AB 1531: Court fees: electronic filing.
- Session Year: 2017-2018
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2018-09-05
(1)Existing law establishes various fees to be paid upon the filing of documents with the court. Existing law also provides for the electronic filing and service of documents through an electronic filing service provider.
This bill would provide that, where a represented party fails to remit payment to an electronic filing service provider, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk, and the clerk may notify the attorney of record that the attorney may be sanctioned for nonpayment of fees. The bill would allow the court to sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic service provider remain unpaid 20 days after notice by the clerk.
(2)Existing law authorizes a court, subject to Judicial Council approval, to accept a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer in payment of designated obligations, including filing fees and other court fees. Existing law authorizes a court or agent of the court to impose a fee, subject to Judicial Council approval, for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, as specified. Existing law, for purposes of this provision, deems an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a filing fee or other court fee to complete an electronic filing transaction to be an agent of the court solely for that purpose, unless otherwise specified.
This bill, in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, would require the court to issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(1)Existing law establishes various fees to be paid upon the filing of documents with the court. Existing law also provides for the electronic filing and service of documents through an electronic filing service provider.
This bill would provide that, where a represented party fails to remit payment to an electronic filing service provider, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk, and the clerk may notify the attorney of record that the attorney may be sanctioned for nonpayment of fees. The bill would allow the court to sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic service provider remain unpaid 20 days after notice by the clerk.
(2)Existing law authorizes a court, subject to Judicial Council approval, to accept a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer in payment of designated obligations, including filing fees and other court fees. Existing law authorizes a court or agent of the court to impose a fee, subject to Judicial Council approval, for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, as specified. Existing law, for purposes of this provision, deems an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a filing fee or other court fee to complete an electronic filing transaction to be an agent of the court solely for that purpose, unless otherwise specified.
This bill, in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, would require the court to issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(1)Existing law establishes various fees to be paid upon the filing of documents with the court. Existing law also provides for the electronic filing and service of documents through an electronic filing service provider.
This bill would provide that, where a represented party fails to remit payment to an electronic filing service provider, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk, and the clerk may notify the filer attorney of record that the attorney of record may be sanctioned for nonpayment of fees. The bill would allow the court to sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic service provider remain unpaid 20 days after notice by the clerk.
(2)Existing law authorizes a court, subject to Judicial Council approval, to accept a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer in payment of designated obligations, including filing fees and other court fees. Existing law authorizes a court or agent of the court to impose a fee, subject to Judicial Council approval, for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, as specified. Existing law, for purposes of this provision, deems an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a filing fee or other court fee to complete an electronic filing transaction to be an agent of the court solely for that purpose, unless otherwise specified.
This bill, in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, would require the court to issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(1)Existing law establishes various fees to be paid upon the filing of documents with the court. Existing law also provides for the electronic filing and service of documents through an electronic filing service provider.
This bill would provide that, where a party fails to remit payment to an electronic filing service provider, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk, and the clerk may notify the filer that the attorney of record may be sanctioned for nonpayment of fees. The bill would allow the court to sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic service provider remain unpaid 20 days after notice by the clerk.
(2)Existing law authorizes a court, subject to Judicial Council approval, to accept a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer in payment of designated obligations, including filing fees and other court fees. Existing law authorizes a court or agent of the court to impose a fee, subject to Judicial Council approval, for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, as specified. Existing law, for purposes of this provision, deems an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a filing fee or other court fee to complete an electronic filing transaction to be an agent of the court solely for that purpose, unless otherwise specified.
This bill, in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, would require the court to issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
Existing law authorizes a court, subject to Judicial Council approval, to accept a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer in payment of designated obligations, including filing fees and other court fees. Existing law authorizes a court or agent of the court to impose a fee, subject to Judicial Council approval, for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, as specified. Existing law, for purposes of this provision, deems an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a filing fee or other court fee to complete an electronic filing transaction to be an agent of the court solely for that purpose, unless otherwise specified.
This bill, in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, would require the court to issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. The bill also would make a conforming change.
Existing law authorizes a court, subject to Judicial Council approval, to accept a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer in payment of designated obligations, including filing fees and other court fees. Existing law authorizes a court or agent of the court to impose a fee, subject to Judicial Council approval, for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, as specified. Existing law, for purposes of this provision, deems an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a filing fee or other court fee to complete an electronic filing transaction to be an agent of the court solely for that purpose, unless otherwise specified.
This bill, in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, would require the court to issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. The bill also would make a conforming change.
Existing law authorizes a local governmental entity, which, except for the individual campuses of the University of California, does not include the state or any of its agencies or departments, to receive a bill credit to a designated benefiting account for electricity exported by the local government to the electrical grid by a specific type of renewable generating facility and requires the Public Utilities Commission to adopt a rate tariff for the benefiting account. This program is known as the local government renewable energy self-generation program. Existing law limits the generating capacity of one of those renewable generating facilities eligible for the program to no more than 5 megawatts and requires the facilities to be located within the geographic boundaries of the local agency or, for a campus, of the local agency where it is located.This bill would change the reference to the program to the public agency renewable energy self-generation program and would make state agencies and departments eligible for the program. The bill would eliminate the maximum generating capacity for a renewable energy generating facility to be eligible for inclusion under the program. The bill would require a renewable energy generating facility to be within the service territory of the electrical corporation servicing the benefiting account to be eligible for the program. The bill would, among other things, exempt the benefiting account from delivery charges for electricity used onsite, as specified.Existing law requires that an electrical corporation offer service or contract to provide a bill credit only until that electrical corporation reaches a certain level of generating capacity from renewable energy generating facilities eligible for the program and provides that an electrical corporation is not obligated to provide a bill credit to a benefiting account not designated by that time.This bill would repeal those provisions.Under the Public Utilities Act, a violation of an order or direction of the Public Utilities Commission is a crime. Because the provision of this bill would require an order or other action of the commission to implement and a violation of that order or action would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.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.Existing law authorizes a local governmental entity, which, except for the individual campuses of the University of California, does not include the state or any of its agencies or departments, to receive a bill credit to a designated benefiting account for electricity exported by the local government to the electrical grid by a specific type of renewable generating facility and requires the Public Utilities Commission to adopt a rate tariff for the benefiting account. This program is known as the local government renewable energy self-generation program. Existing law limits the generating capacity of one of those renewable generating facilities eligible for the program to no more than 5 megawatts and requires the facilities to be located within the geographic boundaries of the local agency or, for a campus, of the local agency where it is located.
This bill would change the reference to the program to the public agency renewable energy self-generation program and would make state agencies and departments eligible for the program. The bill would eliminate the maximum generating capacity for a renewable energy generating facility to be eligible for inclusion under the program. The bill would require a renewable energy generating facility to be within the service territory of the electrical corporation servicing the benefiting account to be eligible for the program. The bill would, among other things, exempt the benefiting account from delivery charges for electricity used onsite, as specified.
Existing law requires that an electrical corporation offer service or contract to provide a bill credit only until that electrical corporation reaches a certain level of generating capacity from renewable energy generating facilities eligible for the program and provides that an electrical corporation is not obligated to provide a bill credit to a benefiting account not designated by that time.
This bill would repeal those provisions.
Under the Public Utilities Act, a violation of an order or direction of the Public Utilities Commission is a crime. Because the provision of this bill would require an order or other action of the commission to implement and a violation of that order or action would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
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.
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the PUC, in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, the State Air Resources Board, electrical corporations, and the motor vehicle industry, to evaluate policies to develop infrastructure sufficient to overcome any barriers to the widespread deployment and use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and, by July 1, 2011, to adopt rules that address specified issues. Among other things, the rules are required to address the impacts upon electrical infrastructure, including infrastructure upgrades necessary for widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and the role and development of public charging infrastructure.This bill would delete impacts upon from the above-described issue that the rules are required to address.Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the PUC, in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, the State Air Resources Board, electrical corporations, and the motor vehicle industry, to evaluate policies to develop infrastructure sufficient to overcome any barriers to the widespread deployment and use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and, by July 1, 2011, to adopt rules that address specified issues. Among other things, the rules are required to address the impacts upon electrical infrastructure, including infrastructure upgrades necessary for widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and the role and development of public charging infrastructure.
This bill would delete impacts upon from the above-described issue that the rules are required to address.
If an electronic filing is made to the clerk by an electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the attorney of record, and the filing was made by the attorney of record and not a self-represented party, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the attorney of record. The clerk may then notify the attorney of record that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. The court may sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic filing service provider remain unsatisfied 20 days after notice by the clerk.
SEC. 2.Section 6159 of the Government Code is amended to read:6159.(a)The following definitions apply for purposes of this section:
(1)Credit card means a card, plate, coupon book, or other credit device existing for the purpose of being used from time to time upon presentation to obtain money, property, labor, or services on credit.
(2)Card issuer means a person, or his or her agent, who issues a credit card and purchases credit card drafts.
(3)Cardholder means a person to whom a credit card is issued or any person who has agreed with the card issuer to pay obligations arising from the issuance of a credit card to another person.
(4)Debit card means a card or other means of access to a debit card cardholders account that may be used to initiate electronic funds transfers from that account.
(5)Draft purchaser means a person who purchases credit card drafts.
(6)Electronic funds transfer means a method by which a person permits electronic access to, and transfer of, money held in an account by that person.
(b)Subject to subdivisions (c) and (d), a court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency may authorize the acceptance of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer for any of the following:
(1)The payment for the deposit of bail for any offense not declared to be a felony or for a court-ordered fee, fine, forfeiture, penalty, assessment, or restitution. Use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph may include a requirement that the defendant be charged an administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction.
(2)The payment of a filing fee or other court fee.
(3)The payment of towage or storage costs for a vehicle that has been removed from a highway, or from public or private property, as a result of parking violations.
(4)The payment of child, family, or spousal support, including reimbursement of public assistance, related fees, costs, or penalties, with the authorization of the cardholder or accountholder.
(5)The payment for services rendered by a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(6)The payment of a fee, charge, or tax due a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(7)The payment of moneys payable to the sheriff pursuant to a levy under a writ of attachment or writ of execution. If the use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph includes any administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction, that fee shall be paid by the person who pays the money to the sheriff pursuant to the levy.
(8)The payment of a donation, gift, bequest, or devise made to or in favor of a county, or to or in favor of a county board of supervisors, pursuant to Section 25355.
(c)A court desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the Judicial Council. A city desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of its city council. Any other public agency desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the governing body that has fiscal responsibility for that agency.
(d)After approval is obtained, a contract may be executed with one or more credit card issuers, debit card issuers, electronic funds transfer processors, or draft purchasers. The contract shall provide for the following matters:
(1)The respective rights and duties of the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency and card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser regarding the presentment, acceptability, and payment of credit and debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests.
(2)The establishment of a reasonable means by which to facilitate payment settlements.
(3)The payment to the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser of a reasonable fee or discount.
(4)Any other matters appropriately included in contracts with respect to the purchase of credit and debit card drafts and processing of electronic funds transfer requests as may be agreed upon by the parties to the contract.
(e)The honoring of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) constitutes payment of the amount owing to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency as of the date the credit or debit card is honored or the electronic funds transfer is processed, if the credit or debit card draft is paid following its due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or the electronic funds transfer is completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer.
(f)If a credit or debit card draft is not paid following due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or is charged back to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the court, city, or other public agency honoring the credit or debit card shall be void. If an electronic funds transfer request is not completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer or is charged back to the agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the agency processing the electronic funds transfer shall be void. A receipt issued in acknowledgment of payment shall also be void. The obligation of the cardholder or accountholder shall continue as an outstanding obligation as if no payment had been attempted.
(g)If a credit card, debit card draft, electronic funds transfer, or other payment offered in payment is returned without payment, for any reason, a reasonable charge for the charge back or return, not to exceed the actual costs incurred by the public agency, may be imposed to recover the public agencys processing and collection costs. This charge may be added to, and become part of, any underlying obligation other than an obligation that constitutes a lien on real property, and a different method of payment for that payment and future payments by this person may be prescribed.
(h)(1)Notwithstanding Title 1.3 (commencing with Section 1747) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, a court or agent of the court, city, county, city and county, or any other public agency may impose a fee for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, not to exceed the costs incurred by the agency or agent in providing for payment by credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer. These costs may include, but shall not be limited to, the payment of fees or discounts as specified in paragraph (3) of subdivision (d). A fee imposed by a court or agent of the court pursuant to this subdivision shall be approved by the Judicial Council. A fee imposed by any other public agency pursuant to this subdivision for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer shall be approved by the governing body responsible for the fiscal decisions of the public agency.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) to complete an electronic filing transaction is deemed an agent of the court. Unless otherwise specified, the electronic filing service provider is deemed an agent of the court for the sole purpose of collecting and remitting a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) for an electronic filing transaction. In case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(3)A court shall not be held liable for the actions of an agent of the court under this subdivision.
(4)An agent of the court shall report its costs in providing for payment by credit or debit card, or electronic funds transfer. These reports shall be issued pursuant to guidelines adopted by the Judicial Council. For purposes of verifying the accuracy of these reports and compliance with this subdivision, the Judicial Council, or its authorized representative, shall have the right to access and examine the records and documents of an agent of the court. The agent of the court shall provide the Judicial Council with all relevant information requested, and shall permit access to its premises at reasonable times for purposes of interviewing employees, and inspecting and copying any relevant records. The agent of the court shall maintain all records and documents relating to its fees and costs for a minimum of four years from the date the fee is imposed, or until the verification process is completed, whichever occurs later.
(i)Fees or discounts provided for under paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) shall be deducted or accounted for before any statutory or other distribution of funds received from the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser to the extent not recovered from the cardholder or accountholder pursuant to subdivision (h).
(j)The Judicial Council may enter into a master agreement with one or more credit or debit card issuers, funds processors, or draft purchasers for the acceptance and payment of credit or debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests received by the courts. A court may join in any of these master agreements or may enter into a separate agreement with a credit or debit card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser.
(k)An electronic filing service provider, as described in subdivision (h), shall not collect or attempt to collect a fee to complete an electronic filing transaction, including a fee to process a payment, a filing fee or other court fee, or a fee charged by the electronic filing service provider for electronically filing documents, from a party who is exempt from paying fees; provided, however, that the electronic filing service provider shall complete the filing notwithstanding the fee exemption.
