BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2015-2016 Regular Session
AB 2882 (Committee on Judiciary)
Version: June 14, 2016
Hearing Date: June 21, 2016
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
NR
SUBJECT
Judiciary omnibus: family law
DESCRIPTION
This bill, sponsored by the Assembly Committee on Judiciary,
would make various changes to the Family Code, including:
allowing conversions of subordinate judicial officer positions
to judges;
allowing formerly incarcerated child support obligors to
petition a court to suspend arrears that previously accrued
during a now-sunsetted pilot program; and
updating and making technical corrections to marriage
establishment, adoption, and Department of Child Support
Services enforcement provisions.
BACKGROUND
AB 1519, sponsored by the Assembly Committee on Judiciary,
seeking to improve the handling of family law cases in the
courts, would make a number of clarifying and/or technical
changes to family law.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
1.Existing law provides that the Legislature shall prescribe the
number of judges and provide for the officers and employees of
each superior court, and that the Legislature may allow the
trial courts to appoint officers such as commissioners to
AB 2882 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 2 of ?
perform subordinate judicial duties. (Cal. Const., art. VI,
Secs. 4, 22.)
Existing law authorizes the courts to appoint subordinate
judicial officers, and sets forth their duties and titles.
(Gov. Code Sec. 71622.)
Existing law authorizes the conversion of 16 subordinate
judicial officer positions in eligible superior courts to
judgeships each fiscal year, as specified, and authorizes the
Judicial Council to convert up to an additional 10 SJOs to
judgeships each year, upon vacancy and subsequent legislative
authorization, if the conversion of these additional positions
will result in judges being assigned to family or juvenile law
assignments previously presided over by subordinate judicial
officers, but requires that such authority be ratified by the
Legislature by statutory enactment. (Gov. Code Secs.
69615-19.)
This bill would ratify the authority of the Judicial Council
to convert 10 subordinate judicial officer positions to
judgeships in 2016-17, provided the conversion of these
positions will result in judges being assigned to family or
juvenile law assignments previously presided over by a
subordinate judicial officer, and would provide that this
authority is in addition to the existing authority provided to
convert 16 SJOs to judges.
2.Existing law allows prospective spouses to combine their last
names into a new last name that is more than one word, but
those names must be hyphenated. (Fam. Code Sec. 306.5.)
This bill would allow prospective spouses to combine their
last names into a new last name that is more than one word,
without the need to hyphenate.
3.Existing law provides that if a marriage license is lost or
damaged before it is returned to the county recorder, a
duplicate license may be issued and returned by the person who
AB 2882 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 3 of ?
solemnized the marriage up to one year from the issuance of
the original license. (Fam. Code Sec. 360.)
This bill would instead provide that a duplicate license shall
be issued within one year from the marriage.
4.Existing law provides, from January 1, 2016 until January 1,
2020, that the obligation to pay child support is suspended
for the period of time in which the obligor is incarcerated or
involuntarily institutionalized, as defined, for any period
exceeding 90 consecutive days, unless the obligor has the
means to pay support while incarcerated or institutionalized
or was incarcerated for any domestic violence offense or as a
result of failure to pay child support, and allows support to
be administratively suspended. (Fam. Code Sec. 4007.5.)
Existing law previously provided for a similar pilot
support-suspension program for a four-year period from July 1,
2011 to July 1, 2015, although support had to be suspended by
the court. (Fam. Code Sec. 4007.5.)
This bill would allow a person, who previously accrued child
support arrears between July 1, 2011 and July 1, 2015 and who
was eligible for an adjustment of those arrears because of
incarceration or institutionalization during that period,
based on a previously existing provision of law, to petition
the court to adjust those arrears pursuant to that
then-existing provision.
5.Existing law allows a person seeking to adopt a dependent
child who has been freed for adoption by the juvenile court to
file the adoption request either in the county where that
person resides or the county where the child was freed for
adoption. (Fam. Code Sec. 8714.)
