BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1103
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 1103 (Papan)
As Amended June 19, 2001
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |76-0 |(May 10, 2001) |SENATE: |37-0 |(June 21, |
| | | | | |2001) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: L. GOV.
SUMMARY : Revises the requirements for law library boards of
trustees.
The Senate amendments require a majority of incumbent judges to
concur when the county board of supervisors reduces the size of
the board of trustees.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes in each county a board of law library trustees for
the purpose of governing the county law library.
2)Provides for the membership of those boards, which is limited
to superior and municipal court judges, members of the county
bar, and members of the board of supervisors.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill:
1)Authorized the appointment of persons who are residents of the
county as law library board trustees.
2)Expanded the authorization of who may serve as a trustee from
county bar members to State Bar members.
3)Eliminated the requirement that a municipal court judge serve
as a trustee.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)SCA 4 (Lockyer), Chapter 34, Statutes of 1996, provided a
local option for merger of the superior and municipal courts
AB 1103
Page 2
in each county. It addressed the concern about duplication
of resources between the courts and facilitating the
administration of justice. SB 2169 (Lockyer), Chapter 931,
Statutes of 1998, made various technical statutory changes
needed
to implement trial court unification in counties which so
elected following the approval of SCA 4. This bill is a
continuation of such efforts, amending the requirements of who
may sit on a law library board of trustees.
2)Proponents of this bill contend that allowing members of the
general public to serve on the boards of county law libraries
would broaden the representation of the public on county law
library boards and reflect the extent of actual library users.
They state that there are an
increasing number of laymen using law libraries for purposes
such as self-representation in a court of law. In addition,
proponents assert that allowing the general public onto a
board enables the lay community to become more familiar with
what a law library does.
Proponents assert that allowing the general public on a board
would be beneficial for fundraising. Judges are constrained
in what they can do to raise money due to ethical obligations.
Proponents state that a major problem of county law libraries
is funding because the statutory source of funding emanates
from a fraction of civil filing fees. Decline in civil action
filings has reduced the county law library funding in the past
several years. They believe that a county board of
supervisors is more likely to appropriate general fund county
money to the county law library if the power of the board and
the courts exists to appoint at least one law library trustee
who is a representative of the general public.
3)Many attorneys do not belong to a county bar in the locale
where they live or practice, whereas all attorneys are
required to belong to the State Bar. Deleting the requirement
of county bar membership allows all of the attorneys in the
county to be eligible to serve on
the board.
Analysis Prepared by : Joanne Wong / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958
AB 1103
Page 3
FN: 0001627