Each year is a little different for CEA and the escrow issues we follow, but 2007 has certainly been a busy year. Not for many, many years has CEA been involved with as many bills covering such a wide variety of issues. The following brief synopses of bills conveys the depth and breadth of the legislative activity for the year.

• AB 18 (Blakeslee): Signature Stamps. Proposed allowing those unable to make traditional marks on documents, including real estate documents, to instead use a signature stamp. Members expressed concerns about the potential for increased fraud. The bill was amended to instead focus on voting documents, rather than the wide variety of legal documents previously covered by the bill.

• AB 239 (DeSaulnier): Proposed a recording surcharge on “real estate documents” in order to fund affordable housing programs in Contra Costa and San Mateo counties. CEA and others argues that the social imperative of housing makes it inappropriate to focus only on those recording real estate documents, and that it is not even clear what a “real estate document” is. Although the bill passed the Assembly, the policy committee hearing in the Senate was cancelled, and it does not appear that the bill will be enacted this year.

• AB 250 (DeVore): Would create a revocable “transfer on death deed” to operate in lieu of probate transfers and transfers operative through joint tenancy and similar vestings. Although the idea was intended to create a simplified system for transferring property on death, in fact the bill was extremely complex and would have raised as many questions as it answered. The policy committee hearing in the Senate was postponed, and the bill will not be enacted this year.

• AB 339 (Cook): This bill was designed to address ambiguities raised in the appellate case of Castillo v. Express Escrow. The case dealt with escrow’s responsibility upon a dispute between dealers and buyers in manufactured housing transactions. CEA participated in negotiations which seem to have resulted in language acceptable to all parties, which will give escrow the certainty we need when disputes arise. We are hopeful that this bill will be enacted this year.

• AB 434 (Silva): This bill would create for the first time a time limit for notaries to respond to requests for copies of entries in notary journals. The first version of the bill proposed a time frame which could have been difficult for notaries; CEA participated in negotiations leading to language imposing a 15 business day time limit to comply with requests, unless exigent circumstances makes compliance not possible in that time frame. As amended, the bill may be enacted this year.

• AB 703 (Ruskin): Designed to combat identity theft, AB 703 would have required that all documents containing social security numbers be either encrypted or stored in locked files. We suggested that the bill could be burdensome for businesses where a great number of documents contain social security numbers. The bill was not heard in the Assembly, and will not be enacted this year.

• AB 864 (Davis): Dealing with housing identified by local agencies as substandard, this bill proposes a lengthy series of new requirements on persons acquiring ownership of these properties. Earlier escrow language was changed substantially, but the bill still requires those acquiring ownership to notify local government and provide information “concurrently” with the close of escrow. The fate of this bill is uncertain.

• AB 886 (Runner): AB 886 proposes a lengthy series of changes to a variety of laws relating to notary, including new requirements in obtaining a notary commission, new rights for law enforcement to inspect and seize notary journals, and broadened thumbprint requirements. CEA negotiated a series of changes to the bill to require inspections and seizures of notary journals to be based upon reasonable suspicion and probable cause of criminal activity, respectively. Also, the list of new documents requiring a thumbprint was narrowed significantly.

• AB 1168 (Jones): This bill proposes new charges on recorded documents, to fund a program for recorders to redact social security numbers from documents recorded since 1962. The bill also would prohibit recording documents containing more than four digits of social security numbers. Both CLTA and Realtors have been heavily involved in negotiating this bill, whose outcome is uncertain.• AB 1188 (Coto): CEA worked closely with the author of AB 1188, which would have required escrow to list a disbursement date on closing statements. While we suggested language which would enable escrow to comply with this new obligation, the sponsors ultimately decided to make AB 1188 a “two-year bill,” meaning that it will not be enacted this year.

• SB 127 (Kuehl): This bill would require earlier delivery of transfer disclosure statements and other documents in real estate transactions, and put new timeframes on delivery of homeowner’s association documents. CEA was heavily involved in negotiating timeframes that would not hinder escrow in attempting to help sellers in this obligation. Future issues of CEA News will outline the new timeframes should SB 127 be enacted and signed.

• SB 133 (Aanestad): This bill is sponsored by CLTA, and would require “title solicitors” to register with the Department of Insurance. CEA is working with CLTA on the language, which would exempt persons whose primary duties involve the processing of escrows.