BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:April 25, 2011 |Bill No:SB |
| |671 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Curren D. Price, Jr., Chair
Bill No: SB 671Author:Price
As Amended:April 14, 2011Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT: Shorthand reporters. Continuing education requirements.
SUMMARY: Requires the Court Reporters Board of California to
establish continuing education requirements for renewal of a shorthand
reporter certificate.
Existing law:
1) Certifies and regulates some 7,700 certified shorthand reporters
(CSRs) and regulates 16 shorthand reporting schools by the Court
Reporters Board of California (Board) within the Department of
Consumer Affairs (DCA).
2) Provides that a CSR certificate is valid for one year, and may be
renewed by applying for the certificate renewal, paying the renewal
fee, and notifying the Board of any substantially related criminal
convictions or of any disciplinary action taken by any regulatory
agency against the licensee. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) �
8024)
3) Establishes various fees which may be charged by the Board,
including fees for examinations, initial and renewal CSR
certificates. (BPC � 8031)
4) General provisions of the Business and Professions Code require the
director of DCA by regulation to develop guidelines for continuing
education programs by DCA boards and bureaus to ensure that
mandatory continuing education is used as a means to create a more
competent licensing population. (BPC � 166)
SB 671
Page 2
This bill:
1) Requires the Board, by July 1, 2012, to adopt regulations to
establish minimum continuing education requirements for renewal of
a CSR certificate.
2) Requires that, no earlier than six months after the effective date
of the regulations, a CSR renewing a certificate must certify to
the Board completion of the minimum continuing education
requirements.
3) Requires the Board to ensure that the required continuing education
is relevant to the practice of shorthand reporting.
4) Requires the Board to establish a procedure for approving
continuing education course providers, and requires continuing
education providers to comply with procedures established by the
Board.
5) Authorizes the Board to establish a fee for providers of continuing
education courses.
6) Authorizes the Board to establish exceptions to the continuing
education requirements for individuals who cannot meet the
continuing education requirements for reasons of health, military
service, or undue hardship.
7) Requires the continuing education requirements to fully comply with
the guidelines for mandatory continuing education established by
DCA.
8) Additionally, authorizes the Board to adopt regulations to
implement the continuing education provisions.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill has been keyed "fiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose. This bill is sponsored by California Court Reporters
Association and Deposition Reporters Association (Sponsors) to
require the Board to establish minimum approved continuing
education requirements for renewal of all shorthand reporter (both
court reporters and "freelance" reporters) certificates on or
before July 1, 2012.
SB 671
Page 3
According to the Sponsors, there are currently no provisions which
ensure the consumer that the CSR is gaining or maintaining the
education necessary to stay updated on the rules, regulations and
statutes that affect the way they practice shorthand reporting.
The Sponsors believe that continuing education will provide
confidence to the citizens of the state that the verbatim record is
and will continue to be held to the highest possible standards.
Mandating continuing education requirements will ensure that all
rules, regulations and statutes specific to the CSR are known by
and followed by the CSR, according to the Sponsors.
2. Background. Certified shorthand reporters, commonly known as court
reporters, typically engage in one of two types of shorthand
reporting practice. "Official" reporters are individuals who work
as employees of the court system, and "freelance" reporters are
individuals hired privately by court reporting businesses and firms
or attorneys to report depositions. In order to obtain licensure,
both types of reporters must qualify by attending one of the 16
California schools of court reporting authorized by the Board and
passing two written exams and a performance exam. There are
currently approximately 7,700 certified shorthand reporter
licensees statewide. The CSR certificate is issued for a one-year
period, expiring on the last day of the birth month of the
licensee.
3. Judicial Counsel Continuing Education Requirement. Beginning
January 1, 2007, the Judicial Counsel of California adopted a
continuing education requirement for all personnel employed by the
Court , including court reporters (California Rules of Court, Title
10, Division 2, Chapter 8, Rule 10.451, ff.). The Rule requires
each employee to complete 8 hours of continuing education every 2
years. The Judicial Council has listed education as a vital
component in achieving the goals of its Long-Range Strategic Plan,
which including access, fairness, and diversity; branch
independence and accountability; modernization of management and
administration; and quality of justice and service to the public.
4. Continuing Education for Court Reporters: A Legislative Sunset
Review Issue. The issue of continuing education has been raised
when reviewing the Board under the sunset review process. In 1996,
the Joint Legislative Sunset Review Committee (Joint Committee)
noted that the Board had been instrumental in attempting to provide
leadership in the area of continuing education for the profession.
At that time, there had been much discussion about the pros and
cons of such requirements, but the Board had deleted a continuing
education proposal from its 1994 legislation when it learned that
SB 671
Page 4
the Governor would not approve it.
At that time the Board stated, that many in the profession believe
that the Board's pre-license testing system keeps the standard of
entry at an appropriate level, and the intensity demanded in the
day-to-day requirements in this occupation drives the individual
licensees to seek and find the educational training requirements
necessary on their own initiative. However, others believe that
the use of electronic information processing and the speed with
which technologies are changing, are putting more pressure on the
profession to keep the standard of performance at its highest
level.
Ultimately, the Joint Committee's recommendation did not include
pursuing continuing education. The issue was again raised in the
2004/2005 review of the Board, however, the Joint Committee did not
recommend establishing a continuing education requirement, due
primarily to the unwillingness of the Schwarzenegger Administration
to establish a continuing education requirement.
5. Prior Legislation. AB 2189 (Karnette) from 2008, was substantially
the same as this bill and would have required the Board to
establish continuing education requirements by July 1, 2009. That
bill was vetoed by the Governor stating that the continuing
education requirements impose an additional burden on the regulated
profession without justifying a compelling need.
6. Arguments in Support. In sponsoring the bill, California Court
Reporters Association (CCRA), states that currently there are no
structures in place that ensure that the CSR is gaining or
maintaining the education necessary to stay updated on the rules,
regulations and statutes affecting the practice of shorthand
reporting. The recently-adopted Judicial Council rules mandating
continuing education for all staff, including court reporters, does
not specifically mandate that the official court reporter obtain
continuing education specifically as it relates to the job of court
reporting according to CCRA.
CCRA further states that in the world of ever-changing technology,
the consumer of the products and services of the CSR expect to be
offered and provided the latest technological advances that are
available; i.e. real time reporting, Internet text streaming,
transcript repositories, exhibit scanning and linking to
transcripts, and much more. The job of a CSR has really morphed
into more of an information manager, an important and integral
component to the litigation process, according to CCRA.
SB 671
Page 5
Also sponsoring the bill, the Deposition Reporters Association of
California (DRA) additionally argues that deposition reporting is
one of the most critical parts of our system of resolving disputes.
An accurate written record of who said what in court is essential
if the outcome of judicial proceeding is to be accepted by the
litigants and the public as non-arbitrary, fair, and credible, and
against a backdrop, where a single error can translate into the
distorted and arbitrary administration of justice, deposition
reporting professionals absolutely must, not just at the time of
licensure but throughout their careers, maintain the highest
possible level of ethics and competence to protect consumers and
our system of justice.
DRA suggests that continuing education as well as vigorous
enforcement are the two tools regulatory boards use to ensure a
sustained level of quality in licensed professionals throughout
their careers.
DRA additionally argues that although official reporters who work
in courtrooms must currently complete ongoing continuing education,
deposition reporters must ensure the integrity and accuracy of the
vital written record while working in a private commercial setting,
even though they are hired by one of the parties in often hotly
contested litigation.
Many arguments for the bill focus on informing CSRs about changes
in laws and regulation, court procedures, and technological
advances in the profession. In many cases, continuing professional
development and education will be undertaken voluntarily by
conscientious, motivated licensees on their own who are motivated
to stay on top of their profession. Yet, the proponents of the
bill point out that typically deposition reporters practice in
isolated settings, apart from other CSRs and may not have ready
access on their own to information regarding changing practices,
technological advances, and changes in the law.
7. Regulatory Issues to be Addressed by the Board. In implementing
the continuing education requirement for CSRs as provided in the
bill, there are several issues that Board will need to consider,
including:
a) Whether the continuing education requirements established by
the Board will be in addition to or the same as the continuing
education requirement established by the Judicial Council for
official reporters. In other words, will a licensed CSR who is
SB 671
Page 6
employed by the court and who must complete the continuing
education required by the Judicial Council be required to
fulfill as separate continuing education requirement to renew
their license from the Board? While it seems appropriate that
the two continuing education requirements work together, it is
recommended that the specific nature and extent of how they work
together be left to the Board to address through its regulatory
process.
b) The bill broadly requires the Board to ensure that the
required continuing education is relevant to the practice of
shorthand reporting. In addition, general DCA guidelines
require boards to ensure that mandatory continuing education is
used as a means to create a more competent licensing population.
These provisions will guide the Board in establishing the
regulations, so that irrelevant courses will not be allowed for
continuing education.
c) The bill does not specify the number of hours of continuing
education would be required for each annual license renewal
period. As stated above, the Judicial Council requirement for
official reporters is to complete eight hours of continuing
education every two years. The Board will need to determine an
appropriate number of hours through its regulatory process.
d) The bill authorizes the Board to establish a fee for
providers of continuing education courses. This provision,
which authorizes but does not require, the Board to require the
fee was added to the bill out of concern about the Board's
funding and staffing necessary to assume the new responsibility
of approving continuing education providers. In addition, the
bill currently does not establish a maximum fee level. An
appropriate level will need to be amended in as the bill goes
forward through the legislative process.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
California Court Reporters Association (Sponsor)
Deposition Reporters Association (Sponsor)
Opposition:
None received as of April 20, 2011
SB 671
Page 7
Consultant:G. V. Ayers