(1)Existing law, the California Public Employees Pension Reform Act of 2013, establishes various limits on retirement benefits generally applicable to a public employee retirement system, as specified. Existing law requires a public employee who is a member of a public retirement system to forfeit accrued rights and benefits in the public retirement system if the individual is convicted of certain felonies, including for conduct arising out of or in the performance of their official duties, relating to salary, disability retirement, service retirement, or other benefits, or that is committed against a child, as specified. Existing law limits this forfeiture to rights and benefits earned or accrued from the earliest date of the commission of the felony.

This bill would require a public employee who is a correctional officer or other prison staff member that is employed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation who is a current member of a public retirement system, convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate within the prison system system, to forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which that public employee is a member and would prohibit that employee from accruing any further benefits in that retirement system. The bill would prohibit any contributions made by the member to the public retirement system from being returned to that member upon the occurrence of a conviction resulting in forfeiture, except as specified. rights and benefits in the public retirement system, as prescribed. The bill would also require a correctional officer or other prison staff member employed by the department who first becomes a member of a public retirement system on or after January 1, 2026, who is convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate within the state prison system, to forfeit all rights and benefits in the retirement system. The bill would establish procedures governing these forfeiture provisions, the forfeiture process, including authorizing a public retirement system to assess a public employer a reasonable amount for reimbursement of specified costs. The bill would require a public retirement system to implement these provisions in a manner that protects an innocent or former spouse and is consistent with existing law governing the division of community property. The bill would apply these provisions retroactively and prospectively, regardless of the public employees date of hire.

(2)Existing law provides the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation with jurisdiction over prisons and institutions, including, among others, the California Correctional Institution in the City of Tehachapi and the Central California Womens Facility, and sets forth its powers and duties regarding the administration of correctional facilities and the care and custody of inmates. Existing law also authorizes the secretary of the department to construct and equip suitable buildings, structures, and facilities for, among others, the California Correctional Institution in the City of Tehachapi for the confinement of males under the custody of the secretary.

This bill would require the department to construct and establish one new building with 100 additional single-cell housing units at the Central California Womens Facility state prison located in the City of Chowchilla for the confinement of women under the custody of the secretary. The bill would also require the department to install fixed cameras by January 1, 2028, in all designated locations that have been ordered by the court or the Legislature, install thermal sensor cameras that track body movements in inmate bathrooms, and eliminate solo shifts for correctional officers, in womens state prison facilities. The bill would also authorize a correctional lieutenant on the site of a state prison facility to grant permission to an inmate, upon the inmates request, to be transferred to restrictive housing.

Existing law requires the Board of State and Community Corrections to administer a competitive grant program that focuses on community-based solutions for reducing recidivism. Existing law requires the board to form an executive steering committee to make recommendations regarding the design, efficacy, and viability of proposals, including threshold and scoring criteria, that, among other things, prioritizes proposals that leverage other federal, state, and local funds or other social investments. Existing law provides examples of possible funding sources, which include, among other sources, the Drug Medi-Cal Treatment Program and the Mental Health Services Act.

This bill would add the Drug Medi-Cal organized delivery system and the Behavioral Health Services Act to that list.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

SB 850 (Ashby) - Prisons

Bill Summary:

SB 850 requires the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to implement several measure intended to prevent staff sexual abuse of incarcerated persons.

Fiscal Impact:

• CDCR: Significant one-time and ongoing costs to CDCR (General Fund) likely in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Specifically, CDCR notes the following:
  
  • The estimated cost to construct one new building with 100 additional single-cell housing units is approximately $55 million. The project would take four to six years to complete, including funding approval, design and construction.
    
  • While CDCR was previously funded for installation of AVSS across the system, to the extent the bill language may expand deployment of fixed cameras to new designated locations, there will be significant cost pressures, likely millions of dollars.
    
  • Costs in the high hundreds of thousands of dollars to low millions of dollars in technology and infrastructure costs to install thermal sensor cameras. CDCR notes that the previous funding did not include installation of thermal sensor cameras. CDCR also has significant policy concerns with utilizing thermal sensor cameras in restrooms for incarcerated persons as it may violate the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA).
    
  • CDCR anticipates significant staffing cost pressures in the range of several millions of dollars to ensure that there are no shifts with only a single floor officer in a housing unit.
    
  • For the provisions related to the forfeiture of accrued benefits in a public retirement system when a correctional officer or other prison staff member is convicted of sexually assaulting an incarcerated person, CDCR anticipates potential litigation related to the implementation of the expansion of benefit forfeiture.
• Public Retirement Systems: Unknown, potentially minimal administrative costs to public retirement systems, including but not limited to, the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS). These costs could be offset by in the long-term savings from avoided benefit payouts due to forfeiture. However, cost-savings are likely minimal, given that incidents involving prison staff engaging in sexual conduct with incarcerated persons often do not result in criminal convictions. The fiscal impact of this bill on public retirement systems is difficult to determine, as it depends on numerous unknown factors, including the number of criminal convictions, employee contributions, and the length of time employees have vested in the system. For context, data from CDCR indicates that between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2024, there were 6,053 allegations of staff sexual misconduct. Of these, only 64 allegations were sustained, and it is likely that some of these involved repeat offenders. Furthermore, it is unlikely that a substantial portion of the sustained allegations led to criminal convictions.

Background:

California’s prisons—and the women’s prisons in particular—have been plagued with allegations of staff sexual assault and sexual misconduct for years.^[1] In 2024, 130 individuals formerly incarcerated at the California Institution for Women (CIW) and CCWF filed a lawsuit against CDCR and 30 current and former correctional officers alleging that they were sexually abused while in prison. The lawsuit alleges that the sexual abuse occurred throughout the prisons, including in cells, closets, and storage rooms, and alleges a variety of sexual abuse, including groping, forced oral copulation, and rape.

