Carrier of Passengers Act of 2024.
By formalizing the notification process, AB 2780 aims to enhance communication between transportation providers and local governments, allowing for better preparation and response to the needs of arriving passengers, particularly those at risk of homelessness. Additionally, it imposes civil penalties of up to $10,000 for violations of its provisions, adding a compliance mechanism that reinforces the enforcement of responsibilities expected from carriers. The bill distinguishes a statewide concern rather than a local affair, thus applying uniformly across cities, including charter cities.
Assembly Bill 2780, titled the Carrier of Passengers Act of 2024, establishes new requirements for passenger carriers, including motor carriers and charter-party carriers involved in transportation services. This legislation mandates that carriers provide electronic notice to local governing bodies at least 24 hours before embarking passengers who are presumed likely to require emergency shelter and other immediate services upon disembarkation. This notice must include details about the anticipated arrival time, number of passengers, and their background status related to immigration, specifically those who have arrived in the country within the last 30 days.
Overall, the sentiment surrounding AB 2780 appears supportive among those advocating for improved local preparedness and support services for incoming vulnerable populations. However, concerns arise regarding the implications for the privacy of passengers, especially regarding the prohibition on local governments sharing information with immigration authorities. Critics might view this as a potential barrier to law enforcement or as a method that complicates immigration oversight.
A central point of contention is the bill's requirement for electronic notification, which places additional duties on local governing bodies. While proponents argue this ensures that local governments can adequately prepare for incoming passengers requiring assistance, opponents may express concerns about the additional bureaucratic burden it imposes. Moreover, the implications for privacy concerning immigration status cause ongoing debate, with advocates cautioning against the potential misuse of reported information.