This bill would allow a petitioner, seeking to adopt a
dependent child who has been freed for adoption by the
juvenile court and placed with that petitioner, to file the
adoption request either in the county where that petitioner
AB 2882 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 4 of ?
resides or the county where the child was freed for adoption.
6.Existing law requires a private adoption agency, when
accepting a child voluntarily relinquished for adoption,
within five court days, to file with the court the original
and 10 copies of the request to approve the relinquishment.
(Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.)
This bill would require a private adoption agency, when
accepting a child voluntarily relinquished for adoption to
file or allow another party to file with the court, within 10
court days, the original and five copies of the request to
approve the relinquishment.
7.Existing law makes the Franchise Tax Board responsible for
various provisions of the state child support enforcement
program for which the Department of Child Support Services is
the single state agency charged with overseeing. (Fam. Code
Secs. 17306, 17400, 17458, 17506, 17508, 17522.5, 17801,
17802.)
This bill would remove an outdated reference to the Franchise
Tax Board from various provisions of the state child support
enforcement statutes that the Department of Child Support
Services is charged with overseeing.
8.Existing law sets forth the process, rules and funding for
development of the California Child Support Automation System,
which was fully implemented in November, 2008. (Welf. & Inst.
Code Sec. 10080 et seq.)
Existing law sets out the duties of the Department of Social
Services and local child support agencies regarding the state
child support plan and the child support disregard. (Welf. &
Inst. Code Sec. 11475.2 et seq.)
Existing law establishes rules governing the operation of the
Statewide Child Support Registry of all child support orders
AB 2882 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 5 of ?
in California. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 16575 et seq.)
This bill would eliminate Welfare & Institutions provisions
regarding development of the child support automation system,
which has now been fully implemented.
9.This bill would make other technical and conforming changes,
including updating cross references and moving provisions of
the Welfare & Institutions Code relevant to the child support
enforcement program to the Family Code.
COMMENT
1.Incarcerated obligors and child support arrears
In 1999, Governor Gray Davis signed legislation creating the
Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) and enacting massive
reforms of the state's child support system. (AB 196 (Kuehl,
Ch. 478, Stats. 1999); SB 542 (Burton, Ch. 542, Stats.1999).)
As part of the reforms, DCSS was mandated to analyze the current
amount of child support arrears statewide and determine the
amount that is realistically collectible. DCSS contracted with
the Urban Institute to conduct this study, which published its
findings and recommendations on how to improve collectibility of
arrears in 2003. (The Urban Institute, Examining Child Support
Arrears in California: The Collectibility Study, March 2003.)
One of the study's recommendations was to suspend child support
orders by operation of law while noncustodial parents are
incarcerated if they have no income or assets. The study found
that, although very few debtors were in state prison at any
point in time, their child support situations were dismal on
average. The median amount of child support orders for
incarcerated debtors was $291 per month, which was only slightly
lower than the median amount among all debtors. However, the
reported income and assets for incarcerated debtors was
substantially lower than other debtors. According to the study,
approximately half of incarcerated debtors had reported incomes
in the two years prior to incarceration and their median annual
net income was just under $3,000. The median arrears amount was
$14,564. The large amount of arrears, combined with an
inability to pay, can make it more difficult for individuals to
AB 2882 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 6 of ?
make the successful transition from prison back into the
community, thus increasing the likelihood of recidivism.
SB 1355 (Wright, Ch. 495, Stats. 2010) created a pilot program
to suspend the obligation to pay child support for obligors
already in the state child support program, for the period of
time the obligor was incarcerated. That program sunsetted on
July 1, 2015, and the Legislature responded last year by
enacting AB 610 (Jones-Sawyer, Ch. 629, Stats. 2015) AB 610
expanded the program to all obligors and allowed an
administrative adjustment, so that incarcerated obligors need
not petition the court to have arrears set aside. The provisions
of AB 610 replaced those of SB 1355 in the code, thereby
limiting the ability of obligors who had debt accrued between
July 1, 2011 and July 1, 2015 to suspend their uncollectable
debt. This bill would revise the statutory reference to the
expired program so that child support that accrued during the
initial pilot project may still be suspended under the terms and
conditions of that pilot.
2.Conversions of available subordinate judicial officer
positions to judgeships in family and juvenile court
Under current law, the Legislature is responsible for
prescribing the number of judges and providing for the officers
and employees of each superior court. (Cal. Const., art. VI,
Sec. 4.) Existing law further permits the Legislature to
provide for, and the courts to
appoint, subordinate judicial officers (SJOs) to assist the
courts in carrying out their duties. (Id. at Sec. 22; Gov. Code
Sec. 71622.)
Historically, SJO positions were created and funded at the
county level to address courts' needs for judicial-like
resources when new judgeships were pending or not yet authorized
by the Legislature. However, responding to the shortage of
judges available to handle the trial courts' workload, the
Legislature has considered numerous bills over the last several
years that established new judgeships and authorized the
conversion of up to 162 existing SJOs (16 per fiscal year) to
judgeships upon vacancy. Unlike judges, SJOs are not directly
accountable to the public, but due to the shortages of judges,
they are performing some of the most complex and sensitive
judicial duties.
AB 2882 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 7 of ?
Recognizing the particular need for judges in family and
juvenile law cases, AB 2763 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 690,
Stats. 2010), authorized the Judicial Council to convert up to
an additional 10 SJOs to judgeships each year, if the conversion
of these additional positions will result in a judge being
assigned to a family or juvenile law assignment previously
presided over by an SJO. However, such authorization must be
ratified by the Legislature. This was done by the Legislature
in 2011-2012 through SB 405 (Corbett, Ch. 705, Stats. 2011), in
2013 through AB 1403 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 510, Stats.
2013), in 2014 through AB 2745 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 311,
Stats. 2014, and last year through AB 1519 (Committee on
Judiciary, Ch. 416, Stats. 2015). This bill would provide the
Judicial Council with that same ratification for 2015-16.
3.Technical and/or non-substantive corrections
This bill makes a number of technical and/or non-substantive
corrections to various codes, including the Family Code,
Government Code and the Welfare & Institutions Code.
a. Relating to marriage
Existing law allows prospective spouses who want to combine last
names to do so only by hyphenating, or by combining the two
names into one. This bill would instead allow those couples to
combine last names without a hyphen, and would also delete a
reference to a health certificate which is no longer required in
order to be married. This bill would additionally provide that,
in the case of a lost or damaged marriage license, a new one
shall be issued within one year from the date of marriage.
Existing law allows for a new license to be issued within one
year from the date the marriage license was initially issued,
which is arguably not helpful in the event of a lost license.
Given that most couples and officiants know the date on which a
marriage took place, this bill should ensure that the timeframe
under which couples need to have a new license issued is clear.
b. Relating to children
The Department of Child Support Services has identified numerous
child support enforcement statutes that have not been updated in
years and contain outdated and inapplicable references,
including references to an outdated automation system,
organizations that no longer exist, and an enhanced role for the
AB 2882 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 8 of ?
Franchise State Tax Board that no longer exists. This bill would
delete those outdated provisions.
This bill would also reduce the number of "voluntary
relinquishment of a child" copies that must be filed with the
court in an adoption proceedings from ten to five, and allow a
petitioner to file for adoption in both the county where the
child was freed for adoption as well as the petitioner's home
county. This bill would also move the statutes authorizing the
automated child support system from the Welfare and Institutions
Code to the Family Code.
Support : Judicial Council of California
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Author
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation : AB 1519 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. Stats.
2015) made four clarifying and/or technical changes to family
law.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Floor (Ayes 80, Noes 0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 20, Noes 0)
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
**************