BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 2629 (Roger Hernández) - Court reporters
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: May 31, 2016 |Policy Vote: JUD. 5 - 1 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: No |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: August 1, 2016 |Consultant: Jolie Onodera |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: AB 2629 would increase the fees charged by court
reporters for original transcripts, and copies thereof,
incrementally over the next five years, as specified.
Fiscal
Impact:
Trial court costs : Potentially significant increase in annual
court costs (General Fund*) resulting from the transcript fee
increases imposed incrementally over five years. Court
expenditures on transcripts total about $20 million annually.
Based on the proposed fee increases, costs to the courts
statewide could potentially increase incrementally by up to
$2.4 million to $7.7 million (General Fund*) over the
five-year period, and annually thereafter, assuming a
consistent level of transcription usage and adoption of the
mandated rates statewide. However, staff notes the estimated
statewide costs are projected to be lower to account for the
proportion of costs attributable to local courts with pre-2012
established rates that may remain unchanged. At the time of
this analysis, the data indicating the proportion of annual
AB 2629 (Roger Hernández) Page 1 of
?
costs attributable to courts with grandfathered rates was
unavailable.
Transcript Reimbursement Fund : Potential future increases in
reimbursements paid out of the Transcript Reimbursement Fund
(Special Fund**) for higher reimbursement costs for
transcripts for low income litigants, to the extent the Court
Reporters Board and its administration of the Transcript
Reimbursement Fund are extended beyond the impending sunset
date of January 1, 2017.
*Trial Court Trust Fund
**Transcript Reimbursement Fund
Background: Existing law establishes the Court Reporters Board (CRB) with
the authority and responsibility to determine the qualifications
of persons applying for certification as a shorthand reporter;
to make rules for the examination of applicants and the issuing
of certificates of qualification in professional shorthand
reporting; to investigate the actions of any licensee, upon
receipt of a verified complaint in writing from any person, for
alleged acts or omissions constituting grounds for disciplinary
action, as specified; and to charge and collect authorized fees.
(Business & Professions Code (BPC) §§ 8000 et seq., 8031.)
Under California law, the fees that a court reporter may charge
in connection with transcripts are set by statute. Those fees
have not been raised since they were last increased to their
current rates in 1990 by SB 2376 (Presley) Chapter
505/1990.Under existing law, transcript-related fees are
prescribed as follows:
The fee for transcription for the original copy is $0.85 for
each 100 words (also known as the "folio rate");
The fee for each copy purchased at the same time by the court,
party, or other person purchasing the original is $0.15 per
100 words;
The fee for a first copy to any court, party, or other person
who does not simultaneously purchase the original is $0.20 per
100 words, and $0.15 for each additional copy purchased at the
same time. (Government Code § 69950(a).)
Under existing law, notwithstanding the above, if a local trial
court had established transcription fees in effect on January 1,
2012, based on an estimate as to the number of words or folios
on a typical transcript page, those transcription fees shall be
AB 2629 (Roger Hernández) Page 2 of
?
the transcription fees for proceedings in those trial courts,
and the policy or practice for determining transcription fees in
those trial courts shall not be unilaterally changed.
(Government Code § 69950(b).)
Existing law requires, until January 1, 2017, certain fees and
revenues collected by the Court Reporters Board from licensees
to be deposited into the Transcript Reimbursement Fund, a
continuously appropriated fund, to be available to provide
reimbursement for the cost of providing shorthand reporting
services to low-income litigants in civil cases. Existing law
authorizes, until January 1, 2017, low-income persons appearing
pro se to apply for funds from the Transcript Reimbursement
Fund, subject to specified requirements and limitations,
including that total disbursements are prohibited from exceeding
$30,000 annually and $1,500 per case. Existing law requires the
board, until January 1, 2017, to publicize the availability of
the Transcript Reimbursement Fund to prospective applicants.
Existing law requires the unencumbered funds remaining in the
Transcript Reimbursement Fund as of January 1, 2017, to be
transferred to the Court Reporters' Fund. (BPC § 8030.5.)
This bill seeks to increase the transcript fees that may be
charged by court reporters for the first time since legislation
was enacted over 25 years ago, setting the current rates.
Proposed Law:
This bill would increase the fees charged for original
transcriptions and copies, as follows:
-----------------------------------------------------------
| | Current | 1/1/2017 | 1/1/2019 | 1/1/2021 |
| | rates |-12/31/201|-12/31/202|and after |
| | | 8 | 0 | |
|---------------+----------+----------+----------+----------|
|Original | $0.85 | $0.93 | $1.03 | $1.13 |
|printed copy. | | | | |
|---------------+----------+----------+----------+----------|
|Copy purchased | $0.15 | $0.17 | $0.20 | $0.22 |
|at same time | | | | |
|as original. | | | | |
|---------------+----------+----------+----------+----------|
|First copy | $0.20 | $0.23 | $0.26 | $0.29 |
AB 2629 (Roger Hernández) Page 3 of
?
|without | | | | |
|simultaneously | | | | |
|purchasing the | | | | |
|original. | | | | |
|---------------+----------+----------+----------+----------|
|Each copy | $0.15 | $0.17 | $0.20 |$0.22 |
|purchased | | | | |
|without | | | | |
|simultaneously | | | | |
|purchasing the | | | | |
|original. | | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------
This bill would retain the provision in existing law that
provides that if a trial court had established transcription
fees that were in effect on January 1, 2012, based on an
estimate or assumption as to the number of words or folios on a
typical transcript page, those transcription fees shall be the
transcription fees for proceedings in those trial courts, and
the policy or practice for determining transcription fees in
those trial courts shall not be unilaterally changed.
This bill would specify the fee for transcription is an
additional 50 percent for special daily copy service in civil
and criminal cases. (Existing law only authorizes the reporter
to charge an additional 50 percent for special daily copy
service in civil cases.)
This bill includes the following uncodified legislative findings
and declarations:
Official court reporters and court reporters pro tempore
employed by the courts are currently paid under a dual
compensation structure in which the base salary of the court
reporter is supplemented by income from preparing required
transcripts and providing other required transcription
services;
The dual compensation structure protects the state from
bearing the full cost of transcript preparation and other
AB 2629 (Roger Hernández) Page 4 of
?
transcription services and avoids the resulting consequences
of overtime liability related to these services;
The fees for original transcripts prepared by official court
reporters and court reporters pro tempore have not been
adjusted in 26 years, and fees for copies purchased at the
same time as the original transcript have only increased once
in 103 years; and
In order to ensure full and fair compensation of official
court reporters and court reporters pro tempore employed by
the court, and in order to attract and retain official court
reporters and court reporters pro tempore employed by the
courts that have sufficient skills and competence to serve the
needs of the justice system, it is imperative that the system
of dual compensation provide sufficient payment for
transcription services.
Related Legislation: AB 2192 (Salas) 2016 would extend the
sunset date on the Court Reporters Board from January 1, 2017,
to January 1, 2020. AB 2192 would additionally increase the
reimbursement amount payable from the Transcript Reimbursement
Fund from $30,000 to $75,000 annually. AB 2192 is scheduled to
be heard today by this Committee.
Prior
Legislation: AB 582 (Evans) 2007 would have increased the
transcription fees paid to court-employed reporters by
unspecified amounts and expanded eligibility for reimbursement
from the Transcription Reimbursement Fund (TRF). AB 582 was gut
and amended to address a different subject matter, and was
subsequently referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee where it
was not set for hearing.
AB 2305 (Klehs) 2006 would have increased transcription fees
paid to court-employed reporters in civil matters. AB 2305 would
have authorized an additional 50 percent fee for special daily
copy service for all matters. AB 2305 was not heard in the
Assembly Judiciary Committee.
Staff
Comments: By incrementally raising the fees charged for
original transcriptions and copies over the next five years,
AB 2629 (Roger Hernández) Page 5 of
?
this bill could result in a potentially significant increase in
annual court costs. Court expenditures on transcripts are
projected at about $20 million annually. Based on the proposed
fee increases, costs to the courts statewide could potentially
increase incrementally by up to $2.4 million to $7.7 million
(General Fund*) over the five-year period, assuming the volume
of transcription usage remains consistent and that the fee
increases are adopted statewide.
However, under existing law, if a local trial court had
established transcription fees in effect on January 1, 2012,
those transcription fees are required be the transcription fees
for proceedings in those trial courts, and the policy or
practice for determining transcription fees in those trial
courts cannot be unilaterally changed. Thus, the estimated
statewide costs are projected to be lower than the figures noted
above to account for the proportion of annual costs attributable
to local trial courts with pre-2012 established rates, as the
costs to those courts will be unaffected by the rate increases
proposed in this measure. At the time of this analysis, the
proportion of statewide costs attributable to courts with
grandfathered rates was unavailable.
Raising court reporter fees for transcription services could
additionally have the effect of increasing future reimbursements
paid out of the Transcript Reimbursement Fund (TRF) due to
higher reimbursement costs for transcripts. Although the Court
Reporters Board (CRB) and its administration of the TRF are
scheduled to sunset on January 1, 2017, pending legislation to
extend the sunset of the CRB and the TRF to January 1, 2020, is
pending in the Legislature via AB 2192 (Salas). AB 2192 would
additionally increase the maximum disbursement amount from the
TRF from $30,000 to $75,000 annually. Although the potential
costs to extend the sunset on the CRB and TRF cannot be
attributable to this measure, by increasing the level of
reimbursements potentially claimed against the TRF due to higher
court reporter fees, this bill could result in additional
payments out of the TRF should it be extended and its
disbursement maximum increased.
-- END --
AB 2629 (Roger Hernández) Page 6 of
?