COUNTY CLERK LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING



COUNTY CLERK LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING

Meeting Date: Tuesday, July 11st, 2017

Time: 10:00 AM

Location: Conference Call

MINUTES

2016 County Clerk Legislative Committee Members

|Melinda Greene / Danielle Rifilato, Santa Barbara |P |Joani Finwall / Dana Gardner, San Bernardino |P |

|Laura Wilson / Joseph Barton / Lisset Barajas, Contra Costa |P |Victoria Rodriguez, Riverside |P |

|Teresa Williamson, San Joaquin |X |Catherine Stefani, San Francisco |X |

|Kammi Foote, Inyo |P |Belinda Gamutan / Marnie Stout, Santa Clara |P |

|Jamie Palma / Julia Melendez, Los Angeles |P |Sheila Harmon / David Valenzuela, Ventura |X |

|Chuck Storey, Imperial |X |Carrie Anderson / Deva Proto, Sonoma |P |

|Olga Lobato / Florence Shimano, Marin |X |Donna Allred / Andrew Graham / Judy Mendoza, Sacramento |P |

|Kathy Lackey, Butte |X |Elizabeth Flores / Andrea Velasco, San Diego |P |

(P – Present; X – Not in attendance)

1. Call to Order

Meeting started at 10:00 AM. Also in attendance: Joanna Francescut, Shasta; Juliet Fernandez, San Mateo; Richard Mendez / Nadia Alobaidi / Isabel Dominguez, Orange; Barbara Levey / Judy Eden, Merced; Kelly Sanders, Humboldt; Margarita Williams, Santa Cruz; Julie Rizzo, Plumas.

2. Legislation

Senate Bill 800 (Business and Professions) Cleanup – Section 34

• Fingerprint and livescan language cleanup. “Fingerprint Cards” have been replaced with “Request for Live Scan”.

• Still moving along.

Assembly Bill 660 (Rubio) Fictitious Business Name Publication Solicitation

• Removes publication requirement for FBN statements, original filings, withdrawals, amendments, and abandonments.

• San Bernardino has passed a local ordinance with constitutional and court approval. There was also opposition against this ordinance.

• We amended it to prohibit commercial activity on the grounds of the County Clerk’s office in an attempt to try and avoid having solicitors harassing customers. There was pushback about whether this infringed on a person’s Constitutional rights, but with San Bernardino’s help with their previous court cases on this subject, we overcame this issue.

• Opposition from newspapers and real estate groups, such as: California Mortgage Association, California Escrow Association, United Trustees Association, etc.

• Penal Code 602.1b prohibits obstructing or intimidating people on the grounds of public agencies. We argued that it doesn’t do this, but it’s more of misleading and telling people they need to pay for their services. Instead, they wanted us to amend this part to say that the solicitors cannot lie to the public. We did this, and they suggest that we post this updated code to try and dismay the solicitors.

• Still moving along.

Assembly Bill 82 (Medina) Diacritical Marks

• AB 82 includes all vital records, including marriage licenses include diacritical marks, including but not limited to accents, tildes, graves, umlauts and cedillas.

• It focuses on vital records (birth, death, marriage, and fetal death).

• This affects the State Registrar, and it does not mention the DMV, Secretary of State, the Department of Public Health, etc.

Problems:

• Software can only accept the 26 letters of the alphabet, so there would need to be an update to accept diacritical marks.

• Big issue is when other forms of ID will not be matching, such as: Driver’s License, Social Security, Passports, etc. Cannot verify their identity with unmatching IDs.

• Would other agencies accept IDs with diacritical marks?

• People would be telling Clerks how to spell their name without any proof.

• Can you search using a diacritical mark?

• How does the public know how to type the diacritical mark?

• How do you accommodate all the nationalities and their diacritical marks?

• There are major costs to this bill, and it’s difficult to measure. They came up with $11 million dollars per county to implement diacritical marks. They also have to figure out the cost for the State to upgrade their system, which is probably around $11 million as well.

• Likely to pass. Need financial cost from counties to determine impact.

• State thinks it’ll cost 20 million dollars to implement this.

• CDPH (Health Dept.) opposes this bill.

• Delaware only allows hyphens and apostrophes, Illinois (marriages only) and Maryland (birth certificates only) allow a subset, and Alaska allows case by case basis (they only allowed 5 so far, because they reason the federal government doesn’t allow diacritical marks, even when their system can handle it).

Assembly Bill 430 (Irwin) Marriage Solemnization: Judges

• Judges want to be able to charge for ceremonies.

• This is an urgency bill. Effective immediately.

• Chaptered.

Senate Bill 80 (Wieckowski) California Environmental Quality Act: notices

• Requires electronic posting of specified notices by lead agencies and county clerks, as well as requiring filing of a notice for every categorical exemption claimed under the CEQA Guidelines.

Senate Bill 273 (Hill) Marriage: Minors

• Existing law authorizes an unmarried person who is under 18 years of age to marry upon obtaining a court order granting permission and the written consent of at least one parent of each party to the marriage.

• Amendment now states more rigorous “judicial screening” than outright prohibit of a mirage license to a person under 18 years old.

• If there is more than 1 parent, they are interviewed separately.

• Must bring it (the approval) to the Clerk at the issuance of the license and wait 1 month from when the order is granted.

Senate Bill 771 (De Leon) CEQA Local Training Requirement

• Will require continuing education requirement for employees of public agencies who have responsibility for overseeing compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This would require clerks to receive 2 hours of continuing education.

3. Bill Assignments

Riverside:

• AB 46

• AB 82 

• SB 244 

• SB 529

San Francisco:

• AB 168

• SB 597

Los Angeles:

• AB 660

San Bernardino:

• AB 430

• AB 492

Sacramento:

• AB 571

• SB 310

• SB 800

San Diego:

• AB 428

Inyo:

• AB 890

• AB 1404

• SB 771

Contra Costa:

• AB 740

• AB 1093

Imperial:

• SB 447

•

Marin:

• AB 1726

• SB 80

Santa Clara:

• SB 2

•

Ventura:

• AB 242

• AB 1479 (Oppose)

• SB 179

• SB 205

Santa Barbara:

• AB 22

• AB 459

AB 22 – Are we going, as a society, going towards a cloud system? How secure is it? Hacking concerns, like the election.

4. Adjourned 11:15 AM

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download