(l)A court, or an electronic filing manager that provides a court, pursuant to a contract, with a system for accepting electronically transmitted documents and associated filing and other court fees, shall accept more than one method of payment from an electronic filing service provider described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h). The court shall determine the methods of payment that will be accepted by the court and the electronic filing manager. The methods of payment may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions such as Automated Clearing House (ACH), and other payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost.
If an electronic filing is made to the clerk by an electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the attorney of record, and the filing was made by the attorney of record and not a self-represented party, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the attorney of record. The clerk may then notify the attorney of record that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. The court may sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic filing service provider remain unsatisfied 20 days after notice by the clerk.
SEC. 2.Section 6159 of the Government Code is amended to read:6159.(a)The following definitions apply for purposes of this section:
(1)Credit card means a card, plate, coupon book, or other credit device existing for the purpose of being used from time to time upon presentation to obtain money, property, labor, or services on credit.
(2)Card issuer means a person, or his or her agent, who issues a credit card and purchases credit card drafts.
(3)Cardholder means a person to whom a credit card is issued or any person who has agreed with the card issuer to pay obligations arising from the issuance of a credit card to another person.
(4)Debit card means a card or other means of access to a debit card cardholders account that may be used to initiate electronic funds transfers from that account.
(5)Draft purchaser means a person who purchases credit card drafts.
(6)Electronic funds transfer means a method by which a person permits electronic access to, and transfer of, money held in an account by that person.
(b)Subject to subdivisions (c) and (d), a court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency may authorize the acceptance of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer for any of the following:
(1)The payment for the deposit of bail for any offense not declared to be a felony or for a court-ordered fee, fine, forfeiture, penalty, assessment, or restitution. Use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph may include a requirement that the defendant be charged an administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction.
(2)The payment of a filing fee or other court fee.
(3)The payment of towage or storage costs for a vehicle that has been removed from a highway, or from public or private property, as a result of parking violations.
(4)The payment of child, family, or spousal support, including reimbursement of public assistance, related fees, costs, or penalties, with the authorization of the cardholder or accountholder.
(5)The payment for services rendered by a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(6)The payment of a fee, charge, or tax due a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(7)The payment of moneys payable to the sheriff pursuant to a levy under a writ of attachment or writ of execution. If the use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph includes any administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction, that fee shall be paid by the person who pays the money to the sheriff pursuant to the levy.
(8)The payment of a donation, gift, bequest, or devise made to or in favor of a county, or to or in favor of a county board of supervisors, pursuant to Section 25355.
(c)A court desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the Judicial Council. A city desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of its city council. Any other public agency desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the governing body that has fiscal responsibility for that agency.
(d)After approval is obtained, a contract may be executed with one or more credit card issuers, debit card issuers, electronic funds transfer processors, or draft purchasers. The contract shall provide for the following matters:
(1)The respective rights and duties of the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency and card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser regarding the presentment, acceptability, and payment of credit and debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests.
(2)The establishment of a reasonable means by which to facilitate payment settlements.
(3)The payment to the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser of a reasonable fee or discount.
(4)Any other matters appropriately included in contracts with respect to the purchase of credit and debit card drafts and processing of electronic funds transfer requests as may be agreed upon by the parties to the contract.
(e)The honoring of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) constitutes payment of the amount owing to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency as of the date the credit or debit card is honored or the electronic funds transfer is processed, if the credit or debit card draft is paid following its due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or the electronic funds transfer is completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer.
(f)If a credit or debit card draft is not paid following due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or is charged back to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the court, city, or other public agency honoring the credit or debit card shall be void. If an electronic funds transfer request is not completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer or is charged back to the agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the agency processing the electronic funds transfer shall be void. A receipt issued in acknowledgment of payment shall also be void. The obligation of the cardholder or accountholder shall continue as an outstanding obligation as if no payment had been attempted.
(g)If a credit card, debit card draft, electronic funds transfer, or other payment offered in payment is returned without payment, for any reason, a reasonable charge for the charge back or return, not to exceed the actual costs incurred by the public agency, may be imposed to recover the public agencys processing and collection costs. This charge may be added to, and become part of, any underlying obligation other than an obligation that constitutes a lien on real property, and a different method of payment for that payment and future payments by this person may be prescribed.
(h)(1)Notwithstanding Title 1.3 (commencing with Section 1747) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, a court or agent of the court, city, county, city and county, or any other public agency may impose a fee for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, not to exceed the costs incurred by the agency or agent in providing for payment by credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer. These costs may include, but shall not be limited to, the payment of fees or discounts as specified in paragraph (3) of subdivision (d). A fee imposed by a court or agent of the court pursuant to this subdivision shall be approved by the Judicial Council. A fee imposed by any other public agency pursuant to this subdivision for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer shall be approved by the governing body responsible for the fiscal decisions of the public agency.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) to complete an electronic filing transaction is deemed an agent of the court. Unless otherwise specified, the electronic filing service provider is deemed an agent of the court for the sole purpose of collecting and remitting a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) for an electronic filing transaction. In case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(3)A court shall not be held liable for the actions of an agent of the court under this subdivision.
(4)An agent of the court shall report its costs in providing for payment by credit or debit card, or electronic funds transfer. These reports shall be issued pursuant to guidelines adopted by the Judicial Council. For purposes of verifying the accuracy of these reports and compliance with this subdivision, the Judicial Council, or its authorized representative, shall have the right to access and examine the records and documents of an agent of the court. The agent of the court shall provide the Judicial Council with all relevant information requested, and shall permit access to its premises at reasonable times for purposes of interviewing employees, and inspecting and copying any relevant records. The agent of the court shall maintain all records and documents relating to its fees and costs for a minimum of four years from the date the fee is imposed, or until the verification process is completed, whichever occurs later.
(i)Fees or discounts provided for under paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) shall be deducted or accounted for before any statutory or other distribution of funds received from the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser to the extent not recovered from the cardholder or accountholder pursuant to subdivision (h).
(j)The Judicial Council may enter into a master agreement with one or more credit or debit card issuers, funds processors, or draft purchasers for the acceptance and payment of credit or debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests received by the courts. A court may join in any of these master agreements or may enter into a separate agreement with a credit or debit card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser.
(k)An electronic filing service provider, as described in subdivision (h), shall not collect or attempt to collect a fee to complete an electronic filing transaction, including a fee to process a payment, a filing fee or other court fee, or a fee charged by the electronic filing service provider for electronically filing documents, from a party who is exempt from paying fees; provided, however, that the electronic filing service provider shall complete the filing notwithstanding the fee exemption.
(l)A court, or an electronic filing manager that provides a court, pursuant to a contract, with a system for accepting electronically transmitted documents and associated filing and other court fees, shall accept more than one method of payment from an electronic filing service provider described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h). The court shall determine the methods of payment that will be accepted by the court and the electronic filing manager. The methods of payment may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions such as Automated Clearing House (ACH), and other payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost.
If an electronic filing is made to the clerk by an electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the filer, attorney of record, and the filing was made by the attorney of record and not a self-represented party, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the filer. attorney of record. The clerk may then notify the filer attorney of record that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. The court may sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic filing service provider remain unsatisfied 20 days after notice by the clerk.
SEC. 2.Section 6159 of the Government Code is amended to read:6159.(a)The following definitions apply for purposes of this section:
(1)Credit card means a card, plate, coupon book, or other credit device existing for the purpose of being used from time to time upon presentation to obtain money, property, labor, or services on credit.
(2)Card issuer means a person, or his or her agent, who issues a credit card and purchases credit card drafts.
(3)Cardholder means a person to whom a credit card is issued or any person who has agreed with the card issuer to pay obligations arising from the issuance of a credit card to another person.
(4)Debit card means a card or other means of access to a debit card cardholders account that may be used to initiate electronic funds transfers from that account.
(5)Draft purchaser means a person who purchases credit card drafts.
(6)Electronic funds transfer means a method by which a person permits electronic access to, and transfer of, money held in an account by that person.
(b)Subject to subdivisions (c) and (d), a court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency may authorize the acceptance of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer for any of the following:
(1)The payment for the deposit of bail for any offense not declared to be a felony or for a court-ordered fee, fine, forfeiture, penalty, assessment, or restitution. Use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph may include a requirement that the defendant be charged an administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction.
(2)The payment of a filing fee or other court fee.
(3)The payment of towage or storage costs for a vehicle that has been removed from a highway, or from public or private property, as a result of parking violations.
(4)The payment of child, family, or spousal support, including reimbursement of public assistance, related fees, costs, or penalties, with the authorization of the cardholder or accountholder.
(5)The payment for services rendered by a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(6)The payment of a fee, charge, or tax due a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(7)The payment of moneys payable to the sheriff pursuant to a levy under a writ of attachment or writ of execution. If the use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph includes any administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction, that fee shall be paid by the person who pays the money to the sheriff pursuant to the levy.
(8)The payment of a donation, gift, bequest, or devise made to or in favor of a county, or to or in favor of a county board of supervisors, pursuant to Section 25355.
(c)A court desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the Judicial Council. A city desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of its city council. Any other public agency desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the governing body that has fiscal responsibility for that agency.
(d)After approval is obtained, a contract may be executed with one or more credit card issuers, debit card issuers, electronic funds transfer processors, or draft purchasers. The contract shall provide for the following matters:
(1)The respective rights and duties of the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency and card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser regarding the presentment, acceptability, and payment of credit and debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests.
(2)The establishment of a reasonable means by which to facilitate payment settlements.
(3)The payment to the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser of a reasonable fee or discount.
(4)Any other matters appropriately included in contracts with respect to the purchase of credit and debit card drafts and processing of electronic funds transfer requests as may be agreed upon by the parties to the contract.
(e)The honoring of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) constitutes payment of the amount owing to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency as of the date the credit or debit card is honored or the electronic funds transfer is processed, if the credit or debit card draft is paid following its due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or the electronic funds transfer is completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer.
(f)If a credit or debit card draft is not paid following due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or is charged back to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the court, city, or other public agency honoring the credit or debit card shall be void. If an electronic funds transfer request is not completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer or is charged back to the agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the agency processing the electronic funds transfer shall be void. A receipt issued in acknowledgment of payment shall also be void. The obligation of the cardholder or accountholder shall continue as an outstanding obligation as if no payment had been attempted.
(g)If a credit card, debit card draft, electronic funds transfer, or other payment offered in payment is returned without payment, for any reason, a reasonable charge for the charge back or return, not to exceed the actual costs incurred by the public agency, may be imposed to recover the public agencys processing and collection costs. This charge may be added to, and become part of, any underlying obligation other than an obligation that constitutes a lien on real property, and a different method of payment for that payment and future payments by this person may be prescribed.
(h)(1)Notwithstanding Title 1.3 (commencing with Section 1747) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, a court or agent of the court, city, county, city and county, or any other public agency may impose a fee for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, not to exceed the costs incurred by the agency or agent in providing for payment by credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer. These costs may include, but shall not be limited to, the payment of fees or discounts as specified in paragraph (3) of subdivision (d). A fee imposed by a court or agent of the court pursuant to this subdivision shall be approved by the Judicial Council. A fee imposed by any other public agency pursuant to this subdivision for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer shall be approved by the governing body responsible for the fiscal decisions of the public agency.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) to complete an electronic filing transaction is deemed an agent of the court. Unless otherwise specified, the electronic filing service provider is deemed an agent of the court for the sole purpose of collecting and remitting a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) for an electronic filing transaction. In case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(3)A court shall not be held liable for the actions of an agent of the court under this subdivision.
(4)An agent of the court shall report its costs in providing for payment by credit or debit card, or electronic funds transfer. These reports shall be issued pursuant to guidelines adopted by the Judicial Council. For purposes of verifying the accuracy of these reports and compliance with this subdivision, the Judicial Council, or its authorized representative, shall have the right to access and examine the records and documents of an agent of the court. The agent of the court shall provide the Judicial Council with all relevant information requested, and shall permit access to its premises at reasonable times for purposes of interviewing employees, and inspecting and copying any relevant records. The agent of the court shall maintain all records and documents relating to its fees and costs for a minimum of four years from the date the fee is imposed, or until the verification process is completed, whichever occurs later.
(i)Fees or discounts provided for under paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) shall be deducted or accounted for before any statutory or other distribution of funds received from the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser to the extent not recovered from the cardholder or accountholder pursuant to subdivision (h).
(j)The Judicial Council may enter into a master agreement with one or more credit or debit card issuers, funds processors, or draft purchasers for the acceptance and payment of credit or debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests received by the courts. A court may join in any of these master agreements or may enter into a separate agreement with a credit or debit card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser.
(k)An electronic filing service provider, as described in subdivision (h), shall not collect or attempt to collect a fee to complete an electronic filing transaction, including a fee to process a payment, a filing fee or other court fee, or a fee charged by the electronic filing service provider for electronically filing documents, from a party who is exempt from paying fees; provided, however, that the electronic filing service provider shall complete the filing notwithstanding the fee exemption.
(l)A court, or an electronic filing manager that provides a court, pursuant to a contract, with a system for accepting electronically transmitted documents and associated filing and other court fees, shall accept more than one method of payment from an electronic filing service provider described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h). The court shall determine the methods of payment that will be accepted by the court and the electronic filing manager. The methods of payment may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions such as Automated Clearing House (ACH), and other payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost.
If an electronic filing is made to the clerk by an electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the filer, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the filer. The clerk may then notify the filer that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. The court may sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic filing service provider remain unsatisfied 20 days after notice by the clerk.
SECTION 1.SEC. 2.Section 6159 of the Government Code is amended to read:6159.(a)The following definitions apply for purposes of this section:
(1)Credit card means a card, plate, coupon book, or other credit device existing for the purpose of being used from time to time upon presentation to obtain money, property, labor, or services on credit.
(2)Card issuer means a person, or his or her agent, who issues a credit card and purchases credit card drafts.
(3)Cardholder means a person to whom a credit card is issued or any person who has agreed with the card issuer to pay obligations arising from the issuance of a credit card to another person.
(4)Debit card means a card or other means of access to a debit card cardholders account that may be used to initiate electronic funds transfers from that account.
(5)Draft purchaser means a person who purchases credit card drafts.
(6)Electronic funds transfer means a method by which a person permits electronic access to, and transfer of, money held in an account by that person.
(b)Subject to subdivisions (c) and (d), a court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency may authorize the acceptance of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer for any of the following:
(1)The payment for the deposit of bail for any offense not declared to be a felony or for a court-ordered fee, fine, forfeiture, penalty, assessment, or restitution. Use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph may include a requirement that the defendant be charged an administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction.
