BILL ANALYSIS Ó
ACR 98
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 10, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
ACR 98 (Wagner) - As Introduced: January 2, 2012
PROPOSED CONSENT (As Proposed to be Amended)
SUBJECT : CALIFORNIA LAW REVISION COMMISSION: STUDIES:
REAUTHORIZATION
KEY ISSUE : SHOULD THE CALIFORNIA LAW REVISION COMMISSION BE
AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE ITS WORK ASSISTING THE LEGISLATURE IN
IMPROVING CALIFORNIA LAW?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this measure is keyed
non-fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
This resolution re-authorizes the California Law Revision
Commission (CLRC) to continue its work to study 21 specified
topics previously authorized or directed for study by the
Legislature, for its report and recommendations to the
Legislature. In addition to 21 previously authorized topics,
this concurrent resolution would remove one previously
authorized topic (special assessments for public improvement)
from the CLRC's calendar. Furthermore, at the request of the
Chairs of the Assembly Water, Parks & Wildlife and Senate
Natural Resources & Water Committees, the measure adds
authority, and requests the Commission, to conduct a review of
the Fish and Game Code. ACR 98 further requires that before
commencing work on any project within the list of topics
authorized for study by the Legislature, the Commission shall
submit a detailed description of the scope of work not only to
the Chairs and Vice Chairs of the Senate and Assembly Committees
on Judiciary, but also to the Chair and Vice Chair of any policy
committee that has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
study. The measure also adds new language expressly approving 2
long-standing Commission practices of providing copies of the
recommendations to members of a policy committee and having
staff available at hearings to explain recommendations and
answer questions from committee members.
Thus the bill continues the long tradition of the California Law
ACR 98
Page 2
Revision Commission to continue its long-standing and helpful
work in assisting the Legislature to improve California law.
There is no known opposition to the measure.
SUMMARY : Authorizes the CLRC to study specific topics.
Specifically, this measure :
1)Re-authorizes the CLRC's study of specified topics (listed
below).
2)Removes authority to study special assessments for public
improvement.
3)Adds authority to conduct a substantial review of the Fish and
Game Code.
4)Requires that, in addition to submitting a detailed
description of the scope of work to the Chairs and Vice Chairs
of the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary before
commencing work on any project within the calendar of topics
authorized or directed for study by the Legislature, the
Commission shall also submit notification to the Chair and
Vice Chair of any policy committee that has jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the study. Any major change to the
scope of work would also require notification.
5)Invites staff of the Commission to appear and testify at any
committee hearing of a bill to implement a commission
recommendation, for the purpose of explaining the
recommendation and answering questions posed by committee
members, provided that the staff may not advocate for the
passage or defeat of the legislation.
6)Invites the Commission to provide a copy of a Commission
recommendation to each member of a policy committee that is
hearing a bill that would implement the recommendation.
EXISTING LAW authorizes the California Law Revision Commission
to study topics approved by concurrent resolution of the
Legislature. (Government Code Section 8293.)
COMMENTS : The California Law Revision Commission was created in
1953 and given the responsibility for a continuing substantive
review of California statutory and decisional law. The
Commission studies the law to discover defects and anachronisms
ACR 98
Page 3
and recommends legislation to make needed reforms.
The Commission's enabling statute recognizes two types of topics
the Commission is authorized to study: (1) those that the
Commission identifies for study and lists in the Calendar of
Topics that it reports to the Legislature, and (2) those that
the Legislature assigns to the Commission directly, by statute
or concurrent resolution. In the past, the bulk of the
Commission's study topics have come through the first route -
matters identified by the Commission and approved by the
Legislature. Once the Commission identifies a topic for study,
it cannot begin to work on the topic until the Legislature, by
concurrent resolution, authorizes the Commission to conduct the
study. Direct legislative assignments have become much more
common in recent years. Many of the Commission's recent studies
were directly assigned by the Legislature.
Reauthorization of topics previously authorized for study . The
CLRC currently has a list of 21 topics that the Legislature has
previously authorized for study. This measure would reauthorize
the CLRC to study the following topics:
1.Creditors' Remedies
2.Probate Code
3.Real and Personal Property
4.Family Law
5.Discovery in Civil Cases
6.Rights and Disabilities of Minors and Incompetent Persons
7.Evidence
8.Arbitration
9.Administrative Law
10. Attorney's Fees
11. Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association Act
12. Trial Court Unification
13. Contract Law
14. Common Interest Developments
15. Legal Malpractice Statutes of Limitation
16. Coordination of Public Records Statutes
17. Criminal Sentencing
18. Subdivision Map Act and Mitigation Fee Act
19. Uniform Statute and Rule Construction Act
20. Place of Trial in Civil Cases
21. Implications of treating a charter school as a public entity
ACR 98
Page 4
Reason for retracting authority to study one previously
authorized topic. This resolution would remove authority to
study special assessments for public improvement. According to
the Commission, that authority was added to allow the Commission
to develop a unified statute to replace the existing
multiplicity of special assessment statutes. The Commission
never began work on that topic, due to higher priority work.
While there would probably be some benefit from a broad
technical cleanup of the special assessment statutes, the
Commission has concluded that there is not enough evidence that
the existing statutory scheme is causing problems to justify the
large investment of resources that the study would require.
Therefore, removal of authorization is appropriate.
Adding study of topic requested by the Chairs of the Assembly
Water, Parks & Wildlife and Senate Natural Resources & Water
Committees. Per AB 2376 (Huffman), Ch. 424, Stats. 2010, the
California Natural Resources Agency is currently developing a
strategic vision for the Department of Fish and Game and the
Fish and Game Commission that addresses specified matters
relating to state fish and wildlife resource management. This
process has involved convening a state executive committee, blue
ribbon commission, and broad stakeholder input. One of the
recommendations out of this process is the need for a
substantive review and updating of the Fish and Game Code to
identify obsolete, inconsistent or duplicative sections. At the
request of the Chairs of the Assembly Water, Parks & Wildlife
and Senate Natural Resources & Water Committees, this resolution
adds authority for the CLRC to study the Fish and Game Code.
The Chairs have specifically asked the CLRC to review the Code
for suggestions to update, clarify, and improve the Code as well
as a review of the mandates and responsibilities of the
Department and Fish and Game Commission, in particular any
overlap in responsibilities and programs lacking in identified
funding.
Promotion of communications between the Commission and the
Legislature. This resolution will provide that prior to
commencing work on any project within the list of topics
authorized or directed for study by the Legislature, the CLRC
shall submit a detailed description of the scope of work to the
Chairs and Vice Chairs of the Committees on Judiciary of the
Senate and Assembly (which was in previous resolutions) as well
as the Chair and Vice Chair of any policy committee that has
jurisdiction over the subject matter of the study, and if during
ACR 98
Page 5
the course of the project there is a major change to the scope
of work, submit a description of the change.
Given the limited resources of the Commission which has suffered
budget cuts in past years, early communication to the
Legislature of proposed topics of study would allow legislative
input on whether a particular proposed topic would likely be
controversial and thus perhaps avoided by the Commission so that
it may devote its limited resources to other, more productive
studies.
The Impressive History of the Commission : Since its creation in
1953, the Commission has made 389 reform recommendations,
ranging from the creation of entire codes to the repeal of a
single section. More than 90% of those recommendations have
been enacted in whole or in substantial part, affecting more
than 24,000 sections of the California codes. Major enactments
include: the Evidence Code, the Family Code, the Probate Code,
the Government Claims Act (also known as the "Tort Claims Act"),
the Enforcement of Judgments Law, the Trust Law, the Power of
Attorney Law, the Durable Power of Attorney for Healthcare, the
Guardianship-Conservatorship Law, the Marketable Title Act, the
Eminent Domain Law, implementation of Trial Court Unification
and Restructuring, Administrative Adjudication, recodification
of Deadly Weapons Law, and the recodification of Mechanics Lien
Law. This Committee has supported on a bi-partisan basis the
annual reauthorization of the Commission's work for many
decades.
Author amendments : Page 2, line 9, delete "2010 and 2011" and
insert "2011 and 2012"
Page 2, line 9, delete "22" and insert "21"
Page 2, line 11, after "study," insert "and further recommends
the addition of one new topic to its calendar and the removal of
one previously authorized topic from its calendar"
Page 3, delete lines 9 and 10
Page 4, between line 30 and 31 insert:
Resolved, That the Legislature approves for study by the
California Law Revision Commission the new topic listed
below:
Whether the Fish and Game Code and related statutory law
should be revised to improve its organization, clarify its
ACR 98
Page 6
meaning, resolve inconsistencies, eliminate unnecessary or
obsolete provisions, standardize terminology, clarify
program authority and funding sources, and make other minor
improvements, without making any significant substantive
change to the effect of the law; and be it further
Resolved, That the Legislature approves removal from the
calendar of the California Law Revision Commission the
topic listed below:
Whether the acts governing special assessments for public
improvement should be simplified and unified; and be it
further
Page 4, line 35, after "Judiciary" add a comma and delete "and"
Page 4, line 36, after "and" add "any other policy committee
that has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the study, and"
Prior Legislation : ACR 49 (Evans), Res. Ch. 98, Stats. 2009
ACR 35 (Evans), Res. Ch. 100, Stats. 2007
SCR 15 (Morrow), Res. Ch. 1, Stats. of 2006
SCR 42 (Campbell), Res. Ch. 122, Stats. of 2005
SCR 4 (Morrow), Res. Ch. 92, Stats. of 2003
ACR 125 (Papan), Res. Ch. 167, Stats. of 2002
ACR 123 (Wayne), Res. Ch. 166, Stats. of 2002
SCR 13 (Morrow), Res. Ch. 78, Stats of 2001
ACR 17 (Wayne), Res. Ch. 81, Stats. of 1999
SCR 65 (Kopp), Res. Ch. 91, Stats. of 1998
SCR 3 (Kopp), Res. Ch. 102, Stats. of 1997
SCR 43 (Kopp), Res. Ch. 38, Stats. of 1996
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Law Revision Commission (sponsor)
Opposition
None on file
ACR 98
Page 7
Analysis Prepared by : Drew Liebert / JUD. / (916) 319-2334