BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Noreen Evans, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
SB 245 (Correa)
As Amended January 6, 2014
Hearing Date: January 14, 2014
Fiscal: No
Urgency: No
BCP
SUBJECT
Contracts
DESCRIPTION
This bill would update the codified findings and declarations
that support the existing requirement for persons who negotiate
certain types of contracts in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog,
Vietnamese, or Korean to provide the other party with a
translated contract.
BACKGROUND
Under existing law, any person who negotiates certain types of
contracts in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, or Korean is
required to provide the other party with a translated version of
the contract the language in which it was negotiated. (Civ. Code
Sec. 1632.) That requirement was first enacted by the
Legislature in 1976 to increase consumer information and
protections for the state's sizeable and growing
Spanish-speaking population. Those protections were later
expanded to also apply to contracts primarily negotiated in
Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, or Korean. In expanding the
translation requirements to cover those languages, the
Legislature codified a finding that the five specified languages
reflect those most widely spoken by Californians in their homes
based upon data from the United States Census of 2000.
This bill would strike the finding related to the United States
Census of 2000 and, instead, codify a finding that the top five
languages, other than English, that are most widely spoken in
households with limited English proficiency are Spanish,
(more)
SB 245 (Correa)
Page 2 of ?
Chinese, Filipino/Tagalog, Vietnamese, and Korean. That finding
would be based on data from the American Community Survey, an
annual statistical survey conducted by the United States Census
Bureau, for the combined years 2009 through 2011. This bill
would not change the substantive translation requirements of
Section 1632.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law requires any person engaged in a trade or business
who negotiates primarily in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog,
Vietnamese, or Korean, orally or in writing, in the course of
entering into specified contracts, to deliver to the other party
to the contract or agreement and prior to the execution thereof,
a translation of the contract or agreement in the language in
which the contract or agreement was negotiated, which includes a
translation of every term and condition in that contract or
agreement. (Civ. Code Sec. 1632 (b).)
Existing law finds and declares that, according to the United
States Census of 2000, of the more than 12 million Californians
who speak a language other than English in the home,
approximately 4.3 million speak an Asian dialect or another
language other than Spanish. Existing law further finds and
declares that the top five languages other than English most
widely spoken by Californians in their homes are Spanish,
Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, and Korean. Together, these
languages are spoken by approximately 83 percent of all
Californians who speak a language other than English in their
homes. (Civ. Code Sec. 1632 (a)(2).)
This bill would strike the above findings and declarations and,
instead, state that according to data from the American
Community Survey, the top five languages other than English that
are most widely spoken in households with limited English
proficiency, are Spanish, Chinese, Filipino/Tagalog, Vietnamese,
and Korean, based on data from combined year 2009 to 2011.
This bill would additionally find and declare that among the 3.8
million households in California with limited English
proficiency, approximately 3.5 million people speak either
Spanish, Chinese, Filipino/Tagalog, Vietnamese, or Korean at
home. This compares to approximately 19.6 million people who
speak only English at home.
SB 245 (Correa)
Page 3 of ?
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
Civil Code Section 1632 lists five foreign languages into
which a variety of different financial contracts and other
financial documents must be translated. Civil Code Section
1632 and the myriad other code sections that refer back to it
are intended to help Californians with limited English
proficiency better understand key financial contracts into
which they enter and other important consumer protection
documents they receive. The code section was first enacted in
1976. The languages referenced in the section have been
periodically updated since that time, to reflect California's
changing demographics. However, the code section has not been
updated to reflect census data more recent than the year 2000.
. . .
Because the five foreign languages that are most commonly
spoken at home in California households with limited English
proficiency are the same as the five foreign languages
currently listed in [Civil Code Section 1632], SB 245 does not
propose to change any of the languages referenced in the
section. Instead, we are simply updating the findings in the
code section, so that the California codes reflect the most
recent census data.
