THIS MORNING THAT --
WEDNESDAY AUGUST TWENTY NINTH WE
HAVE ONE BILL ON OUR AGENDA --
AB TWENTY EIGHTY FOUR BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER KALRA.
AS GOOD MORNING ASSEMBLY MEMBER
WELCOME.
THANK YOU LIKE WE ARE GOING TO
BEGIN AS A SUBCOMMITTEE.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO
ESTABLISH A QUORUM MISHA I
APPRECIATE THAT.
MISTER CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
SENATE BILL.
TWENTY EIGHTY FOUR AS AMENDED IS
A MUCH NARROWER BILL IN SCOPE
BUT ADDRESSES THE SAME ISSUE
WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO TACKLE OF
ASSURING INTEGRITY.
OF COURT TRANSCRIPTS THAT I
WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPROVE MAY TIES
OF THIS COMMITTEE --
OVER THE PAST YEAR.
SIMPLY THE BILL SEEKS TO
PROHIBIT FOR SPECIFIC LAWS AND
REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO
PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY.
AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE COURT
RECORD BY COURT REPORTERS IN A
MANNER THAT IS NOT ADVANTAGE ONE
PARTY OVER ANOTHER.
RATHER THAN AUTHORIZING THE
COURT REPORTERS BOARD OF DIRECT
REGULATORY AUTHORITY TO FIRM
REGISTRATION.
ON ALL COURT REPORTING LAWS
REGULATIONS THE AMENDED BILL
ONLY ALLOWS THE BOARD --
AND PUBLIC PROSECUTORS TO SEEK A
CIVIL ACTION IS THE INTENT.
OF AB TWENTY EIGHTY FOUR TO BE A
STRONG DETERRENT AGAINST THE
MOST EGREGIOUS ACTIONS A
COMPROMISE THE NEUTRAL CARE THE
COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT.
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THESE
FOR PROHIBITED OF THE LAWS
ALREADY APPLIED TO LICENSE COURT
REPORTING ENTITIES AND WHILE
THIS BILL MAY NOT BE AS
COMPREHENSIVE FOR SOME.
IT TRIES GOOD AT THE CORE OF WHY
I CHOOSE TO CARRY THIS ISSUE
ENSURING THE SANCTITY OF THE
COURT RECORD.
AND TO BE CLEAR.
WE HAVE REMOVED THE REQUIREMENT
REGISTRATION WHICH WAS THE
PRIMARY CONCERN OF THE
OPPOSITION AND AS WE KNOW THE
GET THE GOVERNOR DOESN'T ALWAYS
LIKE TO EXPAND.
REGISTRATION AND LICENSING
PROGRAM SO THIS IS A WAY FOR US
TO GET TO THE HEART OF THE ISSUE --
WITHOUT US REQUIRING THE MORE
ONEROUS REGISTRATION WHICH WOULD
WHICH WOULD REQUIRE FAR MORE OF
THESE ARISTIDE TERM.
COMPANIES REPORTERS OF CORPORATE
COMPANIES AND THESE FOUR
REQUIREMENTS THAT JUST SEEK
PARITY AND AGAIN THE SANCTITY OF
THE RECORD.
AB TWENTY EIGHTY FOUR SPOTS BY
THE COURT REPORTERS BOARD AND
SUPPORT BY THE CALIFORNIA COURT
REPORTERS ASSOCIATION AND THE
DEPOSITION REPORTERS ASSOCIATION --
AND A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK
HAS GONE INTO IT AND I
APPRECIATE ALL.
OF THAT HAVE BEEN AT THE TABLE
AND PARTICULARLY THE COURT
REPORTERS BOARD WHO IS.
THAT IF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS
WORKED TO OF HELPED CREATE OF
THE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT MOVED US AWAY FROM THE MORE
ONEROUS REGISTRATION.
WITH ME TO PROVIDE SUPPORTING
TESTIMONY NANCY TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS AS YOU BONVENTRE THAT
DIRECT WITH THE COURT REPORTER
IS BOARD I ALSO HELPED MY THAT
JIM GROSS FOR THAT DEPOSITIONS
REPORTERS.
WE THINK IN BEFORE WE MOVED TO
YOUR WITNESS IF WE COULD
ESTABLISH A QUORUM A PERSISTENT
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL HELP HERE
ILL HERE FULLER.
FULLER HERE ALLEN.
ALLEN HERE DODD.
YOU'RE NOT HERE GALGIANI
GALGIANI HERE GLAZER.
LASER HAIR HERNANDEZ MANAGE YOUR
PASSED HERE AND HERE WELL.
WE HAVE ESTABLISHED A QUORUM
IT'S AMAZING HOW PHOTO IN THE
MORNING WITH THE GOD WILL GET
EVERYONE HERE ON TIME ILLUSTRATE.
WE'RE HERE GO MISS BENNET PLEASE
PROCEED.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ASSEMBLY MEMBER KALRA
FOR THE INTRODUCTION AND THANK
YOU TEAR HILL AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT THE
IMPORTANCE OF AB. TWENTY EIGHTY
FOUR FOR THE CONSUMER.
THE COURT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT
IS AN IMPORTANT DOCUMENT BEFORE
DURING AND AFTER THE DEPOSITION
OR TRIAL.
AND CALIFORNIA LEGISLATORS HAVE
PAINSTAKINGLY WROTE INTO NOT
JUST ONE AREA OF THE CODE BUT
NUMEROUS PLACES IN THE LAW.
NEUTRALITY CARE OF THE RECORD
AND THE ACCURATE MAKING OF THE
OFFICIAL RECORD.
THESE LAWS WERE CRAFTED TO
INCLUDE DETAILS AND SPECIFICITY
ON EXACTLY HOW THE RECORD SHOULD
BE HANDLED TO UPHOLD THE
INTEGRITY OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM.
WE ARE HERE BEFORE YOU BECAUSE
THE BOARD'S MISSION TO SERVE AND
PROTECT THE CALIFORNIA CONSUMER
HAS BEEN NEGATIVELY IMPACTED.
BY A GROWING DISREGARD FOR THE
EXISTING LAWS BY OUT OF STATE
NON LICENSEE OWNED COURT
REPORTING COMPANIES.
WHO OPPOSE THIS AND PREVIOUS
BILLS?
UNLIKE OTHER INDUSTRY MEMBERS
WHO ARE FOLLOWING COURT
REPORTING LAWS AND ETHICS A
COLLECTION OF OUT OF STATE FIRMS
ASSERT THAT THEY ARE NOT
REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE LAWS OF
CALIFORNIA.
AB TWENTY EIGHTY FOUR MAKES IT
CLEAR THAT AT LEAST WITH RESPECT
TO THE KEY LAWS GOVERNING THE
HANDLING OF TRANSCRIPTS.
THE CALIFORNIA CONSUMER WILL
HAVE SOME RECOURSE IN THE CASE
OF A VIOLATION.
THESE AMENDMENTS ARE FOCUSED AND
PRESENT THE ESSENCE FROM THE
PRIOR DRAFT OF THE BILL THAT WAS
HEARD ANALYZED AND APPROVED.
BY THE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
COMMITTEES EARLIER THIS YEAR.
GIVEN THE CONTINUED OPPOSITION
TO THE LAW ON THE LEGISLATIVE
EFFORTS IT'S CLEAR THAT THE
NATIONAL OUT OF STATE FIRMS HAVE
NO INTENTION TO FOLLOW
CALIFORNIA LAW.
AS OTHERS ARE REQUIRED TO DO SO
THIS BILL IS NEEDED.
IN FACT THEY WILL CONTINUE TO
FIGHT HARD TO RETAIN THEIR
UNFAIR ADVANTAGE NOT VIOLATING
THE LAW AND FALSELY CLAIM THAT
THE BORDERS AGAINST THEM.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY THE
BOARD IS HERE TO PROTECT THE
CONSUMERS.
AND WE SUPPORT THE UNDERLYING
ETHICAL.
ON PRINCIPLE OF IMPARTIALITY SO
THAT EACH PARTY IS TREATED
EQUALLY AND FAIRLY.
SO TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY NEW
TOP NEUTRALITY AND FAIRNESS OF
THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ALL OF THE
LAKE LITIGANTS MUST BE ASSURED
THAT THE TRANSCRIPTS PROVIDED BY
COURT REPORTING SERVICERS.
ARE HONESTLY AND ACCURATELY
PREPARED AND HANDLED AND
DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
LAW THIS IS A HALLMARK OF THE
INDUSTRY AND MUST NOT BE
COMPROMISED.
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT OF AB TWENTY EIGHTY FOUR
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
CONSUMER BAKER DIRECTOR FRIEND
APPRECIATE THAT MISTER THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS JIM GROSS
ON BEHALF OF THE DEPOSITION
REPORTERS ASSOCIATION THE ONLY
THING I WILL ADD IS --
I'VE BEEN BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE
ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS WHERE THE
PROPOSAL WAS TO ADDRESS
PARTICULAR PROBLEMS.
IN A PROFESSION WITHOUT
SUBJECTING ALL PARTIES TO A FULL
REGULATORY PROCESS AND THAT IS
WHAT THIS BILL DOES RATHER THAN
THE PREVIOUS LEGISLATION WHICH
WOULD HAVE REQUIRED REGISTRATION
AND WOULD HAVE SUBJECTED.
THE OUT OF STATE FIRMS TO A FULL
REGULATORY PROCESS THIS SIMPLY
SETS FORTH WHAT IS PROHIBITED.
WE THINK THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH
WHAT THE GOVERNOR WAS
CONSIDERING THE VETO AND IT IS
CONSISTENT WITH MANY ACTION
TAKEN BY THIS COMMITTEE IN THE
PAST WE ARE FEW AYE VOTE WE
THANK YOU MISTER GROSS --
OTHERS IN SUPPORT [inaudible]
WE'RE THE CALIFORNIA COURT
REPORTERS ASSOCIATION I DON'T
THINK THE AUTHOR OF THE BOARD
AND DR A FOR WORKING TOGETHER ON
THIS BILL --
AND JUST ASK FOR A VOTE THANK
YOU MISTER HERNANDEZ OTHERS IN
SUPPORT --
ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION.
THE FLOW OF MONEY INCOMPLETE.
MISTER CHAIRMAN MEMBERS MIKE
FOLLOWED ON BEHALF THE COLOR OF
THE COALITION OF DEPOSITION
SERVICES FIRMS --
IN OPPOSITION TO THE BILL WE A
COMMAND AND I WANT TO BE VERY
CLEAR WE COMMAND --
ASSEMBLY MEMBER KALRA AND THE
SPONSORS FOR THIS NEW DIRECTION --
WE APPRECIATE THE PIVOT FROM THE
REGISTRATION APPROACH.
AND WHICH WE NEVER THOUGHT WAS
NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE --
THE BILL WAS AMENDED FRIDAY.
WE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT A
COUPLE OF DAYS BEFORE THAT.
AND HONESTLY I THINK THAT.
THE FOR PROHIBITED PRACTICES ARE
SOMETHING WE COULD COME TO
AGREEMENT ON A FIGHT THAT I
DISAGREE WITH THE
CHARACTERIZATION OF THE BOARD AS
BUT THAT OUR CLIENTS ARE
INTERESTED IN EVADING THE BUT
THE LAW OUHT TO BE CLEAR.
AND THE PROHIBITIONS OUGHT TO BE
UNDERSTANDABLE AND THEY OUGHT TO
BE AS STRAIGHTFORWARD AND GOOD.
CAPABLE OF BEING FOLLOWED AS
POSSIBLE.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT ALL FOUR OF
THE PROHIBITIONS HAVE ISSUES
RELATING TO THEM.
THAT GIVEN MORE TIME I THINK
COULD BE WORKED OUT. FOR EXAMPLE
AND IF THESE ARE THIS IS NOT
OPPOSITION FOR OPPOSITION SAKE
AND THE PROBLEMS ARE NOT TRIVIAL.
I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE THE
BILL SAYS IT IS A VIOLATION AND
YOU CAN BE SUED.
IF THEY IF A COMPANY GIVES A
TRANSCRIPT TO ONE PARTY IN
ADVANCE OF THE OTHER.
IT IS COMMON IN THIS INDUSTRY
FOR THERE TO BE A DATE FOR
PRODUCTION OF THE OF THE
TRANSCRIPT BUT THEN PEOPLE CAN
BE OFFERED AND PAY FOR AN
EXPEDITED PROCESS.
AND AS LONG AS THAT'S OFFERED TO
BOTH SIDES PLAINTIFF AND DEFENSE.
THERE THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A
PROBLEM WITH THAT.
WOOD EXPEDITING WHERE ONE PARTY
PAYS EXTRA AND CAUSES THE SYSTEM
TO CREATE THE TRANSCRIPT FASTER
BE OKAY UNDER THE BILL OR WOULD
IT NOT --
THE BILL SAYS YOU MAY NOT
PROVIDE SERVICES FOR ONLY ONE
PARTY WELL OUR COMPANIES PROVIDE
SERVICES FOR ONLY ONE PARTY ALL
THE TIME.
THEY DO TRIAL PREPARATION
SERVICES FOR ONE SIDE IN ONE
CASE ANOTHER SITE IN ANOTHER
CASE IT'S UNCLEAR WHETHER THAT
WOULD BE PERMITTED OR NOT --
SO EACH OF THE FOUR ISSUES AND I
WON'T GO INTO IT IN EXCRUCIATING
DETAIL EACH OF THEM NEEDS
REFINEMENT.
BILL LAW OUGHT TO BE CLEAR IF
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE SUBJECT
TO A PENALTY.
AND COURT COSTS AND ATTORNEY'S
FEES.
I TOLD MISTER KALRA IN GOOD
FAITH ON BUT JUST THIS WEEK.
THAT IF WE HAVE A CHANCE TO WORK
OUT THIS LANGUAGE OVER THE FALL
I THINK WE CAN GET THERE I JUST
DON'T THINK THIS IS READY FOR
PRIME TIME EACH OF THE FOUR
PROHIBITIONS.
NEEDS WORK BUT WE ARE NOT
INTERESTED IN EVADING THE LAW
AND WE APPRECIATE THE PIVOT AWAY
FROM THE REGISTRATION PROGRAM I
THINK WE CAN COME TO SOMETHING
HERE IT JUST ISN'T READY. FOR
THAT WE ASK FOR A NO VOTE.
THANK YOU VISUAL OTHERS IN
OPPOSITION.
THE NO ONE BRING IT BACK YOU
KNOW I HAD A QUESTION IF I COULD
OF THE DIRECTOR FELT THE YOU
MADE A COUPLE OF OF OF COMMENTS
IN IN YOUR STATEMENT ONE IS THE
USE OF SHE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED.
