BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                     AB 630


                                                                    Page  1


          CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS


          AB  
          630 (Linder)


          As Amended  July 1, 2015


          Majority vote


           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |78-0  |(May 14, 2015) |SENATE: |38-0  |(August 20,      |
          |           |      |               |        |      |2015)            |
          |           |      |               |        |      |                 |
          |           |      |               |        |      |                 |
           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Original Committee Reference:  L. GOV.


          SUMMARY:  Allows a county board of supervisors to require the  
          filing of a new oath of office.


          The Senate amendments:


          1)Allow a county to maintain a record of each person required to  
            file a new oath of office indicating whether or not the person  
            has complied with the requirements, pursuant to this bill's  
            provisions.


          2)Clarify that any record maintained pursuant to this bill's  
            provisions is a public record subject to disclosure under the  
            California Public Records Act.










                                                                     AB 630


                                                                    Page  2


          3)Clarify that failure of an elected or appointed officer or  
            department head, or a disaster service worker, to file a new  
            oath of office pursuant to this bill's provisions shall not be  
            punishable as a crime.


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Senate Appropriations  
          Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.


          COMMENTS:  


          1)Bill Summary.  This bill allows 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, 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 allows a  
            county board of supervisors to require an appointing authority  
            to file a revocation with the county clerk in the event of an  
            officer's departure from office, thus giving notice to the  
            county clerk when an elected or appointed officer leaves  
            office so that the records can be updated.  This bill  
            additionally allows a county to maintain a record of each  
            person required to file a new oath of office, and to indicate  
            whether the person has complied, and clarifies that any record  
            maintained in this manner is a public record that is subject  
            to disclosure under the California Public Records Act.   
            Failure to file a new oath of office pursuant to the bill's  
            provisions shall not be punishable as a crime.
            This bill is sponsored by the California Association of Clerks  
            and Election Officials (CACEO).


          2)Author's Statement.  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.








                                                                     AB 630


                                                                    Page  3


            "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, they are not able to comply with the request  
            at all."


          3)Arguments in Support.  CACEO, the sponsor, notes that "The  
            existing process left the county with outdated information on  
            file that was often untraceable to current staff based on  
            movement between offices or name change due to marriage,  
            divorce, or other reasons."
          4)Arguments in Opposition.  None on file.


          Analysis Prepared by:                                             
                          Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958  FN:  
          0001345