(2)The payment of a filing fee or other court fee.
(3)The payment of towage or storage costs for a vehicle that has been removed from a highway, or from public or private property, as a result of parking violations.
(4)The payment of child, family, or spousal support, including reimbursement of public assistance, related fees, costs, or penalties, with the authorization of the cardholder or accountholder.
(5)The payment for services rendered by a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(6)The payment of a fee, charge, or tax due a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(7)The payment of moneys payable to the sheriff pursuant to a levy under a writ of attachment or writ of execution. If the use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph includes any administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction, that fee shall be paid by the person who pays the money to the sheriff pursuant to the levy.
(8)The payment of a donation, gift, bequest, or devise made to or in favor of a county, or to or in favor of a county board of supervisors, pursuant to Section 25355.
(c)A court desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the Judicial Council. A city desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of its city council. Any other public agency desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the governing body that has fiscal responsibility for that agency.
(d)After approval is obtained, a contract may be executed with one or more credit card issuers, debit card issuers, electronic funds transfer processors, or draft purchasers. The contract shall provide for the following matters:
(1)The respective rights and duties of the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency and card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser regarding the presentment, acceptability, and payment of credit and debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests.
(2)The establishment of a reasonable means by which to facilitate payment settlements.
(3)The payment to the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser of a reasonable fee or discount.
(4)Any other matters appropriately included in contracts with respect to the purchase of credit and debit card drafts and processing of electronic funds transfer requests as may be agreed upon by the parties to the contract.
(e)The honoring of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) constitutes payment of the amount owing to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency as of the date the credit or debit card is honored or the electronic funds transfer is processed, if the credit or debit card draft is paid following its due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or the electronic funds transfer is completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer.
(f)If a credit or debit card draft is not paid following due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or is charged back to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the court, city, or other public agency honoring the credit or debit card shall be void. If an electronic funds transfer request is not completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer or is charged back to the agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the agency processing the electronic funds transfer shall be void. A receipt issued in acknowledgment of payment shall also be void. The obligation of the cardholder or accountholder shall continue as an outstanding obligation as if no payment had been attempted.
(g)If a credit card, debit card draft, electronic funds transfer, or other payment offered in payment is returned without payment, for any reason, a reasonable charge for the charge back or return, not to exceed the actual costs incurred by the public agency, may be imposed to recover the public agencys processing and collection costs. This charge may be added to, and become part of, any underlying obligation other than an obligation that constitutes a lien on real property, and a different method of payment for that payment and future payments by this person may be prescribed.
(h)(1)Notwithstanding Title 1.3 (commencing with Section 1747) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, a court or agent of the court, city, county, city and county, or any other public agency may impose a fee for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, not to exceed the costs incurred by the agency or agent in providing for payment by credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer. These costs may include, but shall not be limited to, the payment of fees or discounts as specified in paragraph (3) of subdivision (d). A fee imposed by a court or agent of the court pursuant to this subdivision shall be approved by the Judicial Council. A fee imposed by any other public agency pursuant to this subdivision for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer shall be approved by the governing body responsible for the fiscal decisions of the public agency.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) to complete an electronic filing transaction is deemed an agent of the court. Unless otherwise specified, the electronic filing service provider is deemed an agent of the court for the sole purpose of collecting and remitting a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) for an electronic filing transaction. In case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(3)A court shall not be held liable for the actions of an agent of the court under this subdivision.
(4)An agent of the court shall report its costs in providing for payment by credit or debit card, or electronic funds transfer. These reports shall be issued pursuant to guidelines adopted by the Judicial Council. For purposes of verifying the accuracy of these reports and compliance with this subdivision, the Judicial Council, or its authorized representative, shall have the right to access and examine the records and documents of an agent of the court. The agent of the court shall provide the Judicial Council with all relevant information requested, and shall permit access to its premises at reasonable times for purposes of interviewing employees, and inspecting and copying any relevant records. The agent of the court shall maintain all records and documents relating to its fees and costs for a minimum of four years from the date the fee is imposed, or until the verification process is completed, whichever occurs later.
(i)Fees or discounts provided for under paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) shall be deducted or accounted for before any statutory or other distribution of funds received from the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser to the extent not recovered from the cardholder or accountholder pursuant to subdivision (h).
(j)The Judicial Council may enter into a master agreement with one or more credit or debit card issuers, funds processors, or draft purchasers for the acceptance and payment of credit or debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests received by the courts. A court may join in any of these master agreements or may enter into a separate agreement with a credit or debit card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser.
(k)An electronic filing service provider, as described in subdivision (h), shall not collect or attempt to collect a fee to complete an electronic filing transaction, including a fee to process a payment, a filing fee or other court fee, or a fee charged by the electronic filing service provider for electronically filing documents, from a party who is exempt from paying fees; provided, however, that the electronic filing service provider shall complete the filing notwithstanding the fee exemption.
(l)A court, or an electronic filing manager that provides a court, pursuant to a contract, with a system for accepting electronically transmitted documents and associated filing and other court fees, shall accept more than one method of payment from an electronic filing service provider described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h). The court shall determine the methods of payment that will be accepted by the court and the electronic filing manager. The methods of payment may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions such as Automated Clearing House (ACH), and other payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost.
(a)The following definitions apply for purposes of this section:
(1)Credit card means a card, plate, coupon book, or other credit device existing for the purpose of being used from time to time upon presentation to obtain money, property, labor, or services on credit.
(2)Card issuer means a person, or his or her agent, who issues a credit card and purchases credit card drafts.
(3)Cardholder means a person to whom a credit card is issued or any person who has agreed with the card issuer to pay obligations arising from the issuance of a credit card to another person.
(4)Debit card means a card or other means of access to a debit card cardholders account that may be used to initiate electronic funds transfers from that account.
(5)Draft purchaser means a person who purchases credit card drafts.
(6)Electronic funds transfer means a method by which a person permits electronic access to, and transfer of, money held in an account by that person.
(b)Subject to subdivisions (c) and (d), a court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency may authorize the acceptance of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer for any of the following:
(1)The payment for the deposit of bail for any offense not declared to be a felony or for a court-ordered fee, fine, forfeiture, penalty, assessment, or restitution. Use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph may include a requirement that the defendant be charged an administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction.
(2)The payment of a filing fee or other court fee.
(3)The payment of towage or storage costs for a vehicle that has been removed from a highway, or from public or private property, as a result of parking violations.
(4)The payment of child, family, or spousal support, including reimbursement of public assistance, related fees, costs, or penalties, with the authorization of the cardholder or accountholder.
(5)The payment for services rendered by a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(6)The payment of a fee, charge, or tax due a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(7)The payment of moneys payable to the sheriff pursuant to a levy under a writ of attachment or writ of execution. If the use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph includes any administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction, that fee shall be paid by the person who pays the money to the sheriff pursuant to the levy.
(8)The payment of a donation, gift, bequest, or devise made to or in favor of a county, or to or in favor of a county board of supervisors, pursuant to Section 25355.
(c)A court desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the Judicial Council. A city desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of its city council. Any other public agency desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the governing body that has fiscal responsibility for that agency.
(d)After approval is obtained, a contract may be executed with one or more credit card issuers, debit card issuers, electronic funds transfer processors, or draft purchasers. The contract shall provide for the following matters:
(1)The respective rights and duties of the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency and card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser regarding the presentment, acceptability, and payment of credit and debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests.
(2)The establishment of a reasonable means by which to facilitate payment settlements.
(3)The payment to the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser of a reasonable fee or discount.
(4)Any other matters appropriately included in contracts with respect to the purchase of credit and debit card drafts and processing of electronic funds transfer requests as may be agreed upon by the parties to the contract.
(e)The honoring of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) constitutes payment of the amount owing to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency as of the date the credit or debit card is honored or the electronic funds transfer is processed, if the credit or debit card draft is paid following its due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or the electronic funds transfer is completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer.
(f)If a credit or debit card draft is not paid following due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or is charged back to the court, agent of the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the court, city, or other public agency honoring the credit or debit card shall be void. If an electronic funds transfer request is not completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer or is charged back to the agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the agency processing the electronic funds transfer shall be void. A receipt issued in acknowledgment of payment shall also be void. The obligation of the cardholder or accountholder shall continue as an outstanding obligation as if no payment had been attempted.
(g)If a credit card, debit card draft, electronic funds transfer, or other payment offered in payment is returned without payment, for any reason, a reasonable charge for the charge back or return, not to exceed the actual costs incurred by the public agency, may be imposed to recover the public agencys processing and collection costs. This charge may be added to, and become part of, any underlying obligation other than an obligation that constitutes a lien on real property, and a different method of payment for that payment and future payments by this person may be prescribed.
(h)(1)Notwithstanding Title 1.3 (commencing with Section 1747) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, a court or agent of the court, city, county, city and county, or any other public agency may impose a fee for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, not to exceed the costs incurred by the agency or agent in providing for payment by credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer. These costs may include, but shall not be limited to, the payment of fees or discounts as specified in paragraph (3) of subdivision (d). A fee imposed by a court or agent of the court pursuant to this subdivision shall be approved by the Judicial Council. A fee imposed by any other public agency pursuant to this subdivision for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer shall be approved by the governing body responsible for the fiscal decisions of the public agency.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) to complete an electronic filing transaction is deemed an agent of the court. Unless otherwise specified, the electronic filing service provider is deemed an agent of the court for the sole purpose of collecting and remitting a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) for an electronic filing transaction. In case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(3)A court shall not be held liable for the actions of an agent of the court under this subdivision.
(4)An agent of the court shall report its costs in providing for payment by credit or debit card, or electronic funds transfer. These reports shall be issued pursuant to guidelines adopted by the Judicial Council. For purposes of verifying the accuracy of these reports and compliance with this subdivision, the Judicial Council, or its authorized representative, shall have the right to access and examine the records and documents of an agent of the court. The agent of the court shall provide the Judicial Council with all relevant information requested, and shall permit access to its premises at reasonable times for purposes of interviewing employees, and inspecting and copying any relevant records. The agent of the court shall maintain all records and documents relating to its fees and costs for a minimum of four years from the date the fee is imposed, or until the verification process is completed, whichever occurs later.
(i)Fees or discounts provided for under paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) shall be deducted or accounted for before any statutory or other distribution of funds received from the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser to the extent not recovered from the cardholder or accountholder pursuant to subdivision (h).
(j)The Judicial Council may enter into a master agreement with one or more credit or debit card issuers, funds processors, or draft purchasers for the acceptance and payment of credit or debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests received by the courts. A court may join in any of these master agreements or may enter into a separate agreement with a credit or debit card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser.
(k)An electronic filing service provider, as described in subdivision (h), shall not collect or attempt to collect a fee to complete an electronic filing transaction, including a fee to process a payment, a filing fee or other court fee, or a fee charged by the electronic filing service provider for electronically filing documents, from a party who is exempt from paying fees; provided, however, that the electronic filing service provider shall complete the filing notwithstanding the fee exemption.
(l)A court, or an electronic filing manager that provides a court, pursuant to a contract, with a system for accepting electronically transmitted documents and associated filing and other court fees, shall accept more than one method of payment from an electronic filing service provider described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h). The court shall determine the methods of payment that will be accepted by the court and the electronic filing manager. The methods of payment may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions such as Automated Clearing House (ACH), and other payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost.
(a)The following definitions apply for purposes of this section:
(1)Credit card means a card, plate, coupon book, or other credit device existing for the purpose of being used from time to time upon presentation to obtain money, property, labor, or services on credit.
(2)Card issuer means a person, or his or her agent, who issues a credit card and purchases credit card drafts.
(3)Cardholder means a person to whom a credit card is issued or any person who has agreed with the card issuer to pay obligations arising from the issuance of a credit card to another person.
(4)Debit card means a card or other means of access to a debit card cardholders account that may be used to initiate electronic funds transfers from that account.
(5)Draft purchaser means a person who purchases credit card drafts.
(6)Electronic funds transfer means a method by which a person permits electronic access to, and transfer of, money held in an account by that person.
(b)Subject to subdivisions (c) and (d), a court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency may authorize the acceptance of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer for any of the following:
(1)The payment for the deposit of bail for any offense not declared to be a felony or for a court-ordered fee, fine, forfeiture, penalty, assessment, or restitution. Use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph may include a requirement that the defendant be charged an administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction.
(2)The payment of a filing fee or other court fee.
(3)The payment of towage or storage costs for a vehicle that has been removed from a highway, or from public or private property, as a result of parking violations.
(4)The payment of child, family, or spousal support, including reimbursement of public assistance, related fees, costs, or penalties, with the authorization of the cardholder or accountholder.
(5)The payment for services rendered by a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(6)The payment of a fee, charge, or tax due a city, county, city and county, or other public agency.
(7)The payment of moneys payable to the sheriff pursuant to a levy under a writ of attachment or writ of execution. If the use of a card or electronic funds transfer pursuant to this paragraph includes any administrative fee charged by the company issuing the card or processing the account for the cost of the transaction, that fee shall be paid by the person who pays the money to the sheriff pursuant to the levy.
(8)The payment of a donation, gift, bequest, or devise made to or in favor of a county, or to or in favor of a county board of supervisors, pursuant to Section 25355.
(c)A court desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the Judicial Council. A city desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of its city council. Any other public agency desiring to authorize the use of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) shall obtain the approval of the governing body that has fiscal responsibility for that agency.
(d)After approval is obtained, a contract may be executed with one or more credit card issuers, debit card issuers, electronic funds transfer processors, or draft purchasers. The contract shall provide for the following matters:
(1)The respective rights and duties of the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency and card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser regarding the presentment, acceptability, and payment of credit and debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests.
(2)The establishment of a reasonable means by which to facilitate payment settlements.
(3)The payment to the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser of a reasonable fee or discount.
(4)Any other matters appropriately included in contracts with respect to the purchase of credit and debit card drafts and processing of electronic funds transfer requests as may be agreed upon by the parties to the contract.
(e)The honoring of a credit card, debit card, or electronic funds transfer pursuant to subdivision (b) constitutes payment of the amount owing to the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency as of the date the credit or debit card is honored or the electronic funds transfer is processed, if the credit or debit card draft is paid following its due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or the electronic funds transfer is completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer.
