BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE Senator Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair 2015 - 2016 Regular ------------------------------------------------------------------ |Bill No: |AB 1974 |Hearing |6/15/16 | | | |Date: | | |----------+---------------------------------+-----------+---------| |Author: |Gallagher |Tax Levy: |No | |----------+---------------------------------+-----------+---------| |Version: |6/8/16 |Fiscal: |Yes | ------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Consultant|Favorini-Csorba | |: | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- County recorder: recordation of documents Specifies procedures for the re-recording of recorded documents. Background State law establishes a recorder in each county. County recorders are responsible generally for examining and recording all documents that deal with establishing ownership of land in counties. This includes the recording of title documents, notes, and home loan payoffs by homeowners, title companies, mortgage companies and government agencies involved in real estate transactions. Recording a document provides public notice of ownership and a verifiable chain of possession for property. State law prescribes procedures for the recording of documents. In order to be recorded, a document is submitted to a county recorder along with the necessary recordation fees. If the document meets the requirements in statute or local ordinance that apply to that type of document, the recorder must record it. The recording statutes specify in minute detail the form and requirements that documents must meet. Many documents must be acknowledged-affirmed by the parties to the transaction as their action-and executed by following specific procedures. For example, a deed conveying a property AB 1974 (Gallagher) 6/8/16 Page 2 of ? to a government agency must be accompanied by a specific form that affirms the consent of the individual transferring the property. However, some documents, such as patents, leases for oil or minerals, and some court judgments, are exempt from the acknowledgement requirement. After following any required procedures, the document is then recorded and kept in the books of the county recorder's office. Recorded documents sometimes need to be re-recorded in order to correct an error in a previously recorded document or to change a name or other details. The County Recorders Association estimates that annually about 3,500 documents in California are re-recorded. There is no formal procedure to re-record documents in statute, leading county recorders to establish their own procedures for doing so that can vary across counties. Some counties have allowed minor corrections to recorded documents without requiring acknowledgement and execution of a new document, while others require the document to be recorded as if it were a new document. Entities such as mortgage brokers, lenders, and escrow officers may do business in multiple counties, so the County Recorders Association wants to standardize this process across all counties. Proposed Law Assembly Bill 1974 specifies a procedure for re-recording documents. Specifically, AB 1974 requires a document that is presented to a county recorder for re-recording to be executed and acknowledged or verified as a new document. This requirement does not apply if any of the following apply: The document is exempt from acknowledgement and execution under current law, The document is presented solely to correct a recording sequence, or The document is presented solely to make a minor correction. AB 1974 (Gallagher) 6/8/16 Page 3 of ? AB 1974 defines a separate process for making a minor correction. Specifically, a document may be re-recorded without acknowledgement or execution if the document is presented along with a corrective affidavit that sets out the information corrected, is certified by the party submitting the affidavit under penalty of perjury, and is acknowledged by the person presenting it. AB 1974 defines minor corrections to include certain changes to incorrect or missing names, an incorrect or missing amount of tax due upon the recording of the document, or a clarification of illegible text. The re-recorded document must include a cover sheet that states the reason for re-recording. State Revenue Impact No estimate. Comments 1. Purpose of the bill . Recorded documents are used to inform determinations of property rights and other legal matters. But errors in recorded documents occasionally occur, and state law does not specify a process for re-recording documents in order to correct those errors. This lack of a defined process leads to potential uncertainty over the accuracy or veracity of the re-recorded documents. In addition, lenders and other entities that frequently record documents in multiple counties face a lack of consistency across counties when trying to correct errors in recorded documents. AB 1974 establishes a standardized process for county recorders to follow when re-recording documents and provides a streamlined process for correcting minor errors, such as an incorrect name. This streamlined process avoids the need to track down all parties to a recorded document for a new acknowledgement and execution, saving time and money. At the same time, AB 1974 includes a strong safeguard to ensure that this process is not abused by requiring certification under penalty of perjury that the information is true. AB 1974 is a commonsense fix to provide a guarantee of accuracy by codifying practices that many county recorders are already following. 2. Balancing act . The streamlined process in AB 1974 reduces AB 1974 (Gallagher) 6/8/16 Page 4 of ? the time and money needed to make minor corrections, relative to requiring the document to be re-recorded as new. But that process only applies to a narrow set of circumstances, such as an incorrect name. There are other corrections that this bill does not authorize to be changed through the streamlined process, such as corrections to parcel numbers, that are seen as uncontroversial by some. In their view, completing an entirely new recording for these changes could have significant costs and could delay the ability of assessors to promptly and correctly assess property. Others see the potential for significant consequences if those changes are fraudulently made. Historically, county recorders and county counsels have followed the processes that they feel are necessary to insure the integrity of recorded documents. It is unclear whether this bill strikes the right balance between guarding against fraud and expediting uncontroversial changes. 3. Funding the mandate . The California Constitution generally requires the state to reimburse local agencies for their costs when the state imposes new programs or additional duties on them. AB 1974 requires the corrective affidavit to be certified under penalty of perjury. By creating a new crime, AB 1974 also creates a new state-mandated program. But the bill partially disclaims the state's responsibility for reimbursing local governments for enforcing these new crimes. That's consistent with the California Constitution, which says that the state does not have to reimburse local governments for the costs of new crimes (Article XIIIB, 6[a][2]). AB 1974 also provides that if the Commission on State Mandates determines there to be a reimbursable mandate for other portions of the bill, local agencies must be reimbursed pursuant to an existing statutory process. But county recorders charge fees for their services, and the state doesn't have to reimburse local governments if they can charge fees to support the increased responsibility. The Committee may wish to consider amending AB 1974 to disclaim the state's responsibility for reimbursing local governments because of their ability to charge fees for recorded documents. Assembly Actions Assembly Local Government Committee: 9-0 Assembly Appropriations Committee: 19-0 Assembly Floor: 79-0 AB 1974 (Gallagher) 6/8/16 Page 5 of ? Support and Opposition (6/9/16) Support : County Recorders Association of California (sponsor). Opposition : Unknown. -- END --