BILL NUMBER: AB 3050	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  AUGUST 21, 2008
	AMENDED IN SENATE  AUGUST 12, 2008
	AMENDED IN SENATE  AUGUST 4, 2008
	AMENDED IN SENATE  JULY 2, 2008
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  MAY 23, 2008

INTRODUCED BY    Committee on Judiciary   (
  Jones (Chair), Evans, Feuer, Krekorian, Laird,
Levine, and Lieber   )   Assembly
Member   Jones 
    (   Coauthor:   Assembly Member  
Coto   ) 
    (   Coauthors:   Senators  
Correa,   Kuehl,   and Oropeza   ) 

                        FEBRUARY 28, 2008

   An act to add Article 9.6 (commencing with Section 6159.5) to
Chapter 4 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, to add
Section 367.6 to the Code of Civil Procedure, to add Sections 756 and
756.5 to the Evidence Code, and to amend  , repeal, and add
 Section 68563 of the Government Code, relating to legal
services.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   AB 3050, as amended,  Committee on Judiciary 
 Jones  . Legal aid: court interpreters: appearances by
telephone.
   (1) Existing law, the State Bar Act, provides for the licensure
and regulation of attorneys by the State Bar of California, a public
corporation. Existing law provides that it is the duty of an attorney
to, among other things, never reject, for any consideration personal
to himself or herself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed.
Existing law provides that a lawyer may fulfill his or her ethical
commitment to provide pro bono services, in part, by providing
financial support to organizations providing free legal services to
persons of limited means.
   This bill would prohibit a person or organization that is not a
 specified type of  legal aid organization, as defined, from
using the term "legal aid," or any  variant or 
 confusingly  similar name in any firm name, trade name,
fictitious business name, or other designation, or on any
advertisement, letterhead, business card, or sign. The bill would
subject a person or organization that violates this prohibition to
specified civil liability.
   (2) Existing law provides that, in all general civil cases, as
defined, a party who has provided notice may appear by telephone at
certain conferences, hearings, and proceedings, except as specified.
   This bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1,
2009, and periodically as appropriate, to enter into one or more
master agreements with a vendor or vendors to provide for telephone
appearances in civil cases under the provisions described above, or
as otherwise permitted by law. The bill would impose requirements
regarding those master agreements, including that the vendor charge a
party for an appearance by telephone in an amount set by the
Judicial Council, and that the vendor pay to the state  $20
  $15  for each appearance by telephone  and a
proportionate share of an amount equal to the total revenue received
from vendors by all courts for providing telephone appearances for
the 2007-08 fiscal year  . The bill would require those funds to
be deposited in the Trial Court Trust Fund and used  , upon
appropriation,  for specified purposes.  The bill
would require the Judicial Council, beginning July 1, 2011, to
allocate funding for services that were previously funded by revenue
received from providing telephone appearances in an amount not
greater than the amount of revenue that court received for providing
telephone appearances in the 2007-08 fiscal year. Certain of these
provisions would become operative only if SB 1407 of the 2007-08
Regular Session is enacted and becomes operative on or before January
1, 2009. 
   (3) Existing law requires that, when a witness is incapable of
understanding the English language or is incapable of expressing
himself or herself in the English language so as to be understood
directly by counsel, court, and jury, an interpreter be sworn to
interpret for him or her.
   This bill would require the Judicial Council, by September 1,
2009, to establish a working group to review, identify, and develop
best practices to provide interpreters in civil actions and
proceedings, as specified. The bill would require the Judicial
Council to select up to 5 courts to participate in a pilot project,
to commence on July 1, 2010,  and end on June 30, 2013,
 to provide interpreters in civil proceedings.  The bill
would provide that the initial pilot courts shall participate until
June 30, 2013, and would require the Judicial Council to consider
whether a pilot court shall continue participating in the project and
whether to select another court or additional courts. The pilot
project would be funded from the revenue derived from the telephonic
appearance fee described above. 
   (4) Existing law requires the Judicial Council to conduct a study
of language and interpreter use and need in court proceedings, with
commentary, and to report its findings and recommendations to the
Governor and to the Legislature every 5 years. Existing law requires
that this study serve as the basis for determining the need to
establish interpreter programs and certification and establishing
these programs and examinations through the normal budgetary process.

