Home California Senator Bob Hertzberg Brings Back Zero-Bail Bill

Senator Bob Hertzberg Brings Back Zero-Bail Bill

by ECT

This week, the “zero bail” bill that was put on hold last year by Senator Bob Hertzberg has been brought back and will be considered in the full assembly. If it passes, it will head to the governors desk.

Zero Bail was rejected by California voters in 2020 (56% in support) but introduced as legislation by Herzberg in January 2021 –labeled as “Safe and Resilient Communities Act.”

The bill was pulled back in September of 2021 after a murder of a Sacramento female by parolee who had been released without bail, it prompted Hertzberg, to pull SB 262 from consideration.  He vowed to bring the bill back at some point.

According to the bill, it would have required the state courts to take into account a defendants ability to pay when setting a bail.

This bill would instead require the Judicial Council to, starting January 1, 2023, prepare, adopt, and annually revise a statewide bail schedule. The bill would require the Judicial Council, when adopting that schedule, to consider the seriousness of the offense charged and input from stakeholders, experts, and other interested parties. The bill would require the court, prior to setting bail, to consider whether nonfinancial conditions will reasonably protect the public and the victim and reasonably assure the arrestee’s presence at trial. The bill would, if the court concludes that money bail is necessary, require the court to conduct an inquiry into the arrestee’s ability to pay, as specified. The bill would prohibit costs relating to conditions of release on bail from being imposed on persons released on bail or on their own recognizance.

Although the bill passed the State Senate in May with a 30-9 vote, it was having trouble in the State Assembly according to Hertzberg.

With the return of the Bill, Hertzberg did make some amendments which now takes aim at the bail bond industry which some people around the state have referred to this bill as the “how much money you have on you bill” or “the right to an affordable bail”. They have also accused Hertzberg of creating a bill to let criminals out of jail.

According to the amendments:

This bill would prohibit costs relating to the conditions of release on bail from being imposed on persons released on bail or on their own recognizance. The bill would additionally require the court to order a return of money or property paid to a bail bond licensee by or on behalf of the arrestee to obtain bail if the action or proceeding against the arrestee who has been admitted to bail is dismissed, dismissed or no charges are filed against the arrestee within 60 days of arrest, or the arrestee has made all court appearances during the pendency of the action or proceeding against the arrestee, as specified. The bill would authorize the bail bond licensee to retain a surcharge not to exceed 5% 10% of the amount paid by the arrestee or on behalf of the arrestee. The bill would require the court to order this return of money or property only for a bail contract entered into on or after January 1, 2022. 2023.

Senate Republican Scott Wilk this week issued the following statement upon the bill coming back:

Democrats Push for Zero Bail, Despite Huge Concerns for Public Safety

SACRAMENTO – Legislative Democrats have breathed life anew into Senate Bill 262, a controversial and dangerous policy proposal that would create a “Zero Bail” system in California. This comes on the heels of Senate Republicans securing a veto of legislation that would have legalized drug dens.

“Between 2020 and 2021, the Yolo County DA reported 420 of the 595 individuals released without bail in Yolo County were rearrested. Coddling criminals only creates more victims,” said Senate Republican Leader Scott Wilk (R-Santa Clarita). “The numbers don’t lie, and it is obvious zero bail is a fail for the public’s safety.”

“As we did recently with the bill that would have legalized drug dens, Senate Republicans will fight hard to see that this bill doesn’t become law. We hope the governor will join us again and choose to protect the public rather than the criminal.”

In light of spiking crime in California and fears that this policy would further endanger Californians, SB 262 was held in committee at the author’s request in 2021. This week Democrats moved it back onto the “active file” for consideration. 

This week the Sacramento Bee published a story on the failure of zero bail in Yolo County, noting that 70% of arrestees released on zero bail were rearrested. According to the Sacramento Bee story, of the 595 people released on zero bail, 420 were rearrested. Of those 420 arrests, 123 of them were for violent crimes such as murder, attempted murder, robbery, kidnapping, robbery, carjacking and domestic violence. 

SB 262 is now being considered by the full Assembly. If it passes, it will return to the Senate for one final vote before the governor must decide to sign or veto the legislation.

 


According to the Bill:

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

 

SB 262, as amended, Hertzberg. Bail.
Existing law provides for the procedure of approving and accepting bail, and issuing an order for the appearance and release of an arrested person. Existing law requires the superior court judges in each county to prepare, adopt, and annually revise a uniform countywide schedule of bail, as specified, and requires the superior court judges, when adopting that schedule, to consider the seriousness of the offense charged and assign an additional amount of required bail for each aggravating or enhancing factor chargeable in the complaint, as specified.

This bill would instead require the Judicial Council to, starting January 1, 2023, prepare, adopt, and annually revise a statewide bail schedule. The bill would require the Judicial Council, when adopting that schedule, to consider the seriousness of the offense charged and input from stakeholders, experts, and other interested parties. The bill would require the court, prior to setting bail, to consider whether nonfinancial conditions will reasonably protect the public and the victim and reasonably assure the arrestee’s presence at trial. The bill would, if the court concludes that money bail is necessary, require the court to conduct an inquiry into the arrestee’s ability to pay, as specified. The bill would prohibit costs relating to conditions of release on bail from being imposed on persons released on bail or on their own recognizance.

This bill would prohibit costs relating to the conditions of release on bail from being imposed on persons released on bail or on their own recognizance. The bill would additionally require the court to order a return of money or property paid to a bail bond licensee by or on behalf of the arrestee to obtain bail if the action or proceeding against the arrestee who has been admitted to bail is dismissed, dismissed or no charges are filed against the arrestee within 60 days of arrest, or the arrestee has made all court appearances during the pendency of the action or proceeding against the arrestee, as specified. The bill would authorize the bail bond licensee to retain a surcharge not to exceed 5% 10% of the amount paid by the arrestee or on behalf of the arrestee. The bill would require the court to order this return of money or property only for a bail contract entered into on or after January 1, 2022. 2023.

This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Full Bill – click here

You may also like

1 comment

Disillusioned Aug 27, 2022 - 12:35 pm

Counting the days before I can leave tools like Bob Hertzberg behind when moving from California… like so many others are doing.

Comments are closed.