Criminal fees.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when AB 1869 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on AB 1869.
You're tracking AB 1869
We'll email you the moment it moves.
AB 1869 — Criminal fees.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 92, Statutes of 2020.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 07, 2020. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 4 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
(1) Existing law imposes various fees contingent upon a criminal arrest, prosecution, or conviction for the cost of administering the criminal justice system, including administering probation and mandatory supervision, processing arrests and citations, and administering home detention programs, continuous electronic monitoring programs, work furlough programs, and work release programs. This bill would repeal the authority to collect many of these fees, among others. The bill would make the unpaid balance of these court-imposed costs unenforceable and uncollectible and would require any portion of a judgment imposing those costs to be vacated. (2) Existing law allows the board of supervisors of any county to establish the office of the public defender and requires the public defender to defend, without expense to the defendant, any person who is not financially able to employ counsel and who is charged with the commission of a crime. Existing law allows the court to hold a hearing to determine whether a defendant owns an interest in real property or other assets and to impose a lien on the property. Upon conclusion of trial, existing law allows the court to make a determination of a defendant's present ability to pay all or a portion of the cost of the public defender. If the court finds that the defendant has the financial ability to pay, existing law requires the court to order the defendant to pay all or a part of the costs the court believes reasonable and compatible with the defendant's financial ability. This bill would delete the authority of the court to impose liens on the defendant's property and make a post-trial determination of the defendant's ability to pay and to order the defendant to pay the costs of the public defender. By requiring a county to provide a public defender without charge to a defendant who may have the ability to pay, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. (4) The bill would appropriate $50,000 from the General Fund to the Department of Finance to begin to implement the provisions of this bill, and would annually appropriate $65,000,000 from the General Fund to the Controller beginning in the 2021–22 fiscal year to the 2025–26 fiscal year, inclusive, for allocation to counties to backfill revenues lost from the repeal of fees specified in this bill, as provided, thereby making an appropriation. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to pursue legislation with the Budget Act of 2021 to finalize the funding allocation methodology for distribution to counties. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 09/18/20 - Chaptered Current pdf September 18, 2020
- Enrolled 09/04/20 - Enrolled pdf September 04, 2020
- Amended 08/27/20 - Amended Senate pdf August 27, 2020
- Amended 02/25/20 - Amended Assembly pdf February 25, 2020
- Introduced 01/07/20 - Introduced pdf January 07, 2020
- AB1869 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 92, Statutes of 2020.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
-
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 59. Noes 17. Page 5437.).
-
Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 59. Noes 16. Page 5435.)
-
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 30. Noes 7.).
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 14. Noes 4.) (August 29).
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.
-
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
-
Joint Rules 61 and 62(a) suspended. (Ayes 29. Noes 10. Page 4299.)
-
Referred to Com. on B. & F.R.
-
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 60. Noes 14. Page 4865.)
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Ordered to second reading.
-
Withdrawn from committee.
-
Assembly Rule 96 suspended. (Ayes 57. Noes 15. Page 4273.)
-
Re-referred to Com. on BUDGET.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on BUDGET. Read second time and amended.
