BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1407
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 24, 2008
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Dave Jones, Chair
SB 1407 (Perata) - As Amended: June 18, 2008
As Proposed to be Amended
SENATE VOTE : 28-8
SUBJECT: COURT FACILITIES: FINANCING
KEY ISSUES :
1)SHOULD THE ISSUANCE OF UP TO $5 BILLION IN LEASE-REVENUE BONDS
BE PERMITTED TO FINANCE THE CONSTRUCTION OF APPROXIMATELY 40
MAJOR CAPITAL CRITICAL NEED PROJECTS FOR THE COURTS?
2)SHOULD THE DEBT SERVICE ON THE ISSUED BONDS BE SUPPORTED BY
RAISING THE FEE ON CONVICTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES, PARKING
TICKETS, AND SPECIFIED CIVIL, FAMILY AND PROBATE FILINGS?
SYNOPSIS
This bill, sponsored by the Judicial Council (JC), states the
intent of the Legislature that lease-revenue bonds, notes, or
bond anticipation notes may issue in an amount not to exceed $5
billion to finance the planning, design, construction,
rehabilitation, renovation, replacement, leasing, or acquisition
of court facilities. The bill requires the Judicial Council to
make recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature for
projects based on its determination that the need for a project
is most immediate and critical using a specified methodology, as
specified.
This bill establishes, within the existing State Court
Facilities Construction Fund (SCFCF), the Immediate and Critical
Needs Account (ICNA), the proceeds of which can only be used
for: (1) the planning, design, construction, rehabilitation,
renovation, replacement, or acquisition of court facilities; (2)
repayment of moneys appropriated for lease of court facilities
pursuant to the issuance of lease-revenue bonds; and (3) payment
for lease or rental of court facilities, including those made
for facilities in which one or more private sector participants
undertake some of the risks associated with the financing,
SB 1407
Page 2
design, construction, or operation of the facility.
To cover the costs associated with the revenue bond, the bill,
as proposed to be amended, seeks to increase fees and fines and
have those increases collections deposited into the ICNA. This
includes, as proposed to be amended, increasing the first paper
and first responsive paper civil fees between $25 and $35, as
specified; increasing or establishing new probate fees for
trusts, estates, conservatorships and guardianships; creating an
assessment on every felony and misdemeanor criminal conviction
of $30 and on every infraction violation of $35; adding $3 for
every parking offense where a parking penalty, fine, or
forfeiture is imposed; increasing fix-it tickets by $15; and
increasing the Traffic Violator School fee by $25. This bill
takes effect immediately as an urgency statute.
This bill is double referred to the Assembly Public Safety
Committee, and is scheduled to be heard by that committee on
Thursday. Based on this timeframe, any amendments agreed to in
this Committee will be taken in the Public Safety Committee.
SUMMARY : Allows for the issuance of revenue bonds to fund
construction of court facilities and increases fees and fines to
support the bonds. Specifically, this bill :
1)Provides that money in the SCFCF shall only be used for the
planning, design, construction, rehabilitation, renovation,
replacement, leasing, or acquisition of court facilities.
2)Establishes the ICNA of the SCFCF, the proceeds of which could
only be used for the following:
a) Planning, design, construction, rehabilitation,
renovation, replacement, or acquisition of court
facilities;
b) Repayment for moneys appropriated for lease of court
facilities pursuant to the issuance of lease-revenue bonds;
or
c) Payment for lease or rental of court facilities,
including those made for facilities in which one or more
private sector participants undertake some of the risks
associated with the financing, design, construction, or
operation of the facility.
3)States the intent of the Legislature that money in the ICNA
SB 1407
Page 3
shall be used in part to pay the debt service of lease-revenue
bonds, notes, bond anticipation notes, or other appropriate
financial instruments in an amount up to $5 billion to finance
the planning, design, construction, rehabilitation,
renovation, replacement, leasing, or acquisition of court
facilities. Provides that the total bond indebtedness may not
exceed the amount that the debt service of which can be
satisfied by revenue from fines and fees.
4)Provides that 25 percent of all money collected for the SCFCF
from any county shall be designated for implementation of
trial court projects in that county, but this provision does
not apply to money deposited in the ICNA.
5)Requires the JC to be responsible for auditing the collection
of fees in the ICNA.
6)Requires the JC to consult with the sheriffs on construction
of court facilities, as specified.
7)Requires the JC to make recommendations to the Governor and
the Legislature for projects based on its determination that
the need for a project is most immediate and critical using
the then most recent version of the Prioritization Methodology
for Trial Court Capital-Outlay Projects. When making the
recommendations, requires the JC to consider and apply (a) any
economic opportunity that exists for a project, as defined,
including free or reduced costs or land for new construction,
or financial contributions from local government or private
parties; and (b) the effect on available resources of using
public-private partnerships.
8)Exempts money expended from the ICNA from submission to the
Corrections Standards Authority.
9)Increases the uniform fee for filing the first paper,
including the first paper on behalf of any plaintiff,
defendant, intervenor, respondent, or adverse party, in a
civil action or proceeding, a Probate Code proceeding, or a
Family Code proceeding from $320 to $355, and distributes as
specified, including $35 to the ICNA.
10) Increases the uniform fee for filing the first paper in a
limited civil case on behalf of the plaintiff or any other
party from $300 to $330, and in the case where the amount
SB 1407
Page 4
demanded, excluding attorney's fees and costs, is $10,000 or
less, increases the uniform fee for filing the first paper
from $180 to $205; and distributes as specified, including $30
or $25, respectively, to the ICNA.
11) Increases the filing fee for a notice of appeal to the
appellate division of the superior court in a limited civil
case from $300 to $330; the fee for filing a writ petition
within the original jurisdiction of the appellate division of
the superior court from $300 to $330; if the amount demanded
in the limited civil case, excluding attorney's fees and
costs, is $10,000 or less, the filing fee for a writ or notice
of appeal to the appellate division of the superior court is
increased from $180 to $205; and distributes as specified,
including $30 or $25, respectively, to the ICNA.
12) Increases the uniform filing fee for estates or trusts and
other cases brought under the Probate Code from $320 and $180
to $355 or $205, respectively; and is distributed as
specified, including $35 or $25, respectively, to the ICNA.
13) Increases fees for petitions, applications, or oppositions
concerning the internal affairs of a trust not subject to a
filing fee; petitions, applications, or objections filed
subsequent to specified probate proceedings; and the first or
subsequent petitions for special letter of administration, as
specified, from $40 to $205, $165 of which is distributed to
ICNA.
14) Establishes a new $20 fee for filing a creditor's claim,
except specified claims by public entities, against an estate
or trust, which is distributed to ICNA.
15) Establishes a new $25 fee for requesting special notice
regarding a decedent's trust or estate, or regarding a
conservatorship or guardianship, which is distributed to ICNA.
Exempts, among others, conservatees and their spouses, and
wards from this new fee.
16) Increases the fee for subsequent petitions in probate
proceedings, including estate, guardianship and
conservatorship proceedings, from $180 to $355, $175 of which
is distributed to ICNA.
17) In order to ensure and maintain adequate funding for court
SB 1407
Page 5
facilities, imposes an assessment of $30 on every felony or
misdemeanor criminal conviction and $35 for every criminal
infraction, including traffic offenses, but not including
parking offenses, and the amount collected is to be deposited
in the ICNA.
18) Increases the fee applied to corrections of violations of
license, registration or mechanical requirements of the
Vehicle Code from $10 to $25, with $15 distributed to ICNA.
19) Increases, for every parking offense where a parking
penalty, fine, or forfeiture is imposed, the state court
construction penalty from $1.50 to $4.50, and requires that a
specified calculated amount is to be deposited in the ICNA.
20) Increases the fee for a person ordered to traffic violator
school for a moving violation from the total bail plus $24 to
the total bail plus $49, and 62.5 percent of the amount
collected is to be deposited in the ICNA.
21) Increases the reduced filing fee for an action for
monetary damages that falls within the monetary jurisdiction
of the small claims court, but the party is statutorily
prohibited from filing in small claims court, from $165 to
$190.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Established the SCFCF, funded by revenues from civil and
criminal fees, fines, penalties, and surcharges, the proceeds
of which are only used to acquire, rehabilitate, construct, or
finance court facilities; or to rehabilitate one or more
existing court facilities in conjunction with the
construction, acquisition, or financing of one or more new
court facilities. (Government Code (GC) Section 70371 et
seq.)
2)Provides that the Judicial Council, as the policymaking body
for the judicial branch, shall have certain responsibilities
and authorities with regard to court facilities, including
conducting audits of the collection of fees by the local
courts, and establishing and consulting with local project
advisory groups on the construction of new trial court
facilities. (GC Section 70391.)
SB 1407
Page 6
3)Provides, among other things, that the JC shall annually
recommend to the Governor and the Legislature the amount
proposed for projects paid for with money in the SCFCF; money
in the SCFCF shall only be used to acquire, rehabilitate,
construct, or finance court facilities; or to rehabilitate one
or more existing court facilities in conjunction with the
construction, acquisition, or financing of one or more new
court facilities; 25 percent of all money collected for the
SCFCF from any county shall be designated for implementation
of trial court projects in that county and based on the
locally approved trial court facilities master plan for that
county. (GC Section 70374.)
4)Provides that the uniform fee for filing the first paper,
including the first paper on behalf of any plaintiff,
defendant, intervenor, respondent, or adverse party, in a
civil action or proceeding, a Probate Code proceeding, or a
Family Code proceeding is $320, and is to be distributed as
specified, including $35 to the SCFCF. (GC Sections 70611,
70612, 70670, and 68085.3.)
5)Provides, among other things, that the uniform fee for filing
the first paper in a limited civil case on behalf of the
plaintiff or any other party is $300, and in the case where
the amount demanded, excluding attorney's fees and costs, is
$10,000 or less, the uniform fee for filing the first paper is
$180; and is to be distributed as specified, including $25 or
$20 to the SCFCF. (GC Sections 70613, 70614, and 68085.4.)
6)Provides that the filing fee for a notice of appeal to the
appellate division of the superior court in a limited civil
case is $300; the fee for filing a writ petition within the
original jurisdiction of the appellate division of the
superior court is $300; if the amount demanded in the limited
civil case, excluding attorney's fees and costs, is $10,000 or
less, the filing fee for a writ or notice of appeal to the
appellate division of the superior court is $180; and is to be
distributed as specified, including $25 or $20 to the SCFCF.
(GC Sections 70621 and 68085.4.)
7)Provides that the uniform filing fee for various estates or
trusts actions under the Probate Code is a specified amount
depending upon the value of the estate or trust; the uniform
filing fee for other Probate Code cases, including those
relating to conservators ($320) and guardians ($180), is $320
SB 1407
Page 7
or $180; and is to be distributed as specified, including $35
or $20 to the SCFCF. (GC Sections 70650-70658, 68085.3 and
68085.4; Probate Code Section 7660.)
8)Finds the graduated uniform civil filing fee, under GC Section
70650, for petitions or accounts filed in connection with the
administration of an estate or trust to be an unconstitutional
estate or inheritance tax. (Burkey v. State of California
(2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 465.)
9)Provides that the fee for petitions, applications, or
oppositions concerning the internal affairs of a trust not
subject to a filing fee; petitions, applications, or
objections filed subsequent to specified probate proceedings;
and the first or subsequent petitions for special letter of
administration, as specified, is $40. (GC Code Section
70657.5.)
10) Provides that the fee for subsequent petitions in probate
proceedings, including estate, guardianship and
conservatorship proceedings, is $180. (GC Code Section
70658.)
11) Provides that there shall be levied a state court
construction penalty in the amount of $5 for every $10 for
every fine, penalty, or forfeiture imposed and collected by
the courts for all criminal offenses. Provides that, for
every parking offense where a parking penalty, fine, or
forfeiture is imposed, an added state court construction
penalty of $1.50 shall be included in the total penalty, fine,
or forfeiture. (GC Section 70372.)
