X
GO

Legislative Report

ACSS monitors legislative activity that affects members. We maintain a current list of bills and measures that we either sponsor, support, oppose, or are simply keeping a close watch over. Read the legislative activity in its entirety on this page, or download the PDF version:

 Legislative Activity Report (Updated March 1, 2019)



ACSS Legislative Report

3/1/2019

Support

 

AB 824

(Wood D)   Business: preserving access to affordable drugs.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/20/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/20/2019

 

Status: 2/21/2019-From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.

 

Location: 2/20/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: The Cartwright Act makes every trust, subject to specified exemptions, unlawful, against public policy, and void and defines “trust” for purposes of the act as a combination of capital, skill, or acts by 2 or more persons, defined as corporations, firms, partnerships, and associations, for certain designated purposes. Under existing law, these purposes include creating or carrying out restrictions in trade or commerce or preventing competition in manufacturing, marketing, transportation, sale or purchase of merchandise, produce, or any commodity. The Unfair Practices Act makes certain business practices unlawful, including unfair competition. Under existing law, unfair competition is defined to include an unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice, unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising, and any false representations to the public.This bill would provide that an agreement resolving or settling, on a final or interim basis, a patent infringement claim, in connection with the sale of a pharmaceutical product, is to be presumed to have anticompetitive effects if a non-reference drug filer receives anything of value from another company asserting patent infringement and if the non-reference drug filer agrees to limit or forego research, development, manufacturing, marketing, or sales of the non-reference drug filer’s product for any period of time, as specified. The bill would provide various exceptions to this prohibition, including, among others, if the agreement has directly generated procompetitive benefits that could not be achieved by less restrictive means and that the procompetitive benefits of the agreement outweigh the anticompetitive effects of the agreement. The bill would make a violation of these provisions punishable by a civil penalty, as specified, and would provide that a violator is liable for any other remedies available under the Cartwright Act, the Unfair Practices Act, or the unfair competition law. The bill would define various terms for these purposes.

 

Oppose

 

SB 341

(Morrell R)   Public employment and retirement.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/19/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/19/2019

 

Status: 2/28/2019-Referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.

 

Location: 2/28/2019-S. L., P.E. & R.

 

Summary: (1)Existing law requires the Board of Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System and the Teachers’ Retirement Board to provide annual reports to the Legislature and the Governor with regard to investment returns on assets of the Public Employees’ Retirement System and the State Teachers’ Retirement System, respectively. As part of these reports, the boards are required to calculate and report on the rate of return on investments based on different assumptions. This bill would require the Board of Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System to report a calculation of liabilities based on a discount rate equal to the yield on a 10-year United States Treasury note in the year prior to the report. The bill would require the Teachers’ Retirement Board to provide a description of the discount rate the board uses for reporting liabilities, a calculation of liabilities based on a discount rate that is 2% below the long-term rate of return assumed by the board, and a calculation of liabilities based on a discount rate equal to the yield on a 10-year United States Treasury note in the year prior to the report. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

 

Watch

 

AB 33

(Bonta D)   State public retirement systems: divestiture from private prison companies.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 12/3/2018  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 12/3/2018

 

Status: 1/17/2019-Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

 

Location: 1/17/2019-A. P.E.,R. & S.S.

 

Summary: The California Constitution provides that the Legislature may, by statute, prohibit retirement board investments if it is in the public interest to do so and providing that the prohibition satisfies specified fiduciary standards.This bill would prohibit the boards of the Public Employees’ Retirement System and the State Teachers’ Retirement System from making new investments or renewing existing investments of public employee retirement funds in a private prison company, as defined. This bill would require the boards to liquidate investments in private prison companies on or before July 1, 2020, and would require the boards, in making a determination to liquidate investments, to constructively engage with private prison companies to establish whether the companies are transitioning their business models to another industry. The bill would provide that it does not require a board to take any action unless the board determines in good faith that the action is consistent with the board’s fiduciary responsibilities established in the constitution. The bill would provide that board members and other officers and employees shall be held harmless and be eligible for indemnification in connection with actions taken pursuant to the bill’s requirements, as specified. The bill would make related legislative findings and declarations.This bill contains other existing laws.

 

 

AB 132

(Cooper D)   Trial costs: Joseph James DeAngelo, Jr.

 

Current Text: Amended: 2/15/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 12/5/2018

 

Last Amend: 2/15/2019

 

Status: 2/19/2019-Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

 

Location: 2/15/2019-A. PUB. S.

 

Calendar: 3/12/2019  9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 126  ASSEMBLY PUBLIC SAFETY, JONES-SAWYER, Chair

 

Summary:  Existing law authorizes a county that is responsible for the cost of a trial or trials or any hearing of a person for the offense of homicide to apply to the Controller for reimbursement of excessive costs incurred by the county under specified circumstances. Under existing law, if the Controller determines that reimbursement is proper, the Controller is required to request the Director of Finance to include any amounts necessary to fulfill reimbursement in a request for deficiency appropriation.This bill, the Justice Act of 2019 for the Reimbursement of County Costs Arising from the Matter of the People v. Joseph DeAngelo, would authorize the County of Sacramento and other California counties to be entitled to reimbursement for the reasonable and necessary costs, as specified, incurred in connection with the prosecution and defense of Joseph DeAngelo. The bill would require a county seeking reimbursement to send a statement of costs to the Controller for approval, and would require the Controller, within 60 days, to either pay approved costs or provide a written statement as to the reason for not making reimbursement at that time. The bill would create the Justice Act of 2019 Fund, and continuously appropriate all funds deposited and maintained in the fund to the Controller for the purposes of making these reimbursements. By creating a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. The bill would make legislative findings and declarations in support of these provisions.

 

 

AB 160

(Voepel R)   Employment policy: voluntary veterans’ preference.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 1/7/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 1/7/2019

 

Status: 2/21/2019-Coauthors Revised.

 

Location: 1/7/2019-A. V. A.

 

Summary: Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), it is an unlawful employment practice for an employer, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification or applicable security regulations established by the United States or the State of California, to refuse to hire or employ a person or to refuse to select a person for a training program leading to employment, or to bar or discharge a person from employment or a training program leading to employment, or to discriminate against a person in compensation or in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of the race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status of that person. FEHA provides that nothing in that act relating to discrimination on account of sex affects the right of an employer to use veteran status as a factor in employee selection or to give special consideration to Vietnam-era veterans.This bill would enact the Voluntary Veterans’ Preference Employment Policy Act to authorize a private employer to establish and maintain a written veterans’ preference employment policy, to be applied uniformly to hiring decisions, to give a voluntary preference for hiring or retaining a veteran over another qualified applicant or employee. The bill would provide that the granting of a veterans’ preference pursuant to the bill, in and of itself, shall be deemed not to violate any local or state equal employment opportunity law or regulation, including, but not limited to, the antidiscrimination provisions of FEHA. The bill would revise the existing veteran status provision in FEHA to remove references to discrimination on account of sex and to Vietnam-era veterans, and would, instead, provide that nothing in that act relating to discrimination affects the right of an employer to use veteran status as a factor in hiring decisions if the employer maintains a veterans’ preference employment policy established in accordance with the Voluntary Veterans’ Preference Employment Policy Act. The bill would prohibit a veterans’ preference employment policy from being established or applied for the purpose of discriminating against an employment applicant on the basis of a protected classification, as specified.

 

 

AB 177

(Low D)   Election day holiday.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 1/9/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 1/9/2019

 

Status: 1/24/2019-Referred to Coms. on E. & R. and G.O.

 

Location: 1/24/2019-A. E. & R.

 

Calendar: 3/13/2019  9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 444  ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING, BERMAN, Chair

 

Summary: Existing law requires that an election for congressional and state elective offices be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each even-numbered year. Existing law requires a presidential general election to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in any year that is evenly divisible by the number 4. This bill would add the day on which a statewide general election is held, which is the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of any even-numbered year, to these lists of holidays. The bill would require community colleges and public schools to close on any day on which a statewide general election is held. The bill would require that state employees, with specified exceptions, be given time off with pay for days on which a statewide general election is held.This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

 

 

AB 181

(Rodriguez D)   Asset management: emerging and transition managers.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 1/9/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 1/9/2019

 

Status: 1/24/2019-Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

 

Location: 1/24/2019-A. P.E. & R.

 

Summary: The California Constitution grants the retirement board of a public employee retirement system plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and administration of the retirement fund and system. This bill would require the Board of Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System and the Teachers’ Retirement Board to each provide a report to the Legislature, commencing March 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, until January 1, 2024, on the status of achieving appropriate objectives and initiatives regarding participation of emerging managers responsible for asset management within each system’s portfolio of investments. With respect to the duties of the PERS board, the bill also would require the board’s report to the Legislature to address the status of achieving appropriate objectives and initiatives regarding participation of transition managers responsible for asset management within its portfolio of investments. The bill would require each report to include certain elements and would require the boards to define specified terms for purposes of these provisions.This bill contains other existing laws.

