BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2393
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Bonnie Lowenthal, Chair
AB 2393 (Levine) - As Introduced: February 21, 2014
SUBJECT : Vehicle registration surcharge: fingerprint
identification
SUMMARY : Authorizes an increase in the vehicle registration fee
used to fund fingerprint identification programs. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Authorizes, for counties that have imposed a vehicle
registration fee for fingerprint identification programs, the
fee to be increased from $1 to $2 (and from $2 to $4 for
commercial vehicles).
2)For counties that have not imposed a $1 vehicle registration
fee for fingerprint identification programs, authorizes
imposition of a $2 fee (and a $4 fee for commercial vehicles).
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes a county board of supervisors to impose a $1
vehicle registration fee for purposes of funding fingerprint
identification programs; for counties that opt to impose this
fee, commercial vehicles in the county pay a $2 vehicle
registration fee for the same purpose.
2)Requires participating counties to make findings as to the
purpose of, and the need for, imposing the additional vehicle
registration fee.
3)Requires the resulting fee revenues to be continuously
appropriated, without regard to fiscal years, for disbursement
to each participating county based upon the number of
registered vehicles in those counties.
4)Requires fee revenues allocated to a county to be expended
exclusively to fund programs that enhance the capacity of
local law enforcement to provide automated mobile and fixed
location fingerprint identification of individuals who may be
involved in vehicle-related crimes (e.g., driving under the
AB 2393
Page 2
influence) and other crimes committed while operating a motor
vehicle.
5)Requires every participating county to issue a fiscal year-end
report to the California State Controller summarizing the data
on its fingerprint identification program, including total
revenues received by the county; total expenditures and funds
encumbered; unexpended or unencumbered fee revenues; estimated
annual cost of the purchase, operation, and maintenance of
automated mobile and fixed location fingerprint equipment,
related infrastructure, law enforcement enhancement programs,
and personnel; and a description of how the use of the funds
benefits the motoring public.
6)Suspends for one year the fee in any county that fails to
submit this report or that has unexpended or unencumbered fee
revenue at the close of the fiscal year in which fee revenue
was received.
7)Imposes, or authorizes the imposition of, a number of other
vehicle registration fees, including:
a) $43 basic registration fee to cover costs related to the
regulation of vehicles;
b) $3 additional basic registration fee, $2 of which is for
programs to reduce vehicle emissions and $1 of which is for
programs to encourage the voluntary retirement of passenger
vehicles and light-duty and medium-duty trucks that are
high polluters;
c) $24 California Highway Patrol (CHP) fee to pay for
additional CHP officers;
d) Vehicle license fee (VLF) based on the value of the
vehicle. The VLF is an in-lieu property tax and revenue
collected is returned to cities and counties;
e) $20 smog abatement fee for newer model-year vehicles;
f) Various fees collected on behalf of local districts or
counties. These fees may include:
i) Up to $4 for vehicles registered in San Mateo County
for purposes related to traffic congestion and stormwater
AB 2393
Page 3
pollution management;
ii) $4 for vehicles registered in San Francisco to fund
programs to provide public transit;
iii) $1 for freeway service patrol programs;
iv) Between $2 and $19 for programs to reduce air
pollution from motor vehicles;
v) $1 for programs aimed at deterring vehicle theft and
prosecuting driving-under-the-influence violations; and,
vi) $1 for vehicle abatement activities.
Commercial vehicles are subject to many of these same fees in
addition to others, such as fees related to cargo theft
deterrence and to gross vehicle weight.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS : The Department of Justice (DOJ) started the
fingerprint identification program, known as Cal-ID, in the late
1980s to provide a way to verify the identity of persons placed
under arrest and to assist law enforcement agencies in other
ways, such as identifying human remains and identifying possible
criminal suspects, using fingerprint evidence gathered at crime
scenes.
Limited funding for the technology and equipment hampered
implementation of Cal-ID. As a result, the Legislature passed
SB 720 (Lockyer), Chapter 587, Statutes of 1997, authorizing
counties to impose a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations in
the county and to use the money for the Cal-ID program. SB 720
limited the duration of the program to five years. Subsequent
legislation extended authorization for the program twice: AB
879 (Keeley), Chapter 986, Statutes of 2002, extended the
program until 2006 and added reporting requirements, and AB 857
(Bass), Chapter 470, Statutes of 2005, extended the program
until January 2012. Finally, AB 674 (Bonilla), Chapter 205,
Statutes of 2011, repealed the sunset date entirely.
According to the sponsors, the Cal-ID program has been a
statewide success. They contend it has saved DOJ countless
AB 2393
Page 4
hours of manually scanning inked fingerprint cards. Further,
local law enforcement officials assert that since the original
legislation, advances in biometric science and technology have
developed to the point that law enforcement can now send and
receive from the field identification needed to authenticate
individuals using not only fingerprints but also retinal scans,
facial scans, palm-prints, and thumbprints. These advancements
offer significant benefits to law enforcement, such as the
ability to:
1)Authenticate individuals remotely and avoid unnecessary
transfers to a booking facility;
2)Rapidly identify dangerous individuals;
3)Confirm instances of mistaken identities; and,
4)View a driver's license photograph from the field.
Although the program has been extended indefinitely, the author
points out that the $1 vehicle registration fee has not changed
since the inception of the program 17 years ago. This bill is
intended to restore some of the lost purchasing power of the
original $1 fee as well as to allow law enforcement to take
advantage of advances in technology.
Writing in opposition to AB 2393, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers
Association argues that the fee increase proposed in this bill
runs afoul of Constitutional provisions governing the imposition
of special taxes, namely that imposition of such a tax requires
a two-thirds vote of the electorate.
To this point, AB 2393 is a majority vote measure in the
Legislature because it does not directly result in a taxpayer
paying a higher tax. Instead, this bill delegates to county
boards of supervisors the authority to impose a vehicle
registrations fee. Ultimately, county counsels will have to
determine the appropriate vote threshold at the county level,
where a two-thirds vote of the electorate may be required.
Previous legislation: SB 720 (Lockyer), Chapter 587, Statutes
of 1997, originally authorized the imposition of a $1 fee for
the automated fingerprinting systems, until January 2003.
AB 879 (Keeley), Chapter 986, Statutes of 2002, extended the
AB 2393
Page 5
program until 2006 (and added reporting requirements).
AB 857 (Bass), Chapter 470, Statutes of 2005, extended the
program until January 2012.
AB 674 (Bonilla), Chapter 205, Statutes of 2011, extended the
program indefinitely.
Double referral : This bill is double-referred to the Local
Government Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California State Sheriffs' Association (sponsor)
California Association of Crime Laboratory Directors
Kern County Sheriff
Yolo County Sheriff
Opposition
California Car Clubs
California Taxpayers Association
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Analysis Prepared by : Janet Dawson / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093