BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �






          SENATE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT & RETIREMENT   BILL NO:  AB 1824
          Norma Torres, Chair          HEARING DATE:  June 23, 2014
          AB 1824 (Rendon)    as amended   4/22/14      FISCAL:  NO

           1937 ACT COUNTY RETIREMENT LAW:  OPTIONAL SETTLEMENT  
          REVISIONS
           
           HISTORY  :

            Sponsor:  California Retired County Employees Association  
          (CRCEA)

            Other legislation:  AB 1136 (Fong), 2009
                          Vetoed by Governor
                        AB 979 (Negrete McLeod),
                          Chapter 441, Statutes of 2004

           ASSEMBLY VOTES  :

            PER & SS                 4-1       5/07/14
            Assembly Floor           51-22     5/23/14
           
          SUMMARY  :

          AB 1824 permits, upon adoption by a county board of  
          retirement, a retired member of a county retirement system  
          being operated under the County Employees' Retirement Law of  
          1937 ('37 Act) to change a previously elected optional  
          settlement, as specified.

           BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS  :
          
           1)Existing law :
           
              a)   establishes the 1937 Act County Employees' Retirement  
               System, governed by the '37 Act and comprised of 20  
               independent county retirement systems.

             b)   permits a member of a '37 Act retirement system,  
               prior to the first payment of any retirement allowance,  
               to elect certain optional settlements, which reduce the  
               allowance payable to the retiree through his or her life  
               in exchange for providing ongoing payments to the  
          Pamela Schneider
          Date:  June 16, 2014                                    Page  
          1









               beneficiary (which could be a spouse or other  
               individual) for his or her lifetime in the event of the  
               retiree's death.

             c)   provides that, upon the death of a '37 Act member who  
               died after a service retirement or non-service related  
               disability and  did not  elect an optional settlement, an  
               allowance equaling 60% of his or her retirement  
               allowance will be continued throughout life to a  
               surviving spouse to whom he or she was married for at  
               least one year prior to the effective date of  
               retirement.

             d)   allows, upon adoption by a county board of  
               supervisors, retired '37 Act members, who marry  after   
               retirement, to purchase, at no cost to the retirement  
               system, an optional survivor benefit in order to  
               increase the survivor benefit that would be paid to the  
               new spouse if the member dies first.

           1)This bill  :  
           
             a)   allows a '37 Act retiree, in order to provide for his  
               or her spouse, to revise an optional settlement, as  
               specified, if all of the following apply:

               i)     the retiree retired on or before the date the  
                 post-retirement spouse provision was made applicable  
                 in the county from which he or she retired;
               ii)    the retiree was unmarried or had been married  
                 less than one year at the time of retirement;
               iii)   the retiree's spouse is at least age 55 and is  
                 older than the originally designated beneficiary; and
               iv)    the application requirements, including requiring  
                 notification of, and acknowledgement by, beneficiaries  
                 who may be affected by the revision, have been  
                 satisfied.

             b)   specifies that a person who knowingly provides false  
               information in the required written declaration is  
               subject to a civil penalty of not less than one thousand  
               dollars ($1,000) and not more than twenty-five thousand  
               dollars ($25,000), in addition to any civil remedies  
          Pamela Schneider
          Date:  June 16, 2014                                    Page  
          2









               available to the board.  An action to impose a civil  
               penalty pursuant to this provision may be brought by any  
               public prosecutor in the name of the people of the  
               state.

             c)   specifies that after revision, the retiree's  
               allowance will remain the same as provided by the  
               original optional settlement, adjusted to reflect any  
               cost-of-living increases that have been added to the  
               retirement allowance.

             d)   specifies that the retirement system is under no  
               obligation to locate or otherwise contact retired  
               members who may qualify for these provisions.

             e)   specifies that any action taken pursuant to these  
               provisions does not excuse the obligation of a member to  
               provide a continuing benefit to a former spouse pursuant  
               to a court order.

             f)   specifies that these provisions will not become  
               effective in a county until adopted by the county board  
               of retirement.

           COMMENTS  :

           1)Similarity to AB 1136 (Fong)
             
            This bill is similar to AB 1136 (Fong) of 2009, which was  
            vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger due to concerns that the  
            bill would have created unfunded increases to county  
            retirement costs.  AB 1824 differs from that bill by  
            stating that after making this election, the retiree's  
            allowance will remain the same as provided by the original  
            optional settlement.

           2)Arguments in Support  :  

             According to the author:

               The Legislature added a provision to the County  
               Employees' Retirement Law, commonly referred to as the  
               'Post-retirement spouse" provision, which makes a spouse  
          Pamela Schneider
          Date:  June 16, 2014                                    Page  
          3









               eligible for a survivor's continuance of an unmodified  
               allowance, if the spouse was married to the retiree at  
               least two years prior to the retiree's death, and was 55  
               years old on or before the retirees death.  Application  
               of this provision is optional by county, and a number of  
               retirement boards have exercised this option at various  
               times.

               A number of retirees who were unmarried or married for  
               less than one year and who selected an optional  
               settlement in lieu of the unmodified allowance at the  
               time they retired might not have done so had the  
               post-retirement spouse provision been made applicable in  
               the county from which they retired.

               This bill would enable a retiree to change the  
               beneficiary of an optional settlement in a county in  
               which the post-retirement spouse provision has been made  
               applicable provided certain criteria have been met.
             
           As stated by the sponsor:

               Frequently, optional settlements are selected because,  
               when making application for retirement, the employee is  
               either unmarried or is barred from naming his spouse as  
               the beneficiary of an unmodified allowance because he or  
               she had been married less than one year prior to  
               retirement.  By requiring the spouse to be older than  
               the designated beneficiary, and not changing the amount  
               of the pension, the change should result in no  
               additional cost to the retirement system.
           
          3)SUPPORT  :
          
            California Retired County Employees Association (CRCEA)

           4)OPPOSITION  :

            None.




          Pamela Schneider
          Date:  June 16, 2014                                    Page  
          4









                                      #####
          







































          Pamela Schneider
          Date:  June 16, 2014                                    Page  
          5