 

 

AB 190

(Ting D)   Budget Act of 2019.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 1/10/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 1/10/2019

 

Status: 1/24/2019-Referred to Com. on BUDGET.

 

Location: 1/24/2019-A. BUDGET

 

Summary: This bill would make appropriations for the support of state government for the 2019–20 fiscal year.This bill contains other related provisions.

 

 

AB 249

(Choi R)   Public employers: employee organizations.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 1/22/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 1/22/2019

 

Status: 2/7/2019-Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

 

Location: 2/7/2019-A. P.E. & R.

 

Summary: Existing law prohibits the state and specified local public employers from deterring or discouraging public employees and applicants to be public employees from becoming or remaining members of an employee organization, authorizing representation by an employee organization, or authorizing dues or fee deductions to an employee organization. Existing law grants the Public Employment Relations Board jurisdiction over violations of these provisions, except as specified. This bill would prohibit a public employer from deterring or discouraging a public employee or an applicant to be a public employee from opting out of becoming or remaining a member of an employee organization. The bill would prohibit a public employer from taking adverse action against a public employee or applicant to be a public employee who opts out of becoming or remaining a member of an employee organization and would specify that adverse action includes reducing a public employee’s current level of pay or benefits.

 

 

AB 314

(Bonta D)   Public employment: labor relations: release time.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 1/30/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 1/30/2019

 

Status: 2/11/2019-Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

 

Location: 2/11/2019-A. P.E. & R.

 

Calendar: 3/20/2019  9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 444  ASSEMBLY PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT, RODRIGUEZ, Chair

 

Summary: Existing law, including the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, the Ralph C. Dills Act, the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act, the Trial Court Interpreter Employment and Labor Relations Act, Judicial Council Employer-Employee Relations Act, and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Transit Employer-Employee Relations Act, as well as provisions commonly referred to as the Educational Employment Relations Act and the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act, regulates the labor relations of the state, the courts, and specified local public agencies and their employees. Existing law establishes other requirements relating to labor relations that are applicable to specified transit agencies. These acts grant specified public employees the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of their choosing and require public agency employers, among other things, to meet and confer with representatives of recognized employee organizations and exclusive representatives on terms and conditions of employment. These acts generally require the public entities in this context to grant employee representatives of recognized employee organizations reasonable time off without loss of compensation or benefits for certain purposes in connection with labor relations, commonly referred to as release time. This bill would prescribe requirements relating to release time that would apply to all of the public employers and employees subject to the acts described above and would generally repeal the provisions relating to release time in those acts. The bill would require these public employers to grant a reasonable number of employee representatives of the exclusive representative reasonable time off without loss of compensation or other benefits for specified activities. This requirement would apply to activities to investigate and process grievances or otherwise enforce a collective bargaining agreement or memorandum of understanding; to meet and confer with the public employer on matters within the scope of representation, including preparation for the activities specified in these provisions; to testify or appear as the designated representative of the exclusive representative in conferences, hearings, or other proceedings before the Public Employment Relations Board or similar bodies, as specified; to testify or appear as the designated representative of the exclusive representative before the governing body of the public employer, or a personnel, civil service, or merit commission, among others, and to serve as a representative of the exclusive representative for new employee orientations. The bill would require the exclusive representative to provide reasonable notice requesting an absence in this connection. The bill would specify that its provisions prescribe minimum release time rights and would prescribe requirements regarding the relation of its provisions to other labor agreements that address release time. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from enforcing these provisions with regard to public transit workers that are not otherwise subject to the board’s jurisdiction.

 

 

AB 355

(Daly D)   Public Employee Relations Board: Orange County Transportation Authority.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/4/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/4/2019

 

Status: 2/11/2019-Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

 

Location: 2/11/2019-A. P.E. & R.

 

Calendar: 3/20/2019  9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 444  ASSEMBLY PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT, RODRIGUEZ, Chair

 

Summary: Existing law establishes the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) in state government as a means of resolving disputes and enforcing the statutory duties and rights of specified public employers and employees under various acts regulating collective bargaining, including the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. Existing law includes within PERB’s jurisdiction the resolution of disputes alleging violation of rules and regulations adopted by a public agency, as defined, concerning unit determinations, representations, recognition, and elections, as specified. Existing law does not apply the above provisions to employees of specified transit agencies, including the Orange County Transportation Authority, among others.This bill would require employers and employees of the Orange County Transportation Authority to adjudicate complaints of specified labor violations before PERB as an unfair practice and would authorize specified parties aggrieved by PERB’s decision or order to petition for relief from that decision or order, as provided. By requiring the authority to adjudicate claims before PERB, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

 

 

AB 365

(Garcia, Cristina D)   Limited Examination and Appointment Program: persons with developmental disabilities.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/4/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/4/2019

 

Status: 2/15/2019-Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

 

Location: 2/15/2019-A. P.E. & R.

