SACRAMENTO—A proposal calling for boats operated by intoxicated individuals to be impounded for up to 30 days was signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Oct. 8. Senate Bill 393 (SB 393) made it to Newsom’s desk after a previous attempt to have a similar proposal signed into law was actually vetoed under Jerry Brown’s administration.
State Sen. Jeff Stone, R-Riverside County, introduced SB 393 earlier this year; it was proposed in response to the death of Sara Margiotta, a 10-year-old who was killed on the Colorado River. Margiotta died after a drunken boater struck her family’s boat.
Stone had proposed Senate Bill 644 during the 2016-17 legislative session; the bill also called for vessel impoundment similar to SB 393, but Brown, as governor, vetoed the proposal. Brown said Stone’s proposal would not deter anyone from engaging in illegal activities.
So, here’s the $64,000 question, the 800-pound gorilla in the room: which governor was on point, Brown in saying a vessel impound law would not alter illegal behavior or Newsom’s endorsement of a similar proposal a few years later?
Before answering this question let’s review the factual background and legislative perspective about SB 393.
Stone positioned his vessel impound proposal as easy to digest...
Menu
Menu
Menu
Menu
2 Responses
In this case, the storage burden would be shifted to marinas as opposed to an impound lot that would normally be used for cars. My hope would be that the marinas would be compensated appropriately. If the impound fees were forfeit by the owner, the marina would need a lien to protect their interests and facilitate disposal.
Addendum to the above: I see no such wording in the text of the bill that would protect the marina’s interest beyond indemnification.