BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Ellen M. Corbett, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
AB 620
Assemblymember John A. Perez
As Introduced
Hearing Date: July 14, 2009
Business and Professions Code
NRB:jd
SUBJECT
County Clerks; Recordkeeping; Registration
DESCRIPTION
This bill would amend various provisions of existing law
pertaining to the registration of specified law-related
professions. Specifically, it would provide county clerks with
flexibility to issue identification cards that take advantage of
new security features, and clarify rules pertaining to
identification cards for corporations and partnerships. It also
would require that applications for professional photocopiers be
signed under penalty of perjury, as is already required for
related professions. Finally, this bill would make other
technical changes to ensure consistent application of specified
registration requirements statewide.
BACKGROUND
The Business and Professions Code provides a detailed regulatory
structure for numerous professions. Among these professions
are: unlawful detainer assistants; legal document assistants;
process servers; and professional photocopiers.
An unlawful detainer assistant (UDA) is defined as an individual
who, for compensation, renders assistance or advice in the
prosecution or defense of an unlawful detainer claim or action.
(Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6400 (a).) A legal document assistant
(LDA) is generally defined as a person who provides or assists
in providing, for compensation, any self-help service to another
person who is self-represented in a legal matter. (Id. at (c).)
A process server is defined as any natural person that makes,
(more)
AB 620 (John A. Perez)
Page 2 of ?
for compensation, more than 10 services of process in California
during a calendar year, and any corporation that derives
compensation from service of process within California. (Bus. &
Prof. Code Sec. 22350.) A professional photocopier is any
person who, for compensation, obtains or reproduces documents
pertaining to personal medical information, personal identifying
information, or business records. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec.
22450.)
County clerks are responsible for reviewing the applications of
and registering those who work in the aforementioned
professions. Among their duties, clerks are responsible for
ensuring that registrants receive identification cards and
comply with the prerequisites for registration. According to
the sponsor, the California Association of Clerks and Election
Officials, this bill is designed to update, clarify, and
simplify provisions of the Business and Professions Code so that
county clerks may more effectively, and consistently, carry out
their duties.
This bill was approved by the Senate Committee on Business,
Professions and Economic Development on June 22, 2009.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
1. Existing law requires county clerks to register and issue
identification cards to LDAs, UDAs, process servers, and
professional photocopiers, as specified. (Bus. & Prof. Code
Secs. 6407, 22355, 22457.)
This bill would provide such identification cards be a minimum
of 3 by 2 inches. The measure further provides that cards
issued for a partnership or corporation, as opposed to a
specific individual, shall be issued in the name of the
partnership or corporation, and shall not contain a
photograph.
2. Existing law provides that an employee of an LDA and UDA
shall be issued an identification card upon the payment of a
$10 fee. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6407 (a).)
This bill deletes the requirement that additional cards
automatically be issued to employees of legal document and
unlawful detainer assistants upon payment of a fee.
3. Existing law requires a business operating under a
fictitious name to file a fictitious business name statement
AB 620 (John A. Perez)
Page 3 of ?
with the appropriate county clerk. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec.
17910.) Because fictitious business name statements generally
expire within five years after they are filed, the clerk is
required to notify registrants of the pending expiration of
their statement. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 17929 (a).)
This bill would provide that if the notice of pending
expiration is returned to the clerk as undeliverable by the
United States Postal Service, the county clerk is not required
to retain the returned notice.
4. Existing law requires county clerks to register
professional photocopiers, as defined. (Bus. & Prof. Code
Sec. 22450 et seq.) An application for registration must
include the following statements about the applicant: (1)
name, age, address, and telephone number; (2) felony
conviction(s); and (3) a promise to lawfully perform the
duties of a professional photocopier. Existing law does not
require that the application for professional photocopier
registration be signed by the applicant under penalty of
perjury. In contrast, existing law requires that legal
document and unlawful detainer assistants, as well as process
servers, sign their applications for registration under
penalty of perjury. (Bus. & Prof. Code Secs. 6403 (d); 22351
(a)(2).)
This bill would require that applicants for registration as
professional photocopiers sign their applications under
penalty of perjury.
5. Existing law requires county clerks to issue additional
identification cards for employees of professional
photocopiers upon the payment of $10 for each card. (Bus. &
Prof. Code Sec. 22457 (a).)
This bill would provide that identification cards for an
employee of a partnership or corporation must be issued in the
name of the employee and include "Employee of: [insert name of
the partnership or corporation]."
6. Existing law requires that at least one notary public be
involved in the management of a professional photocopier.
(Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 22454.)
This bill would provide that if the notary is someone other
than the registrant, the notary must provide written
AB 620 (John A. Perez)
Page 4 of ?
confirmation authorizing the use of his or her commission for
the registration.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
The author writes:
County clerks are faced with inflexible provisions that
prevent them from operating efficiently. AB 620 provides more
flexibility to county clerks with respect to these
requirements in order to cut down on waste and increase
efficiency.
Specifically, the defined size for certain identification
cards that county clerks issue is problematic because various
counties utilize different technologies. A minimum size
requirement for these cards will allow counties flexibility
when creating, distributing, and utilizing these cards.
County clerks should not be required to waste resources
storing and maintaining undeliverable "fictitious business
name" courtesy notices of pending expiration for two years.
Finally, identification documents issued to corporations or
partnerships should not require a photograph because this
practice is duplicative and unnecessary. Individuals are
required to meet eligibility requirements and pay existing
registration fees to operate as an LDA or UDA. Removing the
photograph requirements from the corporation cards will
eliminate confusion caused by unqualified individuals filing
under the corporation and being issued a card with their photo
similar to the LDA/UDA card. This change to law will create a
clear difference between the cards carried by qualified
individuals and the cards issued to corporate employees, which
will no longer contain a photo.
2. Arguments in support
The California Association of Clerks and Election Officials
(CACEO) is the sponsor of this measure. In its letter of
support, the CACEO states that AB 620 is the product of a
comprehensive review of the Business and Professions Code, which
identified numerous sections in need of updating, clarification,
and simplification.
AB 620 (John A. Perez)
Page 5 of ?
Identification Card Size This bill would amend existing law to
require that specified identification cards meet a minimum size,
rather than conform to a particular size statewide. According
to the CACEO, many county clerks would like to take advantage of
new technology that would provide more secure identification
cards through the use of digital photographs. The sponsor
contends that by eliminating the one-size-fits-all approach of
existing law, this measure will give clerks the flexibility
necessary to take advantage of this new technology.
No automatic issuance of identification cards for employees of
LDAs and UDAs Existing law requires that LDA and UDA applicants
meet specified educational requirements in order to be
registered. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6402.1.) However, existing
law also permits the employees of such registrants to obtain an
identification card, for a fee, without meeting these same
educational prerequisites for registration. According to the
sponsor, these provisions have sparked confusion as to whether
an employee of an LDA or UDA registrant can perform all the
functions of a statutorily qualified registrant merely by paying
a $10 fee. The sponsor states that removing the provision
permitting "employee ID" cards will eliminate this confusion.
No photographs for corporations and partnerships Existing law
requires that identifications cards include a photograph, which
presents little problem for individual applicants, but a great
challenge when the applicant is a corporation or partnership.
According to the sponsor, county clerks typically do not include
a photograph on identification cards issued in the name of a
corporation or partnership, and this bill would conform existing
law to this practice.
Written notary authorization for professional photocopier
management Although existing law requires that a notary be
involved in the management of a professional photocopier, there
is no uniform standard to ensure compliance with this
requirement. According to the sponsor, some counties currently
require written authorization from the notary when he or she is
someone other than the registrant. By adopting this standard
into existing law, the sponsor states that AB 620 would make the
process more consistent statewide.
Identifying employees of professional photocopiers Professional
photocopier employee cards are issued using the registration
number of the individual, partnership, or corporation
authorizing the issuance of the card. However, existing law
AB 620 (John A. Perez)
Page 6 of ?
does not require that employee cards identify their employer.
The sponsor states that, "Adding a requirement that the
(photocopier) ID card include 'employee of . . . and the name of
the employer' will clearly show under whose registration the
employee is being issued an ID card, and that the registration
is for their employer, not themselves."
3. Requirement that professional photocopier applicants sign
application under penalty of perjury
Existing law requires that applications for LDAs, UDAs, and
process servers be filed under penalty of perjury. (Bus. &
Prof. Code Secs. 6403 (d); 22351 (a)(2).) In contrast, there is
no requirement that professional photocopier applicants certify
the accuracy of the information in their applications. The
sponsor states that adding this penalty of perjury requirement
will conform the standards for professional photocopiers to
those of similar professions.
By adding this provision, however, the bill would create a new
crime, as perjury is punishable by imprisonment in state prison
for two, three, or four years. (Pen. Code Sec. 126.) Although
this bill has not been officially referred to the Senate Public
Safety Committee, the creation of a new crime would justify such
a referral. In order to ensure the measure is not unnecessarily
delayed in the policy committee process, the author has agreed
to accept the following amendments which provide that
professional photocopiers must certify as true the statements in
their applications, and that each knowing violation is
punishable by a civil penalty of between $2,500 and $25,000:
Suggested amendments:
At page 4, line 31, delete the entire line and insert "certified
to be true"
At page 5, line 1, delete "signed" and insert "certified to be
true"
At page 5, line 2, delete the entire line
At page 5, line 20, insert "(d) A person or entity that
knowingly provides false information shall be subject to a civil
penalty for each violation in the minimum amount of two thousand
five hundred dollars ($2,500) and the maximum amount of
twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). An action for a civil
AB 620 (John A. Perez)
Page 7 of ?
penalty under this provision may be brought by any public
prosecutor in the name of the people of the State of California
and the penalty imposed shall be enforceable as a civil
judgment."
Support : None Known
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : California Association of Clerks and Elections
Officials
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation : AB 1290 (Mendoza, 2008), contained a similar
provision pertaining to returned notices of a pending fictitious
business name expiration. That measure was vetoed by the
Governor using the generic veto message relating to the budget.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Business and Professions Committee (Ayes 9, Noes 0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 11, Noes 0)
Assembly Floor (Ayes 66, Noes 4)
Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee
(Ayes 9, Noes 0)
**************