California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB212

Introduced
1/15/19  
Introduced
1/15/19  
Refer
2/4/19  
Report Pass
3/18/19  
Report Pass
3/18/19  
Refer
3/19/19  
Refer
3/19/19  
Report Pass
3/28/19  
Report Pass
3/28/19  
Engrossed
4/8/19  
Engrossed
4/8/19  
Refer
4/8/19  
Refer
4/8/19  
Refer
4/24/19  
Refer
4/24/19  
Report Pass
6/5/19  
Report Pass
6/5/19  
Enrolled
6/20/19  
Enrolled
6/20/19  
Chaptered
7/1/19  
Chaptered
7/1/19  

Caption

Counties: recording fees.

Impact

The proposed changes focus on the costs and operational efficiencies associated with maintaining county records. By authorizing the additional fee, the bill aims to ensure that counties have the necessary resources for proper archival management and to maintain compliance with evolving technological standards. This could lead to improved accessibility and integrity of public records, essential for transparency and governance.

Summary

Assembly Bill 212, authored by Assemblymember Bonta, primarily addresses the recording fees for county recorders in California. The bill amends existing statutes to allow county recorders to assess an additional fee of one dollar for each document filed. This fee is designated to support various initiatives, including the conversion of document storage systems to micrographics, the preservation and restoration of archival materials, and the implementation of a reliable system for the permanent preservation of recorded document images. This amendment is intended to enhance the efficiency and security of public record-keeping at the county level.

Sentiment

The commentary surrounding AB 212 suggests a supportive sentiment among stakeholders emphasizing the importance of preserving historical documents and adapting to modern technology. Proponents view the bill as a necessary step towards ensuring that county recorders can effectively manage public records. However, as with many legislative measures involving fees, there may be concerns about the potential financial burden on individuals and businesses filing documents with county recorders.

Contention

While the bill received a majority vote in favor, discussions may have highlighted concerns regarding the impact of additional fees on citizens. Some critics might argue that further costs associated with public record filing could deter individuals from filing essential documents. Moreover, there could be debates on how effectively these additional funds will be utilized and whether they will indeed enhance public record systems as intended.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB2225

State government: storing and recording: public records.

CA AB22

Secretary of State: storing and recording electronic media.

CA SB838

Corporate records: articles of incorporation: blockchain technology.

IA HF1031

A bill for an act relating to county recorder fees and land record information systems management. (Formerly HF 328.)

IN HB1256

Archives and record administration.

CA AB1443

Court records.

LA SB149

Provides relative to the powers, duties, and functions of the Louisiana State Archives. (8/1/24)