[ABATE Local 6 Elist] [ABATE] CTA : AB 334 Anti-Profiling Call to Action INFORMATION FROM LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE

Sun Mar 15 14:03:40 PDT 2015

I sent information the other day about writing or faxing Bill Quirk, Chairman of the Committee on Public Safety, asking support for AB-334.  Below is more information from Chuck Pederson, ABATE State Legislative Director.  Letters and/or faxes are requested to be sent to ALL members of the Committee.  There is a link here   <http://apsf.assembly.ca.gov/membersstaff> Public Safety Committee (and below) giving the names of the committee members.  Also below is the list of members in case you cannot open the link.  The one fax number can be used for each member (916-319-3745).  Please sign your letter or fax and get it sent right away…the bill will be heard early next week so time is of the essence.

Please note that Lorena S. Gonzalez, Assembly District 80, is the only one on the committee in San Diego County and covers Chula Vista, National City, and part of San Diego (City Heights to the border mostly).  If you cannot do all of the letters/faxes, and I hope you can, please at least do Quirk and Gonzalez.

Also below is the bill language and status information.  

If you have questions, please contact me at nemecek at san.rr.com and I’ll try to get an answer for you.  

Nancy

******************************************************************************************************************************************************

Below is some information that can be used to send letters of support to the California State Assembly; Committee on Public Safety for AB334, the anti-profiling bill.

The hyperlinks below will direct you to the committee member contacts and sample letters. I have also provided this information below for those that cannot utilize the hyperlinks.

This should happen within the next week. So lets get the word out! 

Let me know if you have any questions.

 Thank you,

Chuck Pedersen

State Legislative Director

ABATE of California

Mail or fax a letter to every member of the  <http://apsf.assembly.ca.gov/membersstaff> Public Safety Committee.  Don't forget to sign the letter and provide your address when you send it in.  Please send the following applicable letter:     <http://usdefender.net/california-cta-letter.html> In-State California Sample Letter OR  <http://usdefender.net/california-cta-letter-out.html> Out-Of State Sample Letter

Mail Address:  Assembly Public Safety Committee:  1020 N. Street, Room 111, Sacramento, CA 95814

Fax Number:  916-319-3745

*****************************************************************************************************

An example letter – Short Version

Dear Assembly Member,

I am writing to urge you to support AB 334 relating to motorcycle profiling. The problem is pervasive and irrefutable. The solution is cost-free and preserves the 1st, 4th, and 14th amendments.

<your signature>

<your name>
<<address>>

<<City, State, Zip>>

 *****************************************************************************************************\

 An example letter – Long Version

 Dear Assembly Member,

 As a citizen and motorcyclist in the state of California, I am writing to urge you to support AB 334, legislation addressing the issue of motorcycle profiling. Law enforcement profiling and discrimination targeted at motorcyclists and members of motorcycle related organizations is a pervasive problem demanding legislative relief. Despite the opposition's denials, motorcycle profiling legislation is a virtually cost-free solution and highly effective solution.

Indeed, motorcycle profiling is occurring in most regions of California. The motorcycling community has collected a mass of Victim Statements providing irrefutable proof that profiling is occurring.  Importantly, this legislature recently took a stand against discrimination by passing a prohibition on motorcycle-only checkpoints.  Passing a prohibition against profiling would be consistent and reinforce the principles already embraced by this legislature.

Washington State's experience provides empirical validation that motorcycle profiling laws are highly effective with no financial impact.  In fact, the Washington legislature passed profiling legislation unanimously in 2011, despite inaccurate and over-blown financial projections provided by law enforcement.  Almost 5 years later, motorcycle profiling incidents have been substantially reduced with no fiscal impact at the state or local level.  AB 334 models Washington's law so there is every reason to believe that these successes would be replicated.

It is understandable that law enforcement would oppose legislation that represents an indict of current practices.  The recognition that law enforcement policy and training is required to curb current abuses of discretion is nonetheless a critical responsibility of the legislature. The legislature is responsible for managing the relationship between law enforcement and the constituency that they govern. When this relationship is damaged, society becomes less stable.  Recent events around America make this very clear.

Legislatures in Maryland, Minnesota, Oklahoma, New York, Missouri, and Arkansas also recognize the importance of the Washington law.  These states are all considering laws to address motorcycle profiling this session in hopes of repairing the divide between law enforcement and the motorcycling community. AB 334 provides an opportunity for California to help repair this relationship by substantially reducing incidents of profiling and ending a paradigm of law enforcement discrimination in the largest motorcycling state in America.  

Sincerely,

<your signature>

<your name>
<<address>>

<<City, State, Zip>>

Committee Members 

 <http://assembly.ca.gov/a20> Bill Quirk (Chair)

Dem - 20

 <https://lcmspubcontact.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.php?district=AD20> Contact Assembly Member Bill Quirk 

Capitol Office

P.O. Box 942849, Room 2163, Sacramento, CA 94249-0020; (916) 319-2020

 <http://assembly.ca.gov/a67> Melissa A. Melendez (Vice Chair)

 Rep - 67

 <https://lcmspubcontact.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.php?district=AD67> Contact Assembly Member Melissa A. Melendez 

Capitol Office

P.O. Box 942849, Room 6031, Sacramento, CA 94249-0067; (916) 319-2067

 <http://assembly.ca.gov/a80> Lorena S. Gonzalez

Dem - 80

 <https://lcmspubcontact.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.php?district=AD80> Contact Assembly Member Lorena S. Gonzalez 

Capitol Office

P.O. Box 942849, Room 6012, Sacramento, CA 94249-0080; (916) 319-2080

 <http://assembly.ca.gov/a59> Reginald B. Jones-Sawyer, Sr.

 Dem - 59

 <https://lcmspubcontact.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.php?district=AD59> Contact Assembly Member Reginald B. Jones-Sawyer, Sr. 

Capitol Office

P.O. Box 942849, Room 4126, Sacramento, CA 94249-0059; (916) 319-2059

 <http://assembly.ca.gov/a36> Tom Lackey

Rep - 36

 <https://lcmspubcontact.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.php?district=AD36> Contact Assembly Member Tom Lackey 

Capitol Office

P.O. Box 942849, Room 4009, Sacramento, CA 94249-0036; (916) 319-2036

 <http://assembly.ca.gov/a28> Evan Low

Dem - 28

 <https://lcmspubcontact.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.php?district=AD28> Contact Assembly Member Evan Low 

Capitol Office

P.O. Box 942849, Room 2175, Sacramento, CA 94249-0028; (916) 319-2028

 <http://assembly.ca.gov/a53> Miguel Santiago

Dem - 53

 <https://lcmspubcontact.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.php?district=AD53> Contact Assembly Member Miguel Santiago 

Capitol Office

P.O. Box 942849, Room 5119, Sacramento, CA 94249-0053; (916) 319-2053

 Contact information for the Public Safety Committee

Contact Information 

Assembly Public Safety Committee

1020 N Street (LOB), Room 111

Sacramento, California 95814

916.319.3744 phone

916.319.3745 fax

 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

Bill History

CURRENT BILL STATUS

 MEASURE            :  A.B. No. 334

AUTHOR(S)         :  Cooley (Coauthors: Achadjian, Chávez, Gallagher, Gray,

                Olsen, Perea, and Wagner).

TOPIC    :  Peace officers: training: profiling of motorcycle riders.

HOUSE LOCATION           :  ASM

TYPE OF BILL :  

                Active

                Non-Urgency

                Non-Appropriations

                Majority Vote Required

                State-Mandated Local Program

                Fiscal

                Non-Tax Levy

LAST HIST. ACT. DATE:  02/23/2015

LAST HIST. ACTION   :  Referred to Com. on  PUB. S.

COMM. LOCATION          :  ASM PUBLIC SAFETY

HEARING DATE :  03/24/2015

TITLE      :  An act to add Section 13519.17 to the Penal Code,

                relating to the profiling of motorcycle riders.

Bill As Written 3/14/2015

California Legislature—2015–16 Regular Session

Assembly BillNo. 334

  _____  

Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley

(Coauthors: Assembly Members Achadjian, Chávez, Gallagher, Gray, Olsen, Perea, and Wagner)

February 13, 2015

  _____  

An act to add Section 13519.17 to the Penal Code, relating to the profiling of motorcycle riders. 

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 334, as introduced, Cooley. Peace officers: training: profiling of motorcycle riders.

Existing law establishes the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training in the Department of Justice and requires the commission to adopt rules establishing minimum standards regarding the recruitment of peace officers. Existing law requires the commission to develop guidelines and implement courses of instruction regarding racial profiling, handling domestic violence, hate crimes, and human trafficking, among others.

This bill would require the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to ensure that the profiling of motorcycle riders is addressed in the course of basic law enforcement training and offered to law enforcement officers in conjunction with existing training regarding profiling. The bill would require all local law enforcement agencies to adopt a written policy designed to condemn and prevent the profiling of motorcycle riders and to review and audit any existing policies to ensure that those policies do not enable or foster the practice of profiling motorcycle riders. Because this bill would impose additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 

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 these statutory provisions.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes. 

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

P2    1 

SECTION 1.  

The Legislature finds and declares all of the 
2following:

3(a) Millions of Americans ride motorcycles. They may commute 
4to work on a motorcycle or ride for pleasure after work and on 
5weekends.

6(b) A prominent motorcycle organization, the American 
7Motorcycle Association, has over 215,000 members. Their 
8members are on average 46 years of age.

9(c) There are approximately 2,700 motorcycle schools across 
10the United States recognized by the Motorcycle Safety Foundation. 
11Of these, 130 are located in California, where the Motorcycle 
12Safety Foundation contracts with the California Highway Patrol 
13to administer the California Motorcyclist Safety Program. The 
14curriculum of motorcycle schools in California is typical, consisting 
15of approximately three hours of online instruction, five hours of 
16classroom instruction, and 10 hours of instruction on the 
17motorcycle range. Fees for these schools range from $250 to $350, 
18inclusive, and the failure rate is around 13 to 15 percent, inclusive.

19(d) Since its inception in 1987, Motorcycle Safety 
20Foundation-authorized schools in California have educated 900,000 
21Californians in motorcycle safety, including 62,000 in 2013.

22(e) A rising number of older Americans have begun riding 
23motorcycles. For instance, a 2011 Wall Street Journal article, 
24“When Heaven Is a Harley: The 50-plus crowd is having a belated 
25romance with motorcycles” focuses on the increased interest in 
26motorcycling among older Americans.

P3    1(f) According to the Department of Motor Vehicles, Californians 
2over 50 years of age constitute 47 percent of the nearly 1.4 million 
3Californians licensed to operate motorcycles. Nationally, the 
4average age of motorcycle owners rose from 33 to 40 over the past 
510 years.

6(g) One observer of the trend toward older beginner 
7motorcyclists has said, “A lot of them say they were just too busy 
8with careers and kids until now, and they’ve reached a point in 
9life where they want to try something different.”

10(h) An older proponent of motorcycling has described 
11motorcycling’s appeal as a “really good feeling similar to downhill 
12skiing, effortlessly moving through the fresh air.”

13(i) Additionally, motorcycles are more fuel-efficient than cars 
14and a shift to motorcycle commuting may potentially reduce traffic 
15congestion and emissions, thereby aligning with California’s goals 
16under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 
1732) to reduce the transportation sector’s carbon footprint.

18 

SEC. 2.  

Section 13519.17 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

19 

13519.17.  

(a) The Commission on Peace Officer Standards 
20and Training shall ensure that the profiling of motorcycle riders 
21is addressed in the course of basic law enforcement training and 
22offered to law enforcement officers in conjunction with existing 
23training regarding profiling.

24(b) Every local law enforcement agency shall adopt a written 
25policy designed to condemn and prevent the profiling of motorcycle 
26riders and shall review and audit existing procedures, practices, 
27and training materials, to ensure that they do not enable or foster 
28the practice of profiling motorcycle riders.

29(c) For purposes of this section, “profiling of motorcycle riders” 
30means using the fact that a person rides a motorcycle or wears 
31motorcycle paraphernalia as a factor, without any individualized 
32suspicion of the particular person, in deciding to stop and question, 
33take enforcement action, arrest, or search a person or vehicle, with 
34or without legal basis under the California Constitution or the 
35United States Constitution.

36 

SEC. 3.  

If the Commission on State Mandates determines that 
37this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to 
38local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made 
P4    1pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 
24 of Title 2 of the Government Code.

 <http://www.incredimail.com/?id=621159&did=10501&ppd=2820,201206281812,9,1,1953942573452165119&rui=154076760&app_test_id=0&sd=20150315> 

 <http://www.incredimail.com/?id=621159&did=10501&ppd=2820,201206281812,9,1,1953942573452165119&rui=154076760&app_test_id=0&sd=20150315> FREE Animations for your email 

 <http://www.incredimail.com/?id=621159&did=10501&ppd=2820,201206281812,9,1,1953942573452165119&rui=154076760&app_test_id=0&sd=20150315> Click Here! 

 <http://www.incredimail.com/?id=621159&did=10501&ppd=2820,201206281812,9,1,1953942573452165119&rui=154076760&app_test_id=0&sd=20150315> 

  <http://www2l.incredimail.com/gcontent/stamps/new2011/pixel.gif?upn=1953942573452165119> 

  _____  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5751 / Virus Database: 4306/9308 - Release Date: 03/15/15

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://abatelocal6.org/pipermail/elist_abatelocal6.org/attachments/20150315/755a17b2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: butterfly_bottom.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 20662 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://abatelocal6.org/pipermail/elist_abatelocal6.org/attachments/20150315/755a17b2/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 12626 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://abatelocal6.org/pipermail/elist_abatelocal6.org/attachments/20150315/755a17b2/attachment-0001.gif>