BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Ellen M. Corbett, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
As Amended June 9, 2010
Hearing Date: June 29, 2010
Fiscal: No
Urgency: No
KB:jd
SUBJECT
Vital Records: Fees
DESCRIPTION
This bill, sponsored by the Stanislaus County Board of
Supervisors, would authorize the Stanislaus County Board of
Supervisors, until January 1, 2016, to increase fees for
certified copies of marriage certificates, birth certificates,
fetal death records, and death records by up to $2 for the
purposes of collecting funds for governmental oversight and
coordination of a variety of domestic violence and family
violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution efforts.
BACKGROUND
In 2001, pursuant to SB 425 (Torlakson, Chapter 90, Statutes of
2001), the Legislature authorized a pilot program in Contra
Costa County, allowing the county to provide governmental
oversight and coordination of domestic violence prevention,
intervention, and prosecution efforts within the county. The
county was required to make findings and declarations about the
need for oversight and coordination, and per these findings, was
authorized to increase fees by a maximum of $2 for marriage
licenses and on certified copies of vital records to fund the
program. Contra Costa County was required to provide a report
to the Legislature by July 1, 2006, on the outcomes achieved and
the amount of funds received and spent. SB 425 contained a
sunset of January 1, 2007, which was later repealed by SB 968
(Torlakson, Chapter 635, Statutes of 2006), making Contra
Costa's program effective indefinitely.
(more)
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
Page 2 of ?
AB 2010 (Hancock, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2004), subsequently
authorized the Counties of Alameda and Solano to raise the fees
for marriage licenses and for certified copies of vital records.
The money raised is placed in a special fund in each county to
provide for oversight and coordination of domestic violence
prevention, intervention, and prosecution efforts in each
respective county. These efforts include coordination among the
court system, the district attorney's office, the public
defender's office, law enforcement, the probation department,
mental health, substance abuse, child welfare services, adult
protective services, and other agencies and community-based
organizations in the counties. AB 2010 authorized a fee
increase of up to $2 for each county, with further increases
permitted on an annual basis, using the Consumer Price Index
(CPI) for the San Francisco metropolitan area.
The following year, AB 1712 (Hancock, Chapter 545, Statutes of
2005) authorized the City of Berkeley to also increase the fees
for certified copies of vital records by up to $2. The City of
Berkeley, located in Alameda County, operates its own public
health department and offers a full range of public health
services. Accordingly, Berkeley runs its own domestic violence
programs and maintains birth certificates, fetal death, and
death records for its residents. AB 1712 allowed the City of
Berkeley to provide oversight and coordination of its domestic
violence programs under the same terms and conditions that apply
to the rest of Alameda County.
Last year, legislation made the Alameda County and Berkeley
programs permanent (AB 73, (Hayashi, Chapter 215, Statutes of
2009)). Legislators also extended the sunset date for Solano
County's pilot program and authorized a similar pilot program in
Sonoma County (SB 635 (Wiggins, Chapter 365, Statutes of 2009)).
This bill would similarly authorize Stanislaus County to
increase fees for specified vital records for the purposes of
funding oversight and coordination of domestic violence
programs.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law authorizes the Alameda and Solano County Boards of
Supervisors, and the Berkeley City Council, upon making
specified findings and declarations, to increase the fees for
marriage licenses and confidential marriage licenses, as well as
certified copies of marriage, birth, and death certificates, by
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
Page 3 of ?
up to $2, with further increases permitted on an annual basis,
based on the Consumer Price Index for the San Francisco
metropolitan area for the preceding year. (Gov. Code Secs.
26840.10, 26840.11; Health & Saf. Code Secs. 103627, 103627.5,
103628.)
Existing law directs that these fees be deposited into a special
fund to be used for governmental oversight and coordination of
domestic violence and family violence prevention, intervention,
and prosecution efforts. (Wel. & Inst. Code Secs. 18309,
18309.5.)
Existing law provides that the Alameda and Solano County Boards
of Supervisors and the Berkeley City Council must have submitted
to the Assembly and Senate Judiciary Committees, by July 1,
2009, reports regarding such fee increases. The reports were
required to provide the amounts of fees received and expended as
well as the outcomes achieved as a result of the expenditures.
(Gov. Code Secs. 26840.10, 26840.11; Health & Saf. Code Sec.
103627.5.)
Existing law provides a fee of $4 for certified copies of
marriage certificates, birth certificates, and death records.
Part of that existing fee is used to fund governmental oversight
and coordination of domestic violence prevention, intervention,
and prosecution efforts in Contra Costa County. (Health & Saf.
Code Sec. 103626; Wel. & Inst. Code Sec. 18308.)
This bill would authorize the Stanislaus County Board of
Supervisors, upon making findings and declarations of the need
for governmental oversight and coordination of domestic violence
agencies, to increase fees for certified copies of marriage
certificates, birth certificates, fetal death records, and death
records by up to $2.
This bill would allow the Stanislaus County supervisors to
authorize annual increases of those fees by the increase in the
Consumer Price Index for the San Francisco metropolitan area,
rounded to the nearest half dollar.
This bill would require Stanislaus County to direct the local
registrar, county recorder, and county clerk to deposit those
fees into a special fund for governmental oversight and
coordination of a variety of domestic violence and family
violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution efforts. The
County may retain up to 4 percent of the funds for
administrative costs.
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
Page 4 of ?
This bill would provide that applicants for a certified copy of
a birth certificate, fetal death record, or death record in
Stanislaus County must pay an additional fee to the local
registrar, county recorder, or county clerk, as established by
the Board of Supervisors.
This bill would require the Stanislaus County Board of
Supervisors to report to the Legislature the annual amounts of
funds received and expended from fee in-creases and the outcomes
achieved. A preliminary report must be submitted no later than
July 1, 2014.
This bill would sunset on January 1, 2016.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
The author states:
Stanislaus County experiences a 25% greater rate of domestic
violence calls than the state average and a 50% higher rate
for child welfare referrals. In spite of the efforts of law
enforcement and the judicial system, violent crimes in
Stanislaus County continue to escalate. More than 2,000
elders reported being abused and more than 3,000 domestic
violence calls were received by law enforcement in 2009. In
addition, more than 150 cases of sexual assault were reported
and over 10,000 cases are referred through child welfare
annually. What is more sobering is that experts estimate that
only 25% of incidents are actually reported.
The SFJC project will offer a dynamic and proven new approach
by housing a multi-disciplinary team of professionals under
one roof. This approach will reduce the number of times
victims have to re-tell their story and will greatly decrease
the number of places they have to travel to for assistance.
This approach is similar to Family Justice Centers operating
in San Diego, Alameda County and Contra Costa County.
2.Stanislaus County seeks to address domestic violence issues
through the implementation of a Family Justice Center
The Family Justice Center model was originally developed in San
Diego, which opened a center in 2002. The idea behind the FJC
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
Page 5 of ?
model is to create a coordinated, single-point-of-access center
offering comprehensive services for victims of domestic
violence, thereby reducing the number of locations a victim must
visit in order to receive critical services. The United States
Department of Justice, through its Office on Violence Against
Women (OVW), has identified the Family Justice Center (FJC)
model as a best practice in the field of domestic violence.
According to the OVW, documented and public FJC outcomes include
a reduction in the rate of homicide, increased victim safety,
improved offender prosecution, reduced fear and anxiety for
victims and their children, increased efficiency among service
providers through the provision of collaborative victims, and
increased community support for the provision of services and
their children. (Casey Gwinn and Gael Strack, Hope for Hurting
Families: Creating Family Justice Centers Across America,
Volcano Press, 2006.)
Stanislaus County has secured $650,000 of private funding
committed over the next three years for a Family Justice Center,
and is requesting an additional $300,000 in federal funds
through an appropriations request for fiscal year 2011. The
Board of Supervisors estimates that the additional $2 in
increased fees would generate approximately $64,000 annually.
The revenue generated would be used to fund costs related to the
Family Justice Center, with up to four percent available for
administrative costs associated with collecting the fee.
A lease for office space has already been signed and Stanislaus
County plans to open the doors for its Family Justice Center
this year. Approximately fifteen organizations have committed
to partnering for this concerted effort, including law
enforcement agencies and numerous non-profit organizations
dedicated to preventing domestic violence, child and elder
abuse.
Alameda County has established its own FJC, which is funded in
part through increased fees on marriage certificates, and copies
of vital records, currently authorized by statute. (See Gov.
Code Secs. 26840.10, 26840.11; Health & Saf. Code Secs. 103627,
103627.5, 103628.). The program in Alameda County, as well as
the City of Berkeley's, was made permanent last year, after the
pilot programs were demonstrated to be very successful.
This bill would similarly provide Stanislaus County with the
authorization to increase fees on marriage certificates and
other vital records, thus creating a pool of funds that could be
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
Page 6 of ?
used in the county's efforts to combat domestic violence. This
bill would further require the Stanislaus Board of Supervisors
to submit to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary a
report by July 1, 2014 detailing the amount of funds received
and expended pursuant to this bill and outcomes achieved. The
information in this report should enable the Legislature to
determine whether the pilot program in Stanislaus County has
been effective in establishing its stated objectives so as to
merit a further sunset extension.
3.Special legislation
The California Constitution prohibits special legislation when a
general law can apply (Article IV, Section16). AB 1770 contains
findings and declarations explaining the need for legislation
that applies only to Stanislaus County.
