BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 651|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 651
Author: Leno (D), et al
Amended: 9/2/11
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 3-2, 5/3/11
AYES: Evans, Corbett, Leno
NOES: Harman, Blakeslee
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-2, 5/26/11
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Runner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Emmerson
SENATE FLOOR : 24-15, 6/1/11
AYES: Alquist, Calderon, Corbett, Correa, De León,
DeSaulnier, Evans, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu,
Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price,
Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wolk, Wright, Yee
NOES: Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Cannella, Dutton,
Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Harman, Huff, La Malfa, Runner,
Strickland, Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Rubio
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : Not available
SUBJECT : Family law: domestic partnerships
SOURCE : Equality California
CONTINUED
SB 651
Page
2
DIGEST : This bill eliminates the requirement that
domestic partners have a common residence in order to
establish a registered domestic partnership.
Assembly Amendments (1) allow an individual under 18 years
of age to establish a domestic partnership; (2) provide a
process by which two persons could enter into a
confidential domestic partnership; and (3) authorizes a
judgment for dissolution, nullity, or legal separation of a
marriage between persons of the same sex.
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides that in order to
establish a domestic partnership, all of the following
requirements must be met:
Both persons have a common residence.
Neither person is married to someone else or is a
member of another domestic partnership with someone
else that has not been terminated, dissolved, or
adjudged a nullity.
The two persons are not related by blood in a way
that would prevent them from being married to each
other in this state.
Both persons are at least 18 years of age, except
as provided in Section 297.1 which was added in the
Assembly (see p.2 of analysis) allowing unde the age
of 18 domestic partnership.
Either of the following: (i) both persons are
members of the same sex; or (ii) if members of the
opposite sex, one or both persons must be over the age
of 62.
Both persons are capable of consenting to the
domestic partnership. (Fam. Code Sec. 297.)
This bill eliminates the common residence requirement to
establish a domestic partnership.
Section 297.1 of the Family Code, reads:
A person under 18 years of age who, together with the
person with whom he or she proposes to establish a
domestic partnership, otherwise meets the requirements
for a domestic partnership other than the requirement of
being at least 18 years of age, is capable of consenting
CONTINUED
SB 651
Page
3
to and establishing a domestic partnership upon obtaining
a court order granting permission to the underage person
or persons to establish a domestic partnership.
The court order and written consent of the parents of
each person under 18 years of age or of one of the
parents or the guardian of each person under 18 years of
age, shall be filed with the clerk of the court, and a
certified copy of the order shall be filed with the
Secretary of State with the Declaration of Domestic
Partnership.
If it appears to the satisfaction of the court by
application of a person under 18 years of age that the
person requires a written consent to establish a domestic
partnership and that the minor has no parent or guardian,
or has no parent or guardian capable of consenting, the
court may make an order consenting to establishing the
domestic partnership. The order shall be filed with the
clerk of the court and a certified copy of the order
shall be filed with the Secretary of State with the
Declaration of Domestic Partnership.
The Secretary of State shall establish a process by which
two persons, who have been living together as domestic
partners and who meet the requirements may enter into a
confidential domestic partnership. This process shall do
all of the following:
Maintain each confidential Declaration of Domestic
Partnership as a permanent record that is not open to
public inspection except upon order of the court issued
upon a showing of good cause.
Authorize the Secretary of State to charge a reasonable
fee to offset costs directly connected with maintaining
confidentiality of a Declaration of Domestic Partnership.
Existing law prohibits a judgment of dissolution of
marriage from being entered unless one of the parties to
the marriage has been a resident of this state for six
months and of the county in which the proceeding is filed
for three months before the filing of the petition.
CONTINUED
SB 651
Page
4
This bill authorizes a judgment for dissolution, nullity,
or legal separation of a marriage between persons of the
same sex to be entered if the marriage was entered in
California and neither party to the marriage resides in a
jurisdiction that will dissolve the marriage.
Background
The first domestic partnership law in California was
enacted in 1999 by AB 26 (Migden), Chapter 588, Statutes of
1999. Among other things, AB 26 created an official
domestic partnership registry, provided registered domestic
partners hospital visitation rights, and granted health
benefits to domestic partners of state employees. Several
bills granting domestic partners additional rights
followed. SB 2011, (Escutia), Chapter 1004, Statutes of
2000, qualified registered domestic partners for housing in
specially designed accessible housing for senior citizens.
Two years later, AB 25 (Migden), Chapter 893, Statutes of
2001, granted 12 new rights and benefits to registered
domestic partners, including (a) the right to sue for
wrongful death; (b) the right to use employee sick leave to
care for an ill partner or partner's child; (c) the right
to make medical decisions on behalf of an incapacitated
partner; (d) the right to receive unemployment benefits if
forced to relocate because of a partner's job; and (e) the
right to adopt a partner's child as a stepparent.
In 2002, several additional bills were enacted granting
domestic partners additional rights. For example, AB 2216
(Keeley), Chapter 447, Statutes of 2002, granted a domestic
partner inheritance rights if his/her partner dies without
a will. SB 1575 (Sher), Chapter 412, Statutes of 2002,
added domestic partners to persons who are exempted from
the prohibition on benefiting from a will or trust that
they helped draft; and SB 1661 (Kuehl), Chapter 901,
Statutes of 2002, granted six weeks of paid family leave
to employees to care for a sick spouse or domestic partner.
The California Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities
Act of 2003 further expanded the rights of domestic
partners and specifically stated that "registered domestic
partners shall have the same rights, protections, and
CONTINUED
SB 651
Page
5
benefits, and shall be subject to the same
responsibilities, obligations, and duties under the law as
are granted to and imposed upon spouses."(AB 205
ÝGoldberg], Chapter 421, Statutes of 2003.)
In 2004, AB 2208 created the California Insurance Equality
Act (Kehoe), Chapter 488, Statutes of 2004, which
prohibited insurance providers from issuing policies or
plans that discriminate against domestic partners and
required insurance plans that include coverage of spouses
to include the same coverage for domestic partners. SB
1827 (Migden), Chapter 802, Statutes of 2006, created the
State Income Tax Equity Act in 2006, which allowed
registered domestic partners to file joint income taxes in
order to receive the same financial protections afforded to
married heterosexual couples. AB 102 (Ma), Chapter 567,
Statutes of 2007, created the Name Equality Act which
allowed domestic partners to change their surnames,
regardless of gender, upon domestic partnership
registration. Most recently in 2010, AB 2055 (De La
Torre), Chapter 590, extended the right to receive an award
of unemployment insurance benefits to a person who
imminently plans to enter into a registered domestic
partnership that the law currently provides for couples who
are engaged to be married.
This bill eliminates the requirement that registered
domestic partners must have a common residence.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13
2013-14 Fund
Secretary of State Minor,
absorbable one-time costs General
registration
Income tax revenue loss Unknown;
potentially significant General
revenue loss in excess of $110 - $825
CONTINUED
SB 651
Page
6
per one percent increase in RDPs
Health benefits Unknown; potentially significant costs
General
for increased enrolleesof $550 per 100 new RDPs
Unemployment ins. Minor, absorbable
costs annually Special*
*Unemployment Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/7/11)
Equality California (source)
Association of Certified Family Law Specialists
Betty Yee, Member of the Board of Equalization
California Communities United Institute
City of Los Angeles
National Center for Lesbian Rights
SEIU, Local 1000, Lavender Committee
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author's office writes, this
bill eliminates an existing difference between domestic
partners and married spouses by eliminating the requirement
that domestic partners have a common residence. Existing
case law recognizes that while same-sex couples lack the
right to enter into a relationship designated as
"marriage," they possess the right to the core set of basic
substantive legal rights and attributes associated with
marriage, including, the opportunity of an individual to
establish an officially recognized and protected family
possessing mutual rights and responsibilities and entitled
to the same respect and dignity accorded a union
traditionally designated as marriage.
The sponsor, Equality California writes "Equality
California is proud to sponsor Ýthis bill], the Domestic
Partner Equality Act. This bill would reduce the legal
inequalities under state law that presently exist between
marriages and domestic partnerships in California. In
1999, Equality California sponsored the first of many bills
to obtain rights and responsibilities for same-sex couples.
That year, California established legal recognition for
same-sex relationships for the first time called registered
CONTINUED
SB 651
Page
7
domestic partnerships. AB 26 (Migden) created a Domestic
Partner Registry housed within the California Secretary of
State. This groundbreaking law also established hospital
visitation rights for domestic partners, and provided that
state and local government employers could offer health
care coverage and other benefits to domestic partners.
This bill and subsequent bills, now law, sponsored by
Equality California, extended many of the same rights
enjoyed by married couples to California's same-sex
couples; however, differences remain."
RJG:do 9/7/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED