BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE BILL NO.:.........AB 135
Senator Quentin L. Kopp, Chairman AUTHOR:...........RAINEY
VERSION:
(Orig.):
(As Amend.):..05/17/95
FISCAL:..............YES
SUBJECT:
Vehicle registration surcharges: vehicle theft and abandoned vehicle
abatement.
DESCRIPTION:
This bill would extend, for five years each, the sunset (repeal)
dates on provisions authorizing local agencies to impose a $1 vehicle
registration surcharge for abandoned vehicle abatement and a $1
surcharge for vehicle theft enforcement.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law establishes a basic state vehicle registration fee of
$29, which includes a $2 surcharge for additional California Highway
Patrol officers. The fee revenue is deposited in the Motor Vehicle
Account and supports the operations of the Department of Motor
Vehicles, California Highway Patrol and other state motor-vehicle
related activities.
Existing law authorizes local agencies to impose separate motor
vehicle registration fee surcharges in their respective jurisdictions
for a variety of special programs, including $1 for freeway safety
(callbox) programs, $1 for abandoned vehicle abatement, up to $4 for
air quality programs and $1 for deterring and prosecuting vehicle
theft.
SB 2139 (Davis, 1990) authorized counties to impose the $1 fee for
vehicle theft activities for a 5-year period, expiring January 1,
1996, and provided that at least 50 percent of the personnel and
activities funded be dedicated exclusively to vehicle theft. Any
funds collected but not expended for these purposes must be returned
to the state and be deposited in the Motor Vehicle Account. SB 2139
also required that the fee increase not be used to offset a reduction
in any other funds.
Legislation authorizing the $1 fee for local abandoned vehicle
abatement activities limits the collection of the fee to a period of
five years from the date that actual collection of the fee commenced.
This bill would extend for five years the expiration dates on the
authority to collect the $1 vehicle theft and abandoned vehicle
abatement registration fee surcharges. The vehicle theft provisions
would expire on January 1, 2001 while local vehicle abatement
surcharges would expire on a number of future dates, depending on
each jurisdiction's program starting date.
COMMENTS:
1.(a) Proponents of the bill contend that the various county vehicle
theft task forces funded by the $1 registration fees have been
successful in suppressing vehicle theft activities, arresting
AB 135 (RAINEY) Page 3
________________________________________________________________
and prosecuting auto thieves and "chop shop" operators and recovering
stolen vehicles and related property. A review of annual reports by
several of the task forces indicates hundreds of arrests and the
recovery of stolen vehicles with a combined value of several millions
of dollars.
Sponsors indicate that the pursuit of auto theft cases was a
relatively low priority until the special funding became available.
Task force activities typically involve the coordinated efforts of
investigators, analysts, officers and district attorneys and
personnel of cities and counties working with their state and federal
counterparts.
(b) Proponents cite similar success stories and results relative to
vehicle abatement efforts, contending that the programs clear up
public nuisance situations, clean up health hazards and eliminate
potentially dangerous situations for children and others.
2. Earlier Committee action. The Committee approved similar
legislation on March 21, 1995 (SB 36, Killea) relative to extending
the $1 fee authority for vehicle theft programs. There are
differences in the two bills, however:
* SB 36 would extend the program until January 1, 2000 -- or four
years -- rather than AB 135's five years.
* The Committee deleted an inconsistency/loophole in SB 36 that
required only a bare majority of the funds collected to be used for
the stated purposes. AB 135 still contains the provision, however.
* SB 36 prohibits use of vehicle theft funds for purposes not
explicitly authorized in the statutory language. AB 135 does not
contain the same language but does declare the funds are to be
expended exclusively for the program.
Sponsors have indicated their willingness to accept amendments
addressing some of the differences.
3. Vehicle abatement surpluses. It is unclear whether each and
every jurisdiction engaged in vehicle abatement requires continued
support at the current levels. Information compiled by the
California Highway Patrol (see Attachment) reveals a program surplus
or unexpended abatement fund balance in 21 of 27 counties collecting
fees for vehicle abatement. In two noteworthy cases, the unexpended
balances in San Diego and San Mateo counties are equivalent to 47
percent and 67 percent of the counties' annual program revenues,
respectively.
AB 135 (RAINEY) Page 4
________________________________________________________________
If programs are generating surpluses, should they be suspended, a
year at a time, until already-collected revenues are expended?
Alternatively, should annual surpluses be required to be deposited in
the Motor Vehicle Account, as is now required with respect to the
vehicle theft program surcharges?
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 57-14
Appr: 13-1
Trans: 11-1
AB 135 (RAINEY) Page 5
________________________________________________________________
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday, July 5, 1995.)
SUPPORT: California Attorney General's Office
California District Attorneys Association
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
Sacramento County Sheriff's Department
Riverside County Sheriff's Department
San Mateo County Sheriff's Department
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department
California State Sheriffs' Association
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, Inc.
Alameda County Chiefs of Police and Sheriff's Assn.
Daly City Police Department
Belmont Police Department
Galt Police Department
Millbrae Police Department
Costa Mesa Police Department
San Bruno Police Department
Shasta Co. Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority
Yuba County Service Authority
Marin County Joint Powers Authority
City of Los Angeles
City of Chula Vista
City of San Ramon
City of Walnut Creek
City of Concord
City of Lafayette
City of El Cajon
City of National City
City of San Jose
City of Imperial Beach
City of Vista
City of Poway
City of Jackson
City of Fremont
City of Plymouth
City of Hayward
City of La Quinta
City of Norco
City of Indio Fire Department
Alameda County
Contra Costa County
San Diego County
Lake County
Amador County
City/County Assn. of Governments of San Mateo County
San Diego County Regional Auto Theft Task Force
AB 135 (RAINEY) Page 6
________________________________________________________________
CA Independent Public Employees Legislative Council
California Trucking Association
California State Association of Counties
Western States Auto Theft Investigators Association,
Southern Chapter
Orange County Transportation Authority
Independent Cities Association
Farmers Insurance Group of Companies
OPPOSED:
07/05/95