 

Calendar: 3/20/2019  9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 444  ASSEMBLY PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT, RODRIGUEZ, Chair

 

Summary: Existing law requires the Department of Human Resources to administer the Limited Examination and Appointment Program (LEAP) to provide an alternative to the traditional civil service examination and appointment process to facilitate the hiring of persons with disabilities in the state civil service. Until January 1, 2021, the program includes persons with a developmental disability, as defined. Existing law, until January 1, 2021, specifies that LEAP is a voluntary, additional method of applying for state employment and is not a mandate on any state agency employer or job applicant, except as specified that include persons with developmental disabilities in the LEAP program.This bill would instead repeal the above-described provisions on January 1, 2025.

 

 

AB 372

(Voepel R)   State employees: Infant at Work programs.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/5/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/5/2019

 

Status: 2/15/2019-Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

 

Location: 2/15/2019-A. P.E. & R.

 

Calendar: 3/20/2019  9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 444  ASSEMBLY PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT, RODRIGUEZ, Chair

 

Summary: Existing law establishes various employment protections to promote parent-infant bonds and infant health. The Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act, or California Family Rights Act, makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer, as defined, to refuse to grant a request by an eligible employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period to care for a child born to, adopted by, or placed for foster care with, the employee. The New Parent Leave Act prohibits an employer, as defined, from refusing to allow eligible employees to take up to 12 weeks of parental leave to bond with a new child within one year of the child’s birth, adoption, or foster care placement. Other existing law requires both public and private employers to provide a reasonable amount of break time, and make reasonable efforts to provide a private location, for expressing breast milk, as prescribed.This bill would authorize a state agency, as defined, to adopt an Infant at Work program to allow an employee of the agency who is a new parent or caregiver to an infant to bring the infant to the workplace. The bill would establish certain required elements for such a program. The bill would authorize a state agency to adopt regulations that it determines necessary to establish the program. The bill would prohibit a state agency from adopting the program in circumstances that are inappropriate based on safety, health, or other concerns for the infant or adult, as specified.

 

 

AB 472

(Voepel R)   Public employees’ retirement.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/11/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/11/2019

 

Status: 2/12/2019-From printer. May be heard in committee March 14.

 

Location: 2/11/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: Existing law, the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013, establishes various limits on retirement benefits generally applicable to a public employee retirement system, as defined. The act prescribes, among other things, limits on service after retirement without reinstatement into the applicable retirement system.This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to that provision.

 

 

AB 555

(Gonzalez D)   Employee sick leave.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/13/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/13/2019

 

Status: 2/14/2019-From printer. May be heard in committee March 16.

 

Location: 2/13/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary:  Under existing law, an employee who works in California for 30 or more days within a year from the commencement of employment is entitled to paid sick days for certain purposes, as specified. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.

 

 

AB 969

(Gonzalez D)   Collective bargaining: Legislature.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/21/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/21/2019

 

Status: 2/22/2019-From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

 

Location: 2/21/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: Existing law, the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act), governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law excludes certain employees from coverage under the Dills Act, including, among others, managerial employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, as defined. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. This bill would enact the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act, to provide employees of the Legislature, including some supervisory and managerial employees, the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters of employer-employee relations. The bill would prescribe rights, duties, and prohibitions in this context that parallel those in the Dills Act. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including employees of the Legislature in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Legislature. The bill would make it a misdemeanor for any person to willfully resist, prevent, impede, or interfere with any member of the board, or any of its agents, in the performance of duties pursuant to its provisions. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that the provisions of the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act are severable.This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

 

 

AB 1002

(Rodriguez D)   State employer-employee relations.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/21/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/21/2019

 

Status: 2/22/2019-From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

 

Location: 2/21/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: Existing law, the Ralph C. Dills Act, grants to state employees the right to form employee organizations for the purpose of representing their members in negotiating terms and conditions of employment with the state and prescribes definitions and procedures in this regard. Existing law states the purpose of these provisions and prohibits construing them to contravene the spirit or intent of the merit system in state employment. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.

