California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Enacted 1 D cosponsors

SB 481 — State military: inspector general.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 704, Statutes of 2019.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 21, 2019. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 72% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 5 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

Existing law establishes the California Military Department Inspector General to investigate alleged violations of law or gross mismanagement or waste of funds. Existing law establishes qualifications for a person serving in the position of inspector general, including, among other things, that the inspector general be subordinate to the Adjutant General. This bill would instead require that the inspector general be an advisor to the Governor and responsive to the Adjutant General. Existing law, either at the discretion of the inspector general or upon request by the Governor, a Member of the Legislature, any member of the Military Department, or any member of the public, authorizes the inspector general to investigate any complaint or allegation regarding specified issues. This bill would instead require the inspector general to expeditiously investigate those complaints. The bill would also require the inspector general to notify the requesting party of the results of the investigation. The bill would require specified allegations presented to the inspector general to be reported to either the Governor or specified federal inspectors general, and the Adjutant General, as specified. Existing law, the California Military Whistleblower Protection Act, prohibits a person from restricting a member of the Military Department from making specified communications to a Member of Congress, the Governor, a Member of the Legislature, or any state or federal inspector general, or from taking, or threatening to take, unfavorable personnel actions, or withholding, or threatening to withhold, favorable personnel actions, as a reprisal against a member of the Military Department for making specified communications. Existing law requires the inspector general to, after the completion of an investigation into an allegation relating to the act, submit a report on the results of the investigation to the Adjutant General and a copy of the report on the results of the investigation to the member of the department who made the allegation. This bill would require the inspector general to provide an interim response to allegations of actions prohibited by the act when the final response will be delayed, as specified. Existing law requires the inspector general, if the inspector general is not outside the immediate chain of command of both the member submitting the allegation and the individual or individuals alleged to have taken an action prohibited by the California Military Whistleblower Protection Act, to refer the allegation to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau and the Governor. This bill would instead require the inspector general to refer all allegations of actions prohibited by the act to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau and the Governor. The bill would additionally require the Governor or Adjutant General to take disciplinary actions against any member of the department who intentionally engages in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, coercion, or similar acts, as specified, against a person who reported improper activities.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 704, Statutes of 2019.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.

  4. In Senate. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3172.) Ordered to the Senate.

  6. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  7. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 18. Noes 0.) (August 14).

  8. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  9. Referred to Com. on V.A.

  10. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  11. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 1178.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  12. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  13. From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.

  14. Set for hearing May 13.

  15. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  16. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 807.) (April 23).

  17. Set for hearing April 23.

  18. April 9 hearing postponed by committee.

  19. Set for hearing April 9.

  20. March 26 hearing postponed by committee.

  21. Set for hearing March 26.

  22. Referred to Com. on V.A.

  23. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 24.

  24. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

SB 481 Umberg Senate Third Reading By Eggman

Passed 79 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 52000
Democratic 22000
Republican 5000
Total 79000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Mathis — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Low — Yea
Burke — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Smith — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Gray — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Medina — Yea
Chu — Yea
Ting — Yea
McCarty — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Salas — Yea
Brough — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Holden — Yea
Daly — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Weber — Yea
Fong — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Levine — Yea
Wood — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 18 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 5000
Unaffiliated 13000
Total 18000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Fong — Yea
Brough — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 10 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6001
Democratic 4000
Total 10001
% of votes cast 91%0%0%9%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Gloria — Yea
Salas — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Daly — Yea
Brough — Not Voting
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 37 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 26001
Democratic 9000
Republican 2000
Total 37001
% of votes cast 97%0%0%3%
How each member voted (38)
Member Party Vote
Rubio — Yea
Monning — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Beall — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hill — Yea
Roth — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Allen — Yea
Borgeas — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bates — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Chang — Yea
Pan — Yea
Mitchell — Not Voting
Mark Stone — Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety veterans
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 481 do?
Existing law establishes the California Military Department Inspector General to investigate alleged violations of law or gross mismanagement or waste of funds. Existing law establishes qualifications for a person serving in the position of inspector general, including, among other things, that the inspector general be subordinate to the Adjutant General. This bill would instead require that the inspector general be an advisor to the Governor and responsive to the Adjutant General. Existing law, either at the discretion of the inspector general or upon request by the Governor, a Member of the Legislature, any member of the Military Department, or any member of the public, authorizes the inspector general to investigate any complaint or allegation regarding specified issues. This bill would instead require the inspector general to expeditiously investigate those complaints. The bill would also require the inspector general to notify the requesting party of the results of the investigation. The bill would require specified allegations presented to the inspector general to be reported to either the Governor or specified federal inspectors general, and the Adjutant General, as specified. Existing law, the California Military Whistleblower Protection Act, prohibits a person from restricting a member of the Military Department from making specified communications to a Member of Congress, the Governor, a Member of the Legislature, or any state or federal inspector general, or from taking, or threatening to take, unfavorable personnel actions, or withholding, or threatening to withhold, favorable personnel actions, as a reprisal against a member of the Military Department for making specified communications. Existing law requires the inspector general to, after the completion of an investigation into an allegation relating to the act, submit a report on the results of the investigation to the Adjutant General and a copy of the report on the results of the investigation to the member of the department who made the allegation. This bill would require the inspector general to provide an interim response to allegations of actions prohibited by the act when the final response will be delayed, as specified. Existing law requires the inspector general, if the inspector general is not outside the immediate chain of command of both the member submitting the allegation and the individual or individuals alleged to have taken an action prohibited by the California Military Whistleblower Protection Act, to refer the allegation to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau and the Governor. This bill would instead require the inspector general to refer all allegations of actions prohibited by the act to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau and the Governor. The bill would additionally require the Governor or Adjutant General to take disciplinary actions against any member of the department who intentionally engages in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, coercion, or similar acts, as specified, against a person who reported improper activities.
Who sponsors SB 481?
SB 481 is sponsored by Umberg, Thomas J. (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 481?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 21, 2019. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 481?
Track SB 481 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 481

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 481

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →