AB 1824 California Assembly · 2013-2014 Regular Session

County employees' retirement: optional settlements revision.

Summary
The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 permits a member or retired member of a retirement system established pursuant to its provisions, prior to the time that the first payment of any retirement allowance is made, to elect certain optional settlements, which operate to reduce the allowance payable to the member through his or her life and provide for a subsequent payment to another party or parties, including his or her spouse. Existing law authorizes a person to revoke a beneficiary nomination at his or her pleasure and nominate a different beneficiary, except for a nomination made under 3 specified optional settlements. This bill, upon adoption by a county, would permit a retired member to revise the designated beneficiary for those specified optional settlements if, at retirement, the retired member was unmarried or had been married less than one year, the retired member had retired before the county adopted other specified optional retirement settlements, and the application to revise includes the signature of the designated beneficiary of the optional settlement or a written declaration, as specified. The bill would provide a civil penalty for a person who knowingly provides false information in the declaration, to be brought at the option of a public prosecutor. The bill would also require, if the designated beneficiary of the optional settlement is a spouse or domestic partner of the member, that the application for revision evidence that person's agreement to the revision. The bill would require, pursuant to this revision, the retired member's allowance to remain the same as provided by the optional settlement, adjusted for any cost-of-living increases that have been added to the retirement allowance. The bill would provide that the retirement system has no obligation to locate or otherwise contact retired members who may qualify for a revision. The bill would provide that any actions taken, as described above, do not excuse the obligation of a member to provide a continuing benefit to a former spouse pursuant to court order.
Bill status signed all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2014
Committee Review
Aug 2014
Assembly Passage
May 2014
Senate Passage
Aug 2014
Signed into Law
Sep 2014
Introduced Feb 18, 2014 Signed Sep 28, 2014
Floor votes · Senate Aug 25, 2014 · Assembly May 23, 2014

How they voted

21–9
Passed · 6 other
Total votes 36
Aug 25, 2014
D Democratic26
21 Yea 5
80% Yea
R Republican10
9 Nay 1
90% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea All Nay Mixed No data
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
19
Key actions
7
Committee
7
Amendments
1
Sep 28, 2014
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 25, 2014
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (21-9-6)
senate
Aug 25, 2014
Lower · Passed
In Assembly. Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling.
lower
Jun 24, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 3. Noes 2.) (June 23).
upper
Jun 5, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.
upper
May 23, 2014
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (45-19-6)
assembly
May 7, 2014
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (May 7).
lower
Apr 23, 2014
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on P.E.,R. & S.S.
lower
Apr 22, 2014
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on P.E.,R. & S.S. Read second time and amended.
lower
Feb 27, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on P.E.,R. & S.S.
lower
Feb 19, 2014
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors

Sponsors

Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Photo of Anthony Rendon
Anthony Rendon
DDemocratic
CA
62