BILL ANALYSIS SB 75 Page 1 Date of Hearing: August 18, 1999 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Carole Migden, Chairwoman SB 75 (Murray) - As Amended: July 15, 1999 Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:10-5 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:YesReimbursable: Yes SUMMARY : This bill: 1)Provides for the registration of domestic partners, as defined, with the Secretary of State (SOS) and authorizes the SOS to charge fees in order to cover registration costs. 2)Requires, when applicable, that a Notice of Termination of Domestic Partnership be filed with the SOS. Establishes rights for domestic partners regarding hospital visitation and participation in conservatorship proceedings affecting a partner. 3)Preempts local ordinances creating domestic partnerships before July 2000, but allows local jurisdictions to adopt ordinances or policies offering additional rights to domestic partners. FISCAL EFFECT : The SOS estimates first-year costs of about $130,000--to develop the registration and termination forms and to implement the program-and ongoing costs of about $60,000. These costs would be fully-offset by registration fees established by the SOS. COMMENTS : 1)Purpose . The author states that SB 75 is "designed to aid, strengthen, protect, and promote committed family relationships." According to the author, hundreds of thousands of Californians cohabit without the benefit of SB 75 Page 2 marriage, though their relationships could be as stable as those of married couples. Recognizing the status of domestic partners would give heterosexual and same-sex partners basic rights in the areas of health care and conservatorships. 2)Background . At the time of the 1990 census, there were approximately 500,000 unmarried couples in California, 93 percent of which were heterosexual couples and 7 percent same-sex couples. Of the 500,000 unmarried couples, 35,000 were senior citizen couples who were not married because of social security or other pension restrictions. In California, 12 cities, four counties, and 10 university systems have domestic partnership policies. In addition, 129 for-profit, not-for-profit and union organizations in the state have chosen to provide benefits to domestic partners. 3)Opposition . Opponents of this bill state that the bill is unnecessary and that the recognition of domestic partnerships would devalue true family commitments. The Capitol Resource Institute, Sacramento strongly opposes SB 75 because it believes that the bill "will undermine the institution of marriage and family. By and large, 'domestic partners' are overwhelmingly same-sex couples. By equating homosexual partner, or any unmarried partner, with the time-honored status of married spouse, the institution of marriage will be weakened and undermined." 4)Related Legislation . In 1997, AB 54 (Murray), which is very similar to this bill, died on the Assembly Floor. AB 26 (Migden), pending referral from the Senate Rules Committee, is very similar to this bill but also authorizes the state Public Employees Retirement System to extend health coverage to state and local public employees who register as domestic partners. Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)319-2081