California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: To Executive

AB 898 — Documents: notaries public: solicitations.

Last action — Vetoed by Governor.

Track this bill free

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

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

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

(1) Existing law makes it unlawful for a nongovernmental entity to solicit funds or information by means of a mailing, electronic message, or Internet Web site that contains a seal, insignia, trade, or brand name, or any other term or symbol that reasonably could be interpreted or construed as implying any state or local government connection, approval, or endorsement, unless the nongovernmental entity has an expressed connection with a state or local entity or unless the solicitation contains specified disclosures in conspicuous and legible type. Existing law requires a business to include the contact information for a referenced governmental agency in an unsolicited mailing that offers to assist the recipient in dealing with the governmental agency. A violation of these or other provisions related to advertising is a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding 6 months, a fine not exceeding $1,000, or both. This bill would additionally make it unlawful for a nongovernmental entity to solicit funds or information by any of those means that contains an emblem or content that reasonably could be interpreted or construed as implying any federal state, or local government connection, approval, or endorsement, unless the nongovernmental entity has an expressed connection with a federal, state or local entity or unless the solicitation contains the specified disclosures and meets other requirements. The bill would require the disclosures to be conspicuously displayed in specified locations, type, and manner. The bill would increase the maximum criminal fine for a violation of these provisions to $2,500 and would authorize a person to recover specified damages resulting from a violation of these provisions. The bill would delete the provisions requiring a business to include the contact information for a referenced governmental agency in an unsolicited mailing that offers to assist the recipient in dealing with the governmental agency. Existing law makes it unlawful for a person to make any untrue or misleading statements in any manner in connection with the offering or performance of an assessment reduction filing service. Existing law provides that an untrue or misleading statement includes representing that an offeror of an assessment reduction filing service is, or is affiliated with, any governmental entity by, among other things, the use of a business name including the word "appeal" or "tax" and any of a list of terms, including "agency," "bureau," or "department." This bill would provide that it is also an untrue or misleading statement in connection with the offering or performance of an assessment reduction filing service if the words "board" or "commission" are used with the word "appeal" or "tax" in the business name of an assessment reduction filing service. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes proof of the execution of an instrument by certain persons and prescribes the form for that proof. Existing law prohibits a proof of the execution of any of several types of specified instruments, including a grant deed, mortgage, deed of trust, quitclaim deed, or security agreement. This bill would add a power of attorney to the types of instruments for which a proof of the execution is prohibited and would further prohibit a proof of the execution for any instrument requiring a notary public to obtain a thumbprint from the party signing the document in the notary public's journal. The bill would also revise the form of certificate that may be used for proof of execution. (3) Existing law prescribes the duties of a notary public, including the duty to demand acceptance and payment of foreign and inland bills of exchange, or promissory notes, to protest them for nonacceptance or nonpayment, and to exercise any other powers and duties that by the law of nations and according to commercial usages, or by the laws of any other state, government, or country, may be performed by notaries. Existing law provides that a protest is a certificate of dishonor of a negotiable instrument made by, among others, a notary public. Existing law provides that the protest of a notary public of a bill of exchange or promissory note for nonacceptance or nonpayment is prima facie evidence of the facts recited therein. The bill would limit the application of these provisions to a notary public employed by a financial institution, during the course and scope of the notary's employment with the financial institution. (4) Existing law prescribes the maximum fees a notary public may charge for specified services. The bill would delete the prescribed maximum fees for every protest for the nonpayment of a promissory note or for the nonpayment or nonacceptance of a bill of exchange, draft, or check, for serving every notice of nonpayment of a promissory note or of nonpayment or nonacceptance of a bill of exchange, order, draft, or check, and for recording every protest. (5) Existing law sets forth the fees the Secretary of State is authorized to charge for the provision of specified business services. The bill would authorize the Secretary of State's office to refuse to perform a service or refuse a filing based on a reasonable belief that the service or filing is being requested for any of a number of specified improper purposes. (6) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Vetoed by Governor.

  2. Enrolled and to the Governor at 3 p.m.

  3. Senate amendments concurred in. To enrollment. (Ayes 53. Noes 24. Page 6298.)

  4. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 13 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.

  5. Read third time, passed, and to Assembly. (Ayes 29. Noes 4. Page 4458.)

  6. Read second time. To third reading.

  7. Read third time, amended. To second reading.

  8. Read second time. To third reading.

  9. From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.

  10. (Corrected June 28.)