   This bill would require, in addition,  as of January 1, 2011,
 that the study described above serve as the basis of
determining the need for and use of interpreters in civil and
criminal court proceedings. The bill would require trial courts to
collect and report the use of interpreters in all criminal and civil
proceedings in the manner specified by the Judicial Council.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  The Legislature hereby finds and declares all of the
following:
   (a) California is emblematic of the American dream, a place of
stunning natural beauty, a seat of international commerce, and a land
of unparalleled opportunity. As a result, California is the most
populous and demographically diverse state in the nation, a meeting
place of cultures, ethnicities, and ideas unlike any other in the
world. Of the state's 34 million people, about 26 percent (roughly
8.8 million people) are foreign born. Californians speak more than
220 languages, and 40 percent of the state's population speaks a
language other than English in the home. This extraordinary diversity
is among the state's greatest assets and has helped make California
an international leader in business, the arts, entertainment,
engineering, medicine, and other fields. The state's diversity also
poses unique challenges for the delivery of government services,
particularly for the courts.
   (b) For Californians not proficient in English, the prospect of
navigating the legal system is daunting, especially for the growing
number of parties who do not have access to legal services and
therefore have no choice but to represent themselves in court, which
is a virtually impossible task for people who are unable to
understand the proceedings. Nearly seven million Californians cannot
access the courts without significant language assistance, cannot
understand pleadings, forms, or other legal documents, cannot
communicate with clerks or court staff, and cannot understand or
participate meaningfully in court proceedings, much less effectively
present their cases without a qualified interpreter. People with
limited English proficiency are also often members of groups whose
cultural traits or economic circumstances make them more likely to be
subjected to legal problems, in part because perpetrators recognize
their victims' limited ability to access judicial protection. It is
essential to provide English learners and other non-English-speaking
litigants with interpreters in order to provide full and equal access
to our justice system without regard to language.
   (c) The Legislature has previously recognized that the number of
persons with limited English proficiency in California is increasing
and recognized the need to provide equal justice under the law to all
California residents and to provide for their special needs in their
relations with the judicial and administrative law system. The
Legislature has likewise recognized that the effective maintenance of
a democratic society depends on the right and ability of its
residents to communicate with their government and the right and
ability of the government to communicate with them.
   (d) Inadequate resources to assist litigants with limited English
proficiency affect the court's ability to function properly, causing
delays in proceedings for all court users, inappropriate defaults,
and faulty interpretation that can ultimately subvert justice. Court
interpreter services are a core court function. Our judicial system
relies on the adversarial process in which neutral arbiters decide
disputes based upon competing presentations of facts and law.
Conducting court proceedings when one party is incapable of fully
participating significantly impairs the quality and efficiency of the
process and its results, including compliance with court orders. The
courts have made significant efforts to assist litigants with
limited English proficiency, including steps to increase the number
of certified and registered interpreters and to provide interpreters
in civil cases, if resources are available. Nevertheless, court
proceedings are required to be conducted in English, and most crucial
court forms and documents are available only in English, while the
number of skilled interpreters has actually declined over the past
decade and the number of persons requiring interpreter services has
increased. As a result, a qualified interpreter is not provided in
most civil proceedings.
   (e) The inability to respond to the language needs of parties in
court impairs trust and confidence in the judicial system and
undermines efforts to secure justice for all. The authority of the
courts depends on public perceptions of fairness and accessibility.
Any significant erosion of public trust and confidence in the
fairness of judicial outcomes threatens the future legitimacy of the
legal system. By excluding a large segment of the population from
participation in an institution that shapes and reflects our values,
we threaten the integrity of the judicial process. Resentment
fostered by the inability to access the benefits of the court system
can ultimately impair enforcement of judicial decrees and attenuate
the rule of law.
   (f) Reliance on untrained interpreters, such as family members or
children, can lead to faulty translations and threaten the court's
ability to ensure justice. Court interpretation is extremely
difficult and takes a rare combination of skills, experience, and
training. Apart from the possibility of fraud, unqualified
interpreters often fail to accurately and comprehensively convey
questions and distort testimony by omitting or adding information, or
by stylistically altering the tone and intent of the speaker,
thereby preventing courts from hearing the testimony properly. These
problems compromise the factfinding process and can result in genuine
injustice.
