Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
File #: 16-240    Version: 1
Type: Legislative Proposal Status: Discussion Agenda
File created: 11/10/2016 In control: Judicial Council
On agenda: 12/16/2016 Final action:
Title: Judicial Council: 2017 Legislative Priorities (Action Required)
Attachments: 1. 20161216-16-240
Judicial Council: 2017 Legislative Priorities (Action Required)

Each year, the Judicial Council authorizes sponsorship of legislation to further key council objectives and establishes priorities for the upcoming legislative year. Last year, the council's legislative priorities focused on investment in the judicial branch and securing critically needed judgeships. The Policy Coordination and Liaison Committee recommends a similar approach for the 2017 legislative year.

PCLC recommends that the Judicial Council consider the following as Judicial Council legislative priorities in 2017:
1. Advocate for continued investment in the judicial branch to include a method for stable and reliable funding for courts to address annual cost increases in baseline operations and plan for the future; and for sufficient additional resources to improve physical access to the courts by keeping courts open, to expand access by increasing the ability of court users to conduct branch business online, and to restore programs and services, including dependency counsel funding, that were reduced over the past few years. This priority also includes seeking the extension of sunset dates on increased fees implemented in the fiscal year (FY) 2012-2013 budget, as follows:
a. $40 increase to first paper filing fees for unlimited civil cases, where the amount in dispute is more than $25,000 (Gov. Code, ? 70602.6)
b. $40 increase to various probate and family law fees
(Gov. Code, ? 70602.6)
c. $20 increase to various motion fees (Gov. Code, ?? 70617, 70657, 70677)
d. $450 increase to the complex case fee (Gov. Code, ? 70616)
e. $40 probate fee enacted in 2013, expiring on January 1, 2019
(Gov. Code, ? 70662)
2. Increase the number of judgeships and judicial officers in superior courts with the greatest need.
a. Seek funding for 12 of the 50 authorized, but unfunded, judgeships to be allocated to the courts with the great...

Click here for full text