BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 879 Page 1 CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS AB 879 (Burke) As Amended July 7, 2015 Majority vote -------------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: | 79-0 | (April 27, |SENATE: | 40-0 | (July 13, 2015) | | | |2015) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- Original Committee Reference: JUD. SUMMARY: Adds an additional avenue for complying with notice requirements in some juvenile court proceedings. Specifically, this bill allows notification of most juvenile dependency court proceedings to be provided by electronic mail when the party to be served has consented to service by electronic mail by signing Judicial Council Form EFS-005. For hearings that involve the possible termination of parental rights, however, notice must be provided as required under current law and may additionally be given by electronic mail. The Senate amendments make a technical change. EXISTING LAW: 1)Establishes the notice requirements for juvenile dependency AB 879 Page 2 proceedings, assigning notification responsibilities to the social worker, probation officer or clerk of the court, depending on the purpose and progression of the hearing proceedings. 2)Specifies the necessary parties to be served with notice of a child dependency hearing, based on the purpose and progression of the impending hearing proceedings. 3)Provides that service of the dependency hearing notice must be written or oral. If the person being served cannot read, notice shall be given orally. 4)Allows the court to require notice of a dependency hearing to be made by publication in a newspaper designated as most likely to give notice to the parent, under specified conditions. 5)Outlines the type of information which must be included in a hearing notice, and whether or not the petition must accompany the hearing notice. 6)If the probation officer, social worker or court knows or has reason to know that an Indian child is involved, notice shall be given in accordance with Welfare and Institutions Code Section 224.2. 7)Pursuant to federal law, specifically the Children's Online Privacy Protection Rule (COPPA), and regulations promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), commercial Web sites and online services (including mobile apps) are prohibited from collecting, using, or disclosing personal information (including name and date of birth) regarding minors under the age of 13, except with parental consent. AB 879 Page 3 FISCAL EFFECT: None COMMENTS: When it appears that a child comes within the jurisdiction of the juvenile dependency court because he or she may be abused, abandoned, or neglected and the social worker determines that the child should be kept in custody for his or her protection, the social worker is required to file a petition with the juvenile court. A hearing is scheduled and notice of the hearing is required to be provided to the mother, father or fathers, guardian or guardians, and the child (if he or she is over 10 years of age), any known sibling of the child, and the attorney for the parent or parents, or guardian or guardians, and in some cases the district attorney or the probate department. Current law requires the probation officer, social worker, or court clerk (depending on the type of hearing and stage of the proceedings) to provide notice of the juvenile dependency proceedings via United States (U.S.) Mail, Certified Mail or newspaper publication. Those same parties are notified of each relevant hearing of the juvenile court as the case proceeds (assuming that the court determines the child is within its jurisdiction). The means of notification are described in each code section that is specific to the proceeding (i.e. the initial petition hearing where the child has been detained, the initial petition hearing where the child has not been detained, the jurisdictional hearing, and the review hearing, among others). Each type of hearing has different notice requirements in terms of who is required to give the notice, the method and content of the notice, and when the notice must be served. This bill amends those provisions to allow written notice of all dependency hearings, except those at which the department is recommending termination of parental rights, to be served by electronic mail. It allows service by electronic means to all parties, except children, for whom this bill has special rules (explained below). The Importance of Notice in Dependency Matters. Notice is both a constitutional and statutory imperative. (In re Jasmine G. AB 879 Page 4 (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1114.) In juvenile dependency proceedings, due process requires parents be given notice that is reasonably calculated to advise them an action is pending and afford them an opportunity to defend. (Id., at p. 1115, citing In re DeJohn B. (2000) 84 Cal.App.4th 100, 106.) Failure to comply with the notice requirements in a dependency case can result in a mistake of constitutional dimension. (Ibid.) In Jasmine G., the social worker spoke with the mother eight times after the setting order, and met with her once, but never told her about any of the upcoming hearings. Although a status report had a new address for the mother, there was no effort to notify her at the new address, or to inform her trial attorney of that address. The appellate court held that "the failure to attempt to give a parent statutorily required notice of a selection and implementation hearing is a structural defect that requires automatic reversal. It denies a parent the opportunity to confer with her attorney, prepare her case, or defend against the loss of parental rights. Without this, we cannot say the loss of parental rights - or the hearing - is fundamentally fair. The absence of any reasonable attempt to give notice goes well beyond trial error. It is not merely a mistake that hinders a party's ability to present the case effectively, but rather a flaw in the systemic framework that denies that party the opportunity to be heard at all. It goes to the basic fairness of the structural scheme." (In re Jasmine G., supra, 127 Cal.App.4th at p. 1116 [emphasis added].) Reliable Methods of Providing Notice. Current law requires notices of court hearings to be sent via regular U.S. mail. As an alternative, Certified U.S. mail, personal service, or newspaper publication (for parents whose last known address cannot be determined) are also allowed. While not foolproof, service by U.S. mail is considered to be reliable (See Evidence Code Section 641, providing "A letter correctly addressed and properly mailed is presumed to have been received in the ordinary course of mail"). When a letter is not "correctly addressed" (because the addressee has moved, for example), AB 879 Page 5 however, notice by mail is completely ineffective. Many families involved in dependency matters are in unstable or insecure situations in terms of housing, schooling and employment. Therefore, notification by a method other than U.S. Mail may be the best way to notify them about court hearings. Arguably, many people, especially those in stress, change their email addresses less often than their mailing addresses. Importance of Being Able to Opt In (Or Not). While more individuals have access to computers and smart phones, not all do. Therefore, it is critically important that the ability to receive notice of court hearings via electronic mail remains optional. Allowing parties to voluntarily choose to be notified of many court hearings by electronic mail would help increase successful delivery of notice, especially to those non-minor dependents, foster youth, and transition youth who may be residing at temporary physical addresses. Electronic mail delivery is also consistent with the courts' existing goal of improving modernization, efficiency and cost savings. As an added bonus, service of notices by electronic means is also environmentally friendly. Special Rules For Children and Hearings Where Parental Rights May Be Terminated. Some minors have the right to be personally notified (i.e. not through their parents, foster parents, guardians, social workers, or attorneys) of court proceedings. For example, existing law provides that for a review hearing, "Notice of the hearing shall be given to the following persons:? (4) The child, if the child is 10 years of age or older; (5) Any known sibling of the child who is the subject of the hearing... If the sibling is 10 years of age or older, the sibling, the sibling's caregiver, and the sibling's attorney." Very similar language is used in most of the other sections in this bill. This bill establishes that electronic mail can only be used to notify minors who are 14 years of age and older about court hearings. It also establishes additional safeguards to ensure actual notice and informed consent. AB 879 Page 6 For any hearing at which a termination of parental rights may occur, existing rules for notice must be followed, but notice may also be provided in electronic format. Termination of parental rights is an extremely sensitive and serious undertaking that has life-altering consequences for parents, as well as children. (See In re Jasmine G., supra, 127 Cal.App.4th at p. 1116.) Because effective notice (or at least a good-faith effort at providing notice) is crucial to ensuring the fundamental fairness of dependency court proceedings, nothing should jeopardize the right of a parent, child, sibling, or guardian to be notified of a hearing at which parental rights could be terminated. Therefore, this bill provides that when the department is recommending the termination of parental rights, notice may be provided by electronic format in addition to the form of notice that is otherwise required by law (personal service, certified mail with return receipt, etc.). Finally, this bill requires the court to inquire, in cases where it has authorized service of written notice to be made by electronic means, whether the parties who are in court and who have opted to receive notices by electronic mail are, in fact, receiving notices and whether their electronic mail addresses have changed. This is very similar to the inquiry that courts are required to make now about the permanent addresses of the parties who are in court. Analysis Prepared by: Alison Merrilees / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0001222 AB 879 Page 7