BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1661
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 6, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Susan Talamantes Eggman, Chair
AB 1661
(McCarty and Gonzalez) - As Amended March 17, 2016
SUBJECT: Local government: sexual harassment training and
education.
SUMMARY: Requires local agency officials to receive sexual
harassment training and education. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires, if a local agency provides any type of compensation,
salary, or stipend to a local agency official of that agency,
all local agency officials of that agency to receive sexual
harassment training and education pursuant to this bill.
2)Allows a local agency to also require any of its employees to
receive sexual harassment training and education pursuant to
this bill.
3)Requires each local agency official, or employee who is so
required, to receive at least two hours of sexual harassment
training and education within the first six months of taking
office or commencing employment, and every two years
thereafter.
AB 1661
Page 2
4)Requires the training and education required by this bill to
include information and practical guidance regarding the
federal and state statutory provisions concerning the
prohibition against, and the prevention and correction of,
sexual harassment and the remedies available to victims of
sexual harassment in employment.
5)Requires the training and education to also include practical
examples aimed at instructing the local agency official in the
prevention of sexual harassment, discrimination, and
retaliation, and to be presented by trainers or educators with
knowledge and expertise in the prevention of sexual
harassment, discrimination, and retaliation.
6)Allows a local agency or an association of local agencies to
offer one or more training courses, or sets of self-study
materials with tests, to meet the requirements of this bill.
These courses may be taken at home, in person, or online.
7)Requires all providers of training courses to provide
participants with proof of participation to meet the
requirements of this bill.
8)Requires a local agency to provide information on training
available to meet the requirements of this bill to its local
agency officials and its employees at least once annually.
AB 1661
Page 3
9)Requires a local agency that requires its local agency
officials or employees to complete the sexual harassment
training and education prescribed by this bill to maintain
records indicating both of the following:
a) The dates that local agency officials or employees
satisfied the requirements of this article; and,
b) The entity that provided the training.
10)Requires, notwithstanding any other law, a local agency to
maintain the records required by this bill for at least five
years after local agency officials or employees receive the
training. These records are public records subject to
disclosure under the California Public Records Act, as
specified.
11)Provides the following definitions:
a) "Legislative body" means the governing body of a city,
county, city and county, or special district;
b) "Local agency" means a city, county, city and county,
charter city, charter county, charter city and county, or
special district; and,
AB 1661
Page 4
c) "Local agency official" means any member of a local
agency governing body and any elected local agency
official.
12)Finds and declares that all employees should have the same
opportunity to work in a safe and harassment free environment
and therefore, sexual harassment training and education for
all local agency officials is a matter of statewide concern
and, not merely a municipal affair, as that term is used in
Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution.
Therefore, this bill shall apply to charter cities, charter
counties, and charter cities and counties.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires all local agency officials to receive training in
ethics, at specified intervals, if the local agency provides
any type of compensation, salary, or stipend to those
officials.
2)Requires an employer having 50 or more employees to provide at
least two hours of classroom or other effective interactive
training and education regarding sexual harassment to all
supervisory employees in California within six months of their
assumption of a supervisory position, and once every two years
thereafter.
3)Defines, for purposes of 2), above, "employer" to mean any
person regularly employing
AB 1661
Page 5
50 or more persons or regularly receiving the services of 50 or
more persons providing services pursuant to a contract, or any
person acting as an agent of an employer, directly or
indirectly, the state, or any political or civil subdivision
of the state, and cities.
FISCAL EFFECT: None
COMMENTS:
1)Bill Summary. This bill requires local agency officials to
receive two hours of sexual harassment training and education
within the first six months of taking office or commencing
employment, and every two years thereafter. The requirements
of the bill apply only if a local agency provides any type of
compensation, salary, or stipend to its local agency
officials. Pursuant to the definitions provided in the bill,
its requirements would apply to any member of a governing body
and any elected official of cities and counties (including
charter cities and charter counties), and special districts.
The bill allows a local agency to also require any of its
employees to receive sexual harassment training and education
as outlined in the bill. This bill is sponsored by Equal
Rights Advocates.
2)Authors' Statement. According to the authors, "In 2004, AB
1825 (Reyes) established requirements for sexual harassment
prevention training in the workplace. Specifically, it
required that employers of 50 or more employees must provide
training of a (minimum) of two hours on sexual harassment
prevention training to all supervisors and once every two
years. Also, it stated that these trainings should be
conducted with existing state resources. In addition, AB 1825
mandated that training needed to be renewed every two years in
AB 1661
Page 6
order to keep employers/employees updated and refreshed on how
to report, prevent, and recognize sexual harassment.
"However, existing law does not explicitly require city or
county elected officials to take (a) sexual harassment
prevention training course. Some cities have interpreted AB
1825 to not apply to city council members, while some cities
have found that it does apply. This loophole has caused
significant confusion. The cost to cities to litigate and/or
settle claims for sexual harassment suits is in the hundreds
of thousands of dollars, which result in a significant loss of
revenue (and) diverts funds from essential constituent
services.
"This bill aims to eliminate confusion by requiring that all
city, county, charter city, charter county, charter city and
county, special district employees, and city elected officials
receive sexual harassment prevention training and education
within a six month period after assuming a new position."
3)Background. During the past few years, California has
witnessed a number of high-profile cases in which elected
local government officials were accused and/or found guilty of
sexually harassing their staff or other employees. Most
visible among them was the City of San Diego's scandal with
its former mayor. A major issue in that case involved a
dispute between the City and the former mayor over who was
responsible for the mayor's sexual harassment training, which
he didn't complete until after sexual harassment allegations
AB 1661
Page 7
were made public and after the required 6-month timeframe for
training had elapsed.
The mayor's attorney argued that the City was responsible for
defending the mayor in his legal battles, because the City
failed to provide training to the mayor within the required
6-month timeline. The City contended that the mayor
repeatedly refused to complete the on-line training course.
The City of San Diego eventually settled several lawsuits
against its former mayor, reporting in February that it
expected total payouts when all suits were settled to reach $1
million.
There have been additional news reports and op-eds on this
issue in other parts of the state, including West Hollywood
and Sacramento. At issue is whether elected officials are
considered "supervisory employees" and, as such, subject to
current law that requires employers to provide sexual
harassment training to employees who are supervisors. Some
jurisdictions have interpreted the law to include elected
officials among supervisory employees, while others have not.
This bill is modeled after current law governing ethics
training for local agency officials, in an attempt to clarify
that local agency officials are, indeed, required to complete
training and education in sexual harassment.
AB 1661
Page 8
4)Suggested Amendments. The Committee may wish to consider the
following amendments:
a) Prevent Duplicative Training. Current law governing
ethics training for local agency officials contains a
provision to account for local agency officials who serve
on more than one board. This provision states, "A local
agency official who serves more than one local agency shall
satisfy the requirements of this article once every two
years without regard to the number of local agencies with
which he or she serves." The Committee may wish to
consider adding such a provision to this bill.
b) Ensure Sufficiency of Course Content. Existing law
requiring ethics training for local agency officials
contains a provision that states, "If any entity develops
curricula to satisfy the requirements of this section, then
the Fair Political Practices Commission and the Attorney
General shall be consulted regarding the sufficiency and
accuracy of any proposed course content. When reviewing
any proposed course content the Fair Political Practices
Commission and the Attorney General shall not preclude an
entity from also including local ethics policies in the
curricula." The Committee may wish to include a similar
provision in this bill.
c) Prevent Conflict With Existing Law. Current law
requires specified sexual harassment training for
supervisory employees that is not identical to the
provisions of this bill that apply to local agency
employees. The Committee may wish to consider amending
AB 1661
Page 9
this bill to clarify that its provisions do not supersede
existing law governing sexual harassment training for
supervisory employees.
d) Technical Amendment. The bill's definition of "local
agency official" should be amended to refer to "legislative
body" instead of "governing body" to maintain consistency
with ethics training requirements.
5)Previous Legislation. AB 2053 (Gonzalez), Chapter 306,
Statutes of 2014, expanded on existing law related to sexual
harassment training for supervisory employees to also include
training on the prevention of abusive conduct.
SB 1087 (Monning), Chapter 750, Statutes of 2014, prohibited a
farm labor contractor (FLC) who engages in sexual harassment
from being issued an FLC's license or renewing the license, as
specified.
AB 1234 (Salinas), Chapter 700, Statutes of 2005, established
provisions for ethics training for local government officials
and designated employees.
AB 1825 (Reyes), Chapter 933, Statutes of 2004, required
employers who have 50 or more employees to provide sexual
AB 1661
Page 10
harassment training and education to all supervisory
employees.
6)Arguments in Support. The Sacramento Collective for Women's
Rights, in support, writes, "Sexual harassment in the
workplace continues to be a prevalent issue in the United
States. Men and women alike can experience sexual harassment
in the workplace; therefore, they should be able to recognize,
resist and report it when it happens?AB 1661?aims to create a
universal mandate for all city and county elected officials to
complete such training. It is time for a universal law that
specifically requires city and county elected officials to
take this training so that it eliminates any confusion as to
what trainings and courses they must take."
The CSAC Excess Insurance Authority, also in support, adds,
"As public entity members, we are often drawn into lengthy and
costly employment-related lawsuits where claims of sexual
harassment are brought forth. Oftentimes, we see that the
lawsuits are directed at supervisory staff either for their
direct actions or their inaction in addressing the alleged
harassment?however, we also see that other employees who are
aware of?potential harassment fail to bring the issue to
light. We believe that expanding the existing law?will
provide for greater education and awareness across all levels
of employment in local government."
7)Arguments in Opposition. None on file.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
AB 1661
Page 11
Support
Equal Rights Advocates [SPONSOR]
Association of California Water Agencies
California Association of Recreation and Park Districts
California Fire Chiefs Association
California Women's Law Center
CSAC Excess Insurance Authority
Fire Districts Association of California
Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association
Organization of SMUD Employees
Sacramento Collective for Women's Rights
San Diego County Court Employees Association
AB 1661
Page 12
San Luis Obispo County Employees Association
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958