CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 3277

Author:(Jones-Sawyer)

As Amended Ver:June 29, 2020

Majority vote

SUMMARY:

Makes various changes to the law requiring processing agencies to provide indigent individuals the opportunity to set up a payment plan to pay parking tickets before a processing agency can use the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to collect unpaid parking debt.

Major Provisions

1. Makes the following changes to the law requiring processing agencies to provide indigent individuals the opportunity to set up a payment plan to pay parking tickets before a processing agency can use DMV to collect unpaid parking debt:
   1. Increases the $300 maximum debt limit to $500 for the total debt amount required for a parking agency to offer a payment plan to an indigent person.
   2. Lengthens the payment plan to be available for a maximum of 24 months from 18 months.
   3. Lengthens the period of time an individual can request a payment plan from 60 calendar days from the issuance of a parking violation to 120 days from the issuance of a parking violation.
2. Clarifies that the required website notification of the availability of a payment plan must be in a place that is readily accessible on the parking citation payment section of the agency's website.

The Senate Amendments:

1. Reduce the maximum debt limit from $750 to $500 for when a parking agency is required to offer a payment plan to an indigent person.
2. Shortens the payment plan payback option from 30 months to 24 months.

COMMENTS:

The Legislature passed AB 503 (Lackey), Chapter 741, Statutes of 2017, in order to stop the spiral of debt for an indigent person. However, processing agencies have been pushing back against implementing AB 503. Assembly Member Lackey had introduced two follow up bills as a result of processing agencies trying to get around implementing the law. AB 2544 (Lackey), Chapter 494, Statutes of 2018, clarified that parking agencies had to offer payment plans for tickets issued prior to July 1, 2018 because processing agencies refused to consider older tickets when implementing the law. AB 833 (Lackey), Chapter 495, Statutes of 2019, clarified that the $300 maximum cap for which a parking agency had to offer a payment plan only applied to the base fines, not to late penalties, because the City of Sacramento was refusing to offer payment plans to individuals who had more than two tickets with a late fee.

This bill is attempting to address the fact that the $300 cap for when a city has to offer an indigent individual a payment plan has different effect depending on the city are you in. In Sacramento, for example, a parking ticket is $52 for parking in a residential zone. If a resident's parking pass expires without them realizing it and they rarely drive because they live in the downtown core, it's easily possible to go days of receiving parking tickets without realizing it. In Sacramento, a person would have to have more than five parking tickets to no longer be able to utilize the payment plan to pay their tickets. In San Francisco, parking at an expired meter or a residential zone is an $87 ticket. While a Sacramento resident could get a payment plan for up to five tickets, someone in San Francisco can only get a payment plan after three tickets.

To remedy this situation, this bill proposes raising the $300 cap to $500 so indigent individuals in cities with expensive parking tickets can still be eligible for the payment plan. Further, indigent individuals will also be able to have their late fees waived up to $500 worth of parking tickets. A late fee added to a $110 ticket in San Francisco could result in a single ticket costing $169. Late fees are a useful tool for helping ensure tickets are paid on time, but may make an already high fine excessive for low income individuals making less than $1500 a month before taxes.

Several organizations, including ACLU and Western Center on Law and Poverty, removed their support for this bill after amendments were taken in the Senate to lower the threshold for when cities have to offer a payment plan from $750 to $500. These organizations are now neutral on the bill.

According to the Author:

According to the author, "AB 3277 would update existing law to allow more individuals to access to payment plans. Granting additional flexibility reduces the financial impact of parking debt for more low-income individuals and gives individuals in financial distress greater lengths of time to enroll and pay off their debts. As cities and counties seek to find ways to help low-income individuals, including vehicle owners experiencing homelessness, AB 3277 makes relief more accessible to a population that is disproportionately struggling with housing and economic instability."

Arguments in Support:

According to Safe Parking LA, "Alternative ticketing plans offer low-income Californians flexible options for paying off parking fines and having late penalties removed once payments are covered. AB 3277 continues to enhance these repayment options by extending eligibility to motorists with higher levels of parking debt, extending the enrollment window, and lengthening the payback period to give people more time to make their payments."