 

 

AB 1033

(Cooper D)   State employment: new employees: information.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/21/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/21/2019

 

Status: 2/22/2019-From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

 

Location: 2/21/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: Existing law, the State Civil Service Act, regulates employment with the state and vests in the Department of Human Resources all powers, duties, and authority necessary to operate the state civil service system. Existing law requires that appointments to state employment generally be made from lists of eligible candidates established pursuant to competitive examinations, which may be administered by an appointing power designated by the department. Existing law requires the department to establish salary ranges for each class of position in the state civil service, as specified, and to provide for intermediate steps within these ranges. Existing law establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System, which provides a defined benefit to members of the system based on final compensation, credited service, and age at retirement, subject to certain variations. This bill would require an appointing power, prior to offering employment to an applicant, to provide the applicant with an explanation of the benefits of state service in the form of specified materials. The bill would require that a formal offer of employment contain a written memorialization acknowledging that the applicant received these materials before accepting employment. The bill would require the Department of Human Resources to create these materials, subject to certain requirements.

 

 

AB 1198

(Stone, Mark D)   Public employees’ retirement: pension reform: excepted employees.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/21/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/21/2019

 

Status: 2/22/2019-From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

 

Location: 2/21/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: The California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), among other things, establishes new retirement formulas, which are generally applicable to employees first employed on or after January 1, 2013, and which a public employer offering a defined benefit pension plan is prohibited from exceeding. PEPRA excepts certain public employees from its provisions. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to this provision.

 

 

AB 1212

(Levine D)   Public employees’ retirement: pension fund management: in-state infrastructure.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/21/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/21/2019

 

Status: 2/22/2019-From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

 

Location: 2/21/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: The California Constitution confers upon the retirement boards of public retirement systems plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for the investment of moneys of those systems. Existing law authorizes the Board of Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System, the Teachers’ Retirement Board of the State Teachers’ Retirement System, and the board of retirement or the board of investments of a retirement system established pursuant to the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937, consistent with their fiduciary duties and investment standards, to prioritize investment in an in-state infrastructure project over a comparable out-of-state infrastructure project. This bill would require a state agency that is responsible for infrastructure projects to produce a list of priority infrastructure projects for funding consideration by the retirement boards, as described above, and to provide it to them. The bill would require a state agency also to provide further project information to a board upon request.

 

 

AB 1320

(Nazarian D)   Public employee retirement systems: Turkey divestment.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/22/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/22/2019

 

Status: 2/25/2019-Read first time.

 

Location: 2/22/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: The California Constitution grants the retirement board of a public employee retirement system plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and administration of the retirement fund and system. The California Constitution qualifies this grant of powers by reserving to the Legislature the authority to prohibit investments if it is in the public interest and the prohibition satisfies standards of fiduciary care and loyalty required of a retirement board. Existing law prohibits the boards of administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System and the State Teachers’ Retirement System from making investments in certain countries and in thermal coal companies, as specified, subject to the boards’ plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and administration of the systems. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would require the boards of administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System and the State Teachers’ Retirement System to liquidate existing investments of public employee retirement funds in investment vehicles issued by the government of Turkey.

 

 

AB 1430

(Garcia, Eduardo D)   State government: public investment opportunities: cost-effective definition.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/22/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/22/2019

 

Status: 2/25/2019-Read first time.

 

Location: 2/22/2019-A. PRINT

 

Summary: Existing law authorizes the Public Utilities Commission, the State Air Resources Board, the California Transportation Commission, and the Labor and Workforce Development Agency to invest public moneys on various project and programs. Existing law requires some of those investments to be cost effective. This bill would require these agencies, by January 1, 2021, to provide a joint assessment of options for redefining the term “cost-effective” to the Legislature for the purposes of prioritizing public investment opportunities. The bill would require these agencies, in assessing the options for the definition, to consider the impact that investments would have on various specified factors. The bill would require these agencies to conduct a joint public process for completing the assessment and to solicit comments from interested stakeholders.

 

 

ACA 2

(Nazarian D)   State tax agency.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 12/3/2018  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 12/3/2018

 

Status: 12/4/2018-From printer. May be heard in committee January 3.

