Denise Moreno Ducheny
(1) Existing law sets the fees at $15 or $20 for various court services, including, but not limited to, issuing a writ for the enforcement of an order or judgment, issuing an abstract of judgment, recording or registering any license or certificate, issuing an order of sale, and filing and entering an award under the Workers' Compensation Law. This bill would increase those fees by $10, and would provide that the $10 fee increase shall be transmitted quarterly for deposit in the Trial Court Trust Fund and, commencing July 1, 2011, used by the Judicial Council for implementing and administering the civil representation pilot program described in (5) below. (2) Under existing law, $25 of each specified filing fee in connection with certain civil proceedings is required to be used for services of an official court reporter in civil proceedings. This bill would increase the amount of those filing fees required to be used for services of an official court reporter in civil proceedings to $30. (3) Under existing law, to the extent that a memorandum of understanding for trial court employees designates certain days as unpaid furlough days for employees assigned to regular positions in the superior court, the court may not be in session on those days except as ordered by the presiding judge. This bill, until July 1, 2010, would authorize the Judicial Council to provide that the courts be closed for the transaction of judicial business for one day per month, which would be treated as a holiday, and to adopt court rules to implement these provisions, subject to specified conditions. The bill would authorize a judge or justice to sign a form, to be prepared by the Administrative Office of the Courts, stating that the judge or justice voluntarily agrees to irrevocably waive an amount equal to 4.62% of his or her monthly salary, as specified. The bill also would require a 4.62% reduction in the compensation due to the sheriff for court security services because of the closure of the courts under these provisions, and would, where a memorandum of understanding has been executed, require the court and the sheriff, county, or sheriff and county to negotiate that reduction in good faith and amend the memorandum of understanding accordingly. By imposing additional duties on county officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law authorizes the Judicial Council to regulate the budget and fiscal management of the trial courts. The Judicial Council is required to adopt rules to provide for reasonable public access to budget allocation and expenditure information at the state and local level, and to adopt rules ensuring that, upon written request, the trial courts provide, in a timely manner, information relating to the administration of the courts, including financial information and other information that affects the wages, hours, and working conditions of trial court employees. This bill would provide that any person shall have the right to obtain specified budget, expenditure, and personnel records of the courts, except as specified. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court that provide public access to nondeliberative or nonadjudicative court records, budget, and management information on or before January 1, 2010. (5) Existing law requires the Judicial Council to provide an annual status report to the chairpersons of the budget committee in each house of the Legislature and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee regarding the California Case Management System and Court Accounting and Reporting System, as specified. Under existing law, the office of the State Chief Information Officer is responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects. This bill would provide that the California Case Management System, and all other administrative and infrastructure information technology projects of the Judicial Council or the courts with total costs estimated at more than $5,000,000, shall be subject to the review and recommendations of the office of the State Chief Information Officer, as specified. The bill would require the State Chief Information Officer to submit a copy of those reviews and recommendations to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. (6) The Superior Court Law Enforcement Act of 2002 authorizes the presiding judge of each superior court to contract with a sheriff or marshal for the necessary level of law enforcement services in the courts. Existing law requires the sheriff or marshal and presiding judge of any county to develop a court security plan to be utilized by the court, as specified, and requires the Judicial Council to establish a process for its review of court security plans in the California Rules of Court. Existing law requires the superior court and the sheriff or marshal to enter into a memorandum of understanding specifying the agreed upon level of court security services and their cost and terms of payment, and requires the sheriff or marshal to provide specified information to the courts by April 30 of each year, with actual court security allocations subject to the approval of the Judicial Council. Existing law requires the Administrative Office of the Courts to use the actual salary and benefits costs approved for court law enforcement personnel as of June 30 of each year in determining the annual funding request for the courts that will be presented to the Department of Finance. This bill would provide that the cost of services specified in the memorandum of understanding shall be based on the estimated average cost of salary and benefits for equivalent personnel classifications in that county, not including overtime pay. In calculating the average cost of benefits, the bill would provide that only specified benefits may be included. The bill would require the Administrative Office of the Courts to use the average salary and benefits costs approved for court law enforcement personnel as of June 30 of each year in determining the annual funding request for the courts that will be presented to the Department of Finance. (7) Existing law permits limited use of electronic recording devices in court proceedings under certain circumstances, but prohibits a court from expending funds for electronic recording technology or equipment to make an unofficial record of an action or proceeding or to use that technology or equipment to make the official record of an action or proceeding in any circumstance that is not authorized. Existing law also requires each superior court to report semiannually to the Judicial Council, and the Judicial Council to report semiannually to the Legislature, regarding all purchases and leases of electronic recording equipment that will be used to record superior court proceedings. This bill would prohibit a court from expending funds for or using electronic recording technology or equipment to make an unofficial record of an action or proceeding, including for purposes of judicial notetaking, or to make the official record of an action or proceeding in any circumstance that is not authorized. The bill would authorize a court to use electronic recording equipment for the internal personnel purpose of monitoring judicial officer performance, if notice is provided to litigants that the proceeding may be recorded for that purpose, as specified. The bill would require a court, prior to purchasing or leasing any electronic recording technology or equipment, to obtain advance approval from the Judicial Council. (8) Existing law states the intent of the Legislature to establish a moratorium on increases in filing fees until January 1, 2012. This bill would provide that, due to the economic crisis facing California in the 2009â€“10 fiscal year, a first paper filing fee increase is included in conjunction with the Budget Act of 2009. This bill would increase those first paper filing fees by $5. (9) Existing law requires the Legislature to make an annual appropriation to the Judicial Council for the general operations of the trial courts based upon the request of the Judicial Council. Existing law requires the annual budget request to include, among other items, a cost-of-living and growth adjustment based on the year-to-year change in the state appropriations limit, and additional funding for the trial courts for costs resulting from the implementation of statutory changes that result in either an increased level of service or a new activity that directly affects the programmatic or operational needs of the courts. This bill would require the Judicial Council to report all approved allocations and reimbursements to the trial courts in each fiscal year, including funding received through augmentations for costs resulting from the implementation of statutory changes, as described above, to the chairs of the Senate and Assembly Committees on Budget and the Judiciary on or before September 30 following the close of each fiscal year. The bill would specify the information to be included in the report, and would require the Administrative Office of the Courts to summarize that information by court and report it to the chairs of the Senate and Assembly Committees on Budget and the Judiciary on or before November 1, 2009, and each November 1 thereafter. The bill would require the trial courts to report to the Judicial Council on or before September 15 of each year all court revenues, expenditures, reserves, and fund balances from the prior fiscal year, as specified, and would require the Judicial Council to summarize and report that information to the chairs of those committees, and to post that information on a public Internet Web site, on or before December 31 of each year. (10) Existing law imposes a fee of $20 upon every conviction for a criminal offense, other than parking offenses, for funding of court security. This bill would increase that court security fee to $30 until July 1, 2011. (11) Existing law authorizes the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to contract with providers of emergency health care services. The department is prohibited from reimbursing a noncontracting hospital or provider of ambulance or other emergency or nonemergency response service at a rate that exceeds the reasonable and allowable costs of the hospital or other provider for those services. The department is required to work with the State Department of Health Care Services in order to establish the costs allowable under these provisions. This bill, instead, would authorize the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to contract with providers of health care services and health care network providers, subject to maximum reimbursement rates, except as specified. The bill would authorize the department to reimburse a noncontract provider of hospital or physician services, or ambulance or any other emergency or nonemergency response service, only at a rate equal to or less than the amount payable under the Medicare Fee Schedule. The bill would authorize the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to adopt regulations to implement these provisions, and to change the maximum reimbursement rates, as specified. (12) Existing law establishes the Youthful Offender Block Grant Program to enhance the capacity of county departments to provide appropriate rehabilitative and supervision services to youthful offenders. Existing law requires the Director of Finance to determine for each fiscal year the total amount of the Youthful Offender Block Grant pursuant to a specified formula and the allocation for each county, and to report those findings to the Controller to make an annual allocation to each county from the Youthful Offender Block Grant Fund. Existing law requires each county, on or before January 1, 2008, to prepare and submit to the Corrections Standards Authority for approval a Juvenile Justice Development Plan for youthful offenders that includes a description of the programs, placements, services, or strategies to be funded by the block grant allocation. This bill instead would require the allocation amount for each county from the Youthful Offender Block Grant Fund to be allocated in 4 equal installments, to be paid in September, December, March, and June, pursuant to the existing formula. The bill would require each county, on or before May 1 of each year, to prepare and submit to the Corrections Standards Authority for approval a Juvenile Justice Development Plan on its proposed expenditures for the next fiscal year of block grant funds that includes a description of the programs, placements, services, or strategies to be funded by the block grant allocation and other specified information. The bill would require each county receiving block grant funds, by October 1 of each year, to submit an annual report to the authority on its utilization of the block grant funds in the preceding fiscal year. By increasing the duties of local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the Corrections Standards Authority to develop and provide a format for the Juvenile Justice Development Plan, and would authorize the authority to develop and provide a dual format for counties for the submission together of that plan and the county multiagency juvenile justice plan, as specified. The bill would require the authority to prepare and make available to the public on its Internet Web site summaries of the annual county reports on the utilization of block grant funds, and would require the authority, by March 15 of each year, to prepare and submit to the Legislature a report summarizing county utilizations of block grant funds in the preceding fiscal year. (13) This bill would provide that its provisions are severable. (14) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on July 1, 2009. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on July 1, 2009, pursuant to the California Constitution. (15) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions. (16) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 22, Statutes of 2009-10 Fourth Extraordinary Session.
Approved by Governor.
Urgency clause adopted.
Enrolled. To Governor at 12:30 p.m.
Senate concurs in Assembly amendments. (Ayes 29. Noes 8. Page 67.) To enrollment.
Read third time. Amended. (Page 55.)
Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 56. Noes 21. Page 62.) To Senate.
In Senate. To unfinished business.
Placed on second reading file.
Read second time. To third reading.
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 23. Noes 12. Page 20.) To Assembly.
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
Read second time. To third reading.
Withdrawn from committee.
Placed on second reading file.
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS.
|Bill Text Versions||Format|
|07/06/09 - Introduced|
|07/23/09 - Amended Assembly|
|07/24/09 - Enrolled|
|07/28/09 - Chaptered|
|No related documents.|
Data on Open States is updated nightly from the official website of the California State Legislature.
If you notice any inconsistencies with these official sources, feel free to file an issue.