BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1483
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1483 (Alquist)
As Amended June 26, 2006
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :39-0
JUDICIARY 9-0 APPROPRIATIONS 18-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Jones, Evans, Haynes, |Ayes:|Chu, Sharon Runner, Bass, |
| |Laird, Leslie, Levine, | |Berg, |
| |Lieber, Montanez, Huff | |Calderon, De La Torre, |
| | | |Emmerson, |
| | | |Haynes, Karnette, Klehs, |
| | | |Leno, |
| | | |Nakanishi, Nation, Laird, |
| | | | |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Saldana, |
| | | |Walters, Yee |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Creates a five-county pilot project to test an
expedited child support modification procedure. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Establishes a procedure for the expedited modification of
child support orders for cases being enforced by the local
child support agencies (LCSAs) in five counties, Alameda,
Fresno, Orange, San Mateo and Santa Clara, provided the county
boards of supervisors in those counties first adopt a
resolution to permit the pilot. LCSAs may then seek expedited
modification of child support orders when those orders are not
in substantial conformity with the state child support
guideline and meet criteria to be established by the
Department of Child Support Services (DCSS). Requires DCSS to
develop forms to implement the pilot, as specified.
2)Requires the LCSA to serve specified papers on both parents,
including an application to modify, proposed order, objection
to modification and request for hearing, and instructions for
completing the objection. Permits a party to object to the
proposed order within 30 days of receipt of the application by
SB 1483
Page 2
serving the objection on the LCSA. Upon receipt of an
objection, requires the LCSA to file the objection with the
court and requires the court to set the matter for hearing.
At the hearing, permits the court to enter an order consistent
with the child support guideline. Allows the order to be made
retroactive to the date of filing of the objection.
3)Permits the LCSA, if it does not receive an objection to the
proposed modification within 40 days of service of the
application, to file the proposed order with the court, along
with a statement verifying that the LCSA has not received any
objections. Allows the court to issue a final order upon
receipt of the documents, without further hearing or evidence.
Requires, except for good cause shown, the order to be
effective on the first of the month following the service of
the application. Permits the court to set aside an order
modified this way within one year of the first collection
after modification of the order. The court can then modify
the order appropriately and date it back to the date of the
original modification order.
4)Requires DCSS and the Judicial Council (JC) to evaluate the
pilot and report the results to the Governor and the
Legislature by July 1, 2009. Sunsets the pilot on January 1,
2010.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Makes local child support agencies responsible for
establishing, modifying and enforcing child support
obligations.
2)Allows individuals seeking modification of their child support
orders to either contact their local child support agency or
file a motion with the court requesting modification. Directs
the JC to develop a simplified method for modifying support
orders. Requires the local child support agency to monitor
child support cases and seek modifications when necessary.
3)Establishes an expedited child support order establishment
procedure and permits set aside of any order established under
this expedited procedure within one year of the first
collection.
SB 1483
Page 3
4)Establishes a formula to calculate support orders under the
state child support guideline.
5)Conditions grants of funds to states under the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
(PRWORA) upon the creation of expedited procedures for the
establishment, modification and enforcement of child support.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
analysis:
1)The workload costs for DCSS to develop forms for the expedited
process and develop criteria to determine eligible cases could
reach $125,000.
2)The cost of evaluating the pilot project could reach $250,000
(based on evaluation costs of other pilot projects).
3)In addition to the costs associated with the legislation, the
modification process could result in savings for the courts
and could increase the amount of child support collected.
COMMENTS : This bill, sponsored by the Child Support Directors
Association of California (CSDA), creates a five-county pilot
project to expedite uncontested modifications of child support
orders being enforced by LCSAs. Current law allows for an
expedited process to establish child support orders, with the
right to set aside such orders if warranted, and this bill
proposes to test a similar model for modification of child
support orders.
According to the author, federal law "requires states to have an
expedited process for modification of child support orders."
While an existing procedure already exists for expedited
creation of child support orders, no procedure exists for
modification of those orders. The author notes that this bill
would address "that deficiency by establishing pilot projects in
five California counties, Alameda, Fresno, Orange, San Mateo and
Santa Clara, to test the use of an expedited process for child
support modifications."
If either parent objects to the proposed expedited modification,
they only have to send the objection and request for hearing
SB 1483
Page 4
form, served with the modification application, to the LCSA.
The LCSA must then serve the objection on the court. The court
must then set the matter for hearing, and the LCSA must provide
notice of the upcoming hearing to the parents. This should help
parents who want to object to the expedited process and proposed
order, but are not sufficiently aware of the process to do so.
Any order established at that hearing may be made retroactive to
the date of the filing of the objection with the court. This
effective date ensures that all parties have notice of both the
proposed modification and any objections before the modification
can become effective, so that parents are on notice that their
support order may be modified.
If neither parent objects, the LCSA may file the proposed order
with the court, along with a statement verifying that the LCSA
has received no objection to the proposed order. The court may
then issue a final modification order based on the filed
documents, without further hearing or evidence, provided the
LCSA certifies that service on the parties was made to addresses
that had been verified as current and active within the last 90
days. An order established this way is effective on the first
of the month following the service of the application, unless
good cause is shown not to do so.
Any order established through the expedited process, without
hearing and without objection, may be set aside within one year
of the first collection after modification of the order. The
order can then be reestablished using more accurate income and
timeshare information back to the date of the original
modification order. This is very similar to the set aside
procedure available for orders established using the expedited
establishment process. This should help ensure that if orders
are incorrectly modified they can be corrected and the
correction can go back to the date the inaccurate modification
was made effective, thereby both reducing uncollectible child
support arrears and helping ensure that children get the support
to which they are entitled. If an order is modified to zero,
the one-year set aside period runs from the date the party
seeking the set-aside received notice of the modified order.
This bill has been carefully crafted to help ensure that any
child support modification entered using this expedited process
represents the actual income and timeshare of the parents. In
addition, the bill has a number of provisions that represent
SB 1483
Page 5
lessons learned from the expedited support order establishment
process begun a decade ago. The bill requires that the LCSA
serve the proposed modification to an address that has been
verified as active. This should help reduce the number of
proposed orders that are not effectively served, an issue that
has plagued LCSAs in the past. The bill also requires that the
LCSA, when serving the proposed order, also serve an objection
form and instructions for completing. This will help
unrepresented parents easily object to the proposed
modification.
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916)
319-2334
FN: 0016458