In 2023, a former correctional officer at CCWF was arrested for sexually assaulting 13 incarcerated individuals over nine years and charged with 96 counts of rape, sodomy, sexual battery, and rape under color of authority.^[2] He was found guilty on 59 of those counts earlier this year.^[3] Also earlier this year, six women filed a lawsuit alleging that that a gynecologist at CIW abused them. The women claim that they “endured abusive pap smears and biopsies and coerced exams, including breast and anal examinations, and that those who crossed him…faced retaliation, including withholding of medical treatment.”^[4]

The 2023-2024 Budget Act established “a sexual assault response and prevention working group and ambassador program” and allocated funds to CDCR as well as the Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition to support the working group in identifying best practices for whistleblower protections and trauma-informed care and support to survivors. The working group consisted of CDCR leadership and staff, correctional officers, community-based organizations led by formerly incarcerated people, representatives from the Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition, and individuals who have survived sexual assault while in custody. The working group met over a six-month period. Two reports were produced as a result of the working group: one authored by CDCR required by the Budget Act and one authored by the community-based organizations that were members of the working group.

The community report on the working group primarily focused on the women’s prisons, CIW and CCWF. The report made several recommendations fitting into five categories: expedited release of survivors, culture shifting, services for survivors, the investigation and reporting process, and accountability.

Proposed Law:

• Central California Women’s Facility:
  • Provides that, there is, and shall continue to be, a state prison known as the Central California Women’s Facility located in the City of Chowchilla.
  • Requires CDCR to construct and establish one new building with 100 additional single-cell housing units at the Central California Women’s Facility.
• Women’s state prison facilities:
  • Requires CDCR to install fixed cameras by January 1, 2028, in all designated locations at women’s state prisons as ordered by the court or the Legislature.
  • Requires CDCR to Install thermal sensor cameras that track body movements in inmate bathrooms at women’s state prisons.
  • Requires CDCR to eliminate solo shifts for correctional officers at women’s state prisons.
  • Requires a correctional lieutenant on the site of a women’s state prison facility shall have the authority to, upon request by an inmate, transfer that inmate to restrictive housing.
• Forfeiture of rights and benefits in the public retirement system:
  
  • If a correctional officer or other prison staff member employed by CDCR, who is a current member of a public retirement system, is convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate within the state prison system, they shall, upon conviction, from the earliest date of commission of the crime, forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in the public retirement system and shall not accrue further benefits in the public retirement system. Pursuant to regulations adopted by the public retirement system board, any contributions made by the member shall be returned to them.
    
  • If a correctional officer or other prison staff member employed by CDCR, who first becomes a member of a public retirement system on or after January 1, 2026, is convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate, they shall, upon conviction, forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in the public retirement system and shall not accrue further benefits in the public retirement system. Pursuant to regulations adopted by the public retirement system board, any contributions made by the member shall not be returned.
    
  • A member shall forfeit all of the rights and benefits earned or accrued from the date that they first became a member of the public retirement system. The rights and benefits shall remain forfeited notwithstanding any reduction in sentence or expungement of the conviction following the date of the member’s conviction.
    
  • Upon conviction, the member and the prosecuting agency shall notify the employer within 60 days of the felony conviction of the date of conviction and the date of the first known commission of the felony.
    
  • The employer and the member shall each notify the public retirement system of the conviction within 90 days of the conviction. A public retirement system may assess the employer a reasonable amount to reimburse the cost of audit, adjustment, or correction, if it determines that the employer failed to comply. The amount assessed shall not exceed the reasonable regulatory costs to the retirement system.
    
  • If a conviction is reversed, the member shall be entitled to either: the forfeited rights and benefits; or, to redeposit any contributions and interest that would have accrued during the forfeiture period, as determined by the system actuary, and then recover the full amount of the forfeited rights and benefits.
    
  • The public retirement system shall implement these provisions in a manner that protects an innocent spouse or former spouse and is consistent with existing law governing the division of community property.

Related Legislation:

SB 337 (Menjivar) would also make several changes to existing law designed to prevent sexual abuse of incarcerated individuals. SB 337 is pending on this Committee’s Suspense File.

-- END --

1. See Richard Winton, ‘Every woman’s worst nightmare’: Lawsuit alleges widespread sexual abuse at California prisons for women (Jan. 18, 2024). Available at: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-01-18/every-womans-worst-nightmare-lawsuit-alleges-widespread-sexual-abuse-at-californias-womens-prisons.
   ↑

2. Jeremy Childs, Ex-corrections officer accused of raping 13 inmates in California women’s prison (May 25, 2023). Available at: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-05-25/ex-corrections-officer-accused-of-raping-inmates-at-california-womens-prison.
   ↑

3. Elize Manoukian, Former guard at California women’s prison found guilty of 59 counts of sexual abuse (Jan. 15, 2025). Available at: https://www.kqed/com/news/12022075/former-guard-california-womens-prison-found-guilty-59-counts-sexual-abuse.
   ↑

4. Anabel Sosa, Lawsuit accuses gynecologist at California women’s prison of abusing patients for years (Feb. 5, 2025). Available at: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-02-05/gynecologist-womens-prison-abuse-lawsuit. ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON LABOR, PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT

Senator Lola Smallwood-Cuevas, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Bill No: SB 850 Hearing Date: April 30, 2025

SUBJECT: Prisons.

KEY ISSUE

This bill would impose unconstitutional pension forfeiture conditions on current members of public employee retirement systems to eliminate retroactively all accrued vested pension rights and confiscate accumulated employee contributions of any California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) employee convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate within the state prison system. The bill also requires CDCR to implement several actions related to preventing CDCR staff abuse of incarcerated persons.

