BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 630
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
630 (Linder) - As Amended April 27, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Local Government |Vote:|9 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable:
No
SUMMARY:
This bill authorizes, but does not require, a county board of
supervisors to require a new oath or affirmation to be filed
within 10 days of a county employee changing, his or her name,
AB 630
Page 2
delegated authority, or department, and would apply to every
elected or appointed county officer or department head, disaster
service worker, and county appointed deputy. This bill also
specifies that the powers of an appointed officer of a county
are no longer granted upon the officer's departure from office,
and allows the board of supervisors to require the appointing
authority to rescind these powers in writing by filing a
revocation in the same manner as the oath of office was filed.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Non-reimbursable costs to counties, likely minor, for
administering new oaths and updating administrative records.
COMMENTS:
Purpose and Background. According to the author, "AB 630
attempts to update and clarify existing law in regards to the
filing of required oaths for public office at the county level.
Under current law, a loyalty oath is administered by the county
clerk and is retained on file as public record for that local
official and must be presented upon request according to the
California Public Records Act. Current law does not require the
filing of a new oath in the event of a name, title, or
department change. The existing process has left counties with
outdated information on file that is often untraceable to
current staff based on movement between offices or name change
due to marriage, divorce, or other reasons. When members of the
public question the validity of their county officials and
request evidence of mandated oaths, county clerks either spend
an unnecessary amount of time tracking people down based on
outdated names, or in most cases, are not able to comply with
the request at all."
AB 630
Page 3
Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916)
319-2081