(f)If a credit or debit card draft is not paid following due presentment to a card issuer or draft purchaser or is charged back to the court, agent of the court, city, county, city and county, or other public agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the court, city, or other public agency honoring the credit or debit card shall be void. If an electronic funds transfer request is not completed with transfer to the agency requesting the transfer or is charged back to the agency for any reason, any record of payment made by the agency processing the electronic funds transfer shall be void. A receipt issued in acknowledgment of payment shall also be void. The obligation of the cardholder or accountholder shall continue as an outstanding obligation as if no payment had been attempted.
(g)If a credit card, debit card draft, electronic funds transfer, or other payment offered in payment is returned without payment, for any reason, a reasonable charge for the charge back or return, not to exceed the actual costs incurred by the public agency, may be imposed to recover the public agencys processing and collection costs. This charge may be added to, and become part of, any underlying obligation other than an obligation that constitutes a lien on real property, and a different method of payment for that payment and future payments by this person may be prescribed.
(h)(1)Notwithstanding Title 1.3 (commencing with Section 1747) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, a court or agent of the court, city, county, city and county, or any other public agency may impose a fee for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer, not to exceed the costs incurred by the agency or agent in providing for payment by credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer. These costs may include, but shall not be limited to, the payment of fees or discounts as specified in paragraph (3) of subdivision (d). A fee imposed by a court or agent of the court pursuant to this subdivision shall be approved by the Judicial Council. A fee imposed by any other public agency pursuant to this subdivision for the use of a credit or debit card or electronic funds transfer shall be approved by the governing body responsible for the fiscal decisions of the public agency.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, an electronic filing service provider who is required to collect and remit a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) to complete an electronic filing transaction is deemed an agent of the court. Unless otherwise specified, the electronic filing service provider is deemed an agent of the court for the sole purpose of collecting and remitting a payment described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) for an electronic filing transaction. In case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
(3)A court shall not be held liable for the actions of an agent of the court under this subdivision.
(4)An agent of the court shall report its costs in providing for payment by credit or debit card, or electronic funds transfer. These reports shall be issued pursuant to guidelines adopted by the Judicial Council. For purposes of verifying the accuracy of these reports and compliance with this subdivision, the Judicial Council, or its authorized representative, shall have the right to access and examine the records and documents of an agent of the court. The agent of the court shall provide the Judicial Council with all relevant information requested, and shall permit access to its premises at reasonable times for purposes of interviewing employees, and inspecting and copying any relevant records. The agent of the court shall maintain all records and documents relating to its fees and costs for a minimum of four years from the date the fee is imposed, or until the verification process is completed, whichever occurs later.
(i)Fees or discounts provided for under paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) shall be deducted or accounted for before any statutory or other distribution of funds received from the card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser to the extent not recovered from the cardholder or accountholder pursuant to subdivision (h).
(j)The Judicial Council may enter into a master agreement with one or more credit or debit card issuers, funds processors, or draft purchasers for the acceptance and payment of credit or debit card drafts and electronic funds transfer requests received by the courts. A court may join in any of these master agreements or may enter into a separate agreement with a credit or debit card issuer, funds processor, or draft purchaser.
(k)An electronic filing service provider, as described in subdivision (h), shall not collect or attempt to collect a fee to complete an electronic filing transaction, including a fee to process a payment, a filing fee or other court fee, or a fee charged by the electronic filing service provider for electronically filing documents, from a party who is exempt from paying fees; provided, however, that the electronic filing service provider shall complete the filing notwithstanding the fee exemption.
(l)A court, or an electronic filing manager that provides a court, pursuant to a contract, with a system for accepting electronically transmitted documents and associated filing and other court fees, shall accept more than one method of payment from an electronic filing service provider described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (h). The court shall determine the methods of payment that will be accepted by the court and the electronic filing manager. The methods of payment may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions such as Automated Clearing House (ACH), and other payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost.
SECTION 1.Section 2830 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:2830.(a)As used in this section, the following terms have the following meanings:(1)Benefiting account means an electricity account, or more than one account, that satisfies either of the following:(A)The account or accounts are located within the geographical boundaries of a public agency, or, for a campus, within the geographical boundary of the city, county, or city and county in which the campus is located, with the account or accounts being mutually agreed upon by the public agency and an electrical corporation.(B)The account or accounts belong to members of a joint powers authority and are located within the geographical boundaries of the group of public agencies that formed the joint powers authority, if the eligible renewable generating facility and electricity account or accounts are wholly located within the confines of a single county within which the joint powers authority is located and electric service is provided by a single electrical corporation, with the account or accounts being mutually agreed upon by the joint powers authority and the electrical corporation.(2)Bill credit means an amount of money credited to a benefiting account that is calculated based upon the time-of-use electricity generation component of the electricity usage charge of the generating account, multiplied by the quantities of electricity generated by an eligible renewable generating facility that are exported to the grid during the corresponding time period. Electricity is exported to the grid if it is generated by an eligible renewable generating facility, is not utilized onsite by the public agency, and the electricity flows through the meter site and on to the electrical corporations distribution or transmission infrastructure.(3)Campus means an individual community college campus, individual California State University campus, or individual University of California campus.(4)Eligible renewable generating facility means a generation facility that meets all of the following requirements:(A)Is an eligible renewable energy resource, as defined in Article 16 (commencing with Section 399.11) of Part 1.(B)Is located within the service territory of the electrical corporation serving the benefiting account.(C)Is owned by, operated by, or on property under the control of the public agency.(D)Is sized to offset all or part of the electrical load of the benefiting account. For these purposes, premises that are leased by a public agency are under the control of the public agency.(5)Generating account means the time-of-use electric service account of the public agency where the eligible renewable generating facility is located.(6)Public agency means a city, county, whether general law or chartered, city and county, special district, school district, political subdivision, other local public agency, a joint powers authority formed pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 6500) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code) that has as members public agencies located within the same county and same electrical corporation service territory, or any agency or department of the state, including the Department of Water Resources and an individual campus of the University of California or the California State University, but shall not mean a joint powers authority that has as members public agencies located in different counties or different electrical corporation service territories, or that has as a member the federal government, any federal department or agency, or another state, or any department or agency of another state.(b)A public agency may elect to receive electric service pursuant to this section if all of the following conditions are met:(1)The public agency designates one or more benefiting accounts to receive a bill credit.(2)A benefiting account receives service under a time-of-use rate schedule.(3)The benefiting account is the responsibility of, and serves property that is owned, operated, or on property under the control of the same public agency that owns, operates, or controls the eligible renewable generating facility.(4)The electrical output of the eligible renewable generating facility is metered for time of use to allow calculation of the bill credit based upon when the electricity is exported to the grid.(5)All costs associated with the metering requirements of paragraphs (2) and (4) are the responsibility of the public agency.(6)All costs associated with interconnection are the responsibility of the public agency. For purposes of this paragraph, interconnection has the same meaning as defined in Section 2803, except that it applies to the interconnection of an eligible renewable generating facility rather than the energy source of a private energy producer.(7)The public agency does not sell electricity exported to the electrical grid to a third party.(8)All electricity exported to the grid by the public agency that is generated by the eligible renewable generating facility becomes the property of the electrical corporation to which the facility is interconnected, but shall not be counted toward the electrical corporations total retail sales for purposes of Article 16 (commencing with Section 399.11) of Chapter 2.3 of Part 1. Ownership of the renewable energy credits, as defined in Section 399.12, shall be the same as the ownership of the renewable energy credits associated with electricity that is net metered pursuant to Section 2827.(9)An electrical corporation shall not be required to compensate a public agency for electricity generated from an eligible renewable facility pursuant to this section in excess of the bill credits applied to the designated benefiting account. A public agency renewable generation facility participating pursuant to this section shall not be eligible for any other tariff or program that requires an electrical corporation to purchase generation from that facility while participating in the public agency renewable energy self-generation program pursuant to this section.(c)(1)A benefiting account shall be billed for all electricity usage, and for each bill component, at the rate schedule applicable to the benefiting account, including any cost-responsibility surcharge or other cost recovery mechanism, as determined by the commission, to reimburse the Department of Water Resources for purchases of electricity, pursuant to Division 27 (commencing with Section 80000) of the Water Code, except that a benefiting account shall be exempt from paying delivery charges for electricity generated by an eligible renewable generating facility that is utilized onsite and not exported to the grid when the benefiting account is colocated with an eligible renewable generating facility.(2)The bill shall then subtract the bill credit applicable to the benefiting account. The generation component credited to the benefiting account shall not include the cost-responsibility surcharge or other cost recovery mechanism, as determined by the commission, to reimburse the Department of Water Resources for purchases of electricity, pursuant to Division 27 (commencing with Section 80000) of the Water Code. The electrical corporation shall ensure that the public agency receives the full bill credit.(3)If, during the billing cycle, the generation component of the electricity usage charges exceeds the bill credit, the benefiting account shall be billed for the difference.(4)If, during the billing cycle, the bill credit applied pursuant to paragraph (2) exceeds the generation component of the electricity usage charges, the difference shall be carried forward as a financial credit to the next billing cycle.(5)After the electricity usage charge pursuant to paragraph (1) and the credit pursuant to paragraph (2) are determined for the last billing cycle of a 12-month period, any remaining credit resulting from the application of this section shall be reset to zero.(d)The electrical corporation serving the benefiting accounts shall establish a new service account and metering for the eligible renewable generating facility, if necessary.(e)A benefiting account shall be allowed to take service on any rate tariff otherwise applicable to the rate class of the benefiting account.(f)The commission shall ensure that the transfer of a bill credit to a benefiting account does not result in a shifting of costs to bundled service subscribers. The costs associated with the transfer of a bill credit shall include all billing-related expenses.(g)Not more frequently than once per year, and upon providing the electrical corporation with a minimum of 60 days notice, the public agency may elect to change a benefiting account. Any credit resulting from the application of this section earned prior to the change in a benefiting account that has not been used as of the date of the change in the benefiting account shall be applied, and may only be applied, to a benefiting account as changed.(h)A public agency shall provide the electrical corporation to which the eligible renewable generating facility will be interconnected with not less than 60 days notice prior to the eligible renewable generating facility becoming operational. The electrical corporation shall file an advice letter with the commission that complies with this section not later than 30 days after receipt of the notice proposing a rate tariff for a benefiting account. The commission, within 30 days of the date of filing, shall approve the proposed tariff or specify conforming changes to be made by the electrical corporation to be filed in a new advice letter.(i)The public agency may terminate its election pursuant to subdivision (b), upon providing the electrical corporation with a minimum of 60 days notice. Should the public agency sell its interest in the eligible renewable generating facility, or sell the electricity generated by the eligible renewable generating facility, in a manner other than required by this section, upon the date of either event, and the earliest date if both events occur, no further bill credit pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) may be earned. Only credit earned prior to that date shall be made to a benefiting account.(j)This chapter does not apply to an electrical corporation with 60,000 or fewer customer accounts.SEC. 2.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.(a)As used in this section, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Benefiting account means an electricity account, or more than one account, that satisfies either of the following:
(A)The account or accounts are located within the geographical boundaries of a local government public agency, or, for a campus, within the geographical boundary of the city, county, or city and county in which the campus is located, with the account or accounts being mutually agreed upon by the local government or campus public agency and an electrical corporation.
(B)The account or accounts belong to members of a joint powers authority and are located within the geographical boundaries of the group of public agencies that formed the joint powers authority, if the eligible renewable generating facility and electricity account or accounts are wholly located within the confines of a single county within which the joint powers authority is located and electric service is provided by a single electrical corporation, with the account or accounts being mutually agreed upon by the joint powers authority and the electrical corporation.
(2)Bill credit means an amount of money credited to a benefiting account that is calculated based upon the time-of-use electricity generation component of the electricity usage charge of the generating account, multiplied by the quantities of electricity generated by an eligible renewable generating facility that are exported to the grid during the corresponding time period. Electricity is exported to the grid if it is generated by an eligible renewable generating facility, is not utilized onsite by the local government, public agency, and the electricity flows through the meter site and on to the electrical corporations distribution or transmission infrastructure.
(3)Campus means an individual community college campus, individual California State University campus, or individual University of California campus.
(4)Eligible renewable generating facility means a generation facility that meets all of the following requirements:
(A)Has a generating capacity of no more than five megawatts. (B)(A)Is an eligible renewable energy resource, as defined in Article 16 (commencing with Section 399.11) of Part 1.
(C)(B)Is located within the geographical boundary of the local government or, for a campus, within the geographical boundary of the city or city and county, if the campus is located in an incorporated area, or county, if the campus is located in an unincorporated area. service territory of the electrical corporation serving the benefiting account.
(D)(C)Is owned by, operated by, or on property under the control of the local government or campus. public agency.
(E)(D)Is sized to offset all or part of the electrical load of the benefiting account. For these purposes, premises that are leased by a local government or campus public agency are under the control of the local government or campus. public agency.
(5)Generating account means the time-of-use electric service account of the local government or campus public agency where the eligible renewable generating facility is located.
(6)Local government Public agency means a city, county, whether general law or chartered, city and county, special district, school district, political subdivision, other local public agency, or a joint powers authority formed pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 6500) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code) that has as members public agencies located within the same county and same electrical corporation service territory, but shall not mean the state, or any agency or department of the state, other than including the Department of Water Resources and an individual campus of the University of California or the California State University, or any but shall not mean a joint powers authority that has as members public agencies located in different counties or different electrical corporation service territories, or that has as a member the federal government, any federal department or agency, this or another state, or any department or agency of this state or another state.
(b)Subject to the limitation in subdivision (h), a local government A public agency may elect to receive electric service pursuant to this section if all of the following conditions are met:
(1)The local government public agency designates one or more benefiting accounts to receive a bill credit.
(2)A benefiting account receives service under a time-of-use rate schedule.
(3)The benefiting account is the responsibility of, and serves property that is owned, operated, or on property under the control of the same local government public agency that owns, operates, or controls the eligible renewable generating facility.
(4)The electrical output of the eligible renewable generating facility is metered for time of use to allow calculation of the bill credit based upon when the electricity is exported to the grid.
(5)All costs associated with the metering requirements of paragraphs (2) and (4) are the responsibility of the local government. public agency.
(6)All costs associated with interconnection are the responsibility of the local government. public agency. For purposes of this paragraph, interconnection has the same meaning as defined in Section 2803, except that it applies to the interconnection of an eligible renewable generating facility rather than the energy source of a private energy producer.
(7)The local government public agency does not sell electricity exported to the electrical grid to a third party.
(8)All electricity exported to the grid by the local government public agency that is generated by the eligible renewable generating facility becomes the property of the electrical corporation to which the facility is interconnected, but shall not be counted toward the electrical corporations total retail sales for purposes of Article 16 (commencing with Section 399.11) of Chapter 2.3 of Part 1. Ownership of the renewable energy credits, as defined in Section 399.12, shall be the same as the ownership of the renewable energy credits associated with electricity that is net metered pursuant to Section 2827.
(9)An electrical corporation shall not be required to compensate a local government public agency for electricity generated from an eligible renewable facility pursuant to this section in excess of the bill credits applied to the designated benefiting account. A local government public agency renewable generation facility participating pursuant to this section shall not be eligible for any other tariff or program that requires an electrical corporation to purchase generation from that facility while participating in the local government public agency renewable energy self-generation program pursuant to this section.
(c)(1)A benefiting account shall be billed for all electricity usage, and for each bill component, at the rate schedule applicable to the benefiting account, including any cost-responsibility surcharge or other cost recovery mechanism, as determined by the commission, to reimburse the Department of Water Resources for purchases of electricity, pursuant to Division 27 (commencing with Section 80000) of the Water Code. Code, except that a benefiting account shall be exempt from paying delivery charges for electricity generated by an eligible renewable generating facility that is utilized onsite and not exported to the grid when the benefiting account is colocated with an eligible renewable generating facility.
(2)The bill shall then subtract the bill credit applicable to the benefiting account. The generation component credited to the benefiting account shall not include the cost-responsibility surcharge or other cost recovery mechanism, as determined by the commission, to reimburse the Department of Water Resources for purchases of electricity, pursuant to Division 27 (commencing with Section 80000) of the Water Code. The electrical corporation shall ensure that the local government public agency receives the full bill credit.
(3)If, during the billing cycle, the generation component of the electricity usage charges exceeds the bill credit, the benefiting account shall be billed for the difference.
(4)If, during the billing cycle, the bill credit applied pursuant to paragraph (2) exceeds the generation component of the electricity usage charges, the difference shall be carried forward as a financial credit to the next billing cycle.
(5)After the electricity usage charge pursuant to paragraph (1) and the credit pursuant to paragraph (2) are determined for the last billing cycle of a 12-month period, any remaining credit resulting from the application of this section shall be reset to zero.
(d)The electrical corporation serving the benefiting accounts shall establish a new service account and metering for the eligible renewable generating facility, if necessary.
(e)A benefiting account shall be allowed to take service on any rate tariff otherwise applicable to the rate class of the benefiting account.
(d)(f)The commission shall ensure that the transfer of a bill credit to a benefiting account does not result in a shifting of costs to bundled service subscribers. The costs associated with the transfer of a bill credit shall include all billing-related expenses.
(e)(g)Not more frequently than once per year, and upon providing the electrical corporation with a minimum of 60 days notice, the local government public agency may elect to change a benefiting account. Any credit resulting from the application of this section earned prior to the change in a benefiting account that has not been used as of the date of the change in the benefiting account shall be applied, and may only be applied, to a benefiting account as changed.
(f)(h)A local government public agency shall provide the electrical corporation to which the eligible renewable generating facility will be interconnected with not less than 60 days notice prior to the eligible renewable generating facility becoming operational. The electrical corporation shall file an advice letter with the commission that complies with this section not later than 30 days after receipt of the notice proposing a rate tariff for a benefiting account. The commission, within 30 days of the date of filing, shall approve the proposed tariff or specify conforming changes to be made by the electrical corporation to be filed in a new advice letter.
(g)(i)The local government public agency may terminate its election pursuant to subdivision (b), upon providing the electrical corporation with a minimum of 60 days notice. Should the local government public agency sell its interest in the eligible renewable generating facility, or sell the electricity generated by the eligible renewable generating facility, in a manner other than required by this section, upon the date of either event, and the earliest date if both events occur, no further bill credit pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) may be earned. Only credit earned prior to that date shall be made to a benefiting account.
(h)An electrical corporation is not obligated to provide a bill credit to a benefiting account that is not designated by a local government prior to the point in time that the combined statewide cumulative rated generating capacity of all eligible renewable generating facilities within the service territories of the states three largest electrical corporations reaches 250 megawatts. Only those eligible renewable generating facilities that are providing bill credits to benefiting accounts pursuant to this section shall count toward reaching this 250-megawatt limitation. Each electrical corporation shall only be required to offer service or contracts under this section until that electrical corporation reaches its proportionate share of the 250-megawatt limitation based on the ratio of its peak demand to the total statewide peak demand of all electrical corporations. (i)(j)This chapter does not apply to an electrical corporation with 60,000 or fewer customer accounts.
SEC. 2.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
SECTION 1.Section 740.2 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:740.2.The commission, in consultation with the Energy Commission, State Air Resources Board, electrical corporations, and the motor vehicle industry, shall evaluate policies to develop infrastructure sufficient to overcome any barriers to the widespread deployment and use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles. By July 1, 2011, the commission shall adopt rules to address all of the following:(a)The electrical infrastructure, including infrastructure upgrades necessary for widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and the role and development of public charging infrastructure.(b)The impact of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles on grid stability and the integration of renewable energy resources.(c)The technological advances that are needed to ensure the widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and what role the state should take to support the development of this technology.(d)The existing code and permit requirements that will impact the widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and any recommended changes to existing legal impediments to the widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles.(e)The role the state should take to ensure that technologies employed in plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles work in a harmonious manner and across service territories.(f)The impact of widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles on achieving the states goals pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 and renewables portfolio standard program and what steps should be taken to address possibly shifting emissions reductions responsibilities from the transportation sector to the electrical industry.The commission, in consultation with the Energy Commission, State Air Resources Board, electrical corporations, and the motor vehicle industry, shall evaluate policies to develop infrastructure sufficient to overcome any barriers to the widespread deployment and use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles. By July 1, 2011, the commission shall adopt rules to address all of the following:
(a)The impacts upon electrical infrastructure, including infrastructure upgrades necessary for widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and the role and development of public charging infrastructure.
(b)The impact of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles on grid stability and the integration of renewable energy resources.
(c)The technological advances that are needed to ensure the widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and what role the state should take to support the development of this technology.
(d)The existing code and permit requirements that will impact the widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles and any recommended changes to existing legal impediments to the widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles.
(e)The role the state should take to ensure that technologies employed in plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles work in a harmonious manner and across service territories.
(f)The impact of widespread use of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles on achieving the states goals pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 and renewables portfolio standard program and what steps should be taken to address possibly shifting emissions reductions responsibilities from the transportation sector to the electrical industry.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Sep 5, 2018 | Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 248, Statutes of 2018. |
| Sep 5, 2018 | Approved by the Governor. |
| Aug 24, 2018 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:30 p.m. |
| Aug 20, 2018 | Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. |
| Aug 14, 2018 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 16 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77. |
| Aug 13, 2018 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. |
| Aug 7, 2018 | Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar. |
| Aug 6, 2018 | From committee: Be ordered to second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to Consent Calendar. |
| Jul 2, 2018 | Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Jun 28, 2018 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 26). |
| Jun 18, 2018 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on JUD. |
| Jun 6, 2018 | In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author. |
| Apr 19, 2018 | Referred to Com. on JUD. |
| Jan 29, 2018 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| Jan 29, 2018 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. |
| Jan 22, 2018 | Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar. |
| Jan 18, 2018 | From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (January 18). |
| Jan 11, 2018 | Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Jan 10, 2018 | Read second time and amended. |
| Jan 9, 2018 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (January 9). |
| Jan 3, 2018 | From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on JUD. Re-referred. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (January 3). Re-referred to Com. on JUD. |
| Sep 15, 2017 | Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96. |
| Sep 14, 2017 | Re-referred to Com. on U. & E. |
| Sep 13, 2017 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on U. & E. Read second time and amended. |
| Apr 19, 2017 | In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author. |
| Apr 17, 2017 | Assembly Rule 56 suspended. (Page 1005.) |
| Mar 29, 2017 | Re-referred to Com. on U. & E. |
| Mar 28, 2017 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on U. & E. Read second time and amended. |
| Mar 27, 2017 | Referred to Coms. on U. & E. and L. GOV. |
| Feb 19, 2017 | From printer. May be heard in committee March 21. |
| Feb 17, 2017 | Read first time. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2018 | AB 1531 BERMAN Concurrence in Senate Amendments | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Aug 13, 2018 | Consent Calendar AB1531 | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| Jun 26, 2018 | Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar | Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary |
Passed |
|
| Jan 29, 2018 | AB 1531 BERMAN Consent Calendar Second Day Regular Session | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Jan 18, 2018 | Do pass. To Consent Calendar. | Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Jan 9, 2018 | Do pass as amended, and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar | Assembly Standing Committee on Judiciary |
Passed |
|
| Jan 3, 2018 | Be re-referred to the Committee on [Judiciary] | Assembly Standing Committee on Rules |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| Advanced Energy Economy | ** Support | Apr 17, 2017 |
| California Association Of Sanitation Agencies | ** Support | Apr 17, 2017 |
| California Solar Energy Industries Association | ** Support | Apr 17, 2017 |
| California State Association Of Counties | ** Support | Apr 17, 2017 |
| Coalition for Improving Court Access | ** Support | Aug 8, 2018 |
| Judicial Council of California | ** Support | Aug 8, 2018 |
| OpTerra Energy Services | ** Support | Apr 17, 2017 |
| Solar Energy Industries Association | ** Support | Apr 17, 2017 |
| SunPower Corporation | ** Support | Apr 17, 2017 |
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
CSA1 Bill Id:AB 1531
Author:(Berman)
As Amended Ver:July 2, 2018
Majority vote
ASSEMBLY: | 75-0 | (January 29, 2018) | SENATE: | 37-0 | (August 13, 2018) |
Original Committee Reference: U.&E.
SUMMARY: Establishes rules regarding payment of court fees when using an electronic filing service provider. Specifically, this bill:
- Requires that if a duplicate payment is made to a court by a party or an electronic service provider by credit card or other electronic means for, among other things, court filing fees, the court must issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
- Allows an electronic filing service provider, if an electronic filing is made to the court by the electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the attorney of record, and the filing was made by the attorney of record and not an unrepresented party, to notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the attorney of record. Allows the clerk to notify the attorney of record that the attorney may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees and allows the court to sanction that attorney if the fees remain unsatisfied 20 days after the clerk's notice.
The Senate amendments add 2), above.
EXISTING LAW:
- Authorizes courts to allow parties to electronically file court documents in accordance to rules established by the Judicial Council, and as provided by state law. (Code of Civil Procedure Section (CCP) 1010.6(b). Unless stated otherwise, all further statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.)
- Authorizes courts to require parties to electronically file and serve documents in a civil action in accordance to rules established by the Judicial Council, and as provided by state law, including:
- The court and the parties must have access to more than one electronic filing service provider capable of electronically filing documents with the court or to electronic filing access directly through the court;
- The court may charge fees of no more than the actual cost of the electronic filing and service of the documents, any fees charged by an electronic filing service provider must be reasonable, and the court, an electronic filing manager (EFM), or an electronic filing service provider (EFSP) must waive any fees charged if the court deems a waiver appropriate, including in instances where a party has received a fee waiver;
- The court must have a procedure for the filing of non-electronic documents in order to prevent the program from causing undue hardship or significant prejudice to any party in an action, including, but not limited to, unrepresented parties; and
- Unrepresented parties are exempt from mandatory electronic filing and service. (Section 1010.6(d))
- Authorizes courts to require parties to electronically file documents in a class action, a consolidated action, or a group of actions, a coordinated action, or an action that is deemed complex under Judicial Council rules, provided that the trial court's order does not cause undue hardship or significance prejudice to any party to the action. (Section 1010.6(c))
- Requires Judicial Council to adopt rules relating to the voluntary or mandatory electronic filing and service of documents in trial courts which must include statewide policies on vendor contracts, privacy, access to public records, unrepresented parties, parties with fee waivers, hardships, reasonable exceptions to electronic filing, and the integrity of electronic service. (Section 1010.6(e) and (f))
- Sets forth the rules adopted by the Judicial Council regarding electronic filing and serving of court documents. (California Rules of Court, Rules 2.250-2.261)
- Allows a court, city, county or other public agency to authorize the acceptance of credit card, debit card or electronic funds transfer for payment of, among other things, court-ordered fees, fines, penalties, assessments, restitution, filing fees, non-felony bail deposits, towage or storage costs for a vehicle, or child or spousal support. Requires a court or an entity contracted with a court to provide a system for acceptance of electronically transmitted documents to provide a menu of payment options that may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions, and payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost. (Government Code Section 6159)
- Requires the county, if a taxpayer or agent submits a payment for a particular property tax that has already been paid to the county, to return the replicated payment, as defined, to the tendering party within 60 days of the date the payment becomes final, as defined. (Revenue and Taxation Code Section 2780 et seq.)
- Establishes procedures for the voiding of a filing if the filing fees are made by check that is later returned without payment. The procedures include notification to the party that tendered the check and a requirement that the filing be voided by the clerk if the fee is not paid in full within 20 days of the notice. (Section 411.20)
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS: California's court system is one of the largest in the world, with over 6.2 million cases filed statewide in the superior courts during the 2016 fiscal year, representing a 40 percent caseload drop since fiscal year 2009. (Judicial Council of California, 2017 Courts Statistics Report: Statewide Caseload Trends p. 94, 2017.) Given the high volume of filings in California's courts each year, a party's ability (or requirement) to file and serve documents electronically significantly improves the court's capacity to process filings and may provide added convenience to the parties and their attorneys. However, electronic filing has created some complications that still need to be resolved, including what to do if duplicate fees are received by a court. This bill seeks to create a uniform, statewide solution to this minor, but not insignificant problem.
Basic Rules for Electronic Filing. A court electronic filing system requires both an electronic filing service provider (EFSP) and an electronic filing manager (EFM). Generally, the litigant files the legal document with the EFSP which translates the information and sends it to the EFM, which delivers and communicates that information to the court's case management system. Both the EFSP and the EFM are generally private companies.
Current law provides basic rules for EFSPs. These include requiring that courts and parties have access to more than one EFSP capable of electronically filing documents with the court to prevent a monopoly by one vendor. Fees charged by EFSPs must also be reasonable, and courts, EFMs, and EFSPs must waive any fees charged if the court deems a waiver appropriate, including in instances where a party has received a fee waiver. These provisions, all insisted upon by this Committee, help ensure that electronically filing does not unfairly advantage one company or, more importantly, disadvantage any party, particularly those with minimal means or no representation, thus helping promote access to justice for all litigants in California.
This Bill Creates a Uniform Rule to Address Two Problems That Could Result From Electronic Filing. One problem that has arisen or increased with the advent of electronic filing is the duplicate payment of filing fees. For example, multiple parties to an action may mistakenly pay a single filing fee or a law firm and an EFSP may both pay a filing fee near a filing deadline to avoid missing the critical deadline. In any event, the extra payment must be refunded, but today there is no uniform, statewide standard for refunding the extra payment, and the lack of a standard has, according to the author, created logistical challenges for the parties and for EFSPs.
This bill proposes to create that uniform statewide standard by requiring that if a duplicate payment is made to a court by credit card or other electronic means, the court must issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. This "last in, first out" refund approach is already used by many courts to address duplicate payment issues. It is also used for duplicate property tax payments, which may occur when, for example, a homeowner and the mortgage company both pay the property tax. (Revenue and Taxation Code Section 2781) While not all courts today use this method for dealing with duplicate payment issues, no court has raised concerns to this statewide solution.
The bill also creates a process to make it easier for EFSPs to collect money owed to them that was not paid by attorneys who filed court documents through them. Specifically, this bill allows, but does not require, courts to sanction an attorney of record if fees to the EFSP remain unpaid 20 days after a specified notice by the clerk.
Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0003894
Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB |
CONSENT
Bill No: AB 1531
:
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/26/18
AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Monning, Stern, Wieckowski
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 75-0, 1/29/18 (Consent) - See last page for vote
SOURCE: Coalition for Improving Court Access
DIGEST:
This bill provides that in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing (e-filing) service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. This bill provides a mechanism whereby the court can sanction the attorney of record if fees to the electronic service provider remain unpaid 20 days after a specified notice is provided to the filer.
Existing law:
- Authorizes courts to allow parties to electronically file court documents in accordance to rules established by the Judicial Council, and as provided by state law. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(b).)
- Authorizes courts to require parties to electronically file and serve documents in a civil action in accordance with rules established by the Judicial Council, and as provided by state law, including:
- The court and the parties must have access to more than one electronic filing service provider capable of electronically filing documents with the court or to electronic filing access directly through the court;
- The court may charge fees of no more than the actual cost of the electronic filing and service of the documents, any fees charged by an electronic filing service provider must be reasonable, and the court, an electronic filing manager, or an electronic filing service provider must waive any fees charged if the court deems a waiver appropriate, including in instances where a party has received a fee waiver;
- The court must have a procedure for the filing of non-electronic documents in order to prevent the program from causing undue hardship or significant prejudice to any party in an action, including, but not limited to, unrepresented parties; and
- Unrepresented parties are exempt from mandatory electronic filing and service. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(d).)
- Authorizes courts to require parties to electronically file documents in a class action, a consolidated action, or a group of actions, a coordinated action, or an action that is deemed complex under Judicial Council rules, provided that the trial court’s order does not cause undue hardship or significant prejudice to any party to the action. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(c).)
- Requires Judicial Council to adopt rules relating to the voluntary or mandatory electronic filing and service of documents in trial courts which must include statewide policies on vendor contracts, privacy, access to public records, unrepresented parties, parties with fee waivers, hardships, reasonable exceptions to electronic filing, and the integrity of electronic service. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(e), (f).)
- Allows a court, city, county or other public agency to authorize the acceptance of credit card, debit card or electronic funds transfer for payment of, among other things, court-ordered fees, fines, penalties, assessments, restitution, filing fees, non-felony bail deposits, towage or storage costs for a vehicle, or child or spousal support. (Gov. Code Sec. 6159.)
- Requires a court or an entity contracted with a court to provide a system for acceptance of electronically transmitted documents to provide a menu of payment options that may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions, and payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost. (Id.)
- Requires the county, if a taxpayer or agent submits a payment for a particular property tax that has already been paid to the county, to return the replicated payment, as defined, to the tendering party within 60 days of the date the payment becomes final, as defined. (Rev. & Tax. Code Sec. 2780 et seq.)
- Provides that existing rules of court, as adopted by the Judicial Council, set forth rules regarding electronic filing and serving of court documents. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rules 2.250-2.261.)
This bill:
- Provides that in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
- Provides that if an electronic filing is made to the clerk by an electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the attorney of record, and the filing was made by the attorney of record and not a self-represented party, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the attorney of record. The clerk may then notify the attorney of record that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. The court may sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic filing service provider remain unsatisfied 20 days after notice by the clerk.
Background
The federal courts have allowed for e-filing for far longer than California. The federal courts have their own e-filing system and do not contract out with for-profit companies to accept the documents for them. (See Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. Rule 5(d)(3), which provides that a court may, by local rule, allow papers to be filed, signed, or verified by electronic means that are consistent with any technical standards established by the Judicial Conference of the United States, and may require electronic filing only if reasonable exceptions are allowed.)
In California, electronic filing and service have slowly been introduced into the court system. For years, California has authorized limited electronic filing under Section 1010.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In 1999, SB 367 (Dunn, Chapter 514, Statutes of 1999), among other things, enacted Section 1010.6, to allow trial courts to adopt local rules permitting electronic filing and service of documents, and to require the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules for the electronic filing and service of documents in the trial courts of the state, as specified. SB 367 also reflected the legislative intent: (1) to provide for the eventual standardization of electronic filing and service procedures on a statewide level; and (2) to provide that a court shall not adopt an electronic filing procedure that requires a litigant or attorney to possess specialized, cumbersome, or expensive equipment or software to utilize the electronic filing system. Subsequently, in 2010, SB 1274 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 156, Statutes of 2010) authorized parties to consent to, or the court to order, electronic service of documents that are not required to be personally served. Among other things, SB 1274 also required the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules relating to the integrity of electronic filing and service of documents in the trial courts of the state, and redefined “electronic service” to include both electronic notification and electronic transmission, as specified.
In 2012, this state enacted AB 2073, (Silva, Chapter 320, Statutes of 2012), authorizing a pilot program in Orange County’s Superior Court that would allow for mandated electronic filing in specified cases, as long as certain enumerated conditions were met. Recognizing that other courts may subsequently wish to move toward mandatory electronic filing as well, AB 2073 also allowed for that possibility, on the condition that any future courts must also meet the requirements of Section 1010.6 and any additional uniform rules adopted by the Judicial Council for the filing and service of documents in the trial courts of the state based upon its study of the Orange County court’s pilot program. Indeed, in 2013, the Judicial Council approved a proposal, effective July 1, 2013, to allow superior courts to require that parties electronically file and serve documents in civil cases. Notably, those new rules exempt self-represented parties from any mandatory electronic filing and service requirements adopted by participating courts, but also include language that encourages these parties to participate voluntarily. To the extent feasible, courts and other entities are encouraged to assist self-represented parties to electronically file and serve documents. (See California Courts Press Release, Judicial Council Allows Superior Courts to Require E-filing in Civil Cases (Jun. 28, 2013) <http://www.courts.ca.gov/22655.htm [as of Jun. 17, 2017].)
Just last year, California expanded the use of permissive and mandatory electronic filing and service in civil courts as well as in criminal, probate, and juvenile courts by enacting AB 976 (Berman, Chapter 319, Statutes of 2017). AB 976 provided clear rules governing the processes, the timing, and the safeguards that must be in place. This bill seeks to codify a statewide procedure for the treatment of duplicate filing payments. Pursuant to this bill, in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. This bill also seeks to make it easier for electronic service providers to collect money owed to them that was not paid by attorneys who filed court documents through them. Specifically, this bill authorizes courts to sanction the attorney of record if fees to the electronic service provider remain unpaid 20 days after a specified notice by the clerk.
Comments
The author writes:
Last year, I authored AB 976 in order to bring our statutory laws up to date with electronic filing technology and best practices. The bill not only updated the law with regard to civil actions, it also provided parameters for e-filing for criminal, juvenile, and probate proceedings. That bill will increase efficiency for courts and litigants alike, while also potentially saving the state money.
Although expanding e-filing makes sense for a host of reasons, it has highlighted areas needing additional clarification. Accordingly, this bill would ensure that there is uniformity in the handling of duplicate payments in all superior courts. Additionally, the bill would establish a process where an electronic filing service provider, where acting as an agent of the court, can seek the court’s assistance in the event of nonpayment for services.
Related/Prior Legislation
AB 976 (Berman, Chapter 319, Statutes of 2017) expanded the use of permissive and mandatory electronic filing and service in civil courts as well as in criminal, probate, and juvenile courts; and provided clear rules governing the processes, the timing, and the safeguards that must be in place.
AB 2244 (Gatto, Chapter 461, Statutes of 2016) updated some of the statutory rules and conditions surrounding mandatory e-filing, in particular relating to processing fees charged for e-filing payments, payment options, and the ability of prevailing parties to recover e-filing fees.
AB 2073 (Silva, Chapter 320, Statutes of 2012) - See Background.
SB 1274 (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 156, Statutes of 2010) - See Background.
SB 367 (Dunn, Chapter 514, Statutes of 1999) - See Background.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:
Coalition for Improving Court Access (source)
Judicial Council of California
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 75-0, 1/29/18
AYES: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Travis Allen, Arambula, Baker, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Caballero, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Chau, Chávez, Chen, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dahle, Daly, Eggman, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Friedman, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gonzalez Fletcher, Gray, Grayson, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Voepel, Waldron, Weber, Wood, Rendon
NO VOTE RECORDED: Gallagher, McCarty
Prepared by: Christian Kurpiewski / JUD. / (916) 651-4113
8/8/18 16:49:44
**** END ****
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2017-2018 Regular Session
Bill No: AB 1531 (Author:Berman)
Version: June 18, 2018
Hearing Date: June 26, 2018
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
Consultant: MEC
SUBJECT
Court fees: electronic filing
DESCRIPTION
This bill would provide that in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing (e-filing) service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. The bill would provide a mechanism whereby the court can sanction the attorney of record if fees to the electronic service provider remain unpaid 20 days after a specified notice is provided to the filer.
BACKGROUND
The federal courts have allowed for e-filing for far longer than California. The federal courts have their own e-filing system and do not contract out with for-profit companies to accept the documents for them. (See Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. Rule 5(d)(3), which provides that a court may, by local rule, allow papers to be filed, signed, or verified by electronic means that are consistent with any technical standards established by the Judicial Conference of the United States, and may require electronic filing only if reasonable exceptions are allowed.)
In California, electronic filing and service have slowly been introduced into the court system. For years, California has authorized limited electronic filing under Section 1010.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In 1999, SB 367 (Dunn, Ch. 514, Stats. 1999), among other things, enacted Section 1010.6, to allow trial courts to adopt local rules permitting electronic filing and service of documents, and to require the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules for the electronic filing and service of documents in the trial courts of the state, as specified. SB 367 also reflected the legislative intent to: (1) provide for the eventual standardization of electronic filing and service procedures on a statewide level; and (2) to provide that a court shall not adopt an electronic filing procedure that requires a litigant or attorney to possess specialized, cumbersome, or expensive equipment or software to utilize the electronic filing system. Subsequently, in 2010, SB 1274 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 156, Stats. 2010) authorized parties to consent to, or the court to order, electronic service of documents that are not required to be personally served. Among other things, SB 1274 also required the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules relating to the integrity of electronic filing and service of documents in the trial courts of the state, and redefined “electronic service” to include both electronic notification and electronic transmission, as specified.
In 2012, this state enacted AB 2073, (Silva, Ch. 320, Stats. 2012), authorizing a pilot program in Orange County’s Superior Court that would allow for mandated electronic filing in specified cases, as long as certain enumerated conditions were met. Recognizing that other courts may subsequently wish to move toward mandatory electronic filing as well, AB 2073 also allowed for that possibility, on the condition that any future courts must also meet the requirements of Section 1010.6 and any additional uniform rules adopted by the Judicial Council for the filing and service of documents in the trial courts of the state based upon its study of the Orange County court’s pilot program. Indeed, in 2013, the Judicial Council approved a proposal, effective July 1, 2013, to allow superior courts to require that parties electronically file and serve documents in civil cases. Notably, those new rules exempt self-represented parties from any mandatory electronic filing and service requirements adopted by participating courts, but also include language that encourages these parties to participate voluntarily. To the extent feasible, courts and other entities are encouraged to assist self-represented parties to electronically file and serve documents. (See California Courts Press Release, Judicial Council Allows Superior Courts to Require E-filing in Civil Cases (Jun. 28, 2013) <http://www.courts.ca.gov/22655.htm> [as of Jun. 17, 2017].)
Just last year, California expanded the use of permissive and mandatory electronic filing and service in civil courts as well as in criminal, probate, and juvenile courts by enacting AB 976 (Berman, Ch. 319, Stats. 2017). AB 976 provided clear rules governing the processes, the timing, and the safeguards that must be in place. This bill seeks to codify a statewide procedure for the treatment of duplicate filing payments. Pursuant to the bill, in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. The bill also seeks to make it easier for electronic service providers to collect money owed to them that was not paid by attorneys who filed court documents through them. Specifically, the bill would authorize courts to sanction the attorney of record if fees to the electronic service provider remain unpaid 20 days after a specified notice is provided to the filer.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law authorizes courts to allow parties to electronically file court documents in accordance to rules established by the Judicial Council, and as provided by state law. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(b).)
Existing law authorizes courts to require parties to electronically file and serve documents in a civil action in accordance with rules established by the Judicial Council, and as provided by state law, including:
- The court and the parties must have access to more than one electronic filing service provider capable of electronically filing documents with the court or to electronic filing access directly through the court;
- The court may charge fees of no more than the actual cost of the electronic filing and service of the documents, any fees charged by an electronic filing service provider must be reasonable, and the court, an electronic filing manager (EFM), or an electronic filing service provider (EFSP) must waive any fees charged if the court deems a waiver appropriate, including in instances where a party has received a fee waiver;
- The court must have a procedure for the filing of non-electronic documents in order to prevent the program from causing undue hardship or significant prejudice to any party in an action, including, but not limited to, unrepresented parties; and
- Unrepresented parties are exempt from mandatory electronic filing and service. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(d).)
Existing law authorizes courts to require parties to electronically file documents in a class action, a consolidated action, or a group of actions, a coordinated action, or an action that is deemed complex under Judicial Council rules, provided that the trial court’s order does not cause undue hardship or significant prejudice to any party to the action. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(c).)