   (g) An overwhelming number of Californians believe that
interpreters should be made available to assist non-English speakers
in all court proceedings, and that interpreters should be provided
free of charge to low-income non-English speakers.
   (h) California law currently mandates appointment of an
interpreter for all witnesses in civil cases, and for parties with
hearing impairments. In addition, California statutes mandate the
appointment of an interpreter in adjudicative proceedings before
state agencies, boards, and commissions at no charge to the parties
whenever a party or the party's witness does not proficiently speak
or understand English. Other states, by contrast, provide both
witnesses and parties with a right to a court-appointed interpreter
in all civil matters at no cost to the party. 
  SEC. 2.    It is the intent of the Legislature to
encourage the provision of pro bono legal services and financial
support of nonprofit legal organizations that provide free legal
services to underserved communities. 
   SEC. 2.    The Legislature finds and declares that
there continues to be a shortage in the availability of certified and
registered interpreters in the state courts that impacts the state's
ability to provide meaningful access to justice for all court users.
It is the intent of the Legislature that every effort be made to
recruit and retain qualified interpreters to work in the state
courts, and that the Judicial Council make further efforts to improve
and expand court interpreter services and address the shortage of
qualified court interpreters. 
  SEC. 3.  Article 9.6 (commencing with Section 6159.5) is added to
Chapter 4 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, to
read:

      Article 9.6.  Legal Aid Organizations


   6159.5.  The Legislature hereby finds and declares all of the
following:
   (a) Legal aid programs provide a valuable service to the public by
providing free legal services to the poor.
   (b) Private, for-profit organizations that have no lawyers have
been using the name "legal aid" in order to obtain business from
people who believe they are obtaining services from a nonprofit legal
aid organization.
   (c) Public opinion research has shown that the term "legal aid" is
commonly understood by the public to mean free legal assistance for
the poor.
   (d) Members of the public seeking free legal assistance are often
referred by telephone and other directory assistance information
providers to for-profit organizations that charge a fee for their
services, and there are a large number of listings in many telephone
directories for "legal aid" that are not nonprofit but are actually
for-profit organizations.
   (e) The Los Angeles Superior Court has held that there is a common
law trademark on the name "legal aid," which means legal services
for the poor provided by a nonprofit organization.
   (f) The public will be benefited if for-profit organizations are
prohibited from using the term "legal aid," in order to avoid
confusion.
   6159.51.  For purposes of this article, "legal aid organization"
means a nonprofit organization that provides civil legal services for
the poor without charge.
   6159.52.  It is unlawful for any person or organization to use the
term "legal aid," "legal aide," or any  variant or 
 confusingly  similar name in any firm name, trade name,
fictitious business name, or any other designation, or on any
advertisement, letterhead, business card, or sign, unless the person
or organization is a legal aid organization  subject to fair use
principles for nominative, descriptive, or noncommercial use  .
   6159.53.  (a) Any consumer injured by a violation of Section
6159.52 may file a complaint and seek injunctive relief, restitution,
and damages in the superior court of any county in which the
defendant maintains an office, advertises, or is listed in a
telephone directory.
   (b) A person who violates Section 6159.52 shall be subject to an
injunction against further violation of Section 6159.52 by any legal
aid organization that maintains an office in any county in which the
defendant maintains an office, advertises, or is listed in a
telephone directory. In an action under this subdivision, it is not
necessary to allege or prove actual damage to the plaintiff, and
irreparable harm and interim harm to the plaintiff shall be presumed.

   (c) Reasonable attorney's fees shall be awarded to the prevailing
plaintiff in any action under this section.
  SEC. 4.  Section 367.6 is added to the Code of Civil Procedure, to
read:
   367.6.  (a) On or before July 1, 2009, and periodically as
appropriate, the Judicial Council shall enter into one or more master
agreements with a vendor or vendors to provide for telephone
appearances in civil cases under Section 367.5, or as otherwise
permitted by law.
