BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Noreen Evans, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
ACR 98 (Wagner)
As Amended April 12, 2012
Hearing Date: June 12, 2012
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
BCP
SUBJECT
California Law Revision Commission: Studies
DESCRIPTION
This measure, sponsored by the California Law Revision
Commission (CLRC), would authorize the CLRC to study whether
specified laws should be revised, authorize the commission to
study the new topic of the Fish and Game Code and related
statutory laws, and authorize removal of one topic from the
calendar of the CLRC.
This measure would provide that before commencing work on any
project within the list of topics authorized for study by the
Legislature, the CLRC shall submit a detailed description of the
scope of work to the Senate and Assembly Committees on Judiciary
and any policy committee with jurisdiction over the study's
subject matter.
The measure would also expressly allow the CLRC to provide
copies of its recommendations to members of a policy committee
and invite CLRC staff to hearings for the purpose of explaining
recommendations and answering questions from committee members.
BACKGROUND
The California Law Revision Commission was created in 1953 and
tasked with the responsibility for a continuing substantive
review of California statutory and decisional law. The CLRC
studies the law in order to discover defects and make related
recommendations to the Legislature for needed reforms.
(more)
ACR 98 (Wagner)
Page 2 of ?
The CLRC's enabling statute recognizes two types of topics the
CLRC is authorized to study: (1) those that the CLRC 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 CLRC directly, by statute or concurrent resolution. In the
past, the bulk of the CLRC's study topics have come through the
first route - matters identified by the CLRC and approved by the
Legislature. Once the CLRC identifies a topic for study, it
cannot begin to work on the topic until the Legislature, by
concurrent resolution, authorizes the CLRC to conduct the study.
Direct legislative assignments have become much more common in
recent years, and many of the CLRC's recent studies were
directly assigned by the Legislature.
This measure would continue the authorization for the CLRC,
authorize the removal of one topic and add another topic for
study, and make three changes with respect to the interaction of
the CLRC with the Legislature.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law authorizes the California Law Revision Commission
to study topics approved by concurrent resolution of the
Legislature. (Gov. Code Sec. 8293.)
Existing law prohibits an employee or member of the CLRC, with
respect to any proposed legislation concerning matters assigned
to the commission for study, advocate for the passage or defeat
of the legislation by the Legislature or the approval or veto of
the legislation by the Governor or appear before any committee
of the Legislature unless requested to do so by the committee or
its chairperson. (Gov. Code Sec. 8288.)
This measure would reauthorize the CLRC's study of specified
topics.
This measure would authorize the CLRC to study whether the Fish
and Game Code and related statutory law should be revised to
improve its organization, clarify its 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.
This measure would remove the CLRC's authority to study whether
the acts governing special assessments for public improvement
ACR 98 (Wagner)
Page 3 of ?
should be simplified and unified.
This measure would require that before commencing work on any
project within the calendar 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, and
any other policy committee that has jurisdiction over the
subject matter of the study, and if during the course of the
project there is a major change to the scope of work, submit a
description of the change.
This measure would provide that CLRC staff is invited to appear
and testify at any committee hearing of a bill to implement a
CLRC recommendation, for the purpose of explaining the
recommendation and answering questions posed by the committee
members, provided that the staff may not advocate for the
passage or defeat of the legislation.
This measure would further request the CLRC to provide a copy of
a recommendation to each member of a policy committee that is
hearing a bill that would implement the recommendation.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
ACR 98 is the annual concurrent resolution authorizing the
CLRC's study of selected topics. According to the author, ACR
98 would continue the CLRC's existing study authority of 21
specific topics, delete the authorization of one topic, and add
authorization to conduct a comprehensive technical review of the
Fish and Game law. The author further notes that ACR 98 also
"states some procedural rules relating to coordination between
CLRC and the Legislature."
2. Reauthorization of topics previously authorized for
study
The CLRC currently has a list of twenty-one topics that the
Legislature has previously authorized for study. This measure
would reauthorize the CLRC to study the following topics:
Creditors' Remedies; Probate Code; Real and Personal Property;
Family Law; Discovery in Civil Cases; Special Assessments for
Public Improvements; Rights and Disabilities of Minors and
Incompetent Persons; Evidence; Arbitration; Administrative Law;
Attorney's Fees; Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association
ACR 98 (Wagner)
Page 4 of ?