ANALYSIS

Existing law:

1. Creates a judicial doctrine known as the California Rule pursuant to seventy years of California Supreme Court (“the Court”) case law that prevents the Legislature from unilaterally revising public employee pension plans. The Court has based the California Rule on fundamental state and federal constitutional provisions that prohibit the government from enacting laws effecting a substantial impairment of contract. (Beginning with Allen v. City of Long Beach (1955) 45 Cal.2d 128, and explicated most recently in Cal Fire Local 2881 v. California Public Employees’ Retirement System (2019) 6 Cal.5th 965 (“Cal Fire”) and Alameda County Deputy Sheriff’s Assn. v. Alameda County Employee Retirement Assn., S247095 (Cal. Jul. 30, 2020) (“Alameda”.)
2. Provides that pension plan sponsors may make “permissible modifications” to a pension plan if the modifications are “materially related to the theory and successful operation of a pension system.” ((Cal Fire Local 2881 v. California Public Employees Retirement System (2016) 7 Cal.App.5th 115, 123, 129) affirmed by the Court in Cal Fire)
3. Clarifies that public employee pension plans may be modified “for the purpose of keeping [the] pension system flexible to permit adjustments in accord with changing conditions and at the same time maintain the integrity of the system,” but to survive contract clause scrutiny, such changes “must bear some material relation to the theory of a pension system and its successful operation” and “provide comparable new advantages to public employees unless to do so would undermine, or would otherwise be inconsistent with, that proper purpose.” (Alameda at pp. 4-5)
4. Provides, under the California Constitution that, "the members of the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system shall discharge their duties with respect to the system solely in the interest of, and for the exclusive purposes of providing benefits to, participants and their beneficiaries, minimizing employer contributions thereto, and defraying reasonable expenses of administrating the system.” (Ca. Const., Art XVI, § 17)
5. Provides that the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system has plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for administration of the system, and among other provisions, consistent with the fiduciary responsibilities vested in it, must have the sole and exclusive power to provide for actuarial services in order to assure the competency of the assets of the public pension or retirement system. (Ca. Const., Art XVI, § 17)
6. Establishes the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), which provides a defined benefit pension to state employees, classified school employees, and employees of contracting public agencies, including several cities, counties, and special districts throughout the state. (Government Code §20000 et seq.)
7. Establishes approximately 80 other public employee retirement plans, including the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS), which provides pensions to certificated school employees; 20 affiliated county retirement associations (e.g., the Orange County Employees Retirement System and the Los Angeles County Employees’ Retirement Association) under the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (CERL), which provide pensions to specified county employees and is represented by the State Association of County Retirement Systems (SACRS); and several other independent California public pension plans established under ordinances and codes authorized by city and county charters and other state or constitutional legal frameworks (e.g., the Los Angeles City Employees’ Retirement System, the San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System, the San Jose Federated City Employees’ Retirement System, the University of California Retirement System, etc.) (Education Code §26000 et seq.; Government Code §31450 et seq.; et al.)
8. Establishes the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) of 2013, a comprehensive reform of public pension law designed to stabilize public pension systems while preserving the objective of ensuring that public employees who dedicate a lifetime of service to California receive retirement security in their old age (Government Code §7522 et seq.)
9. Requires specified public employees and public elected officials, following conviction for specified offenses arising out of the person’s official duties, to forfeit rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which the person is a member from the time of the commission of a felony. (Government Code §§7522.70, 7522.71, 7522.74.)

This bill:

1. Requires a public employee who is a correctional officer or other prison staff member convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate within the state prison system to forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which that public employee is a member, as specified, and prohibits the employee from accruing further benefits in that system.
2. Requires the public employee to forfeit all of the rights and benefits earned or accrued from the date the employee was first hired with the public retirement system. ^[1]
3. Requires that the employee’s rights and benefits remain forfeited notwithstanding any reduction in sentence or expungement of the conviction following the date of the member’s conviction.
4. Prohibits a public retirement system from returning any contributions made by a public employee, as specified.^[2]
5. Requires the prosecuting agency and a public employee, as specified, upon conviction, to notify the employee’s public employer at the time of the commission of the felony of the following within 60 days of the conviction:
   1. The date of conviction.
   2. The date of the first known commission of the felony.
6. Requires the public employee and the employee’s public employer to each notify each public retirement system in which the public employee is a member of the employee’s conviction within 90 days of the conviction.
7. Provides that the bill’s operation does not depend on its notice obligations.
8. Authorizes a public retirement system to assess a public employer a reasonable amount to reimburse the cost of audit, adjustment, or correction, if it determines that the public employer failed to comply with the bill’s provisions.
9. Limits the amount the retirement system may assess to not more than its reasonable regulatory costs.
10. Entitles the employee to do either of the following if the conviction is reversed and that decision is final:
    1. Recover the forfeited rights and benefits.
    2. Redeposit any contributions and interest that would have accrued during the forfeiture period, as determined by the system actuary, and then recover the full amount of the forfeited rights and benefits.
11. Requires the public retirement system to implement the bill’s provisions in a manner that protects an innocent spouse and is consistent with existing law governing the division of community property, as specified.
12. Requires the bill’s provisions to apply to the extent permissible by law.
13. Requires the bill’s provisions to apply retroactively and prospectively to any public employee, as specified, regardless of that public employee’s date of hire.
14. Includes the following provisions related to the state prison known as the Central California Women’s Facility in the City of Chowchilla:^[3]
    1. Requires CDCR to construct and establish one new building with 100 additional single-cell housing units at the Central California Women’s Facility for the confinement of women under CDCR’s custody.
    2. Requires CDCR do all of the following in all women’s state prison facilities:
       1. Install fixed cameras by January 1, 2028, in all designated locations ordered by the court or the Legislature.
       2. Install thermal sensor cameras that track body movements in inmate bathrooms.
       3. Eliminate solo shifts for correctional officers.
    3. Requires that a correctional lieutenant on the site of a state prison facility have the authority to, upon request by an inmate, transfer that inmate to restrictive housing.

COMMENTS

1. Need for this bill?

According to the Author:

“Under current law, correctional officers convicted of a job-related felony are required to forfeit their pension benefits, losing access to any future accruals from the date of conviction onward. However, because they are allowed to retain any vested pension amounts earned prior to conviction, this creates a concern. This allows individuals convicted of serious offenses to benefit from significant retirement savings accumulated throughout their public service – including tax dollars paid for by California residents, which can amount upwards of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Because of a correctional officer’s role as a public servant, and oath to the state of California, this raises serious concerns about whether these vested amounts should be subject to forfeiture. SB 850 addresses this by retroactively revoking the pension of a correctional officer convicted of sexually assaulting an incarcerated individual, including any vested amounts.”

2. Scope of Analysis:

This analysis is limited to the bill’s provisions affecting CDCR employees’ public pension and employment rights. The committee refers you to the Senate Public Safety Committee’s April 29, 2025, policy hearing and analysis of the bill’s other provisions that deal with incarceration policy.

3. Committee Comments:

For reasons both understandable and compelling, and grounded in proponents’ efforts to effect a consequential end to sexual abuse by CDCR staff against incarcerated persons, this bill seeks to change the terms of CDCR employees’ existing defined benefit pension plan. However, as drafted, this bill constitutes a prima facie example of an unconstitutional impairment of contract because it would strip away the accrued pension benefits of a convicted CDCR sex abuser retroactively to their first day of employment with any employer that provides a public pension, as specified.

The California Supreme Court, as discussed above in the Existing Law section, has protected vested pension rights for approximately seventy years. Under the California Rule interpreting the California Constitution’s contract clause, a public employee vests in their right to their pension upon beginning employment because a pension is deferred compensation for services rendered. It would be an ineffective recruitment policy and possibly a fraudulent inducement if the employer could simply take away the employee’s promised pension before retirement and after the employee provided a lifetime of service. Thus, the Court has generally disallowed retroactive changes to a public pension plan, like the one this bill would require.

The bill’s proponents have suggested that although the Court reaffirmed in its Cal Fire and Alameda decisions that vested pension rights are protected, it also clarified that modifications may be permissible if they are reasonable and serve a legitimate public purpose; that not all pension changes are off-limits; and that courts will scrutinize, if needed, whether any proposed changes are justified and have clear legislative intent.

This description does not reflect the Court’s position, which is that a reasonable modification of vested pension rights must have a material relation to the theory of the pension system or to its successful operation, by which it means that the modification must aid the retirement system in fulfilling its mission to provide promised pension benefits.

“Public employee pension plans may be modified ‘for the purpose of keeping [the] pension system flexible to permit adjustments in accord with changing conditions and at the same time maintain the integrity of the system,’ but to survive contract clause scrutiny, such changes ‘must bear some material relation to the theory of a pension system and its successful operation.’” Alameda at pp 4-5.

Furthermore, the Court clarified that modifications of vested pension rights face a steep hill in overcoming their disfavored treatment.

“‘Such modifications must be reasonable . . . . To be sustained as reasonable, alterations of employees’ pension rights must bear some material relation to the theory of a pension system and its successful operation, and changes in a pension plan which result in disadvantage to employees should be accompanied by comparable new advantages.’ (Allen I, supra, 45 Cal.2d at p. 131; see also Betts v. Board of Administration (1978) 21 Cal.3d 859, 866 (Betts) [contract clause protects not only pension rights available at commencement of employment but also those ‘which are thereafter conferred during the employee’s subsequent tenure’].) This quotation from Allen I is the foundation of the California Rule. ” (Alameda at p. 45)

The Court also reprised in Alameda its seventy years of jurisprudence prohibiting retroactive modifications that are motivated by principles other than those designed to improve a retirement system’s ability to fulfill its mission, stating that such modifications are unreasonable and impermissible. Especially relevant here, the Court cited approvingly its decision from 1955:

“As we framed the question, we were required to ‘determine whether the changes made come within the bounds of a reasonable modification or whether their effect is to impair his vested contractual rights.’ (Wallace, at pp. 183–184.) We again recognized that modification of a pension plan is permitted to cope with changing times, but we balanced this principle against ‘the facts that pension payments are deferred compensation to which a pensioner becomes entitled upon performing all services required under the contract and that his retirement because of age ordinarily shows that he has done everything necessary to entitle him to payment of the pension.’ (Id. at pp. 184–185.) We concluded that the amendment was not a reasonable modification. As we explained, ‘[t]he termination of all pension rights upon conviction of a felony after retirement does not appear to have any material relation to the theory of the pension system or to its successful operation. Rather, the change was designed to benefit the city and, as stated in the city’s brief, to meet the objections of taxpayers who would be opposed to contributing funds for the maintenance of a pensioner who had been convicted of a felony.’ ^[4] (Alameda at pp 49-50, citing Wallace v. City of Fresno (1954) 42 Cal.2d 180)

In any case, the committee agrees with the proponents’ desire to see the Legislature force CDCR employees to end sexual abuse in California prisons.

To that end, it may be possible to implement the proponents’ objective if the bill specifically, and separately, applies to public employees who first become a member of a public pension system after the legislation’s effective date. Segregating current members and future members and including a severability clause will help ensure that if the Court strikes down the provisions from applying to current members, those provisions will still apply to future members.

According to the Court, “(t)o effect a pension modification that is prospective in practice, the Legislature would be required to enact a law that applies only to pension rights accrued after its effective date, while preserving unchanged the law applicable to pension rights accrued prior to that date.” (Alameda at p. 72). The committee has proposed substantive amendments, which could achieve this change for new pension system members going forward (see below, Committee Amendments).

This prospective approach would provide notice to any future CDCR employee that their acceptance of employment with CDCR entails the risk of total loss of all pension benefits if convicted of censorious behavior. In short, the prospective employee would know before accepting the job that their employment contract includes the possibility that they could forfeit years of deferred compensation if at some future time they commit the opprobrious crimes specified in the bill.

The committee amendments recognize the Court’s imperative that public employees’ pension rights vest upon beginning employment. Therefore, any change to those rights must be initiated prior to the person’s employment.

“In evaluating the proper scope of contract clause protection for pension rights, it is important to recognize the unusual nature of such rights as compensation. Public employees begin earning pension benefits from their first day of work. As a result, we have consistently held that pension rights become vested at that time. (Alameda at p. 70)

The Court bases its view in no small part on the fact that the State is dealing with its own employees, so the Court maintains a healthy suspicion as to whether the State is motivated by legitimate public policy or impermissible self-interest in its contractual dealings.

“This rule is consistent with our past constitutional rulings on the power of the state to impair its own contracts. We have always recognized that such impairments may survive contract clause scrutiny, but we have also held that they are subject to significant constraints. ‘[A] State is not completely free to consider impairing the obligations of its own contracts on a par with other policy alternatives. Similarly, a State is not free to impose a drastic impairment when an evident and more moderate course would serve its purposes equally well.’” (Alameda at p. 87)

The committee amendments represent a meaningful course of action that conforms to the Court’s admonition that it disfavors drastic legislative impairments of contracts with the state’s own employees where moderate impairments are available.

Unintended Consequences

The committee joins the proponents in its desire to impress upon CDCR that the State must hold CDCR employees accountable for their egregious history of sexual abuse. Several bills are under consideration in this Legislature to do just that. However, the State cannot implement SB 850’s provisions under current constitutional law. Rather, the bill will create years of litigation that, given current Supreme Court jurisprudence, will be fruitless.

But what if it succeeds? Proponents may suggest that the Legislature should at least pass this bill to test the Court’s resolve to uphold the pension protections it has zealously guarded in the face of the outrageous crimes cited by the author. That is a tempting proposal, but this committee must balance it by weighing the unintended consequences such action could initiate. Below, the committee offers some illustrative examples of possible scenarios that could accompany the debilitation of pension protections if SB 850 were to set a new precedent:

• In the future, if state or federal law criminally prohibits teachers from incorporating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) principles in classroom activities, will those teachers upon a conviction of violating that prohibition have to fear that they will lose a lifetime of savings and pension benefits because of this bill?
• If state or federal law were to punish public employees that help undocumented immigrants evade governmental prosecution, will a conviction of such criminal activity result in the employees’ loss of a lifetime of deferred compensation?
• Should the State abolish pensions for convictions of an otherwise dedicated public servant for occupying or destroying public and private property during protests against governmental policy?
• Should the State ensure that criminal convictions for illegal gun or drug possession result in the alteration of the employee’s public pension benefits?

Finally, although one may easily dismiss these and other examples as not rising to the severity of the sexual assault crimes at issue, the Constitution exists to protect us from hard cases that create avenues for the slow but eventual elimination of our rights. We chip away at it at our peril.

4. Committee Amendments:

SECTION 1. Section 7522.75 is added to the Government Code, to read:

7522.75. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision, a public employee who is a If a correctional officer or other prison staff member employed by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, who is a current member of a public retirement system, that is convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate within the state prison system, that member shall, upon exhaustion of all appeals, forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in any the public retirement system in which that public employee is a member, to the extent provided in subdivision (b) (c), and shall not accrue further benefits in that the public retirement system.

(b) (1) The public employee shall forfeit all of the rights and benefits earned or accrued from the date the employee was first hired with the public retirement system. The rights and benefits shall remain forfeited notwithstanding any reduction in sentence or expungement of the conviction following the date of the member’s conviction.

(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if a correctional officer or other prison staff member employed by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, who first becomes a member of a public retirement system on or after January 1, 2026, is convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate within the state prison system, that member shall, upon exhaustion of all appeals, forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in the public retirement system, to the extent provided in subdivision (c), and shall not accrue further benefits in the public retirement system.

(b) (c) (1) The public employee A member as described in subdivision (a) or (b) shall forfeit all of the rights and benefits earned or accrued from the date the employee was first hired with they first became a member of the public retirement system except as provided in subdivision (f). The rights and benefits shall remain forfeited notwithstanding any reduction in sentence or expungement of the conviction following the date of the member’s conviction.

(2) Any (A) Pursuant to regulations adopted by the public retirement system board, any contributions to the public retirement system made by a member, as described in subdivision (a), shall not be returned to the public employee upon the occurrence of a conviction resulting in forfeiture, except as provided in subdivision (f).

(B) Pursuant to regulations adopted by the public retirement system board, any contributions to the public retirement system made by a member, as described in subdivision (b), shall not be returned to the public employee upon the occurrence of a conviction resulting in forfeiture.

(c) (d) (1) Upon conviction, a public employee member, as described in subdivision (a) or (b), and the prosecuting agency shall notify the public employer who employed the public employee member at the time of the commission of the felony within 60 days of the felony conviction of both of the following:

(A) The date of conviction.

(B) The date of the first known commission of the felony.

(2) The operation of this section is not dependent upon the performance of the notification obligations specified in this subdivision.

(d) The public employer that employs or employed a public employee a member described in subdivision (a) or (b) and that public employee member shall each notify each the member’s public retirement system in which the public employee is a member of that public employee’s member’s conviction within 90 days of the conviction. The operation of this section is not dependent upon the performance of the notification obligations specified in this subdivision.

(e) A public retirement system may assess a public employer a reasonable amount to reimburse the cost of audit, adjustment, or correction, if it determines that the public employer failed to comply with this section. The amount assessed shall not exceed the reasonable regulatory costs to the retirement system.

(f) If a public employee’s member’s conviction is reversed and that decision is final, the employee member shall be entitled to do either of the following:

(1) Recover the forfeited rights and benefits.

(2) Redeposit any contributions and interest that would have accrued during the forfeiture period, as determined by the system actuary, and then recover the full amount of the forfeited rights and benefits.

(g) The public retirement system shall implement this section in a manner that protects an innocent spouse and is consistent with existing law governing the division of community property, including, but not limited to, Section 2610 of the Family Code.

(h) This section shall apply to the extent permissible by law.

(i) This section shall apply retroactively and prospectively to any public employee described in subdivision (a), regardless of that public employee’s date of hire.

SEC. 2. Article 8 (commencing with Section 2049) is added to Chapter 1 of Title 1 of Part 3 of the Penal Code, to read:

Article  8. Central California Women’s Facility

2049. There is and shall continue to be a state prison known as the Central California Women’s Facility, which is located in the City of Chowchilla.

2049.1. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation shall construct and establish one new building with 100 additional single-cell housing units at the Central California Women’s Facility for the confinement of women under the custody of the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

SEC. 3. Section 5030 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

5030. (a) The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation shall do all of the following in all women’s state prison facilities:

(1) Install fixed cameras by January 1, 2028, in all designated locations that have been ordered by the court or the Legislature.

(2) Install thermal sensor cameras that track body movements in inmate bathrooms.

(3) Eliminate solo shifts for correctional officers.

(b) A correctional lieutenant on the site of a state prison facility shall have the authority to, upon request by an inmate, transfer that inmate to restrictive housing.

SEC. 4. The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

5. Proponent Arguments:

According to the California Correctional Police Officers Association:

“SB 850 aims to enhance the safety of our correctional facilities by improving departmental procedures, and infrastructure, as well as imposing stricter penalties on CDCR staff found guilty of sexually assaulting an incarcerated person.”

According to the Steinberg Institute:

“Recent reports of sexual violence at California’s women’s state prisons have highlighted the urgent need for comprehensive prison reform and the reevaluation of privileges granted to correctional staff responsible for the care and safety of incarcerated women. One prison that has brought this issue to the forefront is the Central California Women’s Facility. As the largest women’s correctional facility in California, and the largest women’s prison in the world, it highlights the magnitude of the problem and the urgent need for systemic change.

Sexual assault and abuse in women’s prisons is a serious issue in California. Correctional staff who sexually assault incarcerated women have committed an unacceptable abuse of power. It is an issue that must be addressed swiftly and unwaveringly.”

6. Opponent Arguments:

The committee recognizes that, at the time of this writing, opposition letters received against SB 850 focus on the bill’s requirements to increase prison facilities and the use of cameras and other surveillance devices in the prison setting.

In many cases, the opposition letters actually state strong support for the bill’s retroactive pension forfeiture provisions, seeking to impose greater punishment on abusive CDCR staff.

The committee does not know at this time whether the opposition would continue to support the bill’s pension forfeiture provisions if they were aware that, as written, those provisions are constitutionally unenforceable.

The committee also does not know whether the current opposition would support the committee’s recommended amendments to provide a stronger possibility of the courts upholding forfeiture provisions for future CDCR staff.

Regardless, the committee anticipates opposition from the public pension community focused on the provisions that would unconstitutionally eliminate vested pension benefit rights and confiscate employee contributions. However, it has not yet received such opposition letters at the time of this writing, possibly due to the sudden amendments to the bill after traditional legislative deadlines.

In any case, the committee includes the bill’s current opposition letters because they illustrate essential background to the bill’s genesis and the passion and importance that drives the policy surrounding this bill. The following is a representative sample of that opposition.

According to the California Coalition for Women Prisoners:

“Sexual harassment and assault are a part of everyday life in women’s prisons, including in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)’s Central California Women’s Facility (CCWF) and the California Institution for Women (CIW). Sexual harassment, abuse, and assaults of incarcerated people in the women’s prisons at the hands of correctional officers and other staff have been continuous and relentless in California, with currently and formerly incarcerated women and trans people of all genders reporting and documenting this violence. The Prison Law Office also released a scathing report in 2016 that revealed that the institutional structure and culture of CDCR perpetuates and allows sexual violence to take place. In just the last year, dozens of lawsuits have been filed, addressing the brutal assaults by officers and the serial abuse by a staff gynecologist, now through a class action lawsuit that we have initiated alongside survivors. In January, the trial of a CCWF officer resulted in 64 convictions for rape and sexual battery against nine women, and revealed how easily assaults occur and how officers smuggle in contraband to coerce sexual acts.”

“The Sexual Abuse Response and Prevention Working Group’s Community Report makes alternative recommendations around cameras and their role in promoting accountability for staff abuse. Specifically, it recommends ensuring that the mandated body-worn cameras are actually being properly utilized and that improper deactivation is meaningfully addressed by the Department. The report also lays out concerns about the risk of additional cameras being used by CDCR staff to surveil incarcerated people, adding to the ability of abusive staff to retaliate against incarcerated individuals who report staff abuse. The report also details how CDCR investigations of staff abuse rarely result in sustained findings of employee misconduct despite the presence of verifiable evidence.” ^[5]

“Currently and formerly incarcerated women and TGI people have been at the forefront of building momentum to demand staff sexual abuse be meaningfully addressed. Expanding the prison system through construction of new units at CCWF is an investment in a failed and abusive system. No carceral system has been able to eliminate staff abuse, but there are concrete steps we can take toward prevention, accountability, and pathways to healing for survivors without growing the root of the problem. The only way to truly protect women and trans people of all genders from abuse by prison staff is for them to remain in their community and not enter the prison population.”

7. Dual Referral:

The Senate Rules Committee referred this bill to the Senate Public Safety Committee and the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee.

8. Related Legislation:

SB 337 (Menjivar, 2025) would provide numerous reforms aimed at addressing CDCR staff abuse of prisoners, including a requirement that an employee or officer of a public entity health facility, detention facility, or CDCR, who is convicted of engaging in sexual activity with a consenting adult who is confined in a health facility, detention facility, or subject to supervision, be terminated, and prohibited from being eligible to be hired or reinstated by a public entity health facility. This bill is set for hearing in the Senate Public Safety Committee.

AB 464 (Aguiar Curry, 2025) would extend the statute of limitations for a civil claim of sexual assault by a government employee in a detention facility, would prohibit CDCR from re-hiring a terminated employee who was found to have sexually abused an incarcerated person, and would require additional monitoring and notifications by CDCR when an incarcerated person reports they have been sexually assaulted in a CDCR facility. The Assembly Appropriations Committee referred this bill to its suspense file.

AB 788 (Quirk Silva, 2025) would reorganize CDCR to create the Division of Female Programs and Services and would require CDCR to undertake specified additional efforts to address the treatment of incarcerated women. The Assembly Appropriations Committee referred this bill to its suspense file.

SB 1069 (Menjivar, Chapter 1012, Statutes of 2024) provided that the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has investigatory authority over all staff misconduct cases that involve sexual misconduct with an incarcerated person, and authorizes the OIG to monitor and investigate a complaint that involves sexual misconduct with an incarcerated person.

AB 340 (Furutani, Chapter 296, Statutes of 2012) enacted the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act, which included a provision that persons becoming a member of a retirement system for the first time on or after January 1, 2013, shall forfeit all the rights and benefits earned or accrued from the earliest date of the commission of any felony, as specified, to the forfeiture date, inclusive.

SUPPORT

California Correctional Police Officers Association (Sponsor)

The Steinberg Institute

OPPOSITION

Alliance for Boys and Men of Color

Californians United for a Responsible Budget

Ella Baker Center for Human Rights

Felony Murder Elimination Project

Transitions Clinic Network

Universidad Popular

California Coalition for Women Prisoners

California Public Defenders Association

Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice

Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice

Critical Resistance, Los Angeles

Flying Over Walls

Human Impact Partners

Immigrant Legal Resource Center

Initiate Justice

Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity

LA Defensa

Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition

-- END --

1. For clarification, public employees are hired by their appointing authority (a state agency or department, in this case the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation) or their local public agency, not by their public retirement system (unless they work directly for the retirement system). Public employees become members of a public retirement system upon meeting specified eligibility requirements and maintain membership as long as they are employed by a public employer who is covered by that public retirement system for the provision of retirement benefits. While employment and membership are linked, they are not the same thing.

   There are over 80 public retirement systems in California (see, https://www.nasra.org/ca ). This bill sometimes appears to apply to all of them and sometimes appears to refer only to the largest system, CalPERS. A retirement system member may have a career that spans several different public employers but has membership only in one retirement system. Alternatively, a public employee may become a member in several different public retirement systems depending on the retirement systems that provide retirement benefits to the public employers’ employees. Upon retirement, the employee may thus receive pensions from multiple retirement systems. This bill would appear to require forfeiture of benefits from all of them. ↑

2. While both employer and employee pension fund contributions constitute components of the employee’s deferred compensation, the latter are legally employee property, and likely have additional protected status beyond the scope of this analysis. ↑

3. These provisions are unrelated to this committee’s jurisdiction but the Senate Committee on Public Safety will analyze them for its hearing the day prior to this bill’s hearing in this committee. ↑

4. Emphasis added. ↑

5. Emphasis added. ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Senator Jesse Arreguín, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Bill No: SB 850 Hearing Date: April 29, 2025

Subject: Prisons

HISTORY

Source: California Correctional Peace Officers Association

Prior Legislation: SB 1069 (Menjivar), Ch. 1012, Stats. of 2024

AB 102 (Ting), Ch. 38, Stats. of 2023

AB 76 (Lieber), Ch. 706, Stats. of 2007

AB 550 (Goldberg), Ch. 303, Stats. of 2005

Support: Unknown

Opposition: Californians United for a Responsible Budget; Transitions Clinic Network; Universidad Popular; (unless amended) California Coalition for Women Prisoners; Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice; Critical Resistance, Los Angeles; Flying Over Walls; Initiate Justice; La Defensa; Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition

PURPOSE

The purpose of this bill is to require that all women’s prisons implement various measures to improve the safety of the incarcerated population, the construction of one new building with 100 single-cell housing units, and the forfeiture of all accrued rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which a correctional officer or other prison employee is a member after the employee is convicted of sexually assaulting a person incarcerated in a state prison.

Existing federal law, the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), establishes a zero-tolerance standard for the incidence of prison rape in prisons in the United States, provides for the development and implementation of national standards for the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape, and mandates the review and analysis of the incidence and effects of prison rape. (34 U.S.C. § 30301 et seq.)

Existing law establishes the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the state’s prisons. (Gov. Code, § 12383, subd. (a); Pen. Code, §§ 5000, 5003.)

Existing law requires CDCR to develop policies and operational practices that are designed to ensure a safe and productive institutional environment for women incarcerated in the state’s prisons. (Pen. Code, § 3430, subd. (b).)

Existing law, the Sexual Abuse in Detention Elimination Act (SADEA), provides guidance to CDCR for developing its protocols for responding to sexual abuse, requires certain standards be implemented to reduce the impact of sexual abuse on incarcerated individuals, and requires certain procedures are performed in the investigation and prosecution of sexual abuse incidents. (Pen. Code, §§ 2637-2639.)

Existing law requires the termination of a CDCR employee, confirmed by an investigation to have sexually abused an incarcerated person. Requires administrators to report criminal sexual abuse by staff to law enforcement authorities. (Pen. Code, § 2639, subd. (e).)

Existing law prohibits a male correctional officer from conducting a pat down search of a female incarcerated individual unless the incarcerated person presents a risk of immediate harm to herself or others or risk of escape and there is not a female correctional officer available to conduct the search. (Pen. Code, § 2644, subd. (a).)

Existing law prohibits a male correctional officer from entering into an area of the institution where female incarcerated individuals may be in a state of undress, or be in an area where they can view female incarcerated individuals in a state of undress, including, but not limited to, restrooms, shower areas, or medical treatment areas, unless an incarcerated person in the area presents a risk of immediate harm to herself or others or if there is a medical emergency in the area. Specifies that a male correctional officer cannot enter into a prohibited area if there is a female correctional officer who can resolve the situation in a safe and timely manner without his assistance. Requires staff of the opposite sex to announce their presence when entering a housing unit to prevent incidental viewing. (Pen. Code, § 2644, subd. (b).)

Existing law requires, if a male correctional officer conducts a pat down search or enters a prohibited area, the circumstances for and details of the exception to be documented within three days of the incident. Requires the documentation to be reviewed by the warden and retained by the institution for reporting purposes. (Pen. Code, § 2644, subd. (c).)

Existing law provides that any employee, officer, agent, staff, or volunteer of a detention facility, and any peace officer who engages in sexual activity with a consenting adult who is confined in a detention facility is guilty of a public offense. (Pen. Code, § 289.6, subd. (a)(2).)

Existing law provides that a correctional officer employed by CDCR is a peace officer. (Pen. Code, § 830.5, subd. (b).)

Existing law establishes the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013. Provides that its provisions apply to all state and local public retirement systems and to their participating employers, except as provided. (Gov. Code, §§ 7522, et seq.)

Existing law requires specified public employees and public elected officials, following conviction for specified offenses arising out of the person’s official duties, to forfeit rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which the person is a member. (Gov. Code, §§ 7522.70, 7522.71, 7522.74.)

