BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2393
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 30, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
K.H. "Katcho" Achadjian, Chair
AB 2393 (Levine) - As Introduced: February 21, 2014
SUBJECT : Vehicle registration fees.
SUMMARY : Authorizes counties to increase the vehicle
registration fee for 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)Authorizes, for counties that have not imposed a $1 vehicle
registration fee for fingerprint identification programs,
imposition of a $2 fee, and a $4 fee for commercial vehicles.
3)Specifies the fee be paid at the time of registration or
renewal and quarterly to the Controller pursuant to existing
law.
4)Requires counties to submit a resolution to impose a fee of $2
to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) at least six months
prior to the operative date of the fee increase.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires a vehicle registration fee of $46 to be paid for the
registration of every motor vehicle, except those expressly
exempt.
2)Authorizes a variety of additional fees that are related to
the operation of motor vehicles to be paid with the
registration, to address certain air quality and law
enforcement issues, including a $24 California Highway Patrol
(CHP) fee to pay for additional CHP officers, and $1 for
programs aimed at deterring vehicle theft and prosecuting
driving-under-the-influence violations.
3)Authorizes a county board of supervisors to impose a $1
AB 2393
Page 2
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.
4)Requires participating counties to adopt a resolution which
makes findings as to the purpose of, and the need for,
imposing the additional vehicle registration fee.
5)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.
6)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 and other crimes committed
while operating a motor vehicle.
7)Requires every participating county to issue a fiscal year-end
report to the Controller, on or before November 1 of each
year, to include 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.
8)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.
9)Defines the "California Identification System" or "Cal-ID" to
mean the automated system maintained by the Department of
Justice for retaining fingerprint files and identifying latent
fingerprints.
10) Provides, in Article XIII C of the California Constitution,
that a 'tax' means any levy, charge, or exaction of any kind
AB 2393
Page 3
imposed by a local government, except for the following:
a) A charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or
privilege granted directly to the payor that is not
provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed
the reasonable costs to the local government of conferring
the benefit or granting the privilege;
b) A charge imposed for a specific government service or
product provided directly to the payor that is not provided
to those not charged, and which does not exceed the
reasonable costs to local government of providing the
service or product;
c) A charge imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to
a local government for issuing licenses and permits,
performing investigations, inspections, and audits,
enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the
administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof;
d) A charge imposed for entrance to or use of local
government property, or the purchase, rental, or lease of
local governmental property;
e) A fine, penalty, or other monetary charge imposed by the
judicial branch of government or a local government, as a
result of a violation of law;
f) A charge imposed as a condition of property development;
and,
g) Assessments and property-related fees imposed in
accordance with the provisions of Article XIII D.
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS :
1)Vehicle registration fee . Existing law establishes a basic
vehicle registration fee of $46, plus a $24 surcharge for
additional personnel for the CHP, for the new or renewal
registration of most vehicles or trailer coaches. Existing
law also authorizes local agencies to impose separate vehicle
registration fee surcharges in their respective jurisdictions
AB 2393
Page 4
for a variety of special programs, such as abating abandoned
vehicles, deterring, investigating, and prosecuting vehicle
theft, and for funding fingerprint identification programs.
2)Purpose of this bill . This bill authorizes counties to
increase the vehicle registration fee for fingerprint
identification programs. For counties that have imposed the
$1vehicle registration fee, this bill authorizes an increase
in that amount to $2. For counties that have not imposed the
$1 vehicle registration fee this bill authorizes those
counties to impose $2 vehicle registration fee. This bill is
sponsored by the California State Sheriffs' Association.
3)Author's statement . According to the author, "This bill
simply gives local law enforcement agencies the tools needed
to help keep their communities safe, by allowing counties to
increase the fee for automated fingerprint identification
programs by an additional $1. Technological developments and
infractions have reduced the purchasing power of the proceeds
of an existing fee authority that funds automated fingerprint
identification."
4)Cal-ID and previous legislation . 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, which
authorized counties to impose a $1 vehicle registration fee,
upon the adoption of a resolution by a county's board of
supervisors, with the proceeds directed to local agencies to
purchase and upgrade equipment compatible with the DOJ's
Cal-ID system. 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.
AB 2393
Page 5
Although the program has been extended indefinitely, the
author and sponsor point out that the $1 vehicle registration
fee has not changed since the inception of the program 17
years ago. Currently 45 out of the 58 counties have elected
to increase the vehicle registration fee by $1 in order to
fund Cal-ID.
According to the sponsor, "[Cal-ID] reduces DOJ workload by
avoiding the scanning of inked fingerprint cards and has
increased officer safety by providing rapid and accurate
identification of persons law enforcement encounters in the
field. Additionally, the evolution of technology has
heightened these benefits and eliminated some unnecessary
transportation to booking facilities."
5)Proposition 26 . This bill delegates to county boards of
supervisors the authority to impose a vehicle registration
fee. Since Proposition 26 (2010) has changed the rules of
fees and taxes, and thus tightened the requirements needed for
local voter approval, the issue of whether voter approval is
necessary to increase the fee may be an issue that is
ultimately up to the courts to decide.
In opposition to this bill, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers
Association argues, "?an appropriate fee is either regulatory
in nature, or needs to provide a direct benefit to the
fee-payer. In order for this bill to meet that standard,
everybody paying the fee would either have to be the
perpetrator or the victim of a vehicle crime. As the nexus is
not established, it is a local tax increase requiring a
two-thirds vote." Taxes at the local level require a
two-thirds vote for those taxes that are specifically
dedicated to be used for certain purposes; otherwise, if the
tax is for general purposes, a majority vote of the residents
in the jurisdiction is then needed.
6)Arguments in support . Supporters argue that given the
enhanced technology, increased benefits, and the fact that the
fee has not been adjusted since it was created more than
15 years ago, it is appropriate to allow counties to decide
whether they would like to increase this fee.
7)Arguments in opposition . Opposition argues that this bill
violates provisions of the California Constitution and is
AB 2393
Page 6
therefore devoid of necessary voter approval requirements.
8)Double-referral . This bill was heard by the Transportation
Committee on April 21, 2014, and passed with a 9-6 vote.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California State Sheriffs' Association [SPONSOR]
California Association of Crime Laboratory Directors
California District Attorneys Association
Sheriff Gregory J. Ahern, Alameda County
Sheriff Donny Youngblood, Kern County
Sheriff John R. Robertson, Napa County
Sheriff Sandra Hutchens, Orange County
Opposition
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Analysis Prepared by : Misa Yokoi-Shelton / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958