2. Top five languages other than English
Under existing law, Civil Code Section 1632, a contract must be
translated into the language in which it was negotiated if it
was negotiated primarily in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog,
Vietnamese, or Korean. Those five languages seek to capture the
top five languages, other than English, that are spoken by
Californians in their homes. As codified in existing findings
and declarations, those five languages are spoken by
approximately 83 percent of Californians who speak a language
other than English in their homes. The codified basis for that
percentage is the United States Census of 2000.
This bill seeks to update those findings and declarations so as
to reflect recent information provided by the American Community
Survey (ACS). Accordingly, this bill would strike the existing
SB 245 (Correa)
Page 4 of ?
findings and declarations and, instead, codify that those five
languages remain the top five spoken by households with limited
English proficiency. The bill would further codify that among
the 3.8 million California households with limited English
proficiency, approximately 3.5 million people speak Spanish,
Chinese, Filipino/Tagalog, Vietnamese, or Korean at Home. To
put those numbers in context, the bill would further codify that
19.6 million people speak only English at home.
Although prior codified statistics were based upon the United
States Census of 2000, the proposed numbers in this bill reflect
data from the ACS, which the author notes has replaced the
decennial census for detailed socioeconomic data information
about United States residents. The ACS, conducted by the United
States Census Bureau, is described as "an ongoing survey that
provides data every year -- giving communities the current
information they need to plan investments and services.
Information from the survey generates data that help determine
how more than $400 billion in federal and state funds are
distributed each year." (United States Census Bureau, About the
American Community Survey
http://www.census.gov/acs/www/about_the_survey/american_community
_survey/[as of Jan. 8, 2014].)
Staff notes that this bill seeks to only change the codified
findings and declarations to reflect updated statistics and
would not substantively modify the requirement to translate
contracts. Considering that the present statute reflects
statistics that are nearly 15 years old, updating the codified
findings by including more recent data provided by the ACS would
arguably inform the public that the Legislature is still
tracking the languages spoken in California homes.
3. Amendment to clarify the codified spoken-language data
It should be noted that the existing findings and declarations
refer to the number of Californians who "speak a language other
than English in the home" while the language of the bill refers
to the number of people in California "with limited English
proficiency." Thus, based on data provided by the ACS, the
proposed findings focus on Californians with limited English
proficiency, but, do not state the total number of Californians
who do speak a language other than English in the home.
Considering that the existing findings do reference those
individuals, it is arguably important to continue to codify the
number of Californians who speak a language other than English
SB 245 (Correa)
Page 5 of ?
in the home (as opposed to just those with limited English
proficiency).
Accordingly, the following author's amendment would clarify the
proposed spoken-language data by including the number of
Californians who speak a language other than English in the home
(15.2 million), and clarify that of those who do speak a
language other than English at home, 8.4 million people speak
English very well and 3.0 million speak English well. Of the
remaining 3.8 million individuals (who have limited or no
English proficiency), 3.5 million speak the five languages
listed in Civil Code Section 1632 at home.
Author's amendment :
On page 4, strike out lines 14 through 26, inclusive, and
insert:
(3) According to data from the American Community Survey,
which has replaced the decennial census for detailed
socioeconomic information about United States residents,
approximately 15.2 million Californians speak a language
other than English at home, based on data from combined
years 2009 through 2011. This compares to approximately
19.6 million people, who speak only English at home. Among
the Californians who speak a language other than English at
home, approximately 8.4 million speak English very well,
and another 3.0 million speak English well. The remaining
3.8 million Californians surveyed do not speak English well
or do not speak English at all. Among this group, the five
languages other than English that are most widely spoken at
home are Spanish, Chinese, Filipino/Tagalog, Vietnamese,
and Korean. These five languages are spoken at home by
approximately 3.5 million of the 3.8 million Californians
with limited or no English proficiency, who speak a
language other than English at home.
Support : None Known
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Author
SB 245 (Correa)
Page 6 of ?
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation : None Known
**************