Existing law requires Judicial Council to adopt rules relating to the voluntary or mandatory electronic filing and service of documents in trial courts which must include statewide policies on vendor contracts, privacy, access to public records, unrepresented parties, parties with fee waivers, hardships, reasonable exceptions to electronic filing, and the integrity of electronic service. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(e), (f).)
Existing Rules of Court, adopted by the Judicial Council, set forth rules regarding electronic filing and serving of court documents. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rules 2.250-2.261.)
Existing law allows a court, city, county or other public agency to authorize the acceptance of credit card, debit card or electronic funds transfer for payment of, among other things, court-ordered fees, fines, penalties, assessments, restitution, filing fees, non-felony bail deposits, towage or storage costs for a vehicle, or child or spousal support. (Gov. Code Sec. 6159.)
Existing law requires a court or an entity contracted with a court to provide a system for acceptance of electronically transmitted documents to provide a menu of payment options that may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions, and payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost. (Id.)
Existing law requires the county, if a taxpayer or agent submits a payment for a particular property tax that has already been paid to the county, to return the replicated payment, as defined, to the tendering party within 60 days of the date the payment becomes final, as defined. (Rev. & Tax. Code Sec. 2780 et seq.)
This bill would provide that in case of a duplicate payment by a party or an electronic filing service provider submitting a payment on behalf of a party, the court shall issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
This bill would provide that if an electronic filing is made to the clerk by an electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the filer, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the filer. The clerk may then notify the filer that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. The court may sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic filing service provider remain unsatisfied 20 days after notice by the clerk.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
Last year, I authored AB 976 in order to bring our statutory laws up to date with electronic filing technology and best practices. The bill not only updated the law with regard to civil actions, it also provided parameters for e-filing for criminal, juvenile, and probate proceedings. That bill will increase efficiency for courts and litigants alike, while also potentially saving the state money.
Although expanding e-filing makes sense for a host of reasons, it has highlighted areas needing additional clarification. Accordingly, this bill would ensure that there is uniformity in the handling of duplicate payments in all superior courts. Additionally, the bill would establish a process where an electronic filing service provider, where acting as an agent of the court, can seek the court’s assistance in the event of nonpayment for services.
2. Duplicate Payments
The sponsor of the bill is a group of businesses providing e-filing services to law firms and other filers called the Coalition for Improving Court Access. According to the sponsors:
In a small but significant number of cases, law firms and [electronic filing service providers] both file a given document and submit duplicate payments to the courts. In the fast-paced world of litigation, these duplicate payments can happen for any number of reasons. AB 1531 merely clarifies that when duplicate payments are made to courts and then refunded, refunds should be made to the last party tendering the funds. The “last-in, first-out” refund policy is precisely consistent with existing California law relating to duplicate property tax payments.
In support, the Judicial Council of California writes:
[T]he bill proposes a “last in, first out” approach for processing duplicate court filing refunds. Although there is no existing law on the subject, a number of courts currently use this approach to address duplicate payments for electronic filings, consistent with the statute that governs how counties handle duplicate property tax payments. The Judicial Council believes that codifying this commonly used practice would promote uniformity and consistency across the courts in handling duplicate payments that occur in connection with both paper filings and electronic filings. The enactment of AB 1531 would also clarify the law and help avoid any unnecessary confusion, which should improve the overall efficiency of the courts’ handling of refunds in duplicate payment cases.
3. Issue of nonpayment by attorneys representing litigants
According to an electronic filing company, some attorneys file documents for their clients through their electronic filing company and do not end up paying for the filing. For this reason, the company requests a legislative solution to allow the court to sanction the attorney engaged in such a practice. In a situation where an attorney is deliberately trying to evade payment of filing fees, it is arguably appropriate to provide a mechanism where the court can, in its discretion, sanction the attorney after an appropriate period of time.
Accordingly, this bill would provide that “if an electronic filing is made to the clerk by an electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the filer, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the filer. The clerk would then have the authority to notify the filer that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. The court would have the discretion to sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic filing service provider remain unsatisfied 20 days after notice by the clerk.”
The author has agreed to amend this provision for clarification purposes to ensure that the attorney of record receives notice from the electronic filing service provider and notice from the clerk before sanctions may be authorized. The language is confusing and should be clarified to make clear that an electronic filing service provider may only give notice to the attorney of record who is a filer. Additionally, it should be clarified that the clerk would only have authority to notify the attorney of record, who is a filer, and that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. It should be clarified that this provision does not apply to a self-represented litigant. Allowing the electronic service provider to provide a notice to a self-represented filer that their “attorney of record” may be sanctioned for nonpayment would be confusing and misleading to the self represented filer. As drafted, the bill would allow for the electronic service provider to do this.
Amendment
If an electronic filing is made to the clerk by an electronic filing service provider acting as the agent of the court for purposes of collecting and remitting filing fees, and fees owed to the electronic filing service provider remain unpaid for a period of five days after notice to the attorney of record filer, and the filing was made by the attorney of record and not a self-represented party, the electronic filing service provider may notify the clerk that fees remain unpaid despite notice to the filer attorney of record. The clerk may then notify the filer attorney of record that the attorney of record may be sanctioned by the court for nonpayment of fees. The court may sanction the attorney of record if the fees to the electronic filing service provider remain unsatisfied 20 days after notice by the clerk.
Support: Judicial Council of California
Opposition: None Known
HISTORY
Source: Coalition for Improving Court Access
Related Pending Legislation: None Known
Prior Legislation:
AB 976 (Berman, Ch. 319, Stats. 2017) This bill expanded the use of permissive and mandatory electronic filing and service in civil courts as well as in criminal, probate, and juvenile courts. It provided clear rules governing the processes, the timing, and the safeguards that must be in place.
AB 2244 (Gatto, Ch. 461, Stats. 2016) updated some of the statutory rules and conditions surrounding mandatory e-filing, in particular relating to processing fees charged for e-filing payments, payment options, and the ability of prevailing parties to recover e-filing fees.
AB 2073 (Silva, Ch. 320, Stats. 2012) See Background.
SB 1274 (Committee on Judiciary, Ch. 156, Stats. 2010) See Background.
SB 367 (Dunn, Ch. 514, Stats. 1999) See Background.
Prior Vote:
Assembly Floor (Ayes 75, Noes 0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 17, Noes 0)
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
Assembly Rules Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
**************
Date of Hearing: January 18, 2018
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1531
Author:(Berman) – As Amended Ver:January 10, 2018
Policy Committee: | Rules | Vote: | 10 - 0 |
Judiciary | 10 - 0 | ||
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill requires that if a duplicate payment is made to a court through electronic means, the duplicate payment must be refunded to the entity that made the most recent payment.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Negligible fiscal effect.
COMMENTS:
Background and Purpose. A problem that has arisen or increased with the advent of electronic filing is the duplicate payment of filing fees. For example, multiple parties to an action may mistakenly pay a single filing fee or a law firm and an Electronic Filing Service Provider (EFSP) may both pay a filing fee near a filing deadline to avoid missing the critical deadline. In these cases, the extra payment must be refunded, but today there is no statewide standard for refunding the extra payment, and the lack of a standard has, according to the author, created logistical challenges for the parties and for EFSPs. This bill proposes to create that uniform statewide standard by requiring that if a duplicate payment is made to a court by credit card or other electronic means, the court must issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
Analysis Prepared by: Jessica Peters / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
Date of Hearing: January 9, 2018
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mark Stone, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1531
Author:(Berman) – As Amended Ver:September 13, 2017
PROPOSED CONSENT (As Proposed to be Amended)
SUBJECT: COURT FEES: ELECTRONIC FILING
KEY ISSUE: SHOULD A STATEWIDE, UNIFORM STANDARD BE ESTABLISHED TO REQUIRE THAT IF A DUPLICATE COURT FEE IS PAID, THE EXTRA PAYMENT MUST BE REFUNDED TO THE ENTITY THAT MADE THE DUPLICATE PAYMENT IN A "LAST IN, FIRST OUT" REFUND APPROACH?
SYNOPSIS
Beginning with a pilot project in Orange County, California courts may now mandate that parties electronically file and serve legal documents in various court proceedings, including civil actions. Twelve trial courts now require electronic filing for some case types. Statutory and regulatory requirements direct how electronic filing and service must operate, and specifically limit fees that may be charged and exempt certain parties, such as unrepresented parties, so as not to cause a hardship or limit access to justice. Requiring parties to electronically file and serve documents significantly improves a court’s capacity to process filings and may provide added convenience to the parties and their attorneys. However, electronic filing has created some complications that still need to be resolved, including what to do if duplicate fees are paid. This bill seeks to create a uniform, statewide solution to this problem by requiring that if a duplicate payment is made to a court by credit card or other electronic means the court must issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. This “last in, first out” refund approach is already used by many courts to address duplicate payment issues, and is used for duplicate property tax payments.
This non-controversial bill is sponsored by a coalition of companies in the litigation support services industry, whose services include court filing and process serving. There is no reported opposition.
SUMMARY: Requires that if a duplicate payment is made to a court through electronic means, the duplicate payment must be refunded in a specified manner. Specifically, this bill requires that if a duplicate payment is made to a court by a party or an electronic service provider by credit card or other electronic means for, among other things, court filing fees, the court must issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment.
EXISTING LAW:
- Authorizes courts to allow parties to electronically file court documents in accordance to rules established by the Judicial Council, and as provided by state law. (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1010.6(b). Unless stated otherwise, all further statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.)
- Authorizes courts to require parties to electronically file and serve documents in a civil action in accordance to rules established by the Judicial Council, and as provided by state law, including:
- The court and the parties must have access to more than one electronic filing service provider capable of electronically filing documents with the court or to electronic filing access directly through the court;
- The court may charge fees of no more than the actual cost of the electronic filing and service of the documents, any fees charged by an electronic filing service provider must be reasonable, and the court, an electronic filing manager (EFM), or an electronic filing service provider (EFSP) must waive any fees charged if the court deems a waiver appropriate, including in instances where a party has received a fee waiver;
- The court must have a procedure for the filing of non-electronic documents in order to prevent the program from causing undue hardship or significant prejudice to any party in an action, including, but not limited to, unrepresented parties; and
- Unrepresented parties are exempt from mandatory electronic filing and service. (Section 1010.6(d).)
- Authorizes courts to require parties to electronically file documents in a class action, a consolidated action, or a group of actions, a coordinated action, or an action that is deemed complex under Judicial Council rules, provided that the trial court’s order does not cause undue hardship or significance prejudice to any party to the action. (Section 1010.6(c).)
- Requires Judicial Council to adopt rules relating to the voluntary or mandatory electronic filing and service of documents in trial courts which must include statewide policies on vendor contracts, privacy, access to public records, unrepresented parties, parties with fee waivers, hardships, reasonable exceptions to electronic filing, and the integrity of electronic service. (Section 1010.6(e), (f).)
- Sets forth the rules adopted by the Judicial Council regarding electronic filing and serving of court documents. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rules 2.250-2.261.)
- Allows a court, city, county or other public agency to authorize the acceptance of credit card, debit card or electronic funds transfer for payment of, among other things, court-ordered fees, fines, penalties, assessments, restitution, filing fees, non-felony bail deposits, towage or storage costs for a vehicle, or child or spousal support. Requires a court or an entity contracted with a court to provide a system for acceptance of electronically transmitted documents to provide a menu of payment options that may include credit or debit cards, electronic funds transfers, electronic networks for financial transactions, and payment methods that do not charge a transaction cost. (Government Code Section 6159.)
- Requires the county, if a taxpayer or agent submits a payment for a particular property tax that has already been paid to the county, to return the replicated payment, as defined, to the tendering party within 60 days of the date the payment becomes final, as defined. (Revenue & Taxation Code Section 2780 et seq.)
FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS: California’s court system is one of the largest in the world, with over 6.2 million cases filed statewide in the superior courts during the 2016 fiscal year, representing a 40 percent caseload drop since fiscal year 2009. (Judicial Council of California, 2017 Courts Statistics Report: Statewide Caseload Trends p. 94, 2017.) Given the high volume of filings in California’s courts each year, a party’s ability (or requirement) to file and serve documents electronically significantly improves the court’s capacity to process filings and may provide added convenience to the parties and their attorneys. However, electronic filing has created some complications that still need to be resolved, including what to do if duplicate fees are received by a court. This bill seeks to create a uniform, statewide solution to this minor, but not insignificant problem.
In support of the bill, the author writes:
Existing law does not provide courts with guidance on handling duplicate payments, which has resulted in inconsistent approaches from county to county. The lack of uniformity and guidance had led to circumstances where courts may refund duplicate payments, but leave it to filers and EFSPs to determine who had received the refund and how to ensure that funds end up with the correct party. While the refund may not amount to a significant percentage of the overall amount of funds going back and forth between filers, EFSPs, and courts, it can create logistical challenges that uniformity would resolve.
Accordingly, AB 1531 proposes a “last in, first out” approach to duplicate filing refunds. This approach is consistent with the approach taken by counties, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code section 2781, for duplicate property tax payments. It is also the approach that is currently most often used by courts to address duplicate payments for electronic filings. . . .
Although expanding e-filing makes sense for a host of reasons, it also has the potential to accentuate an ambiguity that exists with a small number of case filings. This bill would ensure that there is uniformity in the handling of duplicate payments in all superior courts.
Background on Electronic Filing. Many state courts throughout the country have electronic filing capabilities. Some of these courts allow electronic filing, while others mandate it. Likewise, federal rules allow federal courts to accept documents via electronic filing, if they so choose and allow federal courts to require electronic filing “only if reasonable exceptions are allowed.” (Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., rule 5(d), 28 U.S.C.) Generally, under the federal approach, only attorneys are mandated to participate in electronic filing.
California initially authorized electronic filing in 1999 under SB 367 (Dunn, Chap. 514, Stats. 1999). In 2012, the Legislature authorized a pilot program to allow the Orange County Superior Court to require parties to file their legal documents electronically under AB 2073 (Silva), Chap. 320, Stats. 2012. Among other things, the AB 2073 pilot required the following: (1) the court to have the ability to maintain the official court record in electronic format for all cases where electronic filing is required; (2) the court and the parties to have access either to more than one EFSP capable of electronically filing documents, or to electronically file directly through the court; and (3) the court to have a procedure for the filing of non-electronic documents in order to prevent undue hardship or significant prejudice to any party in an action.
