BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
SB 1385 (Anderson)
As Introduced
Hearing Date: April 29, 2014
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
NR
SUBJECT
Protection of Victims: Alternate Physical Address
DESCRIPTION
This bill would, upon request, allow the Secretary of State to
designate an alternate physical address for a Safe at Home
program participant if the participant is prohibited from using
a post office box as an address.
(This analysis reflects author's amendments to be offered in
Committee.)
BACKGROUND
The Safe at Home program, which is administered by the Secretary
of State (SOS), is available to victims of domestic violence,
sexual assault, stalking, and reproductive healthcare workers,
and provides them with a substitute mailing address in order to
protect the confidentiality of the participant's home, work, or
school address. The substitute mailing address is an assigned
post office box, and the SOS is designated as the participant's
agent for service of process and receipt of mail. Mail is
forwarded by the SOS from the post office box to the
participant. Thus, the Safe at Home program allows participants
to have a publicly available address without disclosing the
participant's actual residence or alternate location.
Under the program, state and local agencies are required to
accept a program participant's SOS-designated post office box,
unless there is a bona fide statutory or administrative
requirement that the participant's actual address be used. In
(more)
SB 1385 (Anderson)
Page 2 of ?
that event, the state or local agency may use the participant's
physical address, but is required to keep the physical address
private.
This bill seeks to ensure that a participant in the Safe at Home
program is able to maintain the confidentiality of his or her
address whenever required by an entity to give a physical
address.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law establishes an address confidentiality (or Safe at
Home) program within the Office of the Secretary of State (SOS)
in order to enable state and local agencies to both accept and
respond to requests for public records without disclosing the
name and/or address of a victim of domestic violence, sexual
assault, or stalking. Existing law permits any such adult
victim, or parent or guardian acting on behalf of a minor or
incapacitated person, to apply through a community-based
victims' assistance program to have an address designated by the
SOS as his or her substitute mailing address. (Gov. Code Sec.
6205 et seq.)
Existing law authorizes a program participant to request that
state and local agencies use the address designated by the SOS
as a program participant's address. Existing law further
requires state and local agencies to accept that address, unless
both of the following are shown:
the agency has a bona fide statutory or administrative
requirement for the use of the address which would otherwise
be confidential; and
the address will be used only for those statutory and
administrative purposes and not publicly disseminated. (Gov.
Code Sec. 6207.)
Existing law requires the SOS to forward all first class mail
and all mail sent by a governmental agency to the appropriate
program participants, and further provides that the SOS may
refuse to handle or forward packages regardless or size of type
of mailing. (Gov. Code Sec. 6207(d).)
This bill would allow the SOS to designate an alternate physical
address upon the request of a program participant if the
participant is prohibited from using a post office box as an
address.
COMMENT
SB 1385 (Anderson)
Page 3 of ?
1.Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
Senate Bill 1385 makes seamless the protection delivered by
the Safe at Home program. If for any reason an individual
finds that they are not free to use the post office box
that is provided them, they should be able to list a
physical address if necessary.
2.Benefits of allowing the Secretary of State to designate an
alternate physical address
This bill would allow the Secretary of State (SOS) to designate
an alternate physical address for any Safe at Home program
participant who has been prohibited from using a post office box
as an address. Existing law requires state and local agencies
to comply with the laws that govern the Safe at Home program and
maintain address confidentiality even in the event that the use
of a participant's protected address must be used. As
government entities are already required to abide by the laws of
the Safe at Home program, this bill seeks mainly to aid program
participants who are dealing with private businesses that
require a physical address.
There are a number of legal principles, such as freedom of
contract, which insulate private businesses from being required
to strictly comply with the laws that govern the Safe at Home
program. However, the SOS does encourage businesses to take an
active role in helping protect victims of domestic violence and
stalking from being found by their assailants. The SOS posts on
its Web site:
While businesses are not required to comply with the laws that
govern the Safe at Home program, for the safety of your
client, it is recommended that you use the participant's
designated Safe at Home mailing address in lieu of his or her
confidential address on public records. Or, if the
confidential address is required in order to provide services,
you may employ measures to protect the participant's account
and confidential address information, such as requiring the
use of a password.