-
Referred to Com. on BUDGET.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee February 7.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Committee on Budget · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 8 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Committee on Budget
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 20 | 5 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 30 | 7 | 0 | 3 |
| % of votes cast | 75% | 18% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Nay |
| Chang | — | Nay |
| Melendez | — | Nay |
| Morrell | — | Nay |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Bates | — | Not Voting |
| Borgeas | — | Not Voting |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Gonzalez, Lena A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Stern, Henry I. | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Nay |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 37 | 11 | 0 | 3 |
| Democratic | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 59 | 17 | 0 | 3 |
| % of votes cast | 75% | 22% | 0% | 4% |
How each member voted (79)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Friedman | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Burke | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Kamlager | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Smith | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Gloria | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Chu | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Nay |
| Cunningham | — | Nay |
| Diep | — | Nay |
| Fong | — | Nay |
| Brough | — | Nay |
| Obernolte | — | Nay |
| Waldron | — | Nay |
| Mathis | — | Nay |
| Kiley | — | Nay |
| Mayes | — | Nay |
| Frazier | — | Not Voting |
| Eggman | — | Not Voting |
| Voepel | — | Not Voting |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Nay |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca | Democratic | Yea |
| Berman, Marc | Democratic | Yea |
| Boerner, Tasha | Democratic | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Cervantes, Sabrina | Democratic | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grayson, Timothy S. | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Yea |
| Kalra, Ash | Democratic | Yea |
| Limón, Monique | Democratic | Yea |
| Muratsuchi, Al | Democratic | Yea |
| Petrie-Norris, Cottie | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Ramos, James C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Reyes, Eloise Gómez | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Rubio, Blanca E. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wicks, Buffy | Democratic | Yea |
| Chen, Phillip | Republican | Nay |
| Choi, Steven S. | Republican | Nay |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Flora, Heath | Republican | Nay |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Nay |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 10 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 14 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 78% | 22% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (18)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Nay |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Melendez | — | Nay |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 38 | 10 | 0 | 3 |
| Republican | 0 | 4 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 60 | 14 | 0 | 5 |
| % of votes cast | 76% | 18% | 0% | 6% |
How each member voted (79)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Friedman | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Burke | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Gloria | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Kamlager | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Chu | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Nay |
| Cunningham | — | Nay |
| Voepel | — | Nay |
| Waldron | — | Nay |
| Kiley | — | Nay |
| Brough | — | Nay |
| Obernolte | — | Nay |
| Mayes | — | Nay |
| Bigelow | — | Nay |
| Smith | — | Not Voting |
| Mathis | — | Not Voting |
| Diep | — | Not Voting |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Nay |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca | Democratic | Yea |
| Berman, Marc | Democratic | Yea |
| Boerner, Tasha | Democratic | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Cervantes, Sabrina | Democratic | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grayson, Timothy S. | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Yea |
| Kalra, Ash | Democratic | Yea |
| Limón, Monique | Democratic | Yea |
| Muratsuchi, Al | Democratic | Yea |
| Petrie-Norris, Cottie | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Ramos, James C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Reyes, Eloise Gómez | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Rubio, Blanca E. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wicks, Buffy | Democratic | Yea |
| Chen, Phillip | Republican | Not Voting |
| Choi, Steven S. | Republican | Not Voting |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Flora, Heath | Republican | Nay |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Nay |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Nay |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 1869 do?
- (1) Existing law imposes various fees contingent upon a criminal arrest, prosecution, or conviction for the cost of administering the criminal justice system, including administering probation and mandatory supervision, processing arrests and citations, and administering home detention programs, continuous electronic monitoring programs, work furlough programs, and work release programs. This bill would repeal the authority to collect many of these fees, among others. The bill would make the unpaid balance of these court-imposed costs unenforceable and uncollectible and would require any portion of a judgment imposing those costs to be vacated. (2) Existing law allows the board of supervisors of any county to establish the office of the public defender and requires the public defender to defend, without expense to the defendant, any person who is not financially able to employ counsel and who is charged with the commission of a crime. Existing law allows the court to hold a hearing to determine whether a defendant owns an interest in real property or other assets and to impose a lien on the property. Upon conclusion of trial, existing law allows the court to make a determination of a defendant's present ability to pay all or a portion of the cost of the public defender. If the court finds that the defendant has the financial ability to pay, existing law requires the court to order the defendant to pay all or a part of the costs the court believes reasonable and compatible with the defendant's financial ability. This bill would delete the authority of the court to impose liens on the defendant's property and make a post-trial determination of the defendant's ability to pay and to order the defendant to pay the costs of the public defender. By requiring a county to provide a public defender without charge to a defendant who may have the ability to pay, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. (4) The bill would appropriate $50,000 from the General Fund to the Department of Finance to begin to implement the provisions of this bill, and would annually appropriate $65,000,000 from the General Fund to the Controller beginning in the 2021–22 fiscal year to the 2025–26 fiscal year, inclusive, for allocation to counties to backfill revenues lost from the repeal of fees specified in this bill, as provided, thereby making an appropriation. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to pursue legislation with the Budget Act of 2021 to finalize the funding allocation methodology for distribution to counties. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
- Who sponsors AB 1869?
- AB 1869 is sponsored by Committee on Budget.
- What is the current status of AB 1869?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 07, 2020. Enacted.
- Where can I track AB 1869?
- Track AB 1869 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 1869
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of AB 1869
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →