BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 651
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 13, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 651 (Leno) - As Amended: June 22, 2011
Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:6-3
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill eliminates some of the differences between marriages
and domestic partnerships. Specifically, this bill:
1)Eliminates the requirement that domestic partners share a
common residence requirement.
2)Permits a person under 18 years of age to enter a domestic
partnership with the consent of a parent or guardian and a
court order, as provided.
3)Directs the Secretary of State (SOS) to establish a process by
which two persons, who satisfy the requirements to be domestic
partners, and who have been living together as domestic
partners, may enter into a confidential Declaration of
Domestic Partnership. The SOS must maintain the confidential
declaration as a permanent record not open to public
inspection, except upon court order issued upon a showing of
good cause.
4)Authorizes the SOS to charge a reasonable fee to offset the
costs directly associated with maintaining the required
confidentiality.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Administrative Costs . The SOS will incur one-time costs of
around $100,000 for reprogramming related to establishing a
confidential Declaration of Domestic Partnership. Any other
costs to the SOS for implementing the bill's provisions will
be minor and absorbable.
SB 651
Page 2
2)Revenue Impact . SB 1827 (Migden)/Chapter 802 of 2006 allowed
registered domestic partners to file joint income taxes in
order to receive the same financial protection afforded to
married couples. According to the Franchise Tax Board, the
average income tax benefit for married filing jointly versus
those filing as single or head of household could range from
$200 to $1,500 per year depending on each individual's income
levels. For every 1% increase in registered domestic
partnerships, as a result of this bill, who receive this tax
benefit, the resulting income tax revenue loss is $110,000 to
$825,000 annually. Additionally, the exclusion from gross
income for specified medical expenses and health insurance
benefits for these additional domestic partnerships could
result in additional potentially significant lost tax revenue.
3)Health Benefits . The California Public Employees Retirement
System (CalPERS) has indicated that any employee adding a
spouse or domestic partner to his or her health plan increases
health benefit costs by $5,500 annually, plus unknown
increases for retiree and survivor's health benefits as
afforded by the state. Thus these costs will increase to the
extent that additional domestic partnerships formed under the
provisions of this bill involve state employees.
COMMENTS
1)Background . Under current law, in order to register as a
domestic partnership with the SOS, two people must: (a) have a
common residence; (b) not be married to someone else or be a
member of another domestic partnership; (c) not be related by
blood in a way that would prevent them from being married to
each other in this state; (d) be at least 18 years of age; (e)
be members of the same sex, or if members of the opposite sex,
one or both persons must be over the age of 62; and, (f) both
persons must be capable of consenting to the domestic
partnership. About 110,000 individuals are registered as
domestic partners in California.
2)Purpose . The California Supreme Court has found that, other
than the word marriage, same-sex couples in domestic
partnerships have the same substantive privacy and due process
protections as those accorded to opposite-sex married couples,
as well as the same broad protections under the state's equal
protection clause. Nevertheless, there are still many
differences between marriage and domestic partnership, some,
SB 651
Page 3
of which are attributable to differences in state law. This
bill, sponsored by Equality California, seeks to reduce the
legal differences between domestic partnership and marriage
that are the result of those differences in state law.
3)Confidentiality Provisions . Current law allows an unmarried
couple, who have been living together as husband and wife, to
get married confidentially. Confidential marriage certificates
are not open to public inspection without a court order. This
bill creates a confidential declaration of domestic
partnership to allow a couple, who has not registered as
domestic partners, but has otherwise been living together as
domestic partners, to officially register as domestic
partners, with all the ensuing rights and responsibilities,
but to do so confidentially.
4)Opposition . The California Right to Life Committee, Inc.
opposes the bill "as bad policy and one that promotes the
homosexual agenda to normalize this lifestyle and change the
traditional concept of marriage as a contract between one man
and one woman."
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081