AB 1883 California Assembly · 2009-2010 Regular Session

Certified copies of vital records: fees: domestic violence.

Summary
Existing law requires the collection of fees for providing certified copies of vital records, including marriage certificates, birth certificates, fetal death records, and death records. Existing law authorizes the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and the City Council of the City of Berkeley, upon making certain findings and declarations, to authorize an increase in fees for certified copies of certain vital records, up to $2. Existing law, until January 1, 2011, authorizes the Solano County Board of Supervisors, upon making certain findings and declarations, to authorize an increase in fees for certified copies of certain vital records, up to $2. Existing law, until January 1, 2015, authorizes the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, upon making certain findings and declarations, to authorize an increase in fees for certified copies of certain vital records, up to $2. Existing law authorizes the above-described county boards of supervisors and that city council to make further increases in fees each year, as specified. Existing law requires the fees to be allocated for purposes relating to domestic violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution. This bill, until January 1, 2016, would authorize a county board of supervisors, upon making certain findings and declarations, to authorize an increase in fees of up to $4 for certified copies of certain vital records. The bill would require that12 of the fee increase be allocated for purposes relating to domestic violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution and the other12 of the fee increase be allocated for nonprofit, community-based organizations that serve domestic violence victims and their families, as specified. This bill, until January 1, 2016, notwithstanding the above-described authorization, would authorize the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and the City Council of the City of Berkeley, to authorize an increase in fees of up to $2 for certified copies of certain vital records. This bill, until January 1, 2011, notwithstanding the above-described authorization, would authorize the Solano County Board of Supervisors, to authorize an increase in fees of up to $2 for certified copies of certain vital records. This bill, until January 1, 2015, notwithstanding the above-described authorization, would authorize the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, to authorize an increase in fees of up to $2 for certified copies of certain vital records. The bill would require proceeds from the above-described fee increases to be allocated for nonprofit, community-based organizations that serve domestic violence victims and their families, as specified. This bill would provide that when the authorization for the fee increase of up to $2 ends for Solano County and Sonoma County on January 1, 2011, and January 1, 2015, respectively, the above-described provisions authorizing an increase in fees of up to a maximum of $4 shall apply with respect to those counties. This bill would require a county board of supervisors or the City Council of the City of Berkeley to direct, when appropriate, the local registrar, county recorder, and county clerk, to deposit the fees into a special fund, and would authorize a county or the City of Berkeley to retain up to 4% of the special fund for administrative costs, as specified. This bill would require that, prior to using the fee proceeds, a county board of supervisors or the City Council of the City of Berkeley provide for public hearings and comment on the specific manner in which funds are to be used and confer with its local domestic violence shelter or shelters before determining the specific manner in which funds are to be used. The bill would require a county board of supervisors or the City Council of the City of Berkeley to submit to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary, by February 1, 2015, a report regarding the above fee increases, as specified.
Bill status failed 3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2010
Committee Review
Jun 2010
Assembly Passage
May 2010
Senate Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 16, 2010 Last action Nov 30, 2010
Floor votes · Assembly May 3, 2010

How they voted

38–28
Passed · 3 other
Total votes 69
May 3, 2010
D Democratic42
38 Yea 1 Nay 3
90% Yea
I Independent1
1 Nay
100% Nay
R Republican26
26 Nay
100% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea All Nay Mixed No data
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
15
Key actions
4
Committee
5
Amendments
4
Jun 15, 2010
Upper · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
upper
May 25, 2010
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
upper
May 13, 2010
Committee
Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and JUD.
upper
May 3, 2010
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (38-28-3)
assembly
Apr 5, 2010
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
lower
Mar 25, 2010
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 3.) (March 23).
lower
Mar 16, 2010
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Mar 15, 2010
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.
lower
Feb 25, 2010
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Feb 17, 2010
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 19.
lower
1 primary · 1 co-sponsor

Sponsors