Staff notes that requiring the SOS to provide a physical address
for program participants will not in and of itself create an
SB 1385 (Anderson)
Page 4 of ?
obligation for private businesses to comply with the Safe at
Home program. Instead this bill seeks to prevent businesses
from ever receiving the private address of participants by
allowing the SOS to designate a physical address for
participants who find themselves in situations where a post
office box is unacceptable.
3.Ability of Safe at Home Program to handle packages
Existing law requires the SOS to forward all first class mail
and mail sent by a governmental agency to program participants.
This bill would additionally allow the SOS to designate an
alternative physical address for certain Safe at Home
participants. Arguably, a physical address is most often
required for the delivery of packages. UPS, for example, will
not deliver to a post office box. However, existing law
expressly provides that the SOS may refuse to handle or forward
packages. SB 1082 (Corbett, Ch. 270, Stats. 2012.)
However, even if the SOS were allowing to designate an alternate
physical address, there remain practical and logistical reasons
the SOS may have difficulty handling or forwarding packages.
The Safe at Home program is arguably not equipped to handle
packages, and doing so may compromise the safety of Safe at Home
employees, and the confidentiality and safety of victims.
Forwarding packages would also present a serious issue of cost
for the state.
It goes to follow that requiring the SOS to designate an
alternate physical address for certain program participants will
not alleviate the limitations of the Safe at Home program with
respect to packages. Staff further notes that an alternate
physical address, as authorized under this bill, would not
create an obligation of the part of the SOS to handle or forward
packages.
4.Author's amendments to be offered in Committee
In response to concerns expressed about requiring the SOS to
designate an alternate physical address, the author offers the
following amendment.
Author's amendment:
Page 4, line 13 strike "shall" and insert "may"
SB 1385 (Anderson)
Page 5 of ?
Support : Peace Officers Research Coalition
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Author
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
AB 849 (Garcia, Chapter 676, Statutes of 2013) authorized an
application to the SOS's Safe at Home program to be completed at
a community-based assistance program that serves victims of
elder or dependent adult abuse, and required the SOS to conduct
outreach activities to identify and recruit agencies to assist
specified victims in applying to the Safe at Home program.
AB 2483 (Blumenfield, Chapter 102, Statutes of 2012) removed the
requirement that victims alleging stalking as the basis of their
eligibility for the address confidentiality program provide
specific evidence attached to the application.
SB 1082 (Corbett, Chapter 270, Statutes of 2012) made a number
of changes to the Safe at Home program, including requiring
applicants and participants of the program to be domiciled in
California, and authorizing a minor participant to renew his or
her participation upon reaching 18 years of age.
AB 906 (Galgiani, 2012) would have authorized witnesses who have
testified in murder trials to participate in the Safe at Home
program. This bill died on the Senate Appropriations Suspense
File.
AB 454 (Silva, Chapter 101, Statutes of 2011) required that a
party protected by a protective order receive notice when an
action is filed by another party to terminate or modify that
order.
SB 1062 (Bowen, Chapter 639, Statutes of 2006) added victims of
sexual assault to the list of eligible Safe at Home program
participants.
AB 797 (Shelley, Chapter 380, Statutes of 2002) expanded the
Safe At Home program to reproductive health care services
SB 1385 (Anderson)
Page 6 of ?
providers and their employees, volunteers, and patients.
SB 1318 (Alpert, Chapter 562, Statutes of 2000) extended the
protections of the Safe at Home program to victims of stalking,
and revised certain notification procedures relating to
termination of certification as a program participant.
AB 205 (Leach, Chapter 33, Statutes of 2000) extended the Safe
at Home program to cover victims of stalking.
SB 489 (Alpert, Chapter 1005, Statutes of 1998) established the
"Address Confidentiality for Victims of Domestic Violence"
program, which is now referred to as the Safe at Home program.
**************