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

  12. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5.

  13. Read second time. To third reading.

  14. Read third time, amended. To second reading.

  15. Read second time. To third reading.

  16. To second reading.

  17. From inactive file.

  18. To inactive file on motion of Senator Price.

  19. Read second time, amended, and to third reading.

  20. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (June 23).

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

  22. Referred to Com. on JUD.

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

  24. Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 49. Noes 29. Page 1608.)

  25. Read second time. To third reading.

  26. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 4.) (May 5).

  27. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  28. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  29. Referred to Com. on B. & P.

  30. From printer. May be heard in committee March 29.

  31. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Lieu · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 4 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Lieu

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"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 898 LIEU Concurrence in Senate Amendments

Passed 61 Yea · 27 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 582502
Democratic 2001
Republican 1200
Total 612703
% of votes cast 67%30%0%3%
How each member voted (91)
Member Party Vote
Carter — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Evans — Yea
De — Yea
La — Yea
Torre — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Adams — Yea
Bass — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Fong — Yea
Bonnie — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
V. — Yea
Manuel — Yea
Perez — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Salas — Yea
Saldana — Yea
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Cook — Nay
Bill — Nay
Tom — Nay
Fuentes — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Audra — Nay
Galgiani — Yea
Charles — Not Voting
Blakeslee — Not Voting
DeVore — Nay
Gilmore — Yea
Hagman — Nay
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Nay
Hayashi — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hill — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Knight — Nay
Lieu — Yea
Logue — Nay
Miller — Nay
Monning — Yea
Nestande — Nay
Norby — Nay
Ruskin — Yea
Silva — Nay
Smyth — Nay
Solorio — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Torres — Yea
Tran — Nay
Villines — Nay
Ammiano — Yea
Anderson — Nay
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Huber — Yea
Jeffries — Nay
Ma — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Nava — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Skinner — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Torrico — Yea
Conway — Nay
Eng — Yea
Coto — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Davis — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Fuller — Nay
Garrick — Nay
Gatto — Yea
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 →

Assembly 3rd Reading AB898 Lieu By DeSaulnier

Passed 30 Yea · 4 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 29304
Republican 0100
Democratic 1001
Total 30405
% of votes cast 77%10%0%13%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Cogdill — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hollingsworth — Nay
Huff — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Negrete — Yea
Runner — Yea
Ducheny — Yea
Leno — Yea
Ashburn — Nay
Dutton — Yea
Liu — Yea
McLeod — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Romero — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Walters — Not Voting
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Yea
Aanestad — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Harman — Yea
Oropeza — Not Voting
Price — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Wiggins — Not Voting
Cedillo — Not Voting
Wyland — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Emmerson — Nay
Correa — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Yea
Florez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 4 Yea · 1 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4100
Total 4100
% of votes cast 80%20%0%0%
How each member voted (5)
Member Party Vote
Harman — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Leno — Yea
Walters — Nay
Florez — Yea

Official roll call →

AB 898 LIEU Assembly Third Reading

Passed 58 Yea · 32 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 533001
Democratic 4001
Republican 1200
Total 583202
% of votes cast 63%35%0%2%
How each member voted (92)
Member Party Vote
Hall — Yea
Carter — Yea
Eng — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Evans — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Coto — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Charles — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hill — Yea
De — Yea
La — Yea
Torre — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Beall — Yea
Davis — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Bonnie — Yea
V. — Yea
Manuel — Yea
Perez — Yea
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Salas — Yea
Cook — Nay
Bill — Nay
Berryhill — Nay
Tom — Nay
Berryhill — Nay
Fuller — Nay
Gilmore — Nay
Fletcher — Nay
Gaines — Nay
Audra — Nay
Saldana — Not Voting
Hagman — Nay
Harkey — Nay
Huber — Yea
Jeffries — Nay
Knight — Nay
Lieu — Yea
Logue — Nay
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Nay
Adams — Nay
Bass — Yea
Duvall — Nay
Nava — Yea
Nestande — Nay
Price — Yea
Ruskin — Yea
Silva — Nay
Skinner — Yea
Smyth — Nay
Swanson — Yea
Torres — Yea
Torrico — Yea
Tran — Nay
Anderson — Nay
Blakeslee — Nay
Block — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Krekorian — Yea
Ma — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Solorio — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Villines — Nay
Conway — Nay
Emmerson — Nay
DeVore — Nay
Garrick — Nay
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Not Voting
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Nay
Strickland, Tony Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 8 Yea · 4 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 8301
Republican 0100
Total 8401
% of votes cast 62%31%0%8%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Conway — Nay
Eng — Not Voting
Hayashi — Yea
Nava — Yea
Ruskin — Yea
Smyth — Nay
Hernandez — Yea
Price — Yea
Emmerson — Nay
Niello, Roger W. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety finance 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 898 do?
(1) Existing law makes it unlawful for a nongovernmental entity to solicit funds or information by means of a mailing, electronic message, or Internet Web site that contains a seal, insignia, trade, or brand name, or any other term or symbol that reasonably could be interpreted or construed as implying any state or local government connection, approval, or endorsement, unless the nongovernmental entity has an expressed connection with a state or local entity or unless the solicitation contains specified disclosures in conspicuous and legible type. Existing law requires a business to include the contact information for a referenced governmental agency in an unsolicited mailing that offers to assist the recipient in dealing with the governmental agency. A violation of these or other provisions related to advertising is a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding 6 months, a fine not exceeding $1,000, or both. This bill would additionally make it unlawful for a nongovernmental entity to solicit funds or information by any of those means that contains an emblem or content that reasonably could be interpreted or construed as implying any federal state, or local government connection, approval, or endorsement, unless the nongovernmental entity has an expressed connection with a federal, state or local entity or unless the solicitation contains the specified disclosures and meets other requirements. The bill would require the disclosures to be conspicuously displayed in specified locations, type, and manner. The bill would increase the maximum criminal fine for a violation of these provisions to $2,500 and would authorize a person to recover specified damages resulting from a violation of these provisions. The bill would delete the provisions requiring a business to include the contact information for a referenced governmental agency in an unsolicited mailing that offers to assist the recipient in dealing with the governmental agency. Existing law makes it unlawful for a person to make any untrue or misleading statements in any manner in connection with the offering or performance of an assessment reduction filing service. Existing law provides that an untrue or misleading statement includes representing that an offeror of an assessment reduction filing service is, or is affiliated with, any governmental entity by, among other things, the use of a business name including the word "appeal" or "tax" and any of a list of terms, including "agency," "bureau," or "department." This bill would provide that it is also an untrue or misleading statement in connection with the offering or performance of an assessment reduction filing service if the words "board" or "commission" are used with the word "appeal" or "tax" in the business name of an assessment reduction filing service. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes proof of the execution of an instrument by certain persons and prescribes the form for that proof. Existing law prohibits a proof of the execution of any of several types of specified instruments, including a grant deed, mortgage, deed of trust, quitclaim deed, or security agreement. This bill would add a power of attorney to the types of instruments for which a proof of the execution is prohibited and would further prohibit a proof of the execution for any instrument requiring a notary public to obtain a thumbprint from the party signing the document in the notary public's journal. The bill would also revise the form of certificate that may be used for proof of execution. (3) Existing law prescribes the duties of a notary public, including the duty to demand acceptance and payment of foreign and inland bills of exchange, or promissory notes, to protest them for nonacceptance or nonpayment, and to exercise any other powers and duties that by the law of nations and according to commercial usages, or by the laws of any other state, government, or country, may be performed by notaries. Existing law provides that a protest is a certificate of dishonor of a negotiable instrument made by, among others, a notary public. Existing law provides that the protest of a notary public of a bill of exchange or promissory note for nonacceptance or nonpayment is prima facie evidence of the facts recited therein. The bill would limit the application of these provisions to a notary public employed by a financial institution, during the course and scope of the notary's employment with the financial institution. (4) Existing law prescribes the maximum fees a notary public may charge for specified services. The bill would delete the prescribed maximum fees for every protest for the nonpayment of a promissory note or for the nonpayment or nonacceptance of a bill of exchange, draft, or check, for serving every notice of nonpayment of a promissory note or of nonpayment or nonacceptance of a bill of exchange, order, draft, or check, and for recording every protest. (5) Existing law sets forth the fees the Secretary of State is authorized to charge for the provision of specified business services. The bill would authorize the Secretary of State's office to refuse to perform a service or refuse a filing based on a reasonable belief that the service or filing is being requested for any of a number of specified improper purposes. (6) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 898?
AB 898 is sponsored by Lieu.
What is the current status of AB 898?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” 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 898?
Track AB 898 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 898

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 898

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →