Assembly Public Employment and Retirement Committee
Event Log
SB443 — SB 443 is introduced and presented as a measure to clarify CalPERS retirement retention rules for public employees who move into or join a joint powers authority. The author explains that existing law is ambiguous and that the bill would ensure the same retirement rules apply to later-joining local governments, helping avoid negative impacts on recruitment, staffing, equity, and continuity for employees in newly formed or expanding JPAs. The presentation concludes with support for the bill and a request for an aye vote, after which the bill is placed on hold.
SB443 — The committee voted due pass and re-referred SB 443 to the Committee on Appropriations, with a 7 to 0 outcome reported.
Carly Shelby — Carly Shelby, speaking on behalf of the City of La Verne, testifies in strong support of SB 443 before the committee.
Jack Waco — Jack Waco, representing the Pajaro River Flood Management Agency, is introduced and then testifies in support of the bill. He explains that the proposal would help current employees of state or local agencies transfer their CalPERS classic status into the new JPA, emphasizing the value of that flexibility.
SB443 — The witness expresses strong support for SB 443 and describes it as clarifying retirement benefit retention.
Janice O'Malley — Testified in support on behalf of AFSCME California.
Janice O'Malley — Janice O'Malley testified in support of the measure on behalf of AFSCME and later again in support on behalf of CSEA.
SB494 — SB 494 is introduced and explained as a parity bill that would give classified school employees the same disciplinary appeal rights currently available to teachers and some other public employees, including having appeals heard by an administrative law judge. Supporters emphasize that it extends comparable protections and equal treatment. Opposition argues the bill would reduce local control by taking final disciplinary authority away from school districts and county offices of education, impose a one-size-fits-all process, require use of an administrative law judge, and shift the full cost of appeals to local education agencies.
SB494 — The committee voted due pass and re-referred SB 494 to the Committee on Higher Education, with a 5 to 0 outcome reported.
Ms. Nabnett-Purier / Navit Purrier — Introduced as a witness testifying on behalf of CSEA; she states CSEA represents more than 250,000 classified public school employees.
two members — The speaker references two unnamed members whose experiences are used as examples of why the bill is needed.
unidentified witness for SB 494 — Continued the argument in support of SB 494, saying the employee was denied a fair discipline hearing and asking for an aye vote.
Mitch Steiger — Mitch Steiger of the California Federation of Teachers was introduced as a supporter of S.J.R. 2 and then testified in support of the measure, speaking on behalf of CFT and describing the organization as a union of educators and classified professionals.
Erica Hoffman — Testified in respectful opposition to SB 494 on behalf of the California School Boards Association and the California County Superintendents.
Andrew Martinez — Andrew Martinez, representing the Community College League of California, introduced himself and stated that his organization opposes the measure. He added that the Association of California Community College Administrators also opposes it.
Sarah Petrowski — Testified in respectful opposition on behalf of the California Association of School Business Officials.
Jeff Vocker — Testified in opposition representing the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools and the Orange County Department of Education.
Lucy Salcedo Carter — Testified in opposition on behalf of the Alameda County Office of Education and the Association of California School Administrators.
Angelina Kanoi — Testified in opposition on behalf of the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools and Dr. Deborah Duardo.
Navit Purrier — Testified in support on behalf of the California School Employees Association.
Michelle Rodriguez — Named as seconding the motion; likely a garbled reference to Assembly Member Rodriguez or another member, but preserved as spoken.
SJR2 — The committee voted to adopt SJR 2 and reported it out 5 to 0.
Tom Lackey — Identified as seconding the motion.
Tom Lackey — Recorded in the roll call vote.
Tom Lackey — Member Lackey is listed in the roll call.
Tasha Boerner — Tasha Boerner was called during roll call, but the transcript remains unclear and repeats the same mention.
Tasha Boerner — Appears in the corrected vote tally as voting aye.
Tasha Boerner — Recorded in the roll call vote.
Tasha Boerner — Tasha Boerner is repeatedly called during the roll-call vote and responds 'aye' each time, indicating her affirmative votes on the items being considered.
Juan Alanis — Juan Alanis was called during roll call, but the transcript is garbled and unclear, appearing as both 'Elawani?' and 'Alanis?'.
Juan Alanis — Juan Alanis is repeatedly recorded as voting aye during a series of roll calls, including item number one, SB 301, and consent calendar items five through seven. The sequence also notes that the bills were then placed back on hold, making this a continuous voting/procedural moment.
Juan Alanis — Recorded in the roll call vote.
Juan Alanis — Member Alanis is listed in the roll call.
Robert Garcia — Robert Garcia is first called during roll and marked present, then later recorded as voting aye on the consent calendar. He also appears in the motion correction as the second on the motion and in the corrected vote tally as voting aye.
Robert Garcia — Appears in the roll call as voting aye.
Robert Garcia — Assembly Member Garcia expressed support for the bill and cast an aye vote.
Robert Garcia — Member Garcia is listed in the roll call and appears to vote aye.
Stephanie Nguyen — Stephanie Nguyen was involved in the bill’s procedural handling: she seconded the motion on the consent calendar, later moved the bill, and was recorded in the corrected vote tally as voting aye.
Stephanie Nguyen — Identified as making the motion to move the bill.
Stephanie Nguyen — Made the motion on the bill.
Stephanie Nguyen — Named as making the first motion on the resolution.
Stephanie Nguyen — Member Nguyen appears to be referenced as 'win' in the garbled roll call and is likely recorded as aye.
SB301 — SB 301 was called up as the next file item and introduced by Senator Grayson. The bill would prevent cities or districts under the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 from amending contracts to exclude certain employee groups, and witnesses explained that it clarifies when exclusion from membership is not appropriate and promotes consistency between retirement laws. The discussion concluded with the current vote on SB 301 before it was placed back on hold.
SB301 — The committee took up SB 301 under a due pass motion and recorded a 7 to 0 vote.
Senator Grayson — Introduced SB 301.
Doug Supers — Named as the witness to follow the author's presentation.
Doug Subers — Testified in support of SB 301 on behalf of California Professional Firefighters and explained the bill's purpose of aligning retirement law provisions.
Tina McKinnor — Tina McKinnor was first marked present during roll call, then voted aye on the consent calendar, and later participated in the subsequent vote tally/procedural exchange.
Tina McKinnor — Recorded as voting aye.
Tina McKinnor — The roll call appears to record Chair McKinnor voting aye, though the transcript is garbled.