12) Provides that, to ensure and maintain adequate funding for
court security, a fee of $20 shall be imposed on every
conviction for a criminal offense, including a traffic
offense, except parking offenses. (Penal Code Section
1465.8.)
13) Provides that a fee of $10 is applied to corrections of
violations for license, registration or mechanical
requirements of the Vehicle Code, distributed as specified.
(Vehicle Code Section 40611.)
14) Provides that a fee amounting to the total bail plus $24
shall be collected by the court clerk when a person is ordered
SB 1407
Page 8
to traffic violator school for a moving violation. (Vehicle
Code Section 42007.1.)
15) Provides that, in an action for monetary damages that
falls within the monetary jurisdiction of the small claims
court, but the party is statutorily prohibited from filing in
small claims court, the standard filing fee shall be reduced
by $15 to $165. (Business and Professions Code Section
6322.1.)
16) Requires the JC to formulate and adopt uniform forms and
rules of court for litigants proceeding in forma pauperis,
providing, among other things, standard procedures for
considering and determining applications for permission to
proceed in forma pauperis, and that permission to proceed in
forma pauperis be granted to eligible litigants. Litigants
automatically qualify for a fee waiver if they are receiving
support from specified means-tested programs (including
SSI/SSP, CalWORKs, and food stamps), or their monthly income
is 125 percent or less of the federal poverty guideline.
Litigants may, in the court's discretion, qualify if the
filing fee would come from money that is necessary to provide
for the common necessities of life for the litigant or the
litigant's family. (GC Section 68511.3.)
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS : This bill, sponsored by the Judicial Council, allows
the issuance of up to $5 billion in lease-revenue bonds to
finance the construction of critical needs courthouse
construction projects and supports the debt service for the
bonds by raising specified criminal and civil fees and fines.
Background on Court Facilities : The Trial Court Facilities Act
of 2002 (TCFA) (SB 1732, Escutia, Chap. 1082, Stats. 2002)
established a process for the transfer of responsibility for
court facilities from the counties to the state, and for
calculating a court facilities payment (CFP) to be paid to the
state for those facilities that transfer. AB 1491 (Jones, Chap.
9, Stats. 2008) revived and extended the deadline for facilities
transfers from June 30, 2007 to December 31, 2008. Across the
state's 58 counties, there are approximately 450 court
facilities to be transferred under the TCFA. As of June 18,
2008, 125 facilities have transferred to the state, with about
325 remaining to be transferred.
SB 1407
Page 9
The TCFA also established the State Court Facilities
Construction Fund (SCFCF) into which the revenues from specified
fees, fines, penalties, and surcharges are deposited for
purposes of acquiring, rehabilitating, constructing, or
financing court facilities. The TCFA requires the JC to
annually recommend to the Governor and the Legislature the
amount proposed to be spent for projects paid for with money in
the SCFCF.
In 2004, the JC approved the Trial Court Five-Year Capital
Outlay Plan (Capital Outlay Plan), which uses a systematic
methodology to rank necessary court facility improvements
statewide. The methodology prioritizes facilities projects into
five groups: immediate, critical, high, medium, and low. The
Capital Outlay Plan presents annual estimated funding
requirements to fund all proposed projects over a 10-year
implementation period, with all projects being completed at the
end of the ten years. In April 2007, the JC adopted an updated
Capital Outlay Plan that includes 175 new construction, major
renovation, and expansion projects estimated to cost $9.8
billion in 2007 dollars.
Between 2003 and 2006, several pieces of legislation regarding
court facilities bond measures were introduced. (SB 655
(Escutia, 2003), SB 395 (Escutia, 2005), SB 1163 (Ackerman,
2006), and AB 1340 (Jones, 2007).) None of these bond measures
made it through the Legislature.
According to the sponsor:
Many buildings which house California's courts are in a
critical state of disrepair and antiquated design.
Inadequate security has created dangerous conditions
that place children, jurors, witnesses, litigants,
visitors and court employees at risk. Ninety percent of
court facilities need improvement to provide for:
Safe and sufficient juror assembly space,
courtrooms, and deliberation rooms
Access for the disabled (Americans with
Disabilities Act)
Protection of all parties in family law
disputes
Separation of victims, defendants,
SB 1407
Page 10
witnesses, and families in criminal cases
Protection of children involved in custody,
dependency, criminal, and civil cases
Separate and secure hallways to protect both
defendant's right to a fair trial and the safety of
the public, witnesses, judges and staff
Without the necessary improvements in physical
infrastructure the courts are in danger of losing their
ability to safely and effectively carry out justice.
Supporters of this bill, including many superior courts, a
few county boards of supervisors, Consumer Attorneys of
California, and California Defense Counsel, echo the
author's concerns about the dangerous state of disrepair of
many of California's courthouses, which affects access to
justice. These problems, supporters assert, will only
increase as our state's population increases. The
California State Association of Counties supports the bill
in concept because of the critical need for court
facilities.
Revenue bonds will help finance construction of up to 40
courthouses . This bill authorizes the issuance of up to $5
billion in lease revenue-bonds to finance the construction
of approximately 40 of the most immediate critical need
projects in the Judicial Council's plan. The projects will
be phased in over 4 years. The first year projects have
been approved by the JC and are included in the Governor's
budget for FY 2008-2009 and include courthouses in Butte,
Los Angeles, Tehama and Yolo Counties. The second year
projects include courthouses in Imperial, Lake, Monterey,
Riverside, Sacramento, Shasta, Sonoma and Sutter Counties.
The projects for years three and four have not been selected
or recommended by Judicial Council and will be selected from
a list of 56 projects which have been identified as either
immediate or critical need.
The sponsor states that it "will request approval for only those
projects for which available revenues are projected to fund all
project costs, from site acquisition, through design and
construction." The number of projects that will ultimately be
done will depend on whether the actual revenues meet the
projected revenues from the fines and fees as well as other
factors, such as financing terms, market conditions, and
SB 1407
Page 11
construction costs.
The capital projects financed by the bonds in this bill will be
initiated over a four-year period. The pre-construction phases
of capital outlay projects such as site acquisition and design
will be funded directly from annual revenues secured through the
fee increases in this bill. The construction costs will be
financed using bond proceeds. According to the sponsor:
The construction costs for projects initiated in FY
2008-09 will be paid directly out of collected revenues
in the form of a construction loan from the State Court
Facilities Construction Fund, which would then be repaid
from bond proceeds after construction is completed. . .
. For all other projects, bonds would be issued prior
to the start of construction to pay construction costs
as needed.
The bonds are proposed to be sold in three bond sales over a
three-year period commencing in FY 2013-2014. When the bond
sales are commenced, these fees will have been in place and so
the estimate of how much revenue they will bring in will be more
accurate and thus the number of projects in addition to the
original 12 that can be financed by the bonds can be determined
at that time.
The JC estimates that the construction costs for necessary court
facilities improvements is approximately $10 billion. Since the
bond funds estimated to be raised by this bill will, at best,
meet only half the need, this bill requires the JC to try and
stretch those dollars by leveraging any other public or private
funds that might be available. In making recommendations to the
Governor and the Legislature on what projects to fund, the JC
must consider any economic opportunity that exists for a
project, including free or reduced costs or land for new
construction, or financial contributions from local government
or private parties. In addition, the JC must also consider the
effect on available resources of using public-private
partnerships in these construction projects.
Revenue bonds to be funded by increased fines and fees . The
debt service on the bonds authorized by this bill will be
supported by increases on specified criminal fines and civil
filing fees.
SB 1407
Page 12
Increases to the Uniform Civil Filing Fee : The Uniform Civil
Fees and Standard Fee Schedule Act of 2005 (UCF) was approved as
part of the 2005-2006 Budget Act and took effect January 1,
2006. (AB 145 (Committee on Budget), Chap. 75, Stats. 2005.)
The UCF established statewide, uniform first paper and first
response paper fees at three graduated levels: (1) the filing
fee for limited civil cases where the demand is less than or
equal to $10,000 is $180; (2) the filing fee for limited civil
cases where the demand is greater than $10,000, but less than or
equal to $25,000 is $300; and (3) the filing fee for unlimited
civil cases is $320.
