I'm somewhat shocked to announce that the Board of Governors of the State Bar of California have appointed me to their Law Practice Management and Technology Section Executive Committee for a three-year term, commencing September 2009.
Mom is very proud…
I admit…it was really hard not to title this post with a quip from the Terminator, but it's like shooting fish in a barrel, don't you think?
As expected, all five propositions that would have critically affected the California budget, failed. So, we enter the next fiscal year, beginning July 1st, in big trouble.
At this point, I'm hoping the result doesn't affect AB 5 (it seems we have bipartisan buy-in on it), but I can also wish for pie in the sky; a veto-proof vote.
P.S. I'm sure some of you are wondering, and the answer is, yes, I voted in the election – by absentee ballot. I take my civic duty very seriously. And no, I'm not going to tell you how I voted.
It's no small feat. Californians have been asked to go to the polls twelve times in the past seven years!
Perhaps this is why less than 20% of eligible voters exercised their right to do so…
We're inching closer to a resolution on California AB 5. The Senate has set a hearing date for June 9.
Talk about a collision course! Our special election is underway today and polls still indicate that the five propositions relevant to the budget are failing badly. I'll be posting later tonight or early tomorrow about that.
But since the Governor has championed all of these ballot measures, methinks he's not going to be in a very good mood…
I've seen the Governor's movies. When he gets angry, something always gets broken. Let's hope this time we don't have to play Humpty Dumpty and put AB 5 back together again.
California has serious budget problems. May 19th, five propositions, 1A through 1E, are on the ballot of a special election that will directly affect the future of the state (there's a sixth, 1F, but it isn't important for our purposes right now).
If they fail – and all indications are that they will – the state budget shortfall will reach $21.3 billion. The legislature's Chief Budget Analyst says the state could be broke by July.
See why I'm worried? This is exactly the same scenario that allowed Governor Schwarzenegger to veto AB 5 (in its previous rendition) the last time!
Will we see a repeat? Governor, my advice; please don't play politics with a much-needed set of regulations.
I must confess – I'm not a morning person. This causes numerous problems for me because, as my friends will tell you, I'm not an afternoon nor evening person, either. Basically, I have two stages in any given 24-hour period; coffee and the rest of the day.
So, it is with great pain that once again, I crawl out of bed after receiving another – as my uncle used to quip – 'crap-of-dawn' notice from the California legislature regarding AB 5 so I can bring you the news as soon as possible. Is that dedication, or what?
On April 30th, the Bill was referred to the committee on the judiciary.
Now, where's the !@#$%^ Splenda?!?!?!?
Well, this is embarrassing…
I received an automated update that there had been action on California AB 5, but after trying all day, I can’t confirm that anything has happened.
So, herein lies the dilemma. Do I post this even though I don’t seem to have news or do I refrain and risk looking like a fool if, in fact, something has occurred?
I voted for posting. All I can tell you is that I received notice at 5:32am today that action had occurred yesterday. Either I’ll let you know – or maybe you’ll let me know…
…and eventually, I’ll write an in-depth analysis of California AB 5 and contrast it with the Federal Rules. But, take a look at this fine analysis from Law.com regarding how California will deal with Zubulake ‘accessible vs. inaccessible’ ESI and how it contrasts with the Federal rules.
Finished reading? Great. Now let me tell you why nothing in the analysis rattles me. You should have been treating your ESI as accessible all along. Here’s why:
The law is all about exceptions. Everyone knows the general rule, but ultimately the facts dictate whether an exception is in order. At Sony Pictures in 1997, we successfully fought off a request for ESI in a California court because we made the case that it was accessible, but at punitive cost because we’d long since retired that particular backup system and complying would have required a $250,000 outlay (there was no product like Index Engines around in 1997).
I had a very smart professor in law school. His advice was to always assume the worst-case scenario, then work backwards. It’s actually a very logical approach. Yes, the flood may be that bad, yes, the stock market may fall that much and yes, your adversary may make a persuasive argument to the judge.
Be an actuary. They look at everything as ‘cost vs. risk’. Which will likely cost more, paying to protect or paying after the fact? A young PC user asked me the other day, “Why do I need a firewall? What are the chances that I will be the one that will be hacked?” My answer was, “If you want to gamble, that’s your call, but here’s a short list of things that could happen if you’re the unlucky one.”
Gamble if you like; but be prepared to face the consequences.
It’s Friday the 13th today. It’s Friday the 13th, today. Whoa…a little deja vu there…I swear I just said that a month ago…
As per legislative procedure, AB 5 was “approved” by the Assembly and is now in the “other house” (the Senate).
Have a great weekend. And please, don’t drink and ‘drive‘.
AB 5 has been placed on the Consent Calendar – 2nd Day. The explanation, from my March 6th, 2009 post:
After their second reading, these uncontested bills are placed on the “Consent Calendar–First Legislative Day” for one day, and are then placed upon the “Consent Calendar–Second Legislative Day,” at which point they become eligible for passage. Bills listed on the second-day consent calendar are voted on without debate with one roll-call vote.
We’re getting closer, folks…and they’d better hurry, because I’m running out of “good luck” images…
I’m coming clean. I’m a political junkie. I love all things politics. A favorite blog of mine is FiveThirtyEight.com. If you’re a lawyer, there’s a high probability that you have a background in Political Science (although I confess, I don’t, except by hobby). I thought it might be interesting to post the in-depth explanation of California Legislative Procedure (warning: the link opens a 36-page PDF file) as AB 5 continues to make its way through the process (there was a little more action – you’ll find the explanation on page 8 of the document under ‘Consent Calendar’). Also, I’ve added it as a link to the top right of the button bar and I’ll probably keep it there until this ‘horse race’ concludes.
A little light reading for your Friday…