Arguments in Opposition:

None on file

FISCAL COMMENTS:

According to Senate Appropriation Committee, increasing the cap on the amount of unpaid parking penalties and fees that may be included in a repayment plan, and extending the timeframe for filing a request to participate in a plan are likely to result in an increase in the number of participants, resulting in the following impacts:

1. Unknown, likely minor reduction in state parking citation revenue related to the waiver of all late fees and penalty assessments on citations issued by state parking entities for indigent persons that enter into payment plans pursuant to the expanded criteria in this bill. Additional potential revenue reductions may also occur as a result of removing a collection tool through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Revenue reductions would be mitigated partially by some revenue gains for payments on debt that may not have otherwise been paid. (State University Parking Revenue Fund, other funds administered by institutions of higher education)
2. Unknown, likely minor reduction in local parking citation revenue related to the waiver of all late fees and penalty assessments on citations issued by local parking entities for indigent persons that enter into payment plans pursuant to the expanded criteria in this bill. Additional potential revenue reductions may also occur as a result of removing a collection tool through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Revenue reductions would be mitigated partially by some revenue gains for payments on debt that may not have otherwise been paid. (local funds)

VOTES:

ASM TRANSPORTATION: 15-0-0

YES: Frazier, Fong, Aguiar-Curry, Berman, Chu, Cunningham, Daly, Diep, Friedman, Gipson, Grayson, Kiley, Medina, Nazarian, O'Donnell

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 18-0-0

YES: Gonzalez, Bigelow, Bauer-Kahan, Bloom, Bonta, Calderon, Carrillo, Chau, Megan Dahle, Diep, Eggman, Fong, Gabriel, Eduardo Garcia, Petrie-Norris, McCarty, Robert Rivas, Voepel

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0-3

YES: Aguiar-Curry, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Boerner Horvath, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Chau, Chen, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Megan Dahle, Daly, Diep, Eggman, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Friedman, Gabriel, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez, Gray, Grayson, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kamlager, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Obernolte, Patterson, Petrie‑Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Smith, Mark Stone, Ting, Voepel, Waldron, Weber, Wicks, Wood, Rendon

ABS, ABST OR NV: Low, Muratsuchi, Quirk

SENATE FLOOR: 40-0-0

YES: Allen, Archuleta, Atkins, Bates, Beall, Borgeas, Bradford, Caballero, Chang, Dahle, Dodd, Durazo, Galgiani, Glazer, Lena Gonzalez, Grove, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Hurtado, Jackson, Jones, Leyva, McGuire, Melendez, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nielsen, Pan, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Stern, Umberg, Wieckowski, Wiener, Wilk

UPDATED:

VERSION: June 29, 2020

CONSULTANT: David Sforza / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093 FN: 0003299

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 3277

Author: Jones-Sawyer (D)

Amended: 6/29/20 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: 14-0, 8/4/20

AYES: Beall, Bates, Allen, Dahle, Dodd, Galgiani, Lena Gonzalez, McGuire, Morrell, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Umberg, Wieckowski

NO VOTE RECORDED: Melendez

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/13/20

AYES: Portantino, Bates, Bradford, Hill, Jones, Leyva, Wieckowski

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 6/8/20 (Consent) - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Parking penalties: collection

SOURCE: Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority

DIGEST:

This bill makes various eligibility and programmatic changes to the payment plan program administered by local agencies relative to parking citations.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides several options to processing agencies collecting unpaid parking penalties for tickets, including filing an itemization of unpaid parking penalties and service fees with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for collection with the registration of a vehicle, so long as the processing agency:
2. Provides a payment plan option for indigent persons, as defined, that allows unpaid parking fines and fees to be paid off in monthly installments of no more than $25 for total amounts due that are $300 or less, in a period within 18 months. No prepayment penalty for paying off the balance prior to the payment period may be accessed.
3. Waives all late fees and penalty assessments, exclusive of any state surcharges, as defined, if an indigent person enrolls in the payment plan. Waived late fees and penalty assessments may be reinstated if the person falls out of compliance with the payment plan.
4. Limits the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to $5 or less for indigent persons and $25 or less for all other persons. The processing fee may be added to the payment plan amount at the discretion of the payee.
5. Allows the application for indigency determination for a period of 60 calendar days from the issuance of a notice of parking violation, or 10 days after the administrative hearing determination, whichever is later.
6. Requires a processing agency to allow a registered owner or lessee who falls out of compliance with a payment plan a one-time extension of 45 calendar days from the date the plan becomes delinquent to resume payments before the processing agency files an itemization of unpaid parking penalties and service fees with DMV.
7. Requires a processing agency to include information regarding its payment plan option above on its public website, and a web page link and telephone number to more information on the program.
8. Defines “indigent” for the purposes of this section to mean anyone who meets the income requirements for or is currently on several public assistance programs, including Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or more commonly known as food stamps), Medi-Cal or IHSS.

This bill:

1. Makes the following changes to the law requiring processing agencies to provide indigent individuals the opportunity to set up a payment plan to pay parking tickets before a processing agency can use DMV to collect unpaid parking debt:
2. Increases the $300 maximum debt limit to $500 for the total debt amount required a parking agency to offer a payment plan to an indigent person.
3. Lengthens the payment plan to be available for a maximum of 24 months from 18 months.
4. Lengthens the period of time an individual can request a payment plan from 60 calendar days from the issuance of a parking violation to 120 days from the issuance of a parking violation.
5. Clarifies that the required website notification of the availability of a payment plan must be in a place that is readily accessible in a prominent location on parking payment section of the agency’s website.

Comments

1. Author’s statement. According to the author, “AB 3277 would update existing law to allow more individuals to access to payment plans. Granting additional flexibility reduces the financial impact of parking debt for more low-income individuals and gives individuals in financial distress greater lengths of time to enroll and pay off their debts. As cities and counties seek to find ways to help low-income individuals, including vehicle owners experiencing homelessness, AB 3277 makes relief more accessible to a population that is disproportionately struggling with housing and economic instability.”
2. Parking citations. The cost of being late or being unable to pay a parking ticket on time can easily spiral out of control for an indigent person. An unpaid parking ticket can accrue multiple cycles of late fees. Local agencies are authorized to file unpaid tickets with the DMV, which can require payment in full for unpaid parking tickets when the vehicle owner renews their vehicle registration. However, if someone were unable to pay their parking tickets, then they are unlikely to be able to pay their vehicle registration, which means additional late fees and additional fines for driving an unregistered vehicle. In 2017, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed AB 503 (Lackey, Chapter 741, Statutes of 2017), to break this cycle of debt and require agencies to provide indigent people a payment plan for unpaid parking tickets that also waives late fees, prior to asking DMV to collect their unpaid parking debt, starting on July 1, 2018. In 2018, AB 2544 (Lackey, Chapter 494, Statutes of 2018) was enacted as follow up measure to clarify when local entities are to start implementing the payment plan options. The author of these bills subsequently introduced AB 833 (Lackey, Chapter 495, Statutes of 2019), which clarified that the $300 maximum cap for which a parking agency had to offer a payment plan only applied to the base fines and not to late penalties.

The provisions specified in this bill aim expand the scope of the parking citation payment program voluntarily administered by local agencies in attempt to qualify a larger number of participants that may benefit from the program. The author rightfully points to the economic downturn associated with the current COVID-19 pandemic as one of the primary reasons to modify program eligibility criteria. As Californians continue to experience layoffs, reduced hours, and challenges finding employment, it’s within reason to provide motorists experiencing hardships with options to satisfy their financial obligations to local agencies while still allowing these municipalities to enforce parking ordinances.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, increasing the cap on the amount of unpaid parking penalties and fees that may be included in a repayment plan, and extending the timeframe for filing a request to participate in a plan are likely to result in an increase in the number of participants, resulting in the following impacts:

• Unknown, likely minor reduction in state parking citation revenue related to the waiver of all late fees and penalty assessments on citations issued by state parking entities for indigent persons that enter into payment plans pursuant to the expanded criteria in this bill. Additional potential revenue reductions may also occur as a result of removing a collection tool through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Revenue reductions would be mitigated partially by some revenue gains for payments on debt that may not have otherwise been paid. (State University Parking Revenue Fund, other funds administered by institutions of higher education)
• Unknown, likely minor reduction in local parking citation revenue related to the waiver of all late fees and penalty assessments on citations issued by local parking entities for indigent persons that enter into payment plans pursuant to the expanded criteria in this bill. Additional potential revenue reductions may also occur as a result of removing a collection tool through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Revenue reductions would be mitigated partially by some revenue gains for payments on debt that may not have otherwise been paid. (local funds)

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/18/20)

Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (source)

AARP

Downtown Women’s Center

National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter

North Valley Caring Services

Safe Parking LA

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/18/20)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 6/8/20

AYES: Aguiar-Curry, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Boerner Horvath, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Chau, Chen, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Megan Dahle, Daly, Diep, Eggman, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Friedman, Gabriel, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez, Gray, Grayson, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kamlager, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Patterson, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Smith, Mark Stone, Ting, Voepel, Waldron, Weber, Wicks, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Low, Muratsuchi, Quirk

Prepared by: Manny Leon / TRANS. / (916) 651-4121

8/19/20 10:57:32

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular Session

AB 3277 (Jones-Sawyer) - Parking penalties: collection

Bill Summary:

AB 3277 would revise the criteria under which an indigent person may enter into a payment plan agreement for unpaid parking tickets. Specifically, the bill would expand eligibility to include unpaid parking penalties of up to $500, rather than up to $300, extend the repayment period from 18 months to 24 months, and increase the timeframe for requesting a repayment plan from 60 days to 120 days.

