California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 1883 — Certified copies of vital records: fees: domestic violence.

Last action — From Senate committee without further action.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

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 Text

Action History

  1. From Senate committee without further action.

  2. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  3. 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.

  4. Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and JUD.

  5. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  6. Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 45. Noes 30. Page 4982.)

  7. Read second time. To third reading.

  8. Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

  9. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 3.) (March 23).

  10. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  11. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.

  12. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  13. From printer. May be heard in committee March 19.

  14. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Evans · Primary
  • Yamada · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on · 4 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Evans

Co-sponsors (1)

  • Yamada

Not signed on (120)

120 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 120 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

AB 1883 EVANS Assembly Third Reading

Passed 51 Yea · 33 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 483106
Democratic 2001
Republican 1200
Total 513307
% of votes cast 56%36%0%8%
How each member voted (91)
Member Party Vote
Carter — Yea
Evans — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
De — Yea
La — Yea
Torre — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Fong — Yea
Bass — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Bonnie — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
V. — Yea
Manuel — Yea
Perez — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Salas — Yea
Saldana — Yea
Conway — Nay
Bill — Nay
Tom — Nay
Fuller — Nay
Garrick — Nay
Fletcher — Nay
Audra — Nay
Hagman — Nay
Charles — Not Voting
John — Not Voting
A. — Not Voting
Perez — Not Voting
Cook — Nay
Hall — Not Voting
Hernandez — Yea
Hill — Yea
Huber — Nay
Adams — Nay
Anderson — Nay
Blakeslee — Nay
Jeffries — Nay
Lieu — Yea
Logue — Nay
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Nay
Nava — Yea
Nestande — Nay
Norby — Nay
Ruskin — Yea
Silva — Nay
Smyth — Nay
Solorio — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Torres — Yea
Tran — Nay
Villines — Nay
Ammiano — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Not Voting
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Harkey — Nay
Huffman — Yea
Knight — Nay
Ma — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Skinner — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Torrico — Yea
Emmerson — Nay
Coto — Yea
Eng — Yea
Davis — Yea
DeVore — Nay
Galgiani — Yea
Gilmore — Nay
Beth Gaines — Nay
Bill Berryhill — Nay
Bill Berryhill — Nay
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Nay
Strickland, Tony Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 7 Yea · 3 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6300
Republican 1000
Total 7300
% of votes cast 70%30%0%0%
How each member voted (10)
Member Party Vote
Evans — Yea
Hagman — Nay
Knight — Nay
Lieu — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nava — Yea
Tran — Nay
Brownley — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 1883 do?
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.
Who sponsors AB 1883?
AB 1883 is sponsored by Evans and Yamada.
What is the current status of AB 1883?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 1883?
Track AB 1883 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1883

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 1883

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →