bill's provision would have to pay.
Not having a liability cap can have unintended
consequences. For instance, individuals may hesitate to
call for a search and rescue for someone they know is in
trouble if there is the possibility of significant
financial liability. This can turn into a public safety
issue if individuals search for their friends or family
members without calling for professional help. The bill
also gives the board of supervisors broad discretion to
choose who gets charged by leaving terms such as
"extraordinary methods" undefined. The board also has
discretion to decide who is unable to pay the charges. A
liability cap protects individuals from being charged
unreasonable and inequitable charges without any standards
in place. To address these concerns and remain consistent
with state laws, the committee may wish to consider
amending the bill to add a $12,000 cap on the amount that a
city or city and county may charge an individual for search
and rescue costs.
3. Criminal charges vs. minor violations . Society may
justify someone being charged for search and rescue costs
for some acts, but not others. For instance, a person who
goes for a hike and accidentally trespasses private
property and gets lost and a person who was under the
influence of drugs and got lost as a result are two very
different scenarios. Criminal penalties apply to one, but
not the other. So why should this bill treat them the
same? The committee may wish to consider amending the bill
to make an exception to the liability cap that applies only
to individuals who commit a crime that is punishable by a
sentence of more than one year in prison.
4. Causation vs correlation . AB 2151 does not require
that violating a law or showing wanton and reckless
misconduct caused the need of a search and rescue. Instead
the bill uses broad language that any of the specified
violations have to be "a contributing factor" to the search
and rescue. Therefore, there is no explicit nexus between
AB 2151 -- 5/13/14 -- Page 5
the crime or act and the search and rescue. The committee
may wish to consider amending the bill to reinstate the
provisions of the previous law, which stated that the
search and rescue was caused by the specific acts.
5. Intent and knowledge . Prior law on which AB 2151 is
based specified "any intentional and in knowing violation"
of any state or federal law or local ordinance. AB 2151
does not stipulate intent and knowledge of breaking a law
to be charged for search and rescue costs. The committee
may wish to consider amending the bill to reinstate the
language of intent and knowledge when breaking a law or
ordinance.
Assembly Actions
Assembly Local Government: 9-0
Assembly Floor: 72-0
Support and Opposition (5/12/14)
Support : County of Orange; California State Association of
Counties; California State Firefighters Association;
California State Sheriffs' Association; Orange County
Taxpayers Association; Rural County Representatives of
California.
Opposition : Unknown.
AB 2151 -- 5/13/14 -- Page 6