Cty. of Los Angeles v. Com'n On Mandates

• Decision Date: 28 July 2003
• Docket Number: No. B156870.,B156870.
• Citation: 110 Cal.App.4th 1176,2 Cal.Rptr.3d 419
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. COMMISSION ON STATE MANDATES, Defendant and Appellant; Department of Finance, Real Party in Interest and Appellant.

2 Cal.Rptr.3d 419

110 Cal.App.4th 1176

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. COMMISSION ON STATE MANDATES, Defendant and Appellant Department of Finance, Real Party in Interest and Appellant.

No. B156870.

Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 7.

July 28, 2003.

Paul M. Starkey, Camille Shelton, Sacramento, and Katherine Tokarski, for Defendant and Appellant Commission on State Mandates.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Andrea Lynn Hoch, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Louis R. Mauro and Catherine M. Van Aken, Supervising Deputy Attorneys General and Geoffrey L. Graybill, Deputy Attorney General, for Real Party in Interest and Appellant Department of Finance.

Lloyd W. Pellman, County Counsel and Stephen R. Morris, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent County of Los Angeles.

MUÑOZ (AURELIO), J.^*

A 1995 amendment to Penal Code section 13519¹ requires local law enforcement officers to participate in two hours of domestic violence training. The issue on appeal is whether this amendment resulted in a reimbursable state-mandated program within the meaning of article XIII B, section 6 of the California Constitution for the time spent by local law enforcement officers in such domestic violence training, although such officers were already required to spend 24 hours in continuing education training and the domestic violence training could be included within this total.

This administrative mandamus proceeding was commenced by the County of Los Angeles (County) on a "test claim" filed with and denied by the Commission on State Mandates (Commission) for the County's costs incurred pursuant to section 13519. The trial court found that California Constitution article XIII B, section 6 required the state to reimburse the County for domestic violence training because the County's needs and priorities might be detrimentally affected when the state took away two hours of training by mandating that two specific hours of training occur. The trial court remanded the proceedings to the Commission to determine the amount of costs actually incurred by the County. We reverse.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Article XIII B, section 6 of the California Constitution provides: "Whenever the Legislature or any state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any local government, the state shall provide a subvention of funds to reimburse such local government for the costs of such program or increased level of service...." (Cal. Const., art. XIII B, § 6.) The Commission is charged with hearing and deciding local agency claims of entitlement to reimbursement under article XIII B, section 6. (Gov.Code, § 17551, subd. (a).) Pursuit of such a claim is the exclusive remedy for this purpose (Gov.Code, § 17552), but the Commission's decisions are subject to review by administrative mandamus, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5. (Gov.Code, § 17559, subd. (b).) A "test claim" is "the first claim including claims joined or consolidated with the first claim, filed with the commission alleging that a particular statute or executive order imposes costs mandated by the state." (Gov.Code, § 17521; see also Kinlaw v. State of California (1991) 54 Cal.3d 326, 328-329, 331-333, 285 Cal. Rptr. 66, 814 P.2d 1308.)

In 1995, section 13519, subdivision (e) was amended to provide: "(e) Each law enforcement officer below the rank of supervisor who is assigned to patrol duties and would normally respond to domestic violence calls or incidents of domestic violence shall complete, every two years, an updated course of instruction on domestic violence that is developed according to the standards and guidelines developed pursuant to subdivision (d). The instruction required pursuant to this subdivision shall be funded from existing resources available for the training required pursuant to this section. It is the intent of the Legislature not to increase the annual training costs of local government."²

Penal Code section 13510,³ et seq. requires the State Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to promulgate regulations establishing minimum state standards relating to physical, mental, and moral fitness, and minimum training standards for law enforcement officers. Compliance with POST's requirements is voluntary. (Pen.Code, § 13510 et seq.) POST has a certification program for peace officers specified in sections 13510 and 13522 and for the California Highway Patrol. (Pen.Code, §§ 13510.1, subds.(a)-(c), 13510.3.)