BY OUT OF STATE --
REPORTERS WHO WERE OF FIRMS THAT
ARE NEGATIVELY IMPACTING THE
INDUSTRY IN THOSE WHO ARE IN
STATE IN THE DESERT DISREGARD BY
OUT OF STATE ENTITIES I THINK OF
THE WORD SHE USED.
WHAT WAS THE EXTENT OF THE
PROBLEM I DO GET A LOT OF
COMPLAINTS FROM?
EITHER OTHER REPORTERS WHO ARE
CONCERNED ABOUT THE COMPETITION
OR SOMEONE DOING SOMETHING THAT
WOULD DOESN'T FIT INTO THE
STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE IN
CALIFORNIA.
OR OTHER CONSUMERS THAT HAVE --
COMPLAINED ABOUT THIS. FOR THE
PURPOSES OF AB ON TWENTY EIGHTY
FOUR WITH FOCUSED ONLY ON THE
OTHER COMPLAINTS THAT WE'VE
GOTTEN FROM THE CONSUMERS NOT
FOUND ON OTHER CORE PORTERS THAT
WOULD KINDA TAKEN THE THE OTHER
QUESTIONS OF UNFAIR COMPETITION
OUT OF THIS PARTICULAR BILL.
ON IN REGARD TO THE NUMBER OF
COMPLAINTS THAT WE GET WHERE
SMALL BOARD WE GET FEW
COMPLAINTS BUT 10% OF THE
COMPLAINTS THAT WE GET.
OUR FRON CONSUMERS THAT HAVE HAD
ISSUES [inaudible]
THAT ARE [inaudible]
ON PART OF THE BILL THAT WE HAVE
BEFORE US SO WE TOOK THE TOP
FOUR COMPLAINTS THAT WE GET
ABOUT THE THE OTHER STATE FIRMS
[inaudible]
AND TRY TO JUST ADDRESS THE ONE
THAT WE GET MOST FREQUENTLY AND
SEEM TO BE THE HARDEST ON THE
CONSUMER.
SO RIGHT NOW WHEN THAT WHEN WE
GET THOSE COMPLAINTS FROM THE
CONSUMER.
THEN WE LISTEN TO THE COMPLAINT
WE SAY OH YES THAT'S A VIOLATION
OF THE LAW THEN THEY TELL US WHO
IT IS THAT THEY WANT TO COMPLAIN
AGAINST AND AT THAT POINT THE
BOARD HAS TO SAY I'M SORRY
THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO.
IT'S ROOTED FOR TOUGH WORK FOR
COMPLAINTS. TO THE TO GET 10% OF
THE COMPLAINTS ARE FROM THROUGH
HOW MANY JELLY ANNUALLY HOW MANY
COMPLAINTS YOU.
WE UNDERTAKE FORMAL COMPLAINTS
OF ABOUT A HUNDRED TWO HUNDRED
AND TWENTY PER YEAR.
VERY GOOD THANK YOU --
OTHER QUICK QUESTION YES SENATOR
ALLEN LOVE TO GET A SENSE FROM
THE CHAIR OF THE STAFF ABOUT
THIS AND MAKE IT WORK.
BE SOME SIGNIFICANT.
CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO
THE BILL --
DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS OVER THE
CENTER WHICH IS [inaudible]
ON YOU KNOW WHAT WHAT'S YOUR
EVALUATION OF WHAT WE'VE HEARD
HERE ABOUT.
AS IT THE THE EXTENT TO WHICH
THEY THE NEGOTIATIONS OF HAVE
PROCEEDED AND HOW HOW ARE YOU.
THINKING THROUGH AND THIS IS ROB
IS VERY UNUSUAL BEING PULLED.
IN THE LAST WEEK TO HEAR SOME
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO A BILL
THAT WE VOTE ON A LONG TIME AGO.
I JUST LOVE TO GET YOUR
PERSPECTIVE MISTER CHAIR ON ON
THIS BUT WE LOOKED AT THE THE
AMENDMENTS AND THE CLARITY THAT
WE SAW WAS WAS THERE A ENOUGH TO
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BILL.
AND TO DETERMINE THAT --
THE FACT THAT THE THE VIA THE
BOARD NEXT YEAR IS.
HAVING SUNSET REVIEW THEY WILL
SUNSET AT THE END OF NEXT YEAR --
SO THEY WILL BE STARTING TO
EVALUATE THEIR PROCESSES IN THE
IN THEIR COMPLAINTS AND
EVERYTHING THAT THEY DO.
WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD
OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW THE BILL TO
MOVE FORWARD [inaudible]
BUT GIPSON.
WORKING OPERATIONAL.
ASPECTS AND SOON DILATORY
ENVIRONMENT THE BILL AND THEN --
EVALUATED NEXT YEAR TO SEE IF
THEY'RE ANY REAL PROBLEMS THAT
ARE DEVELOPED BECAUSE OF
LANGUAGE THAT.
THIS THERE I'M CERTAIN WE HEARD
FROM MR BELOW IT ON THE CONCERNS
THAT HE RAISED --
WE DON'T SEE THAT THERE THAT
SUBSTANTIAL OR SIGNIFICANT THAT
PRESENTS A PROBLEM AND THERE'S
WITH THERE'S JUST LITERALLY NO
TIME TO BE ABLE.
TO FIGURE OUT SOME OF THESE
DIFFERENCES AND YEAH I GUESS I
WAS FRONT ROW AT HIS SHIRT SO.
SO THIS IS ACTUALLY NOT AS
DRAMATIC CHANGE I THINK THAT
THAT THERE THERE'S BECAUSE WE
LISTS FOR SPECIFIC THINGS I
THINK IT GIVES THE IMPRESSION
THAT SOME OUR ADDING.
THE SPORTS TO THE THINGS THAT'S
NOT THE CASE WHAT WE'RE DOING IS.
WE WERE PREVIOUSLY REQUIRING
REGISTRATION WHICH MEANS
COMPLYING WITH EVERYTHING.
UNDER REGISTRATION THAT COURT
REPORTERS IN CALIFORNIA THE
LICENSE ON FIRMS HAVE TO COMPLY
WITH SO YOU HAVE THIS MASSIVE
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS WE JUST
PULLED FOR THINGS OUT OF THAT
MASSIVE REGULATORY REQUIREMENT.
WHICH WHICH AND THAT'S HOW IT
NARROWS THE BILL RATHER THAN
REQUIRING REGULATION EUROPE UBER
JUST FOCUSING ON FOR THE ITEMS
THAT CREATE PARITY.
AND ALL ALTHOUGH.
THEN DID ANY LANGUAGE YOU LOOK
AT THE CAN BE QUESTIONS AS TO
HOW STRIP WHAT HAVE YOU
REGULATIONS BEEN IN PLACE FOR A
LICENSE --
OWNED FIRMS IN CALIFORNIA SINCE
NINETEEN FIFTY ONE AND FOR YEARS
FIRMS IN CALIFORNIA HAVE BEEN
ABIDING BY DID VISIT LANGUAGE
PULLED STRAIGHT FROM THE
REGULATION.
IS THAT THIS IS A WILL BEDDED
LANGUAGE LANGUAGE THAT'S BEEN
USE UNDERSTOOD AND ABOUT A STATE
FIRMS YOU KNOW THEY NEED TO
LEARN HOW TO INTERPRET THEIR
PLENTY OF FIRMS THAT CAN TALK TO
IN CALIFORNIA.
THAT HAVE BEEN DOING IT FOR MANY
MANY YEARS THE SAME OUT OF STATE
FIRMS ARE REGULATED IN THOSE
STATES WHERE THEY ON THAT WITH
THEIR HEADQUARTERED.
IT CALIFORNIA FIRMS WANT TO GO
WORK IN THEIR STATES THEY HAVE
ACTUALLY BECOME REGULATED.
SO THIS IS A MUCH AND NARROWER
UP ASK AND AND BILL AND NOW WITH
THESE AMENDMENTS AND THAT'S WHY.
THESE AMENDMENTS EVEN THOUGH
THEY'RE COMING UP IN THE FINAL
FEW DAYS ARE NOT A DRAMATIC
SHIFT IN FACT THERE ARE CLEARLY
A NARROWING OF WHAT WE WERE
ACQUIRING JUST A WEEK AGO.
OF THE SAME PER ACTION AT THAT
ACTUALLY WHEN WE WERE.
BOARD REQUIRED OR HAD THE
LEGISLATION REQUIRED
REGISTRATION THEY WOULD HAVE TO
FOLLOW THE CITY'S FOUR PLUS FOR
MANY MANY MANY MANY MORE.
THE IT MISTER BELOW THEM GOING
TO RESPOND TO THAT.
AYE I'M STE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT
IS AUGUST TWENTY NINTH.
AND THIS BILL HAS BEEN IN PRINT
ONLY A FEW DAYS.
ARE THERE ARE THESE FOUR
PROHIBITIONS. FOR EXAMPLE ON
PAGE.
SIX LINES THREE THROUGH SEVEN IT
TALKS ABOUT FAILING TO NOTIFY
ONE PARTY.
IF THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST FOR A
TRANSCRIPT FROM THE OTHER PARTY
AS ARTICULATED [inaudible]
IN.
A SECTION TWENTY FOUR SEVENTY
FIVE OF THE CODE OF REGULATIONS
IF YOU LOOK AT THAT THEY DIDN'T
HAVE.
IT DOESN'T EVEN QUOTE IT EXACTLY.
THE REGULATION SAYS YOU MUST
NOTIFY TO THE EXTENT REASONABLY
POSSIBLE THAT ISN'T PUT IN THE
STATUTE AGAIN I'M NOT ATTEMPTING
TO TRIVIALIZE OR NITPICK.
BUT THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH EACH
OF THE PROHIBITIONS WHICH COULD
BE RESOLVED IF WE HAD A LITTLE
TIME TO DO IT.
SO THIS ISN'T EVEN AN ACCURATE --
RECITATION OF THE REGULATION
.
AROUND WHAT MOVES AND ASK
QUESTIONS [inaudible]
THERE'S BEEN.
THANK THANK YOU --
ACTUALLY JUST CLARIFY AND SO
WHEN THE EXAMPLES GIVEN BY THE
OPPOSITION [inaudible]
ISSUE OF PAYING FOR AN EXPEDITED --
TRANSCRIPTS NOW --
FOR THE BOARD HAD THERE BEEN
COMPLAINTS WHERE ONE PARTY HAS
GOT THE TRANSCRIPT AND THE OTHER
ONE HAS.
YOU'RE NOT OR HEADED WHEN THAT
WAS SIGNIFICANTLY DELAYED --
SO PROVIDING IT DISADVANTAGED TO
ONE PARTY.
YES WE ARE.
WE HAVE RECEIVED THOSE SPECIFIC
COMPLAINTS ON THAT.
THE OTHER SIDE.
THE CLIENT OF THE FIRM.
GOT THEIR TRANSCRIPT WELL IN
ADVANCE OF THE OTHER.
ONE FUND WE WE LOOK AT THAT WE
TAKE DON'T JUST ASSUME THAT
THERE'S WRONGDOING ON IT WE NEED
TO INVESTIGATE IT SOMTIMES IT'S
BECAUSE THE OTHER SIDE DIDN'T
PAY FOR IT WHILE THEY'RE NOT
GIVING A FREE TRANSCRIPT.
SO ONCE THEY WORK ALL OF THAT
OUT THEN IT'S AVAILABLE SO IT'S
NOT JUST BECAUSE IT'S A SIMPLE
ACT OF ONCE I GOT BEFORE THE
OTHER IT'S MUCH MORE DETAILED
THAN THAT AND THE BOARD LOOKS AT
THAT.
SO IT'S NOT THERE'S NO
EXPECTATION.
THAT IT WON'T BE HANDLED AS
WE'VE HANDLED EVERY OTHER
COMPLAINT OF THAT NATURE.
JUST JUST TO CLARIFY IF ONE
PARTY PAYS FOR NEXT FRIDAY
TRANSIT WITH THE OTHER ONE GET
THE TRANSCRIPT.
IT'S BEEN THE BOARD'S POSITION
THAT THOSE EXPEDITE FEE IS FOR
PREPARATION OF THE TRANSCRIPT IN
ADVANCE OF THE NORMAL BOMB
WORKING TIME.
AND SO THAT CHARGE WOULD GO TO
WHOEVER ORDERED IT ON AN
EXPEDITED BASIS AND WHO WOULD
DECIDE WHAT'S NORMAL WORKING.
THAT'S UP TO EACH INDIVIDUAL
FIRM THEY THEY WORK WITH THE
CLIENTS AND SOMETIMES THEY'LL
SAY IT'S FIVE DAYS OF SEVEN DAYS
IT'S TEN DAYS IT'S TWO WEEKS.
BUT EACH FROM HAS THEIR OWN
WORKING TIME.
SO US ONE CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT.
A WEALTHY PARTY.
PAYS FOR AN EXPERT I CONTRA --
COPY ANY OTHER ONE ESSENTIALLY
GETS ONE THAT'S EXTREMELY
DELAYED.
THEN WITH PUT THEM S. LIVING IN
DISADVANTAGE.
NO IF THEY PAID FOR THAT THE
PREPARATION OF THAT EXPEDITE
THEN THAT I TALK ABOUT ONE
PARTY'S RICH AND THEY CAN PAY
FOR NEXT IT RIGHT THEY'LL BE ON
THE SIDE.
BECAUSE THEY CAN'T PAY FOR AN
EXPEDITED BECAUSE THEY DON'T
HAVE AS MUCH MONEY.
THEN DOESN'T GET A TRANSCRIPT OR
GETS ONE THAT'S VERY VERY
DELAYED UNTIL I WAS UNCLEAR SO
ONCE THAT I'M PART TRANSCRIPT IS
PREPARED WHOEVER PAID THE
EXPEDITE FEE.
ITS AT THAT POINT AVAILABLE TO
ALL OF THE OTHER DESTINY EQUALLY
BANG DENNIS AND ACTUALLY JUST TO
CLARIFY --
YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT AND
WHAT WERE YOU DID YOU SAID ABOUT
SOMEONE PAID FOR EXPIRED
CONTRACT.
BUT SEEM LIKE YOU APPLYING THAT
BOTH PARTIESWOULDN'T GET IT AT
THE SAME TIME STILL.
I CAN UNDERSTAND OF ONE PARTY
THAT THAT THIS SHOULD STILL BE
FOR FAIRNESS EVERYONE TO GET THE
TRANSCRIPT AT SAME TIME THEY'D
HAVE ONE PARTY MUST PAY FOR TO
GET FASTER SO EVERYONE CAN GET A
FASTER TO SPEED THINGS UP THAT'S
GREAT.
BUT I CONCERNED IF ONE PARTY AS
HE GETS AND THE OTHER ONE
DOESN'T THAT'S NOT FAIR.