Act; Trial Court Unification; Contract Law; Common Interest
Developments; Legal Malpractice Statutes of Limitation;
Coordination of Public Records Statutes; Criminal Sentencing;
Subdivision Map Act and Mitigation Fee Act; Uniform Statute and
Rule Construction Act; Place of Trial in Civil Cases; and the
legal and policy implications of treating a charter school as a
public entity for the purposes of the Government Tort Claims
Act.
3. Addition and removal of authority
This measure would additionally authorize the CLRC to conduct a
comprehensive review of the Fish and Game Code and related
statutory law to determine whether those sections should be
revised to improve organization, clarity, and other minor
improvements without making any significant change to their
effect. The author notes that the language complies with "a
request from Senator Pavley and Assembly Member Huffman, as
Chairs of the Senate Natural Resources & Water Committee and
Assembly Water, Parks & Wildlife Committee."
This measure would also remove the authority of the CLRC to
study whether the acts governing special assessments for public
improvement should be simplified and unified. The author notes
that the "authority was added to allow the CLRC to develop a
unified statute to replace the existing multiplicity of special
assessment statutes. The CLRC 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 ÝCLRC] 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."
4. Changes to coordination rules
This measure would make three changes relating to the
relationship between the CLRC and the Legislature.
a. Additional communication with the Legislature
ACR 49 (Evans, Res. Chapter 98, Statutes of 2009) increased
communication between the CLRC and the Legislature by
providing 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
ACR 98 (Wagner)
Page 5 of ?
the scope of work to the Chairs and Vice Chairs of the
Committees on Judiciary of the Senate and Assembly, and if
during the course of the project there is a major change to
the scope of work, submit a description of the change.
This measure would augment that requirement by further
requiring the CLRC to submit that description of the scope of
work to any other policy committee that has jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the study. That enhanced requirement
for early communication would further facilitate legislative
input on whether a particular proposed topic is consistent
with what has been authorized.
b. Inviting staff of the CLRC to appear and testify
Under existing law, CLRC staff may not advocate for the
passage or defeat of a commission recommendation by the
Legislature, and may not appear before any committee of the
Legislature unless requested to do so by the committee or its
chairperson. This measure would specifically invite the staff
of the CLRC to appear and testify at any committee hearing of
a bill that implements a CLRC recommendation. That formal
invitation seeks to ensure that the staff of the CLRC is
technically able to testify at committee hearings for the
purpose of explaining the CLRC recommendation and answering
questions posed by committee members.
It should be noted that this measure further provides that
CLRC staff may not advocate for the passage or defeat of
legislation containing a CLRC recommendation. That provision
restates the existing ban on that activity contained in
Section 8288 of the Government Code.
c. Copies of commission recommendations
Under existing law, the CLRC is required to distribute its
reports and recommendations to the Governor, the Members of
the Legislature, and the heads of all state departments.
Despite that requirement, a separate code section provides
that "Ýn]o report shall be distributed to a Member of the
Legislature unless specifically requested by that member."
(Gov. Code Sec. 9795.) In order to ensure that the
requirement is technically met, this measure would formally
request the CLRC to provide a copy of a recommendation to each
member of a policy committee that is hearing a bill that would
implement the recommendation. Consistent with the above
ACR 98 (Wagner)
Page 6 of ?
changes, this provision would further facilitate communication
between the legislature and the CLRC by ensuring the CLRC is
able to provide members of policy committees with the
underlying recommendation that is the basis of legislation
being heard by the committee.
Support : None Known
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : California Law Revision Commission
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
The following is a list of the prior annual authorizing
resolutions for the CLRC:
ACR 49 (Evans, Res. Ch. 98, Stats. 2009)
ACR 35 (Evans, Res. Ch. 100, Stats. 2007)
SCR 15 (Morrow, Res. Ch. 1, Stats. 2006)
SCR 42 (Campbell, Res. Ch. 122, Stats. 2005)
SCR 4 (Morrow, Res. Ch. 92, Stats. 2003)
ACR 123 (Wayne, Res. Ch. 166, Stats. 2002)
SCR 13 (Morrow, Res. Ch. 78, Stats 2001)
ACR 17 (Wayne, Res. Ch. 81, Stats. 1999)
SCR 65 (Kopp, Res. Ch. 91, Stats. 1998)
SCR 3 (Kopp, Res. Ch. 102, Stats. 1997)
SCR 43 (Kopp, Res. Ch. 38, Stats. 1996)
Prior Vote :
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 16, Noes 0)
Assembly Floor (Ayes 73, Noes 0)
**************
ACR 98 (Wagner)
Page 7 of ?