BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
663 (Jones)
Hearing Date: 08/09/2010 Amended: 06/15/2009
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Judiciary 3-1
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 663 prohibits the use of the term "legal aid"
unless the entity is a bona fide nonprofit organization that
provides civil legal services for the poor without charge.
Specifically, this bill: 1) Defines "legal aid organization" to
mean a nonprofit organization that provides civil legal services
to the poor without charge, and prohibits any person or
organization to use the term "legal aid," "legal aide," or any
variant or similar name unless the person or organization is a
legal aid organization; and 2) provides that any consumer
injured by a violation of its provisions with respect to legal
aid organizations may file a complaint and seek injunctive
relief, restitution, and damages in superior court, as
specified. This bill also makes a number of legislative findings
and declarations.
AB 663 also establishes a Judicial Council pilot program for
providing court interpreters in important civil matters not
currently served. Specifically, this bill:
1) Requires Judicial Council, by September 1, 2010, to
establish a working group to review, identify, and develop
best practices to provide interpreters in civil matters.
2) Requires Judicial Council to select up to five courts to
participate in a pilot project, from July 1, 2011 until
June 20, 2014, to provide interpreters in civil
proceedings, as specified. Judicial Council is required to
report its findings and recommendations based on the pilot
project by September 1, 2013.
3) Requires Judicial Council to assess the need for court
interpreters in court proceedings and report its findings
and recommendations to the Legislature by July 1, 2016, and
every five years thereafter.
4) Requires Judicial Council to enter into a master
agreement with one or more vendors to provide for telephone
appearances in civil cases, as permitted by law, and
mandates the collection of an appearance fee in an amount
set by the Judicial Council. It would require the vendor to
pay the state $15 for every telephone appearance, with
revenue to be used by the Judicial Council to pay the costs
of the pilot court interpreter program.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
Fund
Use of "legal aid" Minor court workload increase;
partially offset by fees General*
New pilot program
$1,200 $2,400 General*
*Trial Courts Trust Fund; cost or cost pressure, depending on
budget actions and chaptering.
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Page 2
AB 663 (Jones)
This bill would require the Judicial Council to select up to
five courts to participate in a pilot project, from July 1, 2011
until June 20, 2014, to provide interpreters in civil
proceedings. Pilot courts would provide interpreters to any
party proceeding in forma pauperis who is present and who does
not proficiently speak or understand the English language for
the purpose of interpreting the proceedings in a language that
the party understands and assisting communications between that
party, his or her attorney, and the court in specified actions
and proceedings.
AB 663 was introduced in 2009, and held in this Committee as a
two-year bill, at the author's request. It appears that the
dates for various required Judicial Council actions assume a
January 1, 2010 enactment. Staff recommends that the program
pilot dates, workgroup dates, fee collection dates, and
reporting requirement dates in the bill be delayed one year, to
reflect the bill's delayed enactment.
This bill provides that the court interpreters pilot program be
funded through telephonic court appearance fees. This bill would
require the Judicial Council to enter into a master agreement or
agreements with one or more vendors to provide for telephone
appearances in civil cases, as permitted by law. The vendor
would be allowed to charge fees to the parties for telephonic
appearances, as specified. The vendor would pay the state $15
for every telephone appearance, as well as 25% of the total fee
revenue the vendor collects, with revenue to be used by the
Judicial Council to pay the costs of the pilot court interpreter
program.
The courts have sustained substantial operations budget
reductions. Since this bill was introduced, the same fee it
seeks to impose has become part of the proposed 2010-11 Budget,
to help backfill general court operations. Both the Assembly and
the Senate approved this fee for court operations, and it is
included in Budget Conference Committee's proposed budget. If
the 2010-11 Budget Act is signed before this bill, the funding
provisions of this bill would chapter out the budget action to
establish this same fee for court operations. If AB 663 is
enacted first, the Budget Act would chapter out the funding
source for the bill, and create cost pressure to the Trial
Courts Trust Fund to fund the court interpreters pilot program.
A similar bill, AB 2302 (Jones 2006), was vetoed with the
following message:
I am returning Assembly Bill 2302 without my signature.
The state has made significant progress towards eliminating the
structural deficit.
However, the state must continue to exercise fiscal discipline
and limit the growth
of state government in order to eliminate the projected deficit
in 2007-08 and the
future. While it is essential to provide non-English speaking
litigants with interpreters
in order to provide meaningful access to our justice system,
this bill would impair
our ability to eliminate the structural deficit. There are many
worthwhile programs
that compete for General Fund dollars. However, now is not the
time to expand
programs that significantly increase the expenditure of General
Fund dollars at a
time the State is moving to eliminate its structural deficit.
For these reasons I am unable to sign this bill.