The UCF also (1) consolidated the court security fee, $25 court
reporter fee, amended and cross-complaint fee, and AB 3000 (10
percent) surcharge as they relate to first paper filing and
response paper fees, and provided that the revenue is included
in the uniform civil fee; (2) included distributions of $20,
$25, and $35 for court facilities in the consolidated filing
fees; (3) established a new Equal Access Fund distribution of
$4.80 per filing fee; and (4) consolidated fees for children's
waiting rooms, dispute resolution, judges' retirement, and law
libraries into the first paper fee. The UCF also increased fees
in probate and small claims court filings. The UCF placed a
moratorium on fee changes, except as specified, through December
31, 2007.
This bill increases UCF fees between $25 for $180 first paper
filing fees, $30 for $300 fees, and $35 for $320 fees, with the
increases to be deposited in the ICNA.
In addition, as proposed to be amended, this bill increases or
establishes several additional probate fees. These fees include
increasing, from $40 to $205, fees for petitions, applications,
or oppositions concerning the internal affairs of a trust not
subject to a filing fee; petitions, applications, or objections
filed subsequent to specified probate proceedings; and the first
or subsequent petitions for special letter of administration, as
specified, and increasing, from $180 to $355, the fee for
subsequent petitions in probate proceedings, including estate,
guardianship and conservatorship proceedings. The bill also
establishes a new $20 fee for filing a creditor's claim, except
specified claims by public entities, against an estate or trust
and a new $25 fee for requesting special notice regarding a
decedent's trust or estate, or regarding a conservatorship or
guardianship. All of these new or increased fees are to be
SB 1407
Page 13
deposited in the ICNA.
There is a delicate balance to be maintained between the cost to
individuals of accessing the courts and the need to provide
physically safe, secure, and accessible court facilities. The
JC argues that the fee increases in this bill would allow the
courts to maintain that delicate balance in the face of urgent
physical, safety- and security-related court facilities needs.
Although this bill increases fees, it does not increase the fee
waiver income limit . In appropriate cases, an individual may be
granted a waiver from required civil fees. Today, the income
for a fee waiver is 125 percent of the federal poverty
guidelines, which is $13,000 in annual income for one person,
$22,000 for a family of three. That standard is widely
acknowledged to be a very demanding standard that does not
account for the relatively higher cost of living in California.
Other standards for poverty in California are higher, such as
the transcript reimbursement fund for low-income civil litigants
(HUD Section 8), the Healthy Families program for poor children
(250 percent of federal poverty guidelines), and the fee waiver
provision for mandatory consumer arbitration (300 percent of
federal poverty guidelines). Moreover, federal law allows legal
services programs to represent poor people up to 200 percent of
poverty.
While this bill increases fees, it does not increase fee waivers
for low-income individuals, thus likely making their access to
justice significantly less attainable. Given that filing fees
are now be increased by up to $35 and that legal services
program are permitted to assist clients with income up to 200
percent of the federal poverty guidelines, this Committee may
wish to consider raising the fee waiver limit from 125 percent
of the federal poverty guidelines to 200 percent of poverty to
help ensure access to the courts for all Californians. This
increase is consistent with legal services income restrictions.
Moreover, this proposed amendment will help prevent Californians
from having to choosing between access to justice and necessary
food, shelter or gas.
Concerns raised over lack of fees to cover important court
programs . This bill raises civil fees a substantial amount,
with all the increased fees going to support the court's
infrastructure needs. Advocates have expressed concern that
while the infrastructure needs are important, so are many
SB 1407
Page 14
programmatic services associated with the courts and none of the
rather substantial fee increase in this bill is going to support
those critical needs. Included in these critical services is
court oversight of conservators, necessary to protect frail and
vulnerable adults from abuse and neglect, and civil interpreters
to ensure litigants who cannot effectively communicate in
English can fully participate in cases, assist their counsel, if
any, and understand and comply with court orders. The Governor
has failed thus far to provide adequate funding for both these
programs. Additionally, advocates are disappointed that fees
increases in this bill do not help support the Equal Access Fund
(EAF), which provides funding for legal services programs.
