BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 804
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
804 (Roger Hernández)
As Amended March 23, 2015
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
|Business & |14-0 |Bonilla, Jones, Baker, | |
|Professions | |Bloom, Campos, Chang, | |
| | |Dodd, Eggman, Gatto, | |
| | |Holden, Mullin, Ting, | |
| | |Wilk, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
|Appropriations |16-0 |Gomez, Bigelow, Bonta, | |
| | |Calderon, Chang, Daly, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | |Holden, Jones, Quirk, | |
| | |Rendon, Wagner, Weber, | |
| | |Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
AB 804
Page 2
SUMMARY: Requires the Court Reporters Board of California (CRB)
to establish continuing education (CE) requirements for renewal of
a shorthand reporter certificate. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the CRB to adopt regulations that establish minimum CE
requirements for renewal of a Certified Shorthand Reporter (CSR)
certificate by July 1, 2016.
2)Requires certificate holders, six months after the effective
date of the regulations, to certify completion of minimum CE
requirements to the CRB when renewing a certificate.
3)Requires the CRB to ensure that the CE requirement is relevant
to the practice of shorthand reporting.
4)Requires the CRB to establish a procedure for approving CE
course providers, and requires CE providers to comply with
procedures established by the CRB.
AB 804
Page 3
5)Authorizes the CRB to establish a fee, as specified, for the
approval of CE providers.
6)Permits the CRB to revoke or deny the right of a CE provider for
failure to comply with requirements or regulations as specified.
7)Authorizes the CRB to establish exceptions to the CE
requirements for individuals who cannot meet the CE requirements
for reasons of health, military service, or undue hardship.
8)Requires that the requirements comply with the guidelines for
mandatory CE established by the Department of Consumer Affairs
(DCA).
AB 804
Page 4
9)Authorizes the CRB to adopt regulations to implement the above
provisions.
FISCAL EFFECT: According the Assembly Appropriations Committee,
minor and absorbable costs to the CRB to implement the changes.
Any additional costs incurred to approve continuing education
providers could be covered by the fee authority granted in the
bill.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose. This bill is co-sponsored by the California Court
Reporters Association and the Deposition Reporters Association
of California. According to the author, this bill "requires the
[CRB] to adopt regulations to establish continuing education
requirements for renewal of a shorthand reporter's certification
that are relevant to the practice of shorthand reporting, and
requires the board to establish a procedure for approving
providers of [CE] courses.
AB 804
Page 5
"Once a shorthand reporter passes their initial test for
licensing, they do not ever have to be retested in order to
renew their license. The only time a CSR is ever retested for a
license is if the CSR relinquishes their licenses then decides
down the road to begin working again or becomes re-licensed."
2)Background. There are two types of CSRs (commonly known as
court reporters). "Official" reporters are individuals who work
as employees of the court system. "Freelance" reporters are
individuals hired privately by court reporting businesses,
firms, or attorneys to report depositions. In order to obtain a
license, CSRs must attend a CRB-approved court reporting school
and pass two written exams and a performance exam. There are 14
shorthand reporting schools in California and approximately
7,000 CSRs.
Enforcement Data. Currently, the CRB receives about 100
AB 804
Page 6
consumer complaints a year, which is divided between untimely
production of transcripts, inaccuracy, and other deficiencies.
In the 2013-14 Fiscal Year, the CRB received 106 complaints.
For the same year, other similarly-sized boards received similar
numbers: the acupuncture board received 189; the board of
optometry received 238; the osteopathic medical board received
360; and the physician assistant board received 351.
Judicial Counsel CE Requirement. In 2007, the Judicial Counsel
of California adopted a CE requirement for all personnel
employed by the Court, including court reporters (California
Rules of Court, Title 10, Division 2, Chapter 7). It requires
court employees to take at least eight hours of CE every two
years. The CE does not have to be related to court reporting.
AB 804
Page 7
CE Issues During Sunset Oversight Hearings. In the CRBs 1996
sunset review, the Joint Committee's recommendation did not
include pursuing CE. The issue was again raised in the 2004-05
review of the Board; however, the joint oversight committee did
not recommend establishing a CE requirement.
Necessity of CEs for CSRs. The CRB has noted industry changes
that may lead to consumer harm. It noted that the court
reporting business model has changed, which now results in a
larger percentage of independent contractors working for large
corporate firms owned by non-licensees. Because the larger
conglomerates tend not to provide as much oversight of CSRs,
CSRs working as independent contractors have less incentive to
stay current with the profession.
However, the CRB does not track the number of CSRs that work as
independent contractors, for firms, or for courts. Further, the
enforcement data shows that CRB has not received a particularly
AB 804
Page 8
high number of consumer complaints. Therefore, it is not clear
what impact this industry change has made.
Nonetheless, imposing CE may be a useful preventive measure,
given the risk to a litigant's legal rights. Therefore, the
benefits to the profession and consumers will have to be weighed
against the costs of a CE requirement to the consumers,
licensees, and the CRB.
Policy Issues for Consideration. Legislation requiring CE's for
CSRs has been passed and vetoed two separate times in past
legislative sessions. The most recent was SB 671 (Price) of
2011. The provisions of SB 671 were substantially similar to
those contained in this bill; however, it was vetoed by Governor
Brown, citing concerns about the burden of CE requirements.
AB 804
Page 9
Arguments in Support: The California Court Reporters Association
(co-sponsor) writes in support, "Under current law, there are no
requirements in place to ensure that a CSR is maintaining the
education needed to stay updated on rules, regulations, statutes
and advancing technologies that affect the profession. Continuing
education requirements ensure that every CSR can produce a
verbatim record that continues to be held to the highest possible
standard. "
The Deposition Reporters Association of California (co-sponsor)
wrote six arguments in support of this measure: 1) CSRs are
important to the legal system, but are not required to take CE
like other legal professionals; 2) CE is a useful consumer
protection tool. CEs would address key differences between
freelance and official court reporters; 3) CE was addressed in the
2005 Joint Committee sunset report; 4) New technology and laws
necessitate CE; 5) Many states also require CE for court
reporters; and 6) The CEs will be left to the CRB and the CRB will
be able to absorb the cost.
Arguments in Opposition: None on file.
AB 804
Page 10
Analysis Prepared by:
Vincent Chee / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301 FN:
0000156