OKAY WE CERTAINLY I WOULD
SUGGEST THAT THESE ARE THE
ISSUES THAT OUGHT TO BE WORKED
THROUGH ON THE BILL --
THERE ARE POLICY QUESTIONS HERE
THAT IS NOT MY UNDERSTANDING OF
HOW THE PROCESS WORKS A WE COULD
TALK ABOUT HOW THE PROCESS WORKS
AND WHETHER THAT THIS EXPEDITING
PROCESS GIVE SOMEBODY AN UNFAIR
ADVANTAGE.
BUT RIGHT NOW BOTH SIDES ARE
WERE TALKING ABOUT CIVIL
LITIGATION BOTH SIDES ARE
OFFERED A TRANSCRIPT AT A
CERTAIN SCHEDULE.
AND ONE SIDE SAYS I WILL PAY
EXTRA LIKE GETTING A SOMETHING
DELIVERED FASTER --
FOR THE COURT REPORTER TO STAY
UP ALL NIGHT AND TRENT AND DO
THE TRANSCRIPT TO GET IT TO THE
PARTY.
I AM TOLD THE PARTY WHO PAYS THE
EXPEDITED FEE GETS IT BEFORE THE
OTHER WHY.
BECAUSE THEY PAID FOR EXTRA FAST
ERROR SERVICE THEY CAN COULDBE
WHAT IT FASTER BECAUSE FOR THEIR
OWN THAT SHOULD THAT FAIRNESS
MEANS THAT MUCH TO GET ACCESS.
ONE PARTY IS PAYING MORE THAN
THE OTHER FOR EXTRA SERVICE NOW
THAT'S WHAT MY CASH WHAT MY
CLIENTS TELL ME OKAY.
BUT IT'S UNCLEAR IN THE LAW HOW
IT WOULD WORK AND THOSE THINGS
OUGHT TO BE WORKED OUT SO THAT
THE LIABILITY FOR VIOLATIONS IS
A CLEAR.
RIGHT OKAY SO MAYBE END OF THE
AISLE THIS IS WHAT THE IT'S
CREATE THAT ADEQUATELY RIGHT NOW
THE OUT OF STATE FIRMS THERE'S
NO --
ACCOUNTABILITY AND THERE'S NO
ENFORCEMENT ABILITY TO REQUIRE
AND SO THE LAW.
IF YOU MOVE TO DISCOVERY LAWS
POSSIBLE CERTAINLY IN CRIMINAL
TRANSCRIPTS ARE SO SHE MADE
AVAILABLE THE SECOND I SAW ONCE
A PAID EXPEDITED THAT'S THEIR
PREROGATIVE BUT ONCE THE
TRANSCRIPTS DONE.
I WORKED ELEVEN YEARS A TRIAL
ATTORNEY BUT THE TRANSFER IS
DONE.
AND IT'S A TRANSCRIPT THAT IS
LEGALLY --
AVAILABLE TO BOTH PARTIES SHOULD
BE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE SAME
TIME AND DOESN'T EXPLOIT THESE
ARE.
THESE ARE THESE ARE UNSETTLED
QUESTIONS.
HE'S ARE VERY SUBTLE QUESTIONS
IN CALIFORNIA ACTUALLY ADDAI
PEAS ARE CHARGING CHORUS WITH
EXISTING LAW AB TWENTY EIGHTY
FOUR MAKES NO CHANGES ALLOWED TO
USE.
AS LONG BEEN THE PUBLISHED
OPINION THE BOARD THE PARTY
EXPANDING PRODUCTION THE
TRANSCRIPT MAY BE CHARGED AND
EXPLOIT FEAT THIS IS SETTLED BUT
THING THAT'S NOT SETTLED AS
ARTISTIC COMPANIES.
DON'T HAVE TO ABIDE BY NEXT WE
HAVE O ENFORCEMENT TOOLS
COMMISSIONER DID YOU WANNA MAKE.
LIKE WE JUST DID ONE
CLARIFICATION VERY CLEAR THAT
THE BOARD HAS ON BEEN ADVISED BY
OUR LEGAL COUNSEL.
THAT THAT IS EXACTLY THE WAY
IT'S INTENDED TO WORK THERE'S
ONE FEE FOR EXPEDITING
PRODUCTION AND THEN THAT
TRANSCRIPT IS AVAILABLE AT THAT
POINT FOR EVERYONE.
AND THAT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED ITS
FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND IT'S ON
OUR BOARD WEBSITE SO THAT IT'S
NOTHING NEW [inaudible]
IS IT TRINITY WHAT AT A COMMENT --
I THINK IT'S CLARIFIED YET AYE
SHE CLARIFIED IT AND WE'RE JUST
GONNA STAY IT'S DISCUSSIONS BEEN
INTERESTING BUT ITS CURRENT LAW.
AND SO ALL OF THESE HAVE BEEN
RESOLVED IN FACT AS I THINK AS
MR CALLER STATED.
THE BILL FOR THIS TIRED. TWO
YEAR SESSION HAS BEEN
REGISTRATION MEANS YOU HAVE TO
FOLLOW EVERY SINGLE LOSS OF THIS
IS WHEN THE LAWS OF THAT WOULD
HAVE TO FOLLOW.
THROUGH IS EXACTLY MISTER COVER
SAID THEY WERE AWARE OF THIS LAW
IT WHERE THIS REQUIREMENT IT'S
VERY CLEAR.
I'M I APOLOGIZE OUR WITNESS
WHO'S IN COURT CUT SECOND CORD
SO SHE'S BEEN TEXTING ME.
INSANE IT'S THE LAW WE ALL NEED
TO FOLLOW THE LAWS LICENSE CORE
REPORTERS SO IT'S ISN'T THIS
ISN'T NOTHING NEW AND IT'S NOT
SURPRISING THOUGH IT'S LATE.
THIS IT'S BEEN ONE OF THE
REQUIREMENTS CANTEEN IN THE BILL
FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS AND THIS
IS THE STANDARD THAT SOUNDS LIKE
WE HAVE TO TRY TO USE IN THE IN
THE BILL AND EVERYTHING IN THE
BILL HIS IS.
CROSS REFERENCE FROM THE
REGULATIONS IN LAW --
FOR MANY MANY YEARS IT'S BEEN
PART OF THE CONVERSATION SINCE
LAST YEAR WITH THIS BILL.
AGAIN WE ARE NEARING THE BILL
THIS IS A BETTER BUILT THE
OPPOSITION THAN A WEEK AGO FAR
BETTER THE DOES NOT REQUIRE
REGISTRATION HIT IT BIG THAT'S
THAT'S BEEN THE CONCLUSION OF
THE OF THE COMMITTEE AND THE
HERE.
THIS THE STAFF AS WELL IN
LOOKING AT THE OF THE
LEGISLATION AND THAT'S WHY WITH
SUNSET REVIEW NEXT YEAR WILL BE
ABLE TO SEE IF THERE ARE THAT
THE CONCERNS THAT MR BELOW
RAISED.
UP FROM THE OUT OF STATE --
REPORTERS THAT --
IN COMPANIES THAT NEED TO BE
EITHER TWEAKED OR RIVER AS WE DO
WITH MOST LEGISLATION TO SEE IF
THERE'S SOME CORRECTIONS TO
HAPPEN IS SENATOR GLAZERS.
I AM COMFORTABLE WOULD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH SENATOR
GLAZERS RATHER QUESTIONS ARE
CONCERNED.
OF WOOD WHICH LIKE TO CLOSE BY I
WOULD SAY THIS WHO MISTER CHAIR
AND MEMBERS THAT RIGHT NOW
BECAUSE THESE OF THESE RULES
DON'T APPLY TO ADD A STATE --
I CAN UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN
THEY HAVE ONCE THEY APPLY TO
THEM THEN THEY'LL HAVE SOME
STANDING TO GO TO SAY HEY YOU
KNOW WE WANT SOMETHING WE WANT
TO PROVIDE SOME FEEDBACK.
MAYBE AWAITS BEEN DONE THE LAST
TEN TWENTY YEARS WE DON'T LIKE
WE DID YOU BE DONE DIFFERENT
WELL THAT'S GREAT NOW THEY'LL
HAVE A VOICE AT THE TABLE
BECAUSE NOW IT'S CAN APPLY TO
THEM.
AND SO I AND TOLD AFP UNTIL WE
GET PARITY IT'S I I THINK IT'S
IT'S UNFAIR TO THE MANY.
MANY FIRMS THAT ADDING APPLYING
FOR MANY MANY YEARS ALREADY UP
BY THE RULES THAT ARE VERY CLEAR
RULES TO THEN SAVE ALL WE NEED
TO TALK ABOUT THE RULES WELL
YEAH ONCE WE GET PARITY.
CONCERT WITH THE RULES AS YOU
MENTIONED MISTER CHAIR YOU KNOW
NEXT YEAR SUNSET REVIEW THERE'S
PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO
FURTHER EVALUATE WHAT THAT I
RESPECTFULLY ASK WHEN I DON'T
REALLY THINK YOU VERY MUCH WE DO
HAVE A MOTION FROM SENATOR
GLAZER OF PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MOTION IS THAT THE MEASURE
BEATRIZ AND RETURN TO THE SENATE
FLOOR HILL AYE.
HILL AYE FULLER.
FULLER NO ALAN.
ALLEN I DIED.
DODD AYE GALGIANI GALGIANI AYE
GLAZER AYE GLAZER AYE HERNANDEZ
HERNANDEZ AYE PAN AYE AND I WILL.
WITH EIGHT VOTES THE BILL WILL
GET OUT WILL HOLD THE ROLE WILL
COMPLETE ABSENT MEMBERS THANK
YOU VERY MUCH RICHARD.
THANK YOU THANK YOU
FOR WELL
[inaudible]
YOU KNOW [inaudible]
WELL NOW [inaudible]
THINK [inaudible]
WHEN EVERYONE?
PERIOD THE VOTE IS SEVEN TO THAT
BILL IS OUT SECURITY
SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING IS
ADJOURNED