   (b) Each master agreement shall include the following terms:
   (1) The vendor shall charge a party for an appearance an amount
set by the Judicial Council, which shall comply with the provisions
of subdivision (c).  The vendor shall report to the Judicial
Council information regarding the number of liens asserted by the
vendor for waived charges   pursuant to subdivision (c), and
the total amount so collected. 
   (2) The vendor shall indemnify and hold the court harmless from
claims arising from a failure or interruption of service.
   (3) Except as provided by paragraph (2) of subdivision (c), for
each appearance a party makes by telephone, the vendor shall pay to
the state  twenty dollars ($20)   fifteen
dollars ($15),  which shall be transmitted quarterly to be
deposited in the Trial Court Trust Fund and  used, upon
appropriation, as follows: 
    (A)     Fifteen dollars
($15) of each twenty dollars ($20) shall be  used by the
Judicial Council for the expenses of the Judicial Council in
implementing and administering the civil interpreter pilot program
under Sections 756 and 756.5 of the Evidence Code and for
reimbursement to those courts providing civil interpreters pursuant
to those sections. 
   (B) The remaining five dollars ($5) of each twenty dollars ($20)
shall be allocated to courts, until June 30, 2011, for the following
purposes:  
   (i) The funds shall be used first to offset any otherwise
unreimbursed expenses, as proven to the Judicial Council, in
providing for telephone appearances.  
   (ii) The funds shall next be used to provide funding to prevent
significant disruption in services in courts where those services
were previously funded by revenue received from providing telephone
appearances. The amount provided to any court pursuant to this
paragraph shall not exceed the amount of revenue received by that
court for providing telephone appearances for the 2007-08 fiscal
year. The authority to provide this funding shall expire on June 30,
2011.  
   (iii) Any remaining funds shall be allocated by the Judicial
Council to implement those Judicial Council priorities providing
increased access to, efficiency, and accountability in the courts.
 
   (C) Beginning July 1, 2011, the remaining five dollars ($5) of
each twenty dollars ($20) shall be deposited in the State Court
Facilities Construction Fund, established in Section 70371 of the
Government Code.  
   (4) In addition to the amount provided by paragraph (3), all
vendors shall pay to the state, on a quarterly basis, an amount equal
to one-quarter of the total amount of revenue received from all
vendors by all courts for providing telephone appearances for the
2007-08 fiscal year. Each vendor shall pay a proportionate share of
this total amount. The Judicial Council shall notify each vendor, on
a quarterly basis, of its share of this amount, which shall be based
on that vendor's percentage of the total number of appearances by
telephone during the previous quarter. Following receipt of the
notice, each vendor shall transmit its share of the amount to the
state for deposit in the Trial Court Trust Fund to provide funding
for the prevention of significant disruption in services in courts
where those services were previously funded by revenue received from
providing telephone appearances.  
   (4) 
    (5)  The master agreement shall include other terms as
the Judicial Council deems appropriate. These terms may include, but
are not limited to, a provision providing the circumstances in which
the charge shall be made for a telephone appearance canceled by the
party.
   (c) The amount the vendor shall charge a party for an appearance
shall be uniform statewide.
   (1) The Judicial Council shall establish the amount to be charged
a party for an appearance.
   (2) If the party has received a waiver of fees  because he or
she is proceeding in forma pauperis  under Section 68511.3 of
the Government Code, the vendor shall not charge that party for an
appearance and shall not pay  twenty dollars ($20) 
 fifteen dollars ($15)  as otherwise required by paragraph
(3) of subdivision (b). The vendor shall be granted a lien in the
amount of the waived charge on any judgment that the party may
receive.  Notice of the lien shall be given to the parties under
rules and on forms adopted by the Judicial Council.  If the
vendor later receives the amount previously waived, for each
appearance for which the vendor receives payment, the vendor shall
transmit  twenty dollars ($20)   fifteen dollars
($15)  to the state for deposit as provided in paragraph (3) of
subdivision (b). If the charge has been waived in part, or the
amount recovered by the vendor is not the full amount, the amount
transmitted to the state shall be reduced proportionally.
   (3) The Judicial Council may establish an additional amount to be
charged, which shall also be uniform statewide, when a party requests
service from a vendor within a short period of time prior to the
hearing, as determined by the Judicial Council.
   (d) If a court elects to make telephone appearances available
through one or more vendors, the court shall enter into one or more
participation agreements under one or more of the master agreements
entered into by the Judicial Council.
   (e) If a court elects to provide telephone appearance services to
parties directly, either in addition to or in lieu of a participation
agreement, the court shall charge a party no more than the same
amount that a vendor may charge under the master agreements provided
for in subdivision (a), subject to the same conditions, waivers, and
transmission of amounts to the state as apply to a vendor.
   (f) Notwithstanding any other provision in this section, a
judicial officer is authorized to allow the appearance by telephone
of parties in that judicial officer's courtroom without the
requirement of using a vendor or paying any amount for the appearance
by telephone. 
   (g) To prevent significant disruptions in those services in courts
that were previously funded by revenue received from providing
telephone appearances, the Judicial Council shall, beginning July 1,
2011, allocate funding in an amount not greater than the amount of
revenue that court received for providing telephone appearances in
the 2007-08 fiscal year.  
  SEC. 4.5.    Section 367.6 is added to the Code of
Civil Procedure, to read:
   367.6.  (a) On or before July 1, 2009, and periodically as
appropriate, the Judicial Council shall enter into one or more master
agreements with a vendor or vendors to provide for telephone
appearances in civil cases under Section 367.5, or as otherwise
permitted by law.
   (b) Each master agreement shall include the following terms:
   (1) The vendor shall charge a party for an appearance an amount
set by the Judicial Council, which shall comply with the provisions
of subdivision (c).
   (2) The vendor shall indemnify and hold the court harmless from
claims arising from a failure or interruption of service.
   (3) Except as provided by paragraph (2) of subdivision (c), for
each appearance a party makes by telephone, the vendor shall pay to
the state twenty dollars ($20) which shall be transmitted quarterly
to be deposited in the Trial Court Trust Fund and used, upon
appropriation, as follows:
   (A) Fifteen dollars ($15) of each twenty dollars ($20) shall be
used by the Judicial Council for the expenses of the Judicial Council
in implementing and administering the civil interpreter pilot
program under Sections 756 and 756.5 of the Evidence Code and for
reimbursement to those courts providing civil interpreters pursuant
to those sections.
   (B) The remaining five dollars ($5) of each twenty dollars ($20)
shall be allocated to courts, until June 30, 2011, for the following
purposes:
   (i) The funds shall be used first to offset any otherwise
unreimbursed expenses, as proven to the Judicial Council, in
providing for telephone appearances.
   (ii) The funds shall next be used to provide funding to prevent
significant disruption in services in courts where those services
were previously funded by revenue received from providing telephone
appearances. The amount provided to any court pursuant to this
paragraph shall not exceed the amount of revenue received by that
court for providing telephone appearances for the 2007-08 fiscal
year. The authority to provide this funding shall expire on June 30,
2011.
   (iii) Any remaining funds shall be allocated by the Judicial
Council to implement those Judicial Council priorities providing
increased access to, efficiency, and accountability in the courts.
   (C) Beginning July 1, 2011, the remaining five dollars ($5) of
each twenty dollars ($20) shall be deposited in the Immediate and
Critical Needs Account of the State Court Facilities Construction
Fund, established in Section 70371.5 of the Government Code.
   (4) The master agreement shall include other terms as the Judicial
Council deems appropriate. These terms may include, but are not
limited to, a provision providing the circumstances in which the
charge shall be made for a telephone appearance canceled by the
party.
   (c) The amount the vendor shall charge a party for an appearance
shall be uniform statewide.
   (1) The Judicial Council shall establish the amount to be charged
a party for an appearance.
   (2) If the party has received a waiver of fees under Section
68511.3 of the Government Code, the vendor shall not charge that
party for an appearance and shall not pay twenty dollars ($20) as
otherwise required by paragraph (3) of subdivision (b). The vendor
shall be granted a lien in the amount of the waived charge on any
judgment that the party may receive. If the vendor later receives the
amount previously waived, for each appearance for which the vendor
receives payment, the vendor shall transmit twenty dollars ($20) to
the state for deposit as provided in paragraph (3) of subdivision
(b). If the charge has been waived in part, or the amount recovered
by the vendor is not the full amount, the amount transmitted to the
state shall be reduced proportionally.
   (3) The Judicial Council may establish an additional amount to be
charged, which shall also be uniform statewide, when a party requests
service from a vendor within a short period of time prior to the
hearing, as determined by the Judicial Council.
   (d) If a court elects to make telephone appearances available
through one or more vendors, the court shall enter into one or more
participation agreements under one or more of the master agreements
entered into by the Judicial Council.
   (e) If a court elects to provide telephone appearance services to
parties directly, either in addition to or in lieu of a participation
agreement, the court shall charge a party no more than the same
amount that a vendor may charge under the master agreements provided
for in subdivision (a), subject to the same conditions, waivers, and
transmission of amounts to the state as apply to a vendor.
   (f) Notwithstanding any other provision in this section, a
judicial officer is authorized to allow the appearance by telephone
of parties in that judicial officer's courtroom without the
requirement of using a vendor or paying any amount for the appearance
by telephone.
   (g) To prevent significant disruptions in those services in courts
that were previously funded by revenue received from providing
telephone appearances, the Judicial Council shall, beginning July 1,
2011, allocate funding for those services in an amount not greater
than the amount of revenue that court received for providing
telephone appearances in the 2007-08 fiscal year. 
  SEC. 5.  Section 756 is added to the Evidence Code, to read:
   756.  (a)  (1)    On or before September 1,
2009, the Judicial Council shall establish a working group to review,
identify, and develop best practices to provide interpreters in
civil actions and proceedings. The best practices developed by the
working group shall be used in carrying out the pilot project
described in Section 756.5.  In 
    (2)     In  developing the best
practices, the working group shall consider ways to maximize the use
of existing resources, calendaring issues, the effective use of
technology, and other practices that will assist courts effectively
deploying interpreters in civil proceedings. 
   (3) Best practices shall include training guidelines to be
utilized by courts participating in the pilot project described in
Section 756.5 to ensure that court interpreters receive training
necessary to comply with the requirements of Section 756.5. Training
activities may include, but are not limited to, video broadcasts,
Internet-based training, and dissemination of written materials.

   (b) The working group shall include court executive officers,
presiding judges, interpreter coordinators, interpreters,  at
least two of whom shall   be nominated by an exclusive
representative of interpreter employees,  representatives of
legal services organizations and organizations representing
individuals with limited English proficiency, and others the Judicial
Council determines necessary.  The working group shall also
include a representative from a rural community in order to highlight
the particular challenges of providing court interpreter services in
rural com   munities. 
  SEC. 6.  Section 756.5 is added to the Evidence Code, to read:
   756.5.  (a)  (1)    The Judicial Council shall
select up to five courts to participate in a pilot project, which
shall commence on July 1, 2010,  and end on June 30, 2013,
 to provide interpreters in civil proceedings as specified
in this section. The pilot courts shall be selected from among those
participating in the working group described in Section 756. 
   (2) The initial pilot courts shall participate in the pilot
project until June 30, 2013. The Judicial Council, in consultation
with pilot courts, shall consider whether a pilot court shall
continue participating in the project and whether to select another
court or additional courts to join the project. Courts selected to
join the project shall participate for three years or another
duration determined by the Judicial Council, in consultation with the
pilot courts. In the selection of the pilot courts, the Judicial
Council shall assess the court's capacity for success. 
   (b) The pilot project shall be conducted for the purpose of
creating models for effectively providing interpreters in civil
matters, implementing best practices, and ascertaining the need for
additional interpreter resources and funding to provide interpreters
in civil matters on a statewide basis. The pilot project shall be
funded from the revenue derived from the telephonic appearance fee
pursuant to Section 367.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
   (c) Interpreters shall be provided by the pilot courts as follows:

                              (1) The pilot courts shall provide
interpreters to any party proceeding in forma pauperis, pursuant to
Section 68511.3 of the Government Code, who is present and who does
not proficiently speak or understand the English language for the
purpose of interpreting the proceedings in a language that the party
understands and assisting communications between the party  , his
or her attorney,  and the court in the following types of
actions and proceedings:
   (A) Actions and proceedings under Section 527.6 of the Code
 of Civil Procedure that are also under Division 10
(commencing with Section 6200) of the Family Code.   of
Civil Procedure. 
