California Commission on Uniform State Laws
State Capitol, Room 3021
Sacramento, California 95814
916/341-8005
916/341-8020 facsimile
Meeting of the California Commission on Uniform State Laws
Date: October 21, 2010
Time: 10:30 a.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Locations:
Office of Legislative Counsel
Bion M. Gregory Conference Room
925 L Street, Lower Level
Sacramento, California 95814
1331 San Pablo Avenue
Berkeley, California 94702
Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.
15301 Ventura Boulevard, Building E
Sherman Oaks, California 91403
1000 Fruitridge Road
Placerville, California 95667
Final Agenda
1. Introductions
2. Status and funding of CCUSL
3. 2011-12 Budget and 2011 Annual Dues
4. Update – legislative program for the second half of the 2009-2010 Legislative Session
5. Legislative program for the first half of the 2011-2012 Legislative Session
6. Potential conflicts of interest for Commissioners
7. Other administrative matters
Minutes
Meeting of the California Commission on Uniform State Laws
October 21, 2010 10:30 a.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Attendees: Pamela Bertani; Diane Boyer-Vine; Dave Clark; Elihu Harris; Justin Houterman; Robert Jameson; Byron Sher; Nat Sterling; Kathy Banuelos, Consultant to the Senate Committee on Judiciary; Susan Ballew, note taker.
Diane Boyer-Vine called the meeting to order at 10:30 a.m. and some attendees began calling in from remote locations.
1. Introductions
Commissioners introduced themselves.
The Chair determined that a quorum was present.
2. Status and funding of CCUSL
Diane Boyer-Vine reported that California’s 2010-11 budget did not include an appropriation for the California Commission on Uniform State Laws. The Office of Legislative Counsel will fund the Commission but for the fiscal year 2010-11 only. The Commission will request a “line item” appropriation for the 2011-12 budget. If the Commission receives no appropriation for 2011-12, the Commissioners will then discuss how to proceed.
3. 2011-12 Budget and 2011 Annual Dues
Diane Boyer-Vine reported that California’s dues for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011 are $148,600. Since the Office of Legislative Counsel is funding only $148,000, there is a shortfall. It was also pointed out that, in prior years, the California Commissioners’ travel expenses to the Uniform Law Conference annual meeting were paid first and the remainder of the appropriation used to pay dues. The Commissioners discussed whether to continue this practice.
A motion was made to pay $118,000 in dues and hold $30,000 to pay Commissioners’ travel expenses. The motion passed.
4. Update – legislative program for the second half of the 2009-2010 Legislative Session
Diane Boyer-Vine reported that A.B. 229, a cleanup of the Uniform Principal and Income Act, was signed by the Governor. Diane also discussed some of the challenges associated with the bill’s passage, specifically the need to concentrate more closely on how a uniform act changes California law.
Diane also reported that S.B. 1098, the Uniform Athlete Agents Act, was vetoed by the Governor. The veto message indicated that the Governor had a problem with which agency would administer it and the cost of administering the act. The California Commission decided to not reintroduce the Uniform Athlete Agents Act during the first half of the 2011-2012 legislative session, but will discuss it again at the Fall 2011 California Commission meeting. Diane acknowledged Commissioners Justin Houterman and Byron Sher and Lynda Gledhill, with Senator Corbett’s staff, for their work on the bill.
5. Legislative Program for the first half of the 2011-2012 Legislative Session
After reviewing the list of Target Acts proposed by the Uniform Law Conference, the California Commission discussed the following for possible inclusion as part of the 2011-12 legislative programs:
• Uniform Adult Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act
The California Law Revision Commission plans to study the uniform act this year and perhaps introduce it. No specific timeframe was given as to when the California Law Revision Commission will have completed its study. Diane Boyer-Vine reported that she met with national representatives of the Alzheimer Association, and they are eager to have the act introduced in California.
• Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (with 2008 Amendments)
Federal legislation is moving through Congress, and California will not introduce the uniform act until federal legislation passes.
• Uniform Military and Overseas Voters Act
Michael Beaver, a deputy legislative counsel with the Office of Legislative Counsel, reported on the differences between the uniform act and California law. After discussion on the merits of the uniform act and the likelihood of it being passed by the Legislature, the Commission decided to speak with interested parties before making a decision on whether to introduce the uniform act. Diane Boyer-Vine agreed to speak with legislative staff in the Senate and Assembly Elections Committees. If those discussions are favorable, then the Secretary of State’s office will be contacted for their feedback. If the Commission decides to introduce the uniform act, Dave Clark and Pam Bertani agreed to work the bill through the legislative process.
• Uniform Collaborative Law Act
Byron Sher explained the provisions of the uniform act and discussion followed. It was decided to explore the viability of introduction in California. A motion was made to pursue the possibility of introducing the Uniform Collaborative Law Act, but limited to family law matters. The motion also included directing the California Commission to talk to interested parties, including the Senate and Assembly Judiciary staff, California State Bar section on family law, and legal aid groups. The motion also stated that if there is support from these groups, then the California Commission will introduce the uniform act. A roll call vote was taken and the motion passed. Byron Sher agreed to work the bill through the legislative process. Mr. Sher also indicated that he would like to attend meetings arranged with legal professionals.
Diane Boyer-Vine reviewed other ULC Target Acts and gave a report on why the acts are not appropriate for introduction in California.
Nat Sterling reported on the Uniform Assignment of Rents Act. He explained that California does not have the uniform act but does already have a comprehensive act on this subject. It appears that the uniform act is based on California’s statute. Nat recommended that, because California’s current law is similar in concept, the uniform act not be pursued.
Nat Sterling also reported on the Insurable Interests Amendment to the Uniform Trust Code. Nat has had communication with a representative of the Trusts and Estates Section of the California State Bar. The State Bar is interested in the revisions but waiting for final approval.
Diane Boyer-Vine reported that the Uniform Law Conference is anxious to receive California’s Legislative Plan for 2011. Diane will prepare the plan based on decisions made at today’s meeting and send it to the California Commissioners for their approval prior to transmittal to the national conference.
6. Potential conflicts of interest for Commissioners
Diane Boyer-Vine reported that the California Commission is not required to have a conflict of interest code, and so Commissioners have no standard when conflict of interest questions arise. Diane asked if the California Commission should adopt a standard with respect to handling outside professional activities by California Commissioners.
Elihu Harris suggested that Commissioners disclose a real or perceived conflict when participating in discussions concerning uniform law matters.
After discussion, it was agreed that Diane will ask the national Uniform Law Conference to find out if they have a conflict of interest statement. Justin Houterman will look for samples of disclosure forms. Diane will draft “disclosure” language, and the Commission will review the draft for formal adoption at the Fall 2011 meeting. In the meantime, as potential conflict of interest issues arise, it is the individual responsibility of Commissioners to disclose their interest.
7. Other administrative matters
There was discussion about Commissioners’ reappointments. Diane Boyer-Vine will find out the name of the new Appointments Secretary in the Governor’s Office.
Commissioners Robert G. Beverly and Matthew S. Rae, who passed away in 2010, were recognized for their long-standing support and enthusiasm for the work of the national Uniform Law Conference and the California Commission on Uniform State Laws.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan Ballew