CSDA LEGAL PRACTICES COMMITTEE MEETING
Thursday, January 23, 2014
10:00 am – 5:00 pm
Friday, January 24, 2014
9:00 am – 1:00 pm
Administrative Office of the Court
Sequoia Room
455 Golden Gate Avenue, 3d Floor
San Francisco
MINUTES[1]
MEMBERS -- LCSA / X / X / Adele Hendrickson / X / X / Julie Paik- / - / Ashley Mendoza / X / X / Lisa Saporito
X / X / Bill Malloy / Lori Cruz
X / Ed McCue / X / X / Melinda Self
Janet Nottley / X / X / Rebecca Durney
X / X / John Berglund / T / T / Robert Lafer
X / X / John Cardoza / X / X / Terry Symens-Bucher
X / X / John Vartanian / X / X / Tex Ritter
X / X / Jose Santana / X / X / Trinidad Madrigal
MEMBERS – IV-D Partners / - / X / Kathy Hrepich, DCSS / T / T / Jonathan Burris, DCSS
- / - / Vickie Contreras, DCSS / - / T / Kristen Donadee, DCSS
X / X / Michael Wright, AOC / T / T / Anna Maves, AOC
- / - / David Oppenheim, CSDA
I.Welcome and housekeeping
NOTE: THURSDAY at 11:00 am we will break from the teleconference portion of the meeting to listen/watch a Webinar on FCC Commission Rules for Calling or Texting Cell Phones. This is only available to those personally in attendance. The Webinar is 90 minutes in length. We will then break for lunch at 12:30 and return to the teleconference meeting at 1:30 pm.
II.Approval of minutes from previous meeting: November 21 & 22, 2013- Motion made, seconded and carries (Terry, Julie) to approve and post to the CSDA website.
III.REPORTS
- AOC-Michael Wright
1.ACA focus group met on 01/16/2014 with 4 commissioners (Sonoma, Tulare, Santa Cruz and San Diego) and 4 Family Law Facilitators (OC, Santa Barbara, LA, San Diego), Anna and Michael. They set some direction for the group and their goals. The first meeting was an orientation meeting and they are using the CSDA ACA report as the jump off document. They will meet monthly. Next meeting focus is to determine what local resources exist, what outreach in there is in the community. What federal and state resources exist to share with all the Courts. The Family Law Facilitators indicated less than 5% of their customers were fully aware of the ACA, so sense is the number will increase. The Family Law Facilitators consider themselves a good point of contact for consumers.
a)Family Code 3751- if an NCP is Medi-cal himself, how will he provide HI for children? The presumption is any HI is already unreasonable. Rebecca raises the issue of tribal health. If tribal care provides the minimal standards required by the ACA, is that acceptable minimal levels and does the CP have to accept that? The code doesn’t require the platinum care, just the minimal standards of care. Adequate under the ACA is not the same as adequate under a medical support order… these are questions we will throw to the court to resolve case by case.
b)FL 342- private forms- now law is changed that HI only needs to be affordable, not thru an employer any more. Does the LCSA have a requirement to modify a case to have medical orders that match the new medical support order language? The employer requirement is out of the statute now. There needs to be a forms change.
c)Dependency exemptions- another area the group wants to research. It should be a case by case determination but hopefully they will identify a subset of case types that will provide guidance. If both parents qualify for the subsidy, both parents may fight for the exemption. Julie asks if there is any discussion of how to plead the exemptions in the S&C?
2.Budget- the governors proposed budget was released. Items of concern:
a)No change to elimination of 1% of court reserves by July 1, 2014. That's in the area of $50 million statewide. This raises a lot of concerns;
b)The midyear allocation budget process has started so they can move money from Courts with extra money and send to Courts who need extra money. Also asking local Courts if they will do the federal drawdown. Since there are no reserves, that’s the money they previously used for the drawdown. Those reserves no longer exist.
c)Overall budget- "Reinvestment" in the judicial branch. This year $100 million reinvestment. Still has a $367 mil deficit overall. Some monies that were swept over have not been restored, but no new sweeps. 3 year blueprint created for a functioning judicial branch, but it's not ready for release. Just draft form.
d)Gaps in funding: pension and retirement funds are big ticket items but not funded. Expectation is service cuts in the local courts.
3.No stakeholder issues per Anna. They met in December but no issues.
a)Service of Supp S&C- this was left over from November meeting but it wasn’t brought up at the stakeholders meeting yet. Michael asked it be placed on the next stakeholders meeting agenda with detail.
4.No 3-parent issues based on the new law yet. AOC is tracking these cases.
- State DCSS – Kathy Hrepich et al.9:00 am Friday
1.CCB – Change board- Kathy says that Janet Nottley and Matt Brega are added to the board. They have a training on Monday.
