Crimes: looting.

Gabriel, Irwin, and Pacheco anchor a measure that reframes looting in disaster contexts and clarifies burglary rules where evacuation orders apply, while preserving the core elements of burglary. The bill states that damage to a structure caused by a disaster shall not preclude a burglary conviction and it recasts looting to cover a broader set of offenses when committed within an evacuation zone, alongside defined timeframes that protect certain dwelling units in disaster areas.

The measure defines key terms and mechanisms that determine when looting charges apply. An “evacuation order” is an official directive from a designated public safety authority requiring relocation due to imminent danger. An “evacuation zone” includes evacuation areas or areas under evacuation warnings and adds protections for residential dwelling units that are damaged or destroyed for one year after the order or warning, and for units undergoing reconstruction for up to three years, with certain exclusions for detached structures not usable for habitation. Within these zones, the offenses that qualify as looting expand to include burglary at various degrees, grand theft, trespass with intent to commit theft, theft from a vehicle, and related offenses, with heightened penalties specified for these acts when committed in the evacuation context.

Implementation details establish how the new framework operates and how it interacts with existing law. The enhanced looting regime applies during and within an affected county under a declared emergency or evacuation order, and it provides separate penalty schedules for conduct occurring inside an evacuation zone versus the broader emergency context. The bill also includes probation-related requirements, alignment with regulatory evacuation guidance, and a provision prohibiting charging someone with looting solely for certain consensual entries to commit listed offenses. Acknowledging fiscal considerations, the measure states that it creates or changes crimes or penalties without a state reimbursement obligation to local agencies, while also designating a state-mandated local program.

The measure’s operative effect is contingent on the enactment and timely effectiveness of another bill, with a sunset-like condition tied to that legislation. It requires review by the Fiscal Committee and anticipates local implementation alongside existing disaster-response and reconstruction timelines, including the reconstruction window tied to debris removal and occupancy certification. Stakeholders, including law enforcement, prosecutors, local governments, and residents in evacuation zones, would operate under an expanded set of charging options and a longer window during which dwelling units may fall within the enhanced enforcement framework, pending regulatory guidance and coordination with the associated statute.