 

Location: 12/3/2018-A. PRINT

 

Summary: The California Constitution establishes the State Board of Equalization, consisting of the Controller and 4 other members elected from districts, and provides for the election, recall, impeachment, filling of vacancies, and salaries and benefits of those board members elected from districts. The California Constitution vests the board with various powers, duties, and responsibilities related to the administration of taxes imposed on property, insurance, and alcoholic beverages.This measure would abolish the State Board of Equalization and instead require the Legislature to create a state tax agency by statute for purposes of carrying out those powers, duties, and responsibilities previously vested in the State Board of Equalization by the California Constitution and by statute. The bill would authorize the Legislature to vest all powers, duties, and responsibilities in a single state tax agency or separately in multiple state tax agencies. The measure would deem the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration and the office of Tax Appeals to be state tax agencies for purposes of these provisions and vest in those entities specified powers, duties and responsibilities currently vested in the State Board of Equalization. The measure would make conforming changes by deleting various references to the State Board of Equalization throughout the California Constitution, including in those provisions regarding the election, recall, impeachment, filling of vacancies, and salaries and benefits of members of the board, and make other nonsubstantive changes.

 

 

SB 73

(Mitchell D)   Budget Act of 2019.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 1/10/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 1/10/2019

 

Status: 1/11/2019-From printer.

 

Location: 1/10/2019-S. BUDGET & F.R.

 

Summary: This bill would make appropriations for the support of state government for the 2019–20 fiscal year.This bill contains other related provisions.

 

 

SB 266

(Leyva D)   Public Employees’ Retirement System: disallowed compensation: benefit adjustments.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/12/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/12/2019

 

Status: 2/21/2019-Referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.

 

Location: 2/21/2019-S. L., P.E. & R.

 

Summary: Existing law, the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL), establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS), which provides a defined benefit to members of the system, based on final compensation, credited service, and age at retirement, subject to certain variations. PERL authorizes a public agency to contract to make its employees members of PERS and prescribes a process for this. PERS is administered by its board of administration, which is responsible for correcting errors and omissions in the administration of the system and the payment of benefits. Existing law requires the board to correct all actions taken as a result of errors or omissions of the state or a contracting agency, in accordance with certain procedures. This bill would establish new procedures under PERL for cases in which PERS determines that the benefits of a member or annuitant are, or would be, based on compensation that conflicts with PEPRA and other specified laws and thus impermissible under PERL. The bill would also apply these procedures retroactively to determinations made on or after January 1, 2017, if an appeal has been filed and the employee member, survivor, or beneficiary has not exhausted their administrative or legal remedies. At the threshold, after determining that compensation for an employee member reported by the state, school employer, or a contracting agency is disallowed, the bill would require the applicable employer to discontinue the reporting of the disallowed compensation. The bill would require that contributions made on the disallowed compensation, for active members, be credited against future contributions on behalf of the state, school employer, or contracting agency that reported the disallowed compensation and would require that the state school employer, or contracting agency to return to the member any contributions paid by the member or on the member’s behalf. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.

 

 

SB 430

(Wieckowski D)   Public employees’ retirement benefits: judges.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/21/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/21/2019

 

Status: 2/22/2019-From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 24.

 

Location: 2/21/2019-S. RLS.

 

Summary: The California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) generally requires a public retirement system, as defined, to modify its pension plan or plans to comply with the act, as specified. Among other things, PEPRA prohibits a public employer offering a defined benefit pension plan from exceeding specified retirement formulas for new members and prohibits an enhancement of a public employee’s retirement formula or benefit adopted after January 1, 2013, from applying to service performed prior to the operative date of the enhancement. PEPRA defines terms for those purposes, including defining “new member” to include an individual who becomes a member of any public retirement system for the first time on or after January 1, 2013, and who was not a member of any other public retirement system prior to that date; an individual who becomes a member of a public retirement system for the first time on or after January 1, 2013, and who was a member of another public retirement system prior to that date, but who was not subject to reciprocity under specified law; or an individual who was an active member in a retirement system and who, after a break in service of more than 6 months, returned to active membership in that system with a new employer.This bill would specifically exclude from the definition of “new member” a judge, as defined in specified existing law, elected to office before January 1, 2013.

 

 

SB 769

(Moorlach R)   Public employees’ retirement.

 

Current Text: Introduced: 2/22/2019  html   pdf

 

Introduced: 2/22/2019

 

Status: 2/25/2019-From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 27. Read first time.

 

Location: 2/22/2019-S. RLS.

 

Summary: The Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL) establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS), which provides pension and other benefits to its members. Under PERL, membership in PERS is compulsory for specified public employees. Existing law provides that those compulsory membership provisions do not apply to certain persons who are expressly excluded from PERS.This bill would make a nonsubstantive change to that provision.

 

Total Measures: 27

Total Tracking Forms: 27