Assuming that other trial courts would eventually want mandatory electronic filing, AB 2073 required the Judicial Council to adopt rules for trial courts. Those rules required a consideration of statewide policies on vendor contracts, privacy, access to public records, unrepresented parties, parties with fee waivers, hardships, reasonable exceptions to electronic filing, and the integrity of electronic service. Trial courts that choose mandatory electronic filing must also follow various statutory requirements. In 2016, the Legislature specified certain rules for electronic filing including prohibiting electronic filing vendors from charging a payment method convenience fee that exceeds the cost incurred to provide the processing, requiring acceptance of a variety of payment options, and allowing recovery of electronic filing fees to a prevailing party as costs in AB 2244 (Gatto), Chap. 461, Stats. 2016. Most recently in last year’s AB 976 (Berman), Chap. 319, the Legislature replaced the Orange County pilot program language with an option for all trial courts to require mandatory filing and service in civil cases, subject to the various rules and requirements to ensure that mandatory filing does not cause harm to litigants.
To date, 12 trial courts have adopted some form of mandatory electronic filing system, including courts in Orange, San Diego, San Francisco, and Santa Clara Counties. Nearly all of these courts require mandatory electronic filing in civil cases.
Although mandatory electronic filing is an attractive option for trial courts because of the significant efficiencies it creates, electronic filing has not been perfect. Indeed, as more and more courts implement electronic filing systems, new issues are discovered, such as competition among vendors; the high cost of electronic filing; and what to do if multiple, overlapping fees are paid. This bill addresses one of those issues.
Basic Rules for Electronic Filing. A court electronic filing system requires both an electronic filing service provider (EFSP) and an electronic filing manager (EFM). Generally, the litigant files the legal document with the EFSP which translates the information and sends it to the EFM, which delivers and communicates that information to the court’s case management system. (Judicial Council, The Critical Role of the State Judiciary in Increasing Access for Self-Represented Litigants: Self-Help Access 360˚, July 2015.) Both the EFSP and the EFM are generally private companies.
Current law provides basic rules for EFSPs. These include requiring that courts and parties have access to more than one EFSP capable of electronically filing documents with the court to prevent a monopoly by one vendor. Fees charged by EFSPs must also be reasonable, and courts, EFMs, and EFSPs must waive any fees charged if the court deems a waiver appropriate, including in instances where a party has received a fee waiver. These provisions, all insisted upon by this Committee, help ensure that electronically filing does not unfairly advantage one company or, more importantly, disadvantage any party, particularly those with minimal means or no representation, thus helping promote access to justice for all litigants in California.
This Bill Creates a Uniform Rule to Address One Small Problem That Could Result From Electronic Filing. One problem that has arisen or increased with the advent of electronic filing is the duplicate payment of filing fees. For example, multiple parties to an action may mistakenly pay a single filing fee or a law firm and an EFSP may both pay a filing fee near a filing deadline to avoid missing the critical deadline. In any event, the extra payment must be refunded, but today there is no uniform, statewide standard for refunding the extra payment, and the lack of a standard has, according to the author, created logistical challenges for the parties and for EFSPs.
This bill proposes to create that uniform statewide standard by requiring that if a duplicate payment is made to a court by credit card or other electronic means, the court must issue any appropriate refund to the entity that made the most recent payment. This “last in, first out” refund approach is already used by many courts to address duplicate payment issues. It is also used for duplicate property tax payments, which may occur when, for example, a homeowner and the mortgage company both pay the property tax. (Revenue & Taxation Code Section 2781.) While not all courts today use this method for dealing with duplicate payment issues, no court has raised concerns to this statewide solution.
Proposed Amendments Narrow the Scope of the Bill. As now in print, this bill also allows an electronic filing service provider, acting as agent of the court, to treat as void any record of payment made that the credit card company or debit card does not honor. This is attempting to address the situation where the electronic filing service provider initially pays for the filing with the court, but is unable to collect payment from the litigant. However, the Judicial Council has some concerns with the mechanics of the bill's proposed solution to this problem. Thus, the author has asked to remove this part of the bill while the stakeholders try to reach a workable solution. To accomplish this, the author proposes to amend the bill as follows:
On page 5, line 15, delete "agent of the court,”
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: This bill is sponsored by the Coalition for Improving Court Access, a group of companies in the litigation support services industry, whose services include process serving, court filing, and e-filing. In support, the Coalition writes:
In a small but significant number of cases, law firms and EFSPs both file a given document and submit duplicate payments to the courts. In the fast-paced world of litigation, these duplicate payments can happen for any number of reasons. AB 1531 merely clarifies that when duplicate payments are made to courts and then refunded, refunds should be made to the last party tendering the funds. This “last-in, first-out” refund policy is precisely consistent with existing California law relating to duplicate property tax payments.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Coalition for Improving Court Access (sponsor)
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
Date of Hearing: April 19, 2017
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES AND ENERGY
Chris Holden, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1531 (
Author:Berman) – As Amended Ver:March 28, 2017
SUBJECT: Public agency renewable energy self-generation program
SUMMARY: Removes the resource capacity cap, location requirement, and program cap on the Renewable Energy Self-Generation Bill Credit Transfer (RES-BCT) program. Specifically, this bill:
- Eliminates reference to eligible local governments and instead establishes eligibility for public agencies generally and expands the definition to specifically include the Department of Water Resources, and any agency or department of the state.
- Eliminates the five megawatt (MW) cap on eligible renewable generating facilities.
- Eliminates the requirement that the renewable generating facility be located within the geographical boundary of the local government or campus and permits projects to be located anywhere within the territory of the electrical corporation (IOU) of the customer.
- Expands the program to permit a public agency customer to receive full retail net metering at one site (benefitting account) and credit surplus electricity to another customer public agency benefitting account in the same territory.
- Eliminates the 250 MW program cap.
EXISTING LAW:
- Establishes the RES-BCT program, which provides that a city, county, city and county, special district, school district, political subdivision, or other local public agency may elect to designate another account or accounts controlled by the governmental entity to receive bill credits for electricity generated by a renewable generating facility located within the boundaries of the governmental entity. (Public Utilities Code § 2830)
- Defines an eligible "benefitting account" under the RES-BCT program to mean an electricity account, or more than one account, located within the geographical boundaries of a local government or, for a campus, within the geographical boundary of the city, county, or city and county in which the campus is located, that is mutually agreed upon by the local government or campus and an electrical corporation. (Public Utilities Code § 2830)
- Requires benefitting accounts under the RES-BCT program to receive service under a time-of-use rate schedule and calculates the BCT amount based on when the electricity was exported to the grid. (Public Utilities Code § 2830)
- Requires the three IOUs to offer contracts to local governments under the RES-BCT program until the combined statewide cumulative generating capacity of all eligible renewable facilities within their service territories reaches 250 MW. (Public Utilities Code § 2830)
- Requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to ensure the transfer of a bill credit to a benefiting account does not result in a shifting of costs onto bundled service subscribers. (Public Utilities Code § 2830)
- Suspends the ability of retail end-use, IOU customers to receive electrical service from an entity other than an IOU unless authorized by the Legislature. This arrangement commonly is referred to as direct access (DA). (Public Utilities Code § 365.1(a))
- Allows limited enrollment into DA for new nonresidential customers based on historical enrollment volumes. (Public Utilities Code § 365.1(b))
FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed fiscal and will be referred to the Appropriations Committee for its review of the fiscal effect of this bill. It is important to note however that the Appropriations Committee limits its analysis to the impact on overall state agency impacts and cannot assess the impacts of policy on the costs of electricity or gas service to ratepayers.
BACKGROUND:
RES-BCT. In 2008, the Legislature approved AB 2466 (Laird), Chapter 540, Statutes of 2008, which allowed a local governmental entity to operate a small renewable electricity generating facility in one location and have the utility credit the output of that facility against electricity the local government consumes at another location. This program is now known as the RES-BCT program or the Laird program.
The basic concept of the program was to allow governmental entities that had many different electricity meters (and thus many accounts with a utility) to produce renewable power at a location where they had very little demand and then use the electricity to benefit another building where demand is high but may not be a suitable location to build renewable generation. For example, a city could locate solar panels over the parking lot at a public park, but use the electricity to benefit city hall.
Under the RES-BCT program, local governments such as cities and counties, school districts, special districts, political subdivisions, and public agencies may participate as well as individual college campuses. In addition, the program requires that the transfer of a bill credit to a benefiting account does not result in a shifting of costs to bundled service subscribers.
The program is not as lucrative to customers as full retail net energy metering because it only credits accounts at the generation rate. The program has had very low subscription rates since its creation. The necessity of this tariff was largely usurped in 2011 by virtual net metering and aggregated net metering which allow customers to receive full retail credit for generation created behind one meter against demand consumption at neighboring buildings with separate meters.
Direct Access or Retail Choice. The ability of customers to contract directly for electricity supplies is also referred to as "direct access" or retail choice and was a key element of the state’s 1996 legislation to deregulate energy markets. Direct access was suspended by the Legislature in 2001 due to the energy crisis. Existing customers were permitted to remain in the program. In 2010 direct access enrollment was permitted to double. Approximately 13 percent of the utilities’ load is now under direct access with a long list of customers on the waiting list. As a result of subsequent legislation allowing limited DA enrollment, the amount of DA generation has returned to nearly the same level as before the electricity crisis.
After the suspension of direct access, the Legislature authorized the creation of a different form of retail choice – community choice aggregation. CCAs are governmental entities formed by cities and counties to procure electricity for their residents, businesses, and municipal facilities. While the CCA is responsible for procurement, the IOU still provides other services such as transmission, distribution, metering, billing, collection, and customer service as it does for direct access.
COMMENTS:
- Author’s Statement. An increasing number of public entities seek to participate in the RES-BCT Program to help meet their climate and environmental goals as well as to reduce energy costs to their customers. Yet despite recommendations from the California Public Utilities Commission to expand eligibility to all customers, many public entities are or will be prevented from participating in the RES-BCT Program due to current restrictions. In keeping with the state’s broader climate, environmental, and clean energy goals, AB 1531 would remove some of these limitations by allowing additional public entities to participate, expanding locational opportunities for site-constrained RES-BCT customers, and eliminating the generation caps which serve as disincentives and barriers to RES-BCT participation. As a national leader in renewables policy, the state ought to be encouraging the maximum deployment of renewable energy by local and state government entities, not restricting it.
Moreover, the RES-BCT Program currently provides local governments and individual public college campuses with electricity bill savings that extend limited budgets for other important funding needs. In particular, Santa Clara County projects to save $40 million over the next 20 years as a result of their RES-BCT investments. AB 1531 would enable additional public entities to take advantage of these benefits without shifting costs to non-participating ratepayers.
- Original Program Purpose. The original purpose of this program was to facilitate the siting of customer renewables for government agencies where the physical site was constrained and the agency could not accommodate rooftop solar behind-the-meter. The example used was the parking lot across the street to serve the load at the courthouse. The program has always had limited interest. Over the years it has been amended several times to expand the definition of the eligible government agencies as this bill does as well. Interest was likely limited in prior years because the customers were credited for only the generation of the facility and did not receive credit for transmission and distribution costs as they do in the traditional full retail NEM tariff.
When electricity goes beyond a customer’s meter, it not only gets complicated but costs are created to the utility – a.k.a. ratepayer. Cost shifts were anticipated by this program but by keeping the generation close to the load served, with small generating facilities, and a program cap, an accommodation was deemed appropriate for local governments to take advantage of local renewables.
- Work-Around on Direct Access. Perhaps unintentionally, but by eliminating the program cap, location restriction, and facility size cap, the author has created a form of open-ended state and local government direct access which would allow a developer to site and build a facility of any size, any place in an IOU territory and sell electricity directly to state and local government customers. Direct Access has been capped since the electricity crisis. The Legislature considered expanding direct access in 2015 but that legislation was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
- CPUC to Consider Retail Choice. The CPUC reports that by the end of 2017, 30-40 percent of IOU customers will be receiving some type of electricity service from an alternative source and/or provider, such as CCAs, rooftop solar, or direct access providers. Projections suggest that this number will grow to well past 80 percent by the middle of the next decade. The CPUC will hold a joint agency En Banc in May to identify and begin to develop an understanding of the challenges and opportunities that the CPUC and the California Energy Commission must examine as a result of these fast approaching changes in order to ensure that affordable, reliable and low-carbon electricity will be available to all California consumers. Part of this overview will look at the role of the IOUs in a future in which customer-oriented technologies disrupt the traditional top-down electricity service model.
- Expanded Eligibility. Until the CPUC, CEC and Legislature address the issues associated with expansion of direct access this bill is premature. The committee may wish to consider amending this bill to limit the program changes to expansion of eligible governmental agencies and allow for an increase in the size of the generating facility from five MWs to ten MWs. Because the overall program cap remains, developers would see a slight increase in economies of scale but the overall program capacity and related ratepayers impacts would remain limited.
- Double Referral. Should this bill be adopted, it should be re-referred to the Assembly Local Government Committee for its consideration. Any amendments should not be taken in this committee due to scheduling constraints before the policy committee deadline and the Local Government Committee will be asked to amend the bill.
- Related Legislation. AB 1573 (Berman) Eliminates the 20 MW project cap on the Green Tariff Shared Renewables Program and authorizes the CPUC to eliminate the program cap of 600 MWs. Set for hearing in the Assembly Utilities & Energy Committee, April 19, 2017.
- Prior Legislation.
AB 1773 (Obernolte) Expanded the definition of local government to allow joint powers authority (JPA) to participate in the RES-BCT program. Chapter 659, Statutes of 2016.
AB 512 (Gordon) Increased the maximum size for renewable energy generating systems eligible under the RES-BCT program from one MW to five MW. Chapter 478, Statutes of 2011.
AB 2693 (Blumenfield) Expanded the RES-BCT program to allow the participation of JPAs. Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee, hearing cancelled, 2011.
AB 1031 (Blumenfield) Expanded the RES-BCT program to allow individual public college and university campuses to participate. Chapter 380, Statutes of 2009.
AB 2466 (Laird) Created the RES-BCT program, which allowed a local governmental entity to operate a small renewable electricity generating facility in one location and have the utility credit the output of that facility against electricity the local government consumes at another location. Chapter 540, Statutes of 2008.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
SunPower Corporation (Sponsor)
Advanced Energy Economy
California Association of Sanitation Agencies
California Solar Energy Industries Association
California State Association of Counties
Opterra Energy Services
Solar Energy Industries Association
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by: Kellie Smith / U. & E. /
Discussed in Hearing
View Older Hearings
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):