Fiscal Impact:

Increasing the cap on the amount of unpaid parking penalties and fees that may be included in a repayment plan, and extending the timeframe for filing a request to participate in a plan are likely to result in an increase in the number of participants, resulting in the following impacts:

• Unknown, likely minor reduction in state parking citation revenue related to the waiver of all late fees and penalty assessments on citations issued by state parking entities for indigent persons that enter into payment plans pursuant to the expanded criteria in this bill. Additional potential revenue reductions may also occur as a result of removing a collection tool through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Revenue reductions would be mitigated partially by some revenue gains for payments on debt that may not have otherwise been paid. (State University Parking Revenue Fund, other funds administered by institutions of higher education)
  
• Unknown, likely minor reduction in local parking citation revenue related to the waiver of all late fees and penalty assessments on citations issued by local parking entities for indigent persons that enter into payment plans pursuant to the expanded criteria in this bill. Additional potential revenue reductions may also occur as a result of removing a collection tool through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Revenue reductions would be mitigated partially by some revenue gains for payments on debt that may not have otherwise been paid. (local funds)

Background:

Existing law authorizes an agency that processes notices of parking violations and delinquent parking violations, after completing specified collection efforts, to file an itemized list of unpaid parking penalties and service fees with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for collection when a vehicle owner attempts to register his or her vehicle. Existing law requires DMV, after receiving an itemized list of a person’s unpaid parking penalties and fees, to refuse to renew his or her vehicle registration, or to issue or renew a driver’s license to that person until all outstanding penalties and fees are paid. After collecting payments for unpaid parking penalties and fees, DMV forwards the revenues to the local jurisdictions that filed the itemized list of unpaid tickets, after deducting its administrative costs.

Existing law prohibits a processing agency from referring an itemized list of unpaid parking penalties issued on or after July 1, 2018 to DMV to collect on delinquent amounts unless a payment plan option is provided for indigent persons. An indigent person is generally defined as having net income at or below 125 percent of the federal poverty level, or receiving benefits under specified public assistance programs. The payment plan must allow monthly installments of no more than $25 for total amounts due that are $300 or less, and a maximum repayment period of 18 months. A processing agency must allow a person a period of 60 days from the issuance of a parking ticket, or 10 days after an administrative hearing determination, whichever is later, to file a request to participate in a payment plan. A processing agency’s website must include specified information on the availability of the option to apply for participation in a payment plan.

Proposed Law:

AB 3277 would make the following changes to the program that provides the option for indigent persons to enter into repayment plans for unpaid parking penalties and related service fees:

• Increase the total amounts due that can be paid in monthly installments from $300 or less to $500 or less.
• Extend the timeframe in which penalties and fees must be repaid from 18 months to 24 months.
• Extend the timeframe in which a person must file a request to participate in a payment plan from 60 days to 120 days, as specified.
• Require a processing agency to ensure that the link to information on the payment plan is readily accessible in a prominent location on the parking citation payment section of the agency’s website.

Related Legislation:

AB 503 (Lackey), Chap. 741/2017, prohibited a processing agency, beginning on July 1, 2018, from referring unpaid parking tickets to the DMV for collection, unless the agency provides a payment plan option for indigent persons.

AB 2544 (Lackey), Chap. 494/2018, clarified the applicability of the payment plan option for indigent persons.

AB 833 (Lackey), Chap. 495/2019, clarified that late fees and penalty assessments on parking tickets, except specified state penalty assessments, are excluded from the $300 cap on amounts owed for participation eligibility.

Staff Comments:

This bill is likely to result in an increase in participation in unpaid parking ticket repayment programs, and a corresponding loss of revenue associated with the waiver of late fees and penalties tied to parking debt owed by indigent persons. However, the additional flexibility provided by the bill may also enhance the ability of some individuals to repay debts that would otherwise have gone unsatisfied, thereby partially mitigating revenue losses. The net impacts are not quantifiable, but staff estimates the annual loss of state revenues in a given year would be minor.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

Senator Jim Beall, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular

Bill No: Hearing Date: 8/4/2020

SUBJECT:

