SACRS 2019 Spring Conference

State Association of County Retirement Systems 2019 Spring Conference
Lake Tahoe, CA

Ashley Dunning and George Joseph spoke during the State Association of County Retirement Systems (SACRS) 2019 Spring Conference in Lake Tahoe, CA May 7-10, 2019. 

On May 7th, George presented "Sexual Harassment Prevention Training for Local Agency Officials (AB1661)." On September 29, 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill (AB) 1661, which requires that if a local agency provides any type of compensation, salary, or stipend to its officials, then all local agency officials of the agency shall receive at least two hours of sexual harassment prevention and education training within the first six months of taking office or commencing employment and every two years thereafter. This interactive training session met the requirements under AB 1661 and AB 1825 (sexual harassment prevention training to employees who perform supervisory functions) and assisted attendees in preventing and effectively responding to complaints of sexual harassment.

Also on May 7th, Ashley presented "Ethics Training for Public Officials (AB 1234)." This two-hour mandatory bi-annual training for public officials covered conflict of interest rules, public meeting and record requirements, due process requirements, and other significant rules for legal compliance by public officials, with a particular focus on how these rules apply to retirement board trustees and senior staff. 

Ashley moderated the Attorney Breakout Roundtable Discussion on May 8th, which covered a wide range of timely legal topics.

On May 9th, Ashley joined a panel with three other experts for "California Supreme Court to Decide: What's Next for the 'California Rule' and Public Employee Pensions as Vested Rights." On March 4, 2019, the California Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in CalFIRE v. CalPERS, which addressed whether the retirement benefit considered in that case was a "vested" benefit that would thus be afforded constitutional protection under California law, and determine that it was not a vested benefit. The panel discussed the CalFIRE decision as well as several other vested rights cases that the Supreme Court is scheduled to decide next. 

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn


Jump to Page

We use cookies on this website to improve functionality, enhance performance, analyze website traffic and to enable social media features. To learn more, please see our Privacy Policy and our Terms & Conditions for additional detail.