BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                SB 537
                                                                Page  1


        SENATE THIRD READING
        SB 537 (Banking and Financial Institutions Committee)
        As Amended  May 16, 2013
        Majority vote 

         SENATE VOTE :36-0  
         
         BANKING & FINANCE   11-0        APPROPRIATIONS      17-0        
         
         ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
        |Ayes:|Dickinson, Morrell,       |Ayes:|Gatto, Harkey, Bigelow,   |
        |     |Achadjian, Blumenfield,   |     |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian  |
        |     |Bonta, Chau, Gatto,       |     |Calderon, Campos,         |
        |     |Harkey, Linder, Perea,    |     |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez,  |
        |     |Weber                     |     |Hall, Holden, Linder,     |
        |     |                          |     |Pan, Quirk, Wagner, Weber |
        |     |                          |     |                          |
         ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
         SUMMARY  :  Makes technical and clarifying changes to several sections  
        of the Financial Code administered by the Department of Financial  
        Institutions (DFI) and to provisions of the Franchise Investment Law  
        administered by the Department of Corporations (DOC).  Specifically,  
         this bill :   

        1)Standardizes, within the Franchise Investment Law, the length of  
          time in which franchisors have to deliver disclosure documents to  
          prospective franchisees at least 14 calendar days, and updates  
          state law references to the document used by franchisors to  
          provide specified information to prospective franchisees, by  
          referring to this document as a "franchise disclosure document"  
          rather than an "offering circular."

        2)Corrects, within the Financial Code, a heading reference, updates  
          state law to reflect changes in minimum levels of federal deposit  
          insurance limits, deletes references to obsolete code sections,  
          corrects incorrect code section references, restores code section  
          references that were inadvertently deleted, and adds clarifying  
          language and definitions.  

         EXISTING LAW  :

        1)Authorizes DFI to administer provisions of the Financial Code  
          regulating the activities of state-chartered banks and industrial  
          loan companies, state-chartered credit unions, money transmitters,  








                                                                SB 537
                                                                Page  2


          trust companies, and insurance premium finance companies  
          (Divisions 1 through 7 of the Financial Code).

        2)Authorizes DOC to administer the Franchise Investment Law  
          (Division 5 of the Corporations Code).

        3)Effective July 1, 2013, reorganizes DFI and DOC as divisions  
          within a new Department of Business Oversight (Government  
          Reorganization Plan No. 2).

         FISCAL EFFECT  :  None
         



        COMMENTS  :  This bill is a technical clean-up bill to various  
        provisions of the Financial Code.  The following summarizes the  
        purpose of the proposed amendments to the Financial Code:

        1)Correct the heading of Division 1, Article 4, Chapter 7 to restore  
          applicability of the provisions in this article to banks.  This  
          article was incorrectly titled by SB 664 (Banking and Financial  
          Institutions Committee), Chapter 243, Statutes of 2011.

        2)Reflect the increase in federal deposit insurance from $100,000 to  
          $250,000 (Section 1805).

        3)Amend references to incorrect code sections and delete references  
          to obsolete code sections (Sections 155, 185, 329, 376, 413, 563,  
          1024, 1026, 1080, 1255, 1495, 1515, 1702, 1805, 1806, 1835, 1858,  
          4805.01, 4805.02, 4805.05, 4805.10, 4821,5, 4822, 4823, 4824,  
          4826.5, 4827, 4827.3, 4827.7, 4871.5, 4877.03, 4901.5, 4961.5,  
          4970, 4982, 4990, 4995, and 18003).

        4)Clarify to which law or laws a particular section applies  
          (Sections 101, 103, 133, 171, 189, 326, 331, 377, and 600).

        5)Conform language to the Money Transmission Act definition of a  
          money transmitter (Sections 185 and 329).

        6)Add clarifying language and definitions (Sections 186, 187, 188,  
          190, 329, 405, 589, 590, 672, 1331, 1473, 1485, and 1495).

        7)Restore inadvertently deleted code section references (Sections  








                                                                SB 537
                                                                Page  3


          329 and 1485).

        8)Simplify an unnecessarily complicated definition (Section 379).  

        9)The following summarizes the purpose of the proposed amendments to  
          the Franchise Investment Law:

           a)   SB 998 (Cox), Chapter 101, Statutes of 2007, required  
             disclosure documents to be delivered by franchisors to  
             prospective franchisees 14 calendar days, rather than 10  
             business days, before that prospective franchisee signs any  
             franchise agreement.  However, that legislation failed to  
             revise all of the sections that required revision, in order to  
             effect its change.  This bill would make the changes  
             inadvertently omitted from SB 998.   

        The Federal Trade Commission, North American Securities  
        Administrators Association, and California regulations refer to the  
        disclosure document required to be provided by franchisors to  
        prospective franchisees as a franchise disclosure document.   
        However, some provisions of California's Franchise Investment Law  
        continue to refer to this document by its old name ("offering  
        circular").  This bill standardizes the references to this document  
        in California law by deleting references to "offering circular" and  
        replacing them with references to "franchise disclosure document." 


         Analysis Prepared by  :    Mark Farouk / B. & F. / (916) 319-3081 


                                                                  FN: 0001597