On or about December 26, 1996, the County filed a "test claim"⁴ pursuant to Government Code section 17522 with the Commission.⁵ The test claim alleged that neither local police officers nor their agencies were given any choice with respect to compliance with section 13519. However, in order to implement the training, the County was required to redirect its officers from their normal work in order to attend the two-hour domestic violence training. The County alleged this substitution of the work agenda of the state for that of the local government violated California Constitution article XIII B, section 6. Furthermore, the County pointed to language in Penal Code section 13519, subdivision (e), providing that, "The instruction required pursuant to this subdivision shall be funded from existing resources available for the training required pursuant to this section. It is the intent of the Legislature not to increase the annual training costs of local government entities."

The test claim alleged that although POST bore the cost of producing two-hour telecourses on domestic violence, POST did not provide for any local law enforcement salary reimbursement for attendance at any type of POST-certified training, including the state-mandated costs for domestic violence training. Adherence to POST standards is voluntary by local law enforcement agencies, but POST requires a minimum of 24 hours of training every two years, to be chosen from a menu of available courses. POST does not dictate the courses that must be taken. POST courses include training in, among other things: interviewing techniques for detectives, defensive weapons, CPR, conflict resolution, bicycle patrol, ritual crime and hate group offenders, vehicle pullover and approach, confessions, courtroom demeanor, electronic vehicle recovery systems, vehicle theft investigation, and cultural awareness.

The POST program gives local law enforcement agencies flexibility in choosing training programs to meet their differing needs. In addition to domestic violence training, certain other programs are legislatively mandated: dealing with the developmentally disabled/mentally ill training (implemented July 1992); high speed vehicle pursuits (implemented November 1994); first aid/CPR (a 21-hour initial course, with a 12-hour refresher course every three years); missing persons (implemented January 1989); racial and cultural diversity (implemented August 1983); sexual harassment (implemented November 1994); and sudden infant death syndrome (implemented July 1990). The time requirements for these other required courses vary. Some elective courses require 40 hours to complete.

However, the County alleged because there were no existing resources available for the domestic violence training, the annual training costs of the County were increased as a result of section 13519. The County Sheriffs Department incurred costs of $170,351.45 for domestic violence training for the fiscal year 1996-1997.

In support of its test claim, the County submitted legislative materials relating to section 13519. These included: A July 5, 1995 memorandum in which the Assembly Committee on Appropriations stated that Senate Bill No. 132, proposing the changes to 13519, understood the "training requirement could have significant costs to local law enforcement in terms of expense and public safety, as most departments will be forced to backfill for offices while the officers are being trained or will have to forego the backfilling and have fewer offices on patrol. Any monetary costs incurred by local law enforcement for the officer backfilling would be state-reimbursable." The Committee noted that, "Although this bill states that the costs of the additional domestic violence training be absorbed by POST within existing resources, the reality is that this bill would create additional non-absorbable costs to POST since POST will be unable to exclude one type of training in favor of the domestic violence training, and instead will have to add this training to their current curriculum. The current curriculum of POST training is just as important to the maintaining of public safety as is the additional domestic violence training."

In addition, the Department of Finance recognized the fiscal impact of section 13519 on local law enforcement agencies, and opposed the adoption of Senate Bill No. 132. Diane M. Cummins, Deputy Director of the State Department of Finance, wrote to Senator Diane Watson on April 20, 1995, that, "This bill also specifies that training required pursuant to this measure `shall be funded from existing resources', as specified. In so specifying, this bill would also require law enforcement agencies to modify existing training programs by increasing training requirements. Finance believes this bill contains a local mandate without providing necessary funding, thereby being in conflict with the California Constitution, which requires the state to fund local mandate costs. Although there is no specific information available regarding the level of additional costs which would be imposed on law enforcement agencies, the Department of Finance is opposed to legislation which would result in additional General Fund expenditures, given the State's ongoing fiscal constraints." The Department of Finance recognized that, "Adding mandatory domestic violence training requirement would result in an additional unknown cost...