2.NRPS generation: Kristen- NRPS automation at case closure. It's progressing now. Question came up- populate only 2b "LCSA no longer providing child support enforcement services?" They want to use that box. Also, check 7b that parties are required to update child support questionnaire with updated addresses. But they don’t do that and it's already a requirement. Do we want to provide least amount of info?
a)Is that sufficient? Do we need to fill out any other boxes? Like box 1 to list the NCP address? Some counties are changing that now to just say the address is "on file at DCSS" but that may prevent future action by the parties if the address is omitted- like lien releases or direct withholdings by the CP.
b)Obligor's name- the name pulls from CSE but it may differ from the caption. The primary name in CSE vs caption name. OC court has issues with names not matching. CSE has a name list for each participant, but those don’t translate to AKAs on the court forms. If names don’t match exactly, the liens will be overlooked.
c)Can counties opt in or opt out and choose either batch generation or manual generation. Kristen will see if it can be turned off if counties don’t want the NRPS batch generated.
Terry asks- doesn’t the court have to weigh in as well? Counties have divergent practices.
3.2/11/14- County awards meeting and business meeting of membership.
4.Mandated reporter- CSPO training- anticipates 4 months for release of updated information.
5.Guideline calculator issues with S&C- append all 3 calc pages to S&C: The add proceeded quickly and is done. Change is done all at once so it will print all 3 pages of guideline printout. 4.11.1 release scheduled for 2/23/14. This is extremely helpful for e-file counties.
6.Judgment of non-paternity- no update.
7.Contempt Workgroup – Kristen should have the draft done by next Friday. Will have meeting to set up training dates.
8.Operational survey updates: Jonathan has visited the last of pilot counties. Now he will work on the data and generate a report. Before a report is released State will circle back to the pilot counties to be sure the format and information is acceptable to those counties. Intent is to not embarrass any counties. Kathy gives thanks to counties for so much cooperation. Hope to get the assessment done of the LCSA's and then move forward with the next phase. The court assessments are not complete; didn’t go so smoothly in coordination. Commissioners are ready but the PJ's are "reluctant." Michael counters there has to be more coordination and planned visits. Advance planning is requested, can't just pop in and expect everyone to be available to sit and talk. But yes, the commissioners were aware and visits are still planned for So Cal counties.
Orange, Ventura and Butte Courts have been visited. Kathy planned to have only LCSA's done in time for budget hearings; not really the Court phase yet. There will be a few best practices offered to the legislature. Kathy wants to make the initial information available to all counties ASAP to use to improve program efficiencies. Those counties with a consistent 5 year increase will be part of the next piece of the assessment. DCSS has an in-house personnel issue with minimal resources in the legal dept.
Adele asks about the FPM data, that DCSS populates that data. It's important for local performance targets, and it hasn’t been populated yet (the 20th already) and it's needed by counties earlier then the end of the month.
9.Order Setting Training- Kathy wants to do training in September. She wants local county participation. This will be the outcome of the practice assessment and survey. The target will be for caseworkers to have some uniformity. DCSS discusses what happens in the counties, and it varies by county. DCSS is reading the law as they read the survey results. There are a lot of diverse practices statewide. Kathy would like Julie's help.. they want some resolution and will invite LCSA attorneysto participate.
a)State Discussion: imputed income; when is it appropriate? There has never been a matrix of when you use it, when you don’t. She wants to "land" on a piece of it, some resolution. It's not that anyone is breaking the "law," but there is a lot of divergence. Julie points out that a lot of this is local based, commissioners have their own ideas and counties mold to their local court practices. Michael opines yes, there is divergence in the courts as well. He would like the Courts to be advised of the direction of the training, and he recognizes it's appropriate to have some training on what the general accepted legal practices should be.
b)Other issues- Jonathan says it's too early to identify other issues. The DCSS attorneys will work thru it first then go thru LPC for help. Kathy knows there may not be consensus. LPC will provide them with the most recent matrix of work we did in 2012 that we stopped when the DCSS survey was revealed. Adele will provide Kathy a copy of that draft matrix.
10.FCC/FTC autodialing- Kathy will assign someone to research this issue immediately. Adele advises LPC will assemble some questions and issues as it applies to the child support program. Kathy asks if she can just make her assigned attorney be part of the LPC workgroup? Yes,contact John Berglund. Kathy also says she needs to involve the IT since that’s directly involved as the "automation." LPC concurs.
11.Budget/ Allocation: John V asks if there is any update to allocation? Budget hearings coming up, along with May Revise. No updates today.
12.Abstract Request from EDD: Rebecca will forward the new requirement to submit something called an "abstract request" in order to receive information email to Kristen to research with EDD. No one had heard of this requirement, so Kristen will review and report back.
13.Legislative Committee meeting: John C asks if they canmake time for a legislativecommittee meeting? Kathy will check with Ann and get back to him. It's probably time.
14.Civil Rights Training- John V asks if the training will go forward? Is it still on? Kristen will confirm and reply to the LPC mail group. Yes, the meeting is set for Weds., 03/12/2014 in Rancho Cordova from 8:30 to 5:00 pm.
- CSDA – Adele Hendrickson for David Oppenheim
1.Staff changes- CSDA has no media specialist but a new recruitment is going out. That just means we don’t have someone to fix the broken website pages on CSDA. There should not be much impact until a new person is hired.
2.Website & Event Manager update- the CSDA board had an ambitious program to develop a new website to make it more responsive to membership needs, and to replace or revamp the events manager. It still moving forward but a bit of a delay due to some IT issues. Goal is a new website by the end of the year.
3.Policy Symposium- on March 18th in Sacramento. Max participation of 200, no charge and free lunch. It's unlikely there will be webinar as cost prohibitive. This will bring together a number of different policy wonks from various agencies that may interact with the child support program. Very highly respected symposium so very limited attendance available.
4.Annual Conference- Legal track is directed at legal issues for case managers not attorneys. So while there will be MCLE offered, the sessions are directed at non attorneys primarily. Attorneys will be trained more fully at the Attorney college later in the year.
5.Mailbox for ACA questions: . Any questions will then be directed to whoever can answer the questions: Policy or LPC, etc. John V. raises issue that "constant contact" has prevented some counties from receiving emails like this, so is someone tracking or fixing that?
6.Highlights from January Directors Meeting
a)Customer payments- Kiosks is a hot topic, wide application of uses that would take cash, credit and debit cards; doesn’t take coins or checks. It is a secure transaction so even if the kiosk is lost or broken into, the payment will still be honored by SDU. State DCSS is working for a moneygram kiosk. CoCo and Marin are working with Touch pay for kiosks. They would also be used for court fines, filing fees, etc. Instead of using clerks to take cash. Some county auditors are not comfortable with the kiosks. They want to see more security.
b)Realignment- Phase 2 is dead. Officially.
c)EPC cards- huge security breaches so the EPC cards were disabled a couple times in recent months. Problem is we don’t have a lot of current addresses because of the success of the cards. They get their money each month so have no need to keep their address current.
d)Fraudulent tax returns- the 6 mo injured spouse rule doesn’t apply to these when it's false SSN or other false information used to file a tax return. Business solutions number we have is for internal LCSA calls, not customer calls. Aggrieved NPC's are being asked to fax their tax info, id info, etc., but the business solutions staff were not told to observe all the basic security protocol, such as confirmation of a secure line, waiting for the personal info, etc., Because it's fraud, it's an open issue forever, no statute of limitations. As a result of our reports at the LPC last meeting, Business Solutions will not contact an LCSA or CSS directly to have the NCP turn over all that information. Business Solutions will contact the NCP directly.
e)Tribal Liasion- no longer George Chance. It's now Vicki Contreras.
f)IRS Penalties re: ACA: info was wrong. Penalty for folks who don’t have ACA coverage will be paid BEFORE child support.
- Chair – Adele Hendrickson
1.Autodialing and Federal rules on calls and texting- First part of Thursday was spent in a very informative webinar on federal rules whether our program can use autodialing or texting to enforce child support or contact our customers. A 113 page handout was emailed earlier. A Sub-Committee on the issues identified today will include lead John B, Tex, Rob L. Get info or questions to John since he will send an email to the attorney who made the webinar presentation.Jonathan wonders if the State has liability for some of the auto dialing. He will report back in the March meeting.
a)Does the protocol apply to the child support program?
(1)Autodialing- we do have the systems that hold/ store numbers in a database that can be used to call. Tex argues there is a difference between FTC and FCC regulations and that FTC doesn’t apply to us. Which definition do we fall under? Rob thinks they both apply and they overlap and it just determines how we would be sued. A lot of counties use autodialing for information, for debt collection and for outreach.
(2)Texting- same analysis- unless the number was received from the person you are calling, you can't use for autodialing.
(3)Manual calling or texting from a database- Person to person is completely excluded and permissible as long as you aren’t trying to sell something.
b)Does our child support paperwork provide any notice that if they give us their number they are providing PEC to use that number to auto call or text them?
c)Does it matter who gave us the number and does it matter (person called vs someone else)
(1)From person we are calling
(2)From the other parent
(3)From another source
(4)From another county
d)Does it matter if there is a cost involved to the party, like a wal mart phone that costs minutes (i.e., not unlimited plan)?
e)Does what we do constitute marketing or just debt collection?
f)Can the parties opt out or opt in? What's required if it does apply to us? If they don’t respond, is that consent? When and how can they revoke the right to use those numbers?
g)Does it apply to just manual random calls? Or the fact we have it in a database, does it then apply to us? Only applies to auto calls.
h)State DCSS has not really looked into the issue per Jonathan. It's recognized as a new issue that needs further research.