4.Opposition
In opposition, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association writes:
As currently drafted, AB 1770 would authorize local government
violations of the California Constitution. It is a tax for a
special purpose and therefore must require a two-thirds vote
by local voters. This increase cannot be termed a fee since
there is absolutely no nexus between certified certificates
and domestic violence prevention.
A tax does require a two-thirds vote of the Legislature or of
local voters, however, a bona fide regulatory fee does not.
(Cal. Const. art. XIII , sec. 3.) The California Supreme Court
laid out the distinction between a fee and a tax in Sinclair
Paints v. Board of Equalization (1997) 15 Cal.4th 866. In order
to be classified as a regulatory fee and not a tax, the Court
held that the fee must not exceed the reasonable cost of
providing the services necessary for which the fee is charged,
and must not be levied for an unrelated revenue purpose.
Domestic violence affects families across all economic,
educational, age, and ethnic lines, and has spillover effects
that can impact the community as a whole. As previously stated,
the fees that would be authorized pursuant to this bill would
specifically be used to fund governmental oversight and
coordination of domestic violence and family violence
prevention, intervention, and prosecution efforts. The fees
would not be used for general revenue purposes, rather to assist
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
Page 7 of ?
the county in providing services to individuals and families in
the community. Further, there is no indication that the fees
that would be levied in this bill are excessive. Thus, it
appears that the fees authorized in this bill are regulatory
fees, and not special taxes.
Committee staff also notes that the fees authorized in this and
the specific uses of those fees are similar to the programs in
Contra Costa County, Alameda County, and the City of Berkeley,
that the Legislature and the Governor made permanent in 2006.
(SB 968 (Torlakson, Chapter 635, Statutes of 2006)), (AB 73
(Hayashi, Chapter 215, Statutes of 2009).)
The County Recorders Association of California is also opposed,
arguing that fees for vital records should relate exclusively to
the cost of recording or obtaining certified copies of vital
records and should not force a county recorder into the unwanted
role of being a revenue generator.
Lastly, the Child Abuse Prevention Center (CAP Center) is
opposed unless the bill is amended to remove the authorization
for increased fees on birth certificates so as to preserve fees
on birth certificates as a dedicated source for child abuse
prevention. Currently, $4 from every fee paid for a birth
certificate goes to trust funds for child abuse prevention. The
CAP Center asserts that adding fees to certified copies of birth
certificates as proposed by AB 1770 would reduce the feasibility
of increasing further revenues for child abuse prevention.
Support : None Known
Opposition : Child Abuse Prevention Center (unless amended);
County Recorders Association of California; Howard Jarvis
Taxpayers Association
HISTORY
Source : Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors
Related Pending Legislation :
AB 1883 (Evans) would allow for the establishment of similar
domestic violence prevention funding pilot programs in all
counties. This bill is currently in the
Senate Local Government Committee.
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
Page 8 of ?
AB 2348 (Yamada) would establish a similar domestic violence
prevention funding pilot program in Yolo County. This bill is
currently in the Assembly Judiciary Committee.
SB 1222 (Wolk) would extend the existing pilot program in Solano
County until January 1, 2012. This bill is currently on the
Assembly Floor.
Prior Legislation :
AB 73 (Hayashi, Chapter 215, Statutes of 2009) deleted the
sunset date for pilot programs in Alameda County and the City of
Berkeley that authorizes increased fees in specified vital
records and marriage licenses for the purposes of funding
domestic violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution.
SB 635 (Wiggins, Chapter 356, Statutes of 2009) established a
similar pilot program for Sonoma County and extended the sunset
for the pilot program in Solano County until 2011.
AB 2231 (Hayashi) of the 2007-2008 Legislative Session would
have extended the sunset date for pilot programs in Alameda and
Solano Counties, and the City of Berkeley that authorizes
increased fees in specified vital records and marriage licenses
from January 1, 2010, to January 1, 2015. This bill was vetoed
by the Governor.
AB 1712 (Hancock, Chapter 545, Statutes of 2005), authorized the
City of Berkeley to increase the fees for certified copies of
birth certificates, fetal death records, and death records by up
to $2.
AB 2010 (Hancock, Chapter 830, Statutes of 2004), authorized
Alameda and Solano Counties to increase the fees for marriage
licenses, and for certified copies of marriage certificates,
birth certificates, fetal death records, and death records.
SB 425 (Torlakson, Chapter 90, Statutes of 2001), authorized a
pilot program in Contra Costa County, allowing the county to
provide governmental oversight and coordination of domestic
violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution efforts
within the county.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 7, Noes 3)
AB 1770 (Galgiani)
Page 9 of ?
Assembly Floor (Ayes 46, Noes 26)
Senate Local Government Committee (Ayes 3, Noes 1)
**************