DIGEST: This bill makes various eligibility and programmatic changes to the payment plan program administered by local agencies relative to parking citations.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides several options to processing agencies collecting unpaid parking penalties for tickets, including filing an itemization of unpaid parking penalties and service fees with DMV for collection with the registration of a vehicle, so long as the processing agency:
2. Provides a payment plan option for indigent persons, as defined, that allows unpaid parking fines and fees to be paid off in monthly installments of no more than $25 for total amounts due that are $300 or less, in a period within 18 months. No prepayment penalty for paying off the balance prior to the payment period may be accessed.
3. Waives all late fees and penalty assessments, exclusive of any state surcharges, as defined, if an indigent person enrolls in the payment plan. Waived late fees and penalty assessments may be reinstated if the person falls out of compliance with the payment plan.
4. Limits the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to $5 or less for indigent persons and $25 or less for all other persons. The processing fee may be added to the payment plan amount at the discretion of the payee.
5. Allows the application for indigency determination for a period of 60 calendar days from the issuance of a notice of parking violation, or 10 days after the administrative hearing determination, whichever is later.
6. Requires a processing agency to allow a registered owner or lessee who falls out of compliance with a payment plan a one-time extension of 45 calendar days from the date the plan becomes delinquent to resume payments before the processing agency files an itemization of unpaid parking penalties and service fees with DMV.
7. Requires a processing agency to include information regarding its payment plan option above on its public website, and a web page link and telephone number to more information on the program.
8. Defines “indigent” for the purposes of this section to mean anyone who meets the income requirements for or is currently on several public assistance programs, including Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or more commonly known as food stamps), Medi-Cal or IHSS.

This bill:

1. Makes the following changes to the law requiring processing agencies to provide indigent individuals the opportunity to set up a payment plan to pay parking tickets before a processing agency can use DMV to collect unpaid parking debt:
2. Increases the $300 maximum debt limit to $500 for the total debt amount required for a parking agency to offer a payment plan to an indigent person.
3. Lengthens the payment plan to be available for a maximum of 24 months from 18 months.
4. Lengthens the period of time an individual can request a payment plan from 60 calendar days from the issuance of a parking violation to 120 days from the issuance of a parking violation.
5. Clarifies that the required website notification of the availability of a payment plan must be in a place that is readily accessible in a prominent location on parking payment section of the agency’s website.

COMMENTS:

1. Author’s statement. According to the author, “AB 3277 would update existing law to allow more individuals to access to payment plans. Granting additional flexibility reduces the financial impact of parking debt for more low-income individuals and gives individuals in financial distress greater lengths of time to enroll and pay off their debts. As cities and counties seek to find ways to help low-income individuals, including vehicle owners experiencing homelessness, AB 3277 makes relief more accessible to a population that is disproportionately struggling with housing and economic instability.”
2. Parking citations. The cost of being late or being unable to pay a parking ticket on time can easily spiral out of control for an indigent person. An unpaid parking ticket can accrue multiple cycles of late fees. Local agencies are authorized to file unpaid tickets with the DMV, which can require payment in full for unpaid parking tickets when the vehicle owner renews their vehicle registration. However, if someone were unable to pay their parking tickets, then they are unlikely to be able to pay their vehicle registration, which means additional late fees and additional fines for driving an unregistered vehicle. In 2017, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed AB 503 (Lackey, Chapter 741, Statutes of 2017), to break this cycle of debt and require agencies to provide indigent people a payment plan for unpaid parking tickets that also waives late fees, prior to asking DMV to collect their unpaid parking debt, starting on July 1, 2018. In 2018, AB 2544 (Lackey, Chapter 494, Statutes of 2018) was enacted as follow up measure to clarify when local entities are to start implementing the payment plan options. The author of these bills subsequently introduced AB 833 (Lackey, Chapter 495, Statutes of 2019), which clarified that the $300 maximum cap for which a parking agency had to offer a payment plan only applied to the base fines and not to late penalties.

The provisions specified in this bill aim expand the scope of the parking citation payment program voluntarily administered by local agencies in attempt to qualify a larger number of participants that may benefit from the program. The author rightfully points to the economic downturn associated with the current COVID-19 pandemic as one of the primary reasons to modify program eligibility criteria. As Californians continue to experience layoffs, reduced hours, and challenges finding employment, it’s within reason to provide motorists experiencing hardships with options to satisfy their financial obligations to local agencies while still allowing these municipalities to enforce parking ordinances.

Related Legislation:

AB 503 (Lackey, Chapter 741, Statutes of 2017) — required the offering of a payment plan and the waiver of penalties for indigent people with unpaid parking tickets prior to filing an itemization of them at the DMV, starting on July 1, 2018.

AB 2544 (Lackey, Chapter 494, Statutes of 2018) — clarified when local entities are to start implementing the abovementioned payment plan options.

AB 833 (Lackey, Chapter 495, Statutes of 2019) — clarified that the $300 maximum cap for which a parking agency had to offer a payment plan only applied to the base fines and not to late penalties.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

• State costs of an unknown, but likely minor amount.

POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Monday,

July 27, 2020.)

SUPPORT:

LA Homeless Services Authority (Sponsors)

AARP

Downtown Women’s Center

National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter

North Valley Caring Services

Safe Parking LA

OPPOSITION:

None received.

-- END --

Date of Hearing: June 2, 2020

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 3277

Author:(Jones-Sawyer) – As Introduced Ver:February 21, 2020

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill expands the parameters according to which a processing agency—such as a local parking authority—must offer a parking penalty payment plan to an indigent person.

Specifically, this bill makes the following changes to existing law, which requires a processing agency to provide an indigent individual the opportunity to set up a payment plan to pay past-due parking penalties before the processing agency may use the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to collect the individual’s unpaid parking penalties:

1. Increases, from $300 to $750, the amount of parking penalty debt (PPD) for which a processing agency must offer a payment plan to an indigent person, as defined.
2. Lengthens, from 18 months to 30 months, the duration of the PPD payment plan the processing agency must offer an indigent person.
3. Lengthens, from 60 calendar days from the issuance of a parking violation to 120 calendar days from the issuance of a parking violation, the time an individual may request a PPD payment plan from a processing agency.
4. Requires a processing agency to place in a prominent place on its website the notification of the availability of a PPD payment plan the agency is required by existing law to post.

FISCAL EFFECT:

State costs of an unknown, but likely minor amount.

As this committee’s analysis of the bill that established the obligation of a processing agency to offer a PPD payment plan to an indigent individual, both the obligation to offer a PPD payment plan and the restriction on a processing agency’s ability to use DMV for PPD collection could change the amount of parking citation revenue that is collected by local agencies. A portion of that citation revenue is transferred to the state coffers, mainly to support court operations. However, the committee is unaware of a significant decrease in the state’s PPD-related citation revenue resulting PPD payment plans. Therefore, this analysis concludes the effect of this bill on state revenue will be similarly minor.

COMMENTS:

Background and Purpose. Unpaid parking tickets can develop into significant financial hardship, especially for those with few resources. Parking tickets include many add-on fees, making even small infractions difficult to pay. Late payment often results in late fees. Many processing agencies use DMV to collect unpaid parking penalties, as the DMV could add the unpaid parking debt to the cost of vehicle registration. An individual who is unable to pay the vehicle registration would likely face DMV late fees. If the individual continues to drive the vehicle, unregistered, they may face further penalty and even vehicle impoundment.

In response, the Legislature approved AB 503 (Lackey), Chapter 741, Statutes of 2017. AB 503 prevents a processing agency from referring an indigent individual’s PPD to DMV for collection until the agency has offered the individual the option of a payment plan for PPD up to $300, payable in monthly installments of no more than $25 over 18 months. This bill increases the amount of the PPD payment plan to $750, extends the payment plan to 30 months and makes other changes to increase the ability of an indigent person to pay PPD.

Analysis Prepared by: Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: May 4, 2020

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

Jim Frazier, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 3277 (

Author:Jones-Sawyer) – As Introduced Ver:February 21, 2020

SUBJECT: Parking penalties: collection

SUMMARY: Makes various changes to the law requiring processing agencies to provide indigent individuals the opportunity to set up a payment plan to pay parking tickets before a processing agency can use the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to collect unpaid parking debt. Specifically, this bill:

1. Makes the following changes to the law requiring processing agencies to provide indigent individuals the opportunity to set up a payment plan to pay parking tickets before a processing agency can use DMV to collect unpaid parking debt:
2. Increases the $300 maximum debt limit to $750 for the total debt amount required for a parking agency to offer a payment plan to an indigent person.
3. Lengthens the payment plan to be available for a maximum of 30 months from 18 months.
4. Lengthens the period of time an individual can request a payment plan from 60 calendar days from the issuance of a parking violation to 120 days from the issuance of a parking violation.
5. Clarifies that the required website notification of the availability of a payment plan must be in a place that is readily accessible in a prominent location on the agency’s website.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides several options to processing agencies collecting unpaid parking penalties for tickets, including filing an itemization of unpaid parking penalties and service fees with DMV for collection with the registration of a vehicle, so long as the processing agency:
2. Provides a payment plan option for indigent persons, as defined, that allows unpaid parking fines and fees to be paid off in monthly installments of no more than $25 for total amounts due that are $300 or less, in a period within 18 months. No prepayment penalty for paying off the balance prior to the payment period may be accessed.
3. Waives all late fees and penalty assessments, exclusive of any state surcharges, as defined, if an indigent person enrolls in the payment plan. Waived late fees and penalty assessments may be reinstated if the person falls out of compliance with the payment plan.
4. Limits the processing fee to participate in a payment plan to $5 or less for indigent persons and $25 or less for all other persons. The processing fee may be added to the payment plan amount at the discretion of the payee.
5. Allows the application for indigency determination for a period of 60 calendar days from the issuance of a notice of parking violation, or 10 days after the administrative hearing determination, whichever is later.
6. Requires a processing agency to allow a registered owner or lessee who falls out of compliance with a payment plan a one-time extension of 45 calendar days from the date the plan becomes delinquent to resume payments before the processing agency files an itemization of unpaid parking penalties and service fees with DMV.
7. Requires a processing agency to include information regarding its payment plan option above on its public website, and a web page link and telephone number to more information on the program.
8. Defines “indigent” for the purposes of this section to mean anyone who meets the income requirements for or is currently on several public assistance programs, including: Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or more commonly known as food stamps), Medi-Cal or IHSS.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

The cost of fines and fees associated with traffic and parking citations has steadily increased over the last few decades. After adding on fees to base fines, tickets can total in the hundreds of dollars. Add-on fees for minor offenses double or quadruple the original fine, and until recently California suspended driver’s licenses for failure to pay traffic fines.

For parking tickets, local agencies are allowed to use DMV to collect unpaid debt. DMV can require payment in full for unpaid parking tickets in order to renew vehicle registration. For indigent individuals, these piling fees have created a cycle of debt where they are unable to pay back parking fines, and then get additional fines for driving an unregistered vehicle and an increased vehicle registration fee for late payments.

The cost from being late on payment of a parking ticket could easily spiral out of control for an indigent person. In Sacramento, the fine for a parking ticket amounts to $52. If someone is unable to pay that ticket on time, the late fee adds an additional $52. If Sacramento then were to ask DMV to collect the unpaid debt, before the passage of AB 503 (Lackey), Chapter 741, Statutes of 2017, DMV could add the entire cost of the ticket to vehicle registration fees. If someone were unable to pay the $104 all at once on top of their vehicle registration fees, late fees for vehicle registration increase by 60% of the original fee for payments over 30 days late, which can increase the registration fee as much as $100. If a person is then pulled over for having an unregistered vehicle, the fine for driving unregistered vehicles is currently $285. All totaled, these fines alone add up to $489. This would amount to 1/3 of a single individual’s monthly income if they made the maximum amount of money to be eligible for Medi-Cal.

The unpaid debt is not the only issue for someone who received parking tickets. Having 5 or more unpaid parking tickets allows law enforcement to tow someone’s vehicle or place a restrictive device on it. If the fines are moved to DMV for collections and the individual cannot afford to pay their vehicle registration, law enforcement can tow the vehicle if the registration is more than six months expired.

Recovering a vehicle after it has been towed is expensive. Towed into Debt: How Towing Practices in California Punish Poor People, a report issued by the sponsors of this bill, notes that the average tow fee in California is $189, with a $53 storage fee per day and a $150 administrative fee. After three days of storage a towing fee could come out to $499. The cost of five unpaid parking tickets in Sacramento would result in a total cost of $520 with late fees. The cost of a three day tow plus the costs of the 5 unpaid parking tickets ($1019) would amount to all but $400 of an indigent person's monthly income if they made the maximum amount to make them eligible for Medi-Cal.

The Legislature passed AB 503 in order to stop the spiral of debt for an indigent person. However, processing agencies have been pushing back against implementing AB 503. Assemblymember Lackey had introduced two follow up bills as a result of processing agencies trying to get around implementing the law. AB 2544 (Lackey) Chapter 494, Statutes of 2018, clarified that parking agencies had to offer payment plans for tickets issued prior to July 1, 2018 because processing agencies refused to consider older tickets when implementing the law. AB 833 (Lackey) Chapter 495, Statutes of 2019, clarified that the $300 maximum cap for which a parking agency had to offer a payment plan only applied to the base fines, not to late penalties, because the City of Sacramento was refusing to offer payment plans to individuals who had more than two tickets with a late fee.