   (B) Actions and proceedings brought under the Family Code.
   (C) Actions and proceedings relating to unlawful detainer.
   (D) Actions and proceedings involving the appointment or
termination of a probate guardian or conservator.
   (E) Actions or proceedings under the Elder Abuse and Dependent
Adult Civil Protection Act (Chapter 11 (commencing with Section
15600) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code).

   (2) The pilot courts shall provide interpreters in other civil
actions or proceedings or in matters in which the party is not
appearing in forma pauperis if there is sufficient funding and
interpreter resources available to meet all the interpretation needs
in actions and proceedings described in paragraph (1).
   (3) The fees of interpreters utilized under this section shall be
paid for any party proceeding in forma pauperis pursuant to Section
68511.3 of the Government Code.
   (4) The pilot courts shall develop a methodology for 
providing interpreters if sufficient funds provided pursuant to
subdivision (b) are not available   deploying available
interpreter resources if funds provided pursuant to subdivision (b)
are insufficient  to meet the needs for court interpreters in
all of the actions and proceedings set forth in paragraph (1), or if,
after diligent search, a sufficient number of interpreters 
are   is  not available. The pilot courts shall not
consider the order in which the case types are listed in paragraph
(1) in developing this methodology. For purposes of developing this
methodology, the pilot courts shall consider the most effective way
to deploy limited resources.  A pilot court shall not be
obligated to provide services in the areas set forth in paragraph (1)
beyond the services that can be provided with the funding provided
by the telephonic appearance fee pursuant to   Section 367.6
of the Code of Civil Procedure. 
   (5)  The interpreter shall be certified or registered pursuant
to Article 4 (commencing with Section 68560) of Chapter 2 of Title 8
of the Government Code.  Subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section
755 of the Evidence Code shall apply to proceedings described in this
section. 
   (6) The pilot courts may utilize technological solutions to
address the need for providing court interpreters when there are not
sufficient interpreters available in the pilot court to meet the
need. 
   (d) This section shall not be construed to negate or limit any
right to an interpreter in a civil action or proceeding otherwise
provided by state or federal law.
   (e) This section shall not be construed to alter the right of an
individual to an interpreter in criminal, traffic or other
infraction, juvenile, or mental competency actions or proceedings.
   (f) This section shall not result in a reduction in staffing or
compromise the quality of interpreting services in criminal,
juvenile, or other types of matters in which interpreters are
provided.
   (g) (1) On or before September 1, 2012, the Judicial Council shall
report to the Legislature its findings and recommendations based on
the experiences of the  pilot project   model
pilot program  . The report shall include findings and
recommendations regarding the need for additional 
interpreter resources and funding   interpreters and
funding, or other resources,  to provide interpreters in both of
the following:
   (A) Case types that were the subject of the pilot.
   (B) All civil actions and proceedings.
   (2) The report shall also describe, to the extent possible, the
impact of the availability of interpreters on access to justice and
on court administration and efficiency. 
   (3) The report shall also describe the factors affecting selection
of pilot courts, such as the court's capacity for success,
innovation, and efficiency, including, but not limited to, strategies
for collaborating with organizations representing stakeholders,
utilizing local resources, and methods for addressing the
availability of qualified interpreters.  
   (h) Nothing in this chapter shall limit or restrict courts from
providing interpreters in civil proceedings when those services are
already being provided or in matters in which the judicial officer
deems it necessary to appoint an interpreter.  
   (i) Nothing in this chapter shall alter or negate the application
of the Trial Court Interpreter Employment and Labor Relations Act
(Chapter 7.5 (commencing with Section 71800) of Title 8 of the
Government Code) to the provision of interpreters pursuant to this
section. 