While the EAF receives a small amount of funding from filing
fees, those funds do not come close to meeting the needs of
ensuring low-income Californians access to justice. The
respected California Commission on Access to Justice estimates
the unfunded justice gap between the legal needs of poor
Californians and the resources available to assist them is
approximately $400 million annually. The Commission has
recommended that support for the EAF be doubled, a proposal that
would put the EAF at only approximately $32 million. This bill,
even with its substantial fee increase, does not in any way help
alleviate that need.
Collectors oppose fee increase : The California Association of
Collectors opposes the civil fee increase, but the group is
particularly opposed to the $25 fee increase for an action for
monetary damages that falls within the monetary jurisdiction of
the small claims court, but the party is statutorily prohibited
from filing in small claims court. The collectors believe that
such a fee increase will simply reduce the number of these cases
filed, particularly the lower value cases, thereby reducing the
funds available for the court construction revenue bonds. The
collectors suggest that there are alternative ways to raise fees
that might not risk a reduction of revenue, including increasing
the filing fee for the mandatory settlement conference
statement.
The bill also increases criminal, parking, and traffic school
fines and penalties . This bill also increases certain criminal,
parking, and traffic school fines and penalties, the additional
revenues from which would fund the ICNA and proposed
lease-revenue bonds. In fact the majority of the revenue for
the bonds' debt service will come from the other fines and
penalties.
SB 1407
Page 15
Increase in Fix-It Tickets : Under existing law, a fee of $10 is
applied to corrections of violations for license, registration
or mechanical requirements of the Vehicle Code. These "fix-it"
tickets apply, for example, if a driver is unable to produce his
or her driver's license or registration when pulled over or has
a broken tail light. Funds collected from this fee are
distributed to local general funds, as well as the State Penalty
Fund. This bill, as proposed to be amended, increases that fee
by $15, making the total fee $25. The additional $15 will go to
the ICNA.
Increase in the State Court Construction Parking Penalty : Under
existing law, a State Court Construction Penalty of $1.50 is
imposed for each cited parking offense. The money is deposited
with the county treasurer who then transfers it to the State
Controller to be deposited in the State Court Facilities
Construction Fund. Counties currently have the ability to
impose an additional $2.50 fee on parking citations. This bill
increases the fee by $3 so that the total state fee will be
$4.50. The additional money will be deposited in the ICNA.
Increased Traffic Violator School Fee : Under specified
circumstances, people who receive a traffic citation may elect
to attend traffic violator school. Vehicle Code Section 42007.2
provides that a person attending traffic violator school must
pay a fee equal to their total bail including penalty
assessments and the Traffic Violator School fee in the amount of
$24. The Traffic Violator School fee is paid to the clerk of
the superior court and then deposited into the county general
fund. This bill, as proposed to be amended, increases that
amount by $25 making the total fee $49. The additional $25 will
go to the ICNA.
Traffic schools had opposed the original $40 fee increase . The
bill originally proposed to raise the fee by $40, as opposed to
just $25 and the traffic schools opposed that higher fee
increase because they believed it would discourage many people
from attending traffic school and, instead, cause them to clog
court calendars by fighting their tickets. This, in turn, would
require law enforcement to attend the hearing, often on
overtime, thereby increasing costs to law enforcement. Finally,
the original $40 proposal would reduce attendance at traffic
schools, thereby hurting small businesses. Some of the traffic
schools had suggested, in the alternative, not eliminating the
SB 1407
Page 16
fee increase, but reducing it substantially. It is not known if
the schools still oppose this more modest $25 increase.
$30 and $35 Increase on Criminal Conviction Fee : As proposed to
be amended, this bill imposes an assessment of $30 on every
felony or misdemeanor criminal conviction and $35 for every
criminal infraction, including traffic offenses, but not
including parking offenses, and the amount collected is to be
deposited in the ICNA. A separate fee is imposed for each
violation for which a defendant is convicted. When bail is
deposited for an offense, the amount deposited must include the
assessment. This bill, as originally drafted, would have raised
the assessment by $40 for all criminal convictions.
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, the California Public
Defenders Association (CPDA) and the Teamsters opposed the
original fee increase . They argued, that although a person has
been convicted of a criminal offense, the existing penalty
assessments already more than doubles any statutorily required
fine. In addition, they argued that the use-fee nexus is very
loose if criminal defendants are helping to support non-criminal
courthouses in another county. Finally, CPDA stated:
Increasing the fees for criminal convictions will not
result in increased funding. Under the present fee
structure Public Defender clients struggle to obtain
and maintain employment, and many support families,
including young children. The additional fees imposed
can make or break the ability of a person to pay their
rent, and buy groceries, paving the way to
homelessness. . . .
Increasing fees paid by defendants in criminal cases
will have the unintended but predictable consequence of
less overall fines being paid, current Trial Court
Funding program funding being depleted, and less
compliance with terms of probation as ordered by the
court. Indigent clients facing a barrage of ever
increasing fees will simply choose to spend time in
jail in lieu of the fines; and the counties and the
state will suffer, as taxpayers front the costs of jail
space and courts recover less fees as a result of
frustrated clients who are perpetually teetering on the
brink of homelessness and poverty.
SB 1407
Page 17
It is not known if these groups are still opposed to the more
modest criminal conviction fee increase in the bill as proposed
to be amended.
State Court Construction Penalty : Existing law authorizes a
State Court Construction Penalty of up to $5 for $10 of the base
fine on a criminal offense, not including parking offenses. The
amount levied by each county is up to $5 minus the amount levied
by the county for courthouse construction. Thirteen counties
currently assess the total $5, while the other 45 counties
collect a portion of this amount. This bill requires each
county to collect $5 for every $10 of the base fine.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : While opposition to specific fines or
fees has been discussed under the particular fine or fee, above,
the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association objects to issuing any
additional bonds - whether general obligation or lease-revenue -
when the state is already facing almost $50 billion in bond
debt and a significant budget deficit. The Association believes
that courthouse construction should be budgeted from the general
fund.
Pending Related Legislation : AB 171 (Beall), responding to the
recent appellate court decision in Burkey v. State of California
(2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 465, eliminates the graduated uniform
civil filing fee for petitions or accounts filed in connection
with the administration of an estate or trust and instead
establishes a single uniform $320 filing fee. That bill is
currently before the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Public Safety Committee : This bill is double referred to the
Assembly Public Safety Committee, and is scheduled to be heard
by that Committee on Thursday. Based on this timeframe, any
amendments agreed to in this Committee will be taken in the
Public Safety Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Judicial Council (sponsor)
California Defense Counsel
California Judges Association
California State Association of Counties (in concept)
California Women's Lawyers
SB 1407
Page 18
City of Long Beach
Consumer Attorneys of California
Imperial County Department of Social Services
Regional Council of Rural Counties (in concept)
San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
Solano County Board of Supervisors
State Bar of California
The Superior Courts of the following counties: Alameda, Butte,
El Dorado, Fresno, Imperial, Kern, Lake, Los Angeles, Mendocino,
Orange, Sacramento, San Benito, San Bernardino, San Diego, San
Joaquin, Santa Clara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Sutter, Tehama,
Ventura and Yolo
Yolo County Board of Supervisors
One individual
Opposition
Bruce Elkins Traffic School
California Association of Collectors
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Movie & Film Traffic School
California Public Defenders Association
California Teamsters
California Traffic Classes, Inc.
California Traffic Schools Association (unless amended)
Cheap Traffic School
Comedy Traffic School
GoodByeTicket.com (unless amended)
Great Comedians Traffic School
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Improv TVS, Inc.
Interactive Educational Concepts, Inc.
National Traffic Safety Courses Inc.
Off My Record Traffic School
OneDayTrafficSchool.com
Open 365 Days-A-Year Traffic School
Pizza 4U Great Comedians Traffic School
Saturday & Evenings - Great Teachers 2 Traffic School
Simple Fast Fun Online Traffic School
Study At Home Program (traffic school)
Traffic Classes of America at Home
Four individuals
SB 1407
Page 19
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916)
319-2334