According to the author, “AB 3277 would update existing law to allow more individuals to access to payment plans. Granting additional flexibility reduces the financial impact of parking debt for more low-income individuals and gives individuals in financial distress greater lengths of time to enroll and pay off their debts. As cities and counties seek to find ways to help low-income individuals, including vehicle owners experiencing homelessness, AB 3277 makes relief more accessible to a population that is disproportionately struggling with housing and economic instability.”

This bill is attempting to address the fact that the $300 cap for when a city has to offer an indigent individual a payment plan has different effect depending on the city are you in. In Sacramento, for example, a parking ticket is $52 for parking in a residential zone, and $42 for parking at an expired meter. If a resident’s parking pass expires without them realizing it and they rarely drive because they live in the downtown core, it’s easily possible to go days of receiving parking tickets without realizing it. In Sacramento, a person would have to have more than five parking tickets to no longer be able to utilize the payment plan to pay their tickets.

In San Francisco, parking at an expired meter or a residential area is an $87 ticket, while parking in one spot for three days or parking in a loading zone is a $110 ticket. While a Sacramento resident could get a payment plan for up to five tickets, someone in San Francisco can only get a payment plan after three, or only for two tickets if they get multiple tickets for parking in a loading zone.

To remedy this situation, this bill proposes raising the $300 cap to $750 so indigent individuals in cities with expensive parking tickets can still be eligible for the payment plan. Further, indigent individuals will also be able to have their late fees waived up to $750 worth of parking tickets. A late fee added to a $110 ticket in San Francisco could result in a single ticket costing $169. Late fees are a useful tool for helping ensure tickets are paid on time, but may make an already high fine excessive for low income individuals making less than $1500 a month before taxes.

Finally, the bill requires processing agencies to prominently display on their websites the option to set up a payment plan. Processing agencies are already required to display this information, but the author contends that several have hidden this feature. Cities like San Francisco, Sacramento, Napa, San Jose, Novato, and Los Angeles prominently display the option on their website to pay a ticket. As of the writing of this analysis, the City of San Rafael does not include any information on payment plans in an easily accessible location (it is possible the city does not use DMV to collect unpaid parking debt). Other cities, like the City of Pasadena, have a one line hyperlink that says “AB 503 Unpaid Citation Payment Plan” with no other context describing what the program is without downloading the PDF attached to the hyperlink.

Western Center on Law and Poverty, writing in support of this bill, argues “Most local governments have adopted the provisions of AB 503 and for those with only a few tickets, the payment plans have worked well. In particular, the $25 monthly payment has proven to be key as most low-income persons, even those on public assistance, can afford to make the payment. But, we have also heard of concerns from local legal service programs that the program’s cap meant many drivers could not get on payment plans. We also heard concerns that some people could not get on plans because they had not requested a plan within 60 days after the due date.

AB 3277 addresses these two problems by increasing the cap to $750 from $300 and it proposes to increase the timeframe for requesting a payment plan from 60 days to 120 days after the due date of a parking ticket. Additionally, AB 3277 expands the number of months someone has to pay off the tickets from 18 months to 30 months. This allows indigent drivers to continue paying off parking tickets at $25 a month.”

This bill, or the existing law, is not a local mandate. The requirements set forth in this bill only apply if a processing agency elects to use DMV to collect parking tickets through a person’s vehicle registration. Other means of collecting late payments include wage garnishments, tax liens and towing an individual’s car. According to Towed into Debt, towing someone’s car as a means of debt collection generally has not been fruitful, with the average car selling for $700 and the average fees owed to just the tow yard being close to $2600 by the time the car sells (the tow yard has first priority on any money collected from a lien sale).

Committee comments: Millions of Californians have applied for unemployment benefits since the state has issued a shelter-in-place order in mid-March as a result of the novel coronavirus pandemic. In a time of high unemployment, it may be prudent for cities to offer payment plans for parking tickets and waive late fees for parking tickets in light of the number of Californians that have lost their jobs. Doing so will provide relief at a time when few can afford a major financial hit, while still ensuring cities have the ability to enforce their parking rules (which allows them to reduce congestion and free up space for individuals to shop), as well as generating revenue to provide essential for city services.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

All Peoples Community Center
ACLU
Crenshaw Chamber of Commerce
East Bay Community Law Center
Heart of LA Democratic Club
Legal Services of Northern California
Mypath
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
Shields for Families
Southern California Health & Rehabilitation Program
Western Center on Law & Poverty, INC.
Women's Foundation of California/Women's Policy Institute

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: David Sforza / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093