BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1661
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
1661 (McCarty and Gonzalez)
As Amended August 15, 2016
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | 78-0 |(May 31, 2016) |SENATE: |38-0 |(August 16, |
| | | | | |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: L. GOV.
SUMMARY: Requires local agency officials to receive sexual
harassment prevention training and education.
The Senate amendments:
1)Delete language requiring an entity that develops curricula
for sexual harassment prevention training and education to
consult with the Attorney General regarding the sufficiency
and accuracy of the proposed content and, instead, require
such entities to consult with the city attorney or county
counsel;
2)Revise language regarding a local agency's duty to inform
local agency officials and employees about sexual harassment
prevention training and education to require local agencies to
provide a recommendation (rather than information) on training
and education available at least once in written form before
AB 1661
Page 2
assuming a new position and every two years thereafter (rather
than annually);
3)Change references to "sexual harassment training and
education" to "sexual harassment prevention training and
education;"
4)Add findings and declarations that there have been incidents
in which the employees of local governments have been sexually
harassed by their colleagues and that the harassment of local
government employees by their colleagues can be prevented if
local governments provide training and educating to their
employees.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, likely minor reimbursable mandated costs for local
agencies to consult with a city attorney or county counsel when
developing training curricula, to recommend training available
to local officials every two years, and to maintain records on
local officials' completion of training. (General Fund)
COMMENTS:
1)Bill Summary. This bill requires local agency officials to
receive two hours of sexual harassment prevention 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
legislative body and any elected official of cities and
counties (including charter cities and charter counties), and
special districts.
This bill requires an entity that develops curricula to
AB 1661
Page 3
satisfy the bill's requirements to consult with the city
attorney or county counsel regarding the sufficiency and
accuracy of the curricula, and allows an entity to include
local sexual harassment prevention training and education
policies in the curricula. A local agency official who serves
more than one local agency shall satisfy the bill's
requirements once every two years, regardless of the number of
local agencies he or she serves.
This bill provides that its requirements are in addition to
any other law requiring similar or related training, and
provides that nothing in the bill shall be construed to
supersede the requirements of current law governing sexual
harassment or sexual harassment prevention training, as
specified.
This bill allows a local agency to also require any of its
employees to receive sexual harassment prevention training and
education as outlined in the bill. This bill is sponsored by
Equal Rights Advocates.
2)Authors' Statement. According to the authors, "AB 1825
(Reyes), Chapter 933, Statutes of 2004, 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 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
AB 1661
Page 4
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 (City) 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
were made public and after the required six-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
six-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
AB 1661
Page 5
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.
4)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
harassment training and education to all supervisory
employees.
5)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,
AB 1661
Page 6
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."
6)Arguments in Opposition. None on file.
Analysis Prepared by:
Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN:
0004281