   SEC. 7.    Section 68563 of the   Government
Code   is amended to read: 
   68563.   (a)    The Judicial Council shall
conduct a study of language and interpreter use and need in court
proceedings, with commentary, and shall report its findings and
recommendations to the Governor and to the Legislature not later than
July 1, 1995, and every five years thereafter. The study shall serve
as a basis for (1) determining the need to establish interpreter
programs and certification examinations, and (2) establishing these
programs and examinations through the normal budgetary process. The
study shall also serve as a basis for (1) determining ways in which
the Judicial Council can make available to the public, through public
service announcements and otherwise, information relating to
opportunities, requirements, testing, application procedures, and
employment opportunities for interpreters, and (2) establishing and
evaluating these programs through the normal budgetary process. 
   (b) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2011, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2011, deletes or extends
that date. 
   SEC. 8.    Section 68563 is added to the  
Government Code  , to read:  
   68563.  (a) The Judicial Council shall conduct a study of language
and interpreter use and need in court proceedings, with commentary,
and shall report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and
to the Legislature not later than July 1, 2015, and every five years
thereafter.
   (b) (1) The study shall serve as a basis for all of the following:

   (A) Determining the need to establish interpreter programs and
certification examinations.
   (B) Establishing these programs and examinations through the
normal budgetary process.
   (C) Demonstrating the need for and use of interpreters in civil
and criminal court proceedings, and the extent to which that need is
being met.
   (2) To assist with the completion of the study, trial courts shall
collect and report the use of interpreters in all criminal and civil
proceedings in the manner specified by the Judicial Council,
including, but not limited to, the following data:
   (A) The extent of the need for, and the languages for which
parties need, an interpreter, by type of action or proceeding, and
whether the party is appearing in propria persona or in forma
pauperis.
   (B) The languages for which an interpreter is provided, by type of
action or proceeding, and whether the party is appearing in propria
persona or in forma pauperis.
   (C) The extent to which the interpreters provided are court
employees or independent contractors.
   (D) The extent to which interpreters are appointed pursuant to
subdivision (c) of Section 68561.
   (E) The extent to which interpreters are provided pursuant to
subdivision (d) of Section 68561.
   (c) The study shall also serve as a basis for both of the
following:
   (1) Determining ways in which the Judicial Council can make
available to the public, through public service announcements and
otherwise, information relating to opportunities, requirements,
testing, application procedures, and employment opportunities for
interpreters.
   (2) Establishing and evaluating these programs through the normal
budgetary process.
   (d) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2011. 

  SEC. 7.   Section 68563 of the Government Code is
amended to read:
   68563.  (a) The Judicial Council shall conduct a study of language
and interpreter use and need in court proceedings, with commentary,
and shall report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and
to the Legislature not later than July 1, 1995, and every five years
thereafter.
   (b) (1) The study shall serve as a basis for all of the following:

   (A) Determining the need to establish interpreter programs and
certification examinations.
   (B) Establishing these programs and examinations through the
normal budgetary process.
   (C) Determining the need for and use of interpreters in civil and
criminal court proceedings.
   (2) To assist with the completion of the study, trial courts shall
collect and report the use of interpreters in all criminal and civil
proceedings in the manner specified by the Judicial Council,
including, but not limited to, the following data:
   (A) The languages for which parties need an interpreter, by type
of action or proceeding, and whether the party is appearing in
propria persona or in forma pauperis.
   (B) The languages for which an interpreter is provided, by type of
action or proceeding, and whether the party is appearing in propria
persona or in forma pauperis.
   (C) The extent to which the interpreters provided are court
employees or independent contractors.
   (D) The extent to which interpreters are appointed pursuant to
subdivision (c) of Section 68561.
   (E) The extent to which interpreters are provided pursuant to
subdivision (d) of Section 68561.
   (c) The study shall also serve as a basis for both of the
following:
   (1) Determining ways in which the Judicial Council can make
available to the public, through public service announcements and
otherwise, information relating to opportunities, requirements,
testing, application procedures, and employment opportunities for
interpreters.
   (2) Establishing and evaluating these programs through the normal
budgetary process.  
  SEC. 8.    Section 4.5 of this bill shall become
operative only if SB 1407 of the 2007-08 Regular Session is enacted
and becomes operative on or before January 1, 2009, in which case
Section 4 of this bill shall not become operative. 
                                                     ____ CORRECTIONS
  Text--Pages 8, 15, 16, and 17.
                         ____