This bill provides that there is and shall continue to be a state prison known as the Central California Women’s Facility (CCWF).

This bill requires CDCR to construct and establish one new building with 100 additional single-cell housing units at CCWF for the confinement of women under the custody of the Secretary of CDCR.

This bill requires CDCR to do all of the following in all women’s state prison facilities:

• Install fixed cameras by January 1, 2028, in all designated locations that have been ordered by the court or the Legislature.
• Install thermal sensor cameras that track body movements in inmate bathrooms.
• Eliminate solo shifts for correctional officers.

This bill authorizes a correctional lieutenant on the site of a state prison facility to, upon request by an incarcerated individual, transfer the person to restrictive housing.

This bill requires, notwithstanding any other provision, a public employee who is a correctional officer or other prison staff member that is convicted of sexually assaulting a person incarcerated within the state prison system, to forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which that public employee is a member. Prohibits such a person from accruing further benefits in that public retirement system.

This bill requires the public employee to forfeit all of the rights and benefits earned or accrued from the date the employee was first hired with the public retirement system. Provides that the rights and benefits remain forfeited notwithstanding any reduction in sentence or expungement of the conviction following the date of the member’s conviction.

This bill prohibits any contributions to the public retirement system made by the public employee from being returned to the public employee upon the occurrence of a conviction resulting in forfeiture, except as provided.

This bill requires, upon conviction for sexually assaulting an incarcerated person, a public employee and the prosecuting agency to notify the public employer who employed the public employee at the time of the commission of the felony within 60 days of the felony conviction of the date of conviction and the date of the first known commission of the felony.

This bill requires the public employer that employs or employed a public employee convicted of sexually assaulting an incarcerated person as well as the public employee to each notify each public retirement system in which the public employee is a member of the public employee’s conviction within 90 days of the conviction.

This bill authorizes a public retirement system to assess a public employer a reasonable amount to reimburse the cost of audit, adjustment, or correction, if it determines that the public employer failed to comply with the provisions of this bill. Prohibits the amount assessed from exceeding the reasonable regulatory costs to the retirement system.

This bill requires that the public employee is entitled to do either of the following if the conviction is reversed and that decision is final:

• Recover the forfeited rights and benefits.
• Redeposit any contributions and interest that would have accrued during the forfeiture period, as determined by the system actuary, and then recover the full amount of the forfeited rights and benefits.

This bill requires the public retirement system to implement the provisions of this bill related to public retirement benefits in a manner that protects an innocent spouse and is consistent with existing law governing the division of community property, as specified.

This bill states the provisions pertaining to the public retirement benefits apply to the extent permissible by law.

This bill specifies that the provisions pertaining to the public retirement benefits apply retroactively and prospectively to any public employee convicted of sexually assaulting an incarcerated person, regardless of that public employee’s date of hire.

COMMENTS

1. Need For This Bill

According to the author:

SB 850 addresses the systemic issues of sexual violence and power imbalances within California’s correctional facilities. This bill ensures the rights and dignity of incarcerated women are upheld, sexual abuse is prevented, and perpetrators are held fully accountable. Every effort must be made to create safer environments for our most uniquely vulnerable and hold those entrusted with oversight to the highest standards of professionalism.

To that end, this bill revokes pensions, including any vested amounts, of correctional staff convicted of sexually assaulting an incarcerated person, eliminates solo shifts for correctional staff in all women’s prisons, requires the installation of thermal and fixed cameras, and requires the construction of 100 new single-cell units at the Central California Women’s Facility to provide respite housing for incarcerated women who request it. Together, these measures strengthen accountability, improve transparency, and most importantly, uphold the dignity and safety of the women in our correctional system.

1. PREA

PREA was passed by Congress in 2003. It applies to all correctional facilities, including prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities. Among the many stated purposes for PREA are: to establish a zero-tolerance standard for the incidence of prison rape in prisons in the United States; to develop and implement national standards for the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape; to increase of the available data and information on the incidence of prison rape to improve the management and administration of correctional facilities; and to increase the accountability of prison officials who fail to detect, prevent, reduce, and punish prison rape. (34 U.S.C. § 30301 et seq.) The act also created the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission and charged it with developing standards for the elimination of prison rape.

The PREA standards developed by the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission were issued as a final rule by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2012. (77 Fed.Reg. 37106 (Jun. 20, 2012).) Among other things, the standards require each agency and facility to: designate a PREA point person to coordinate compliance efforts; develop and document a staffing plan, taking into account a set of specified factors, that provides for adequate levels of staffing, and, where applicable, video monitoring, to protect inmates against sexual abuse; and train staff on key topics related to preventing, detecting, and responding to sexual abuse. In addition, the standards provide requirements regarding the avenues for reporting sexual abuse, investigation of sexual abuse, and access to medical and mental health care for inmate victims of sexual abuse.

CDCR PREA Policy

AB 550 (Goldberg), Chapter 303, Statutes of 2005, established SADEA, which made several legislative findings and declarations regarding sexual abuse at CDCR institutions and required CDCR to adopt specified policies, practices, and protocols related to the placement of incarcerated individuals, physical and mental health care of victims who are incarcerated individuals, and investigation of sexual abuse.

CDCR’s PREA policy provides guidelines for the prevention, detection, response, investigation, and tracking of sexual violence, staff sexual misconduct, and sexual harassment against individuals incarcerated in CDCR facilities. (Department Operations Manual, §§ 54040.1-54040.22.) The policy applies to all incarcerated individuals and individuals employed by CDCR, including volunteers and independent contractors assigned to an institution, community correctional facility, conservation camp, or parole.

1. Ongoing Concerns Regarding Sexual Abuse of Incarcerated Individuals

California’s prisons—and the women’s prisons in particular—have been plagued with allegations of staff sexual assault and sexual misconduct for years. (See Richard Winton, ‘Every woman’s worst nightmare’: Lawsuit alleges widespread sexual abuse at California prisons for women (Jan. 18, 2024) available at <https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-01-18/every-womans-worst-nightmare-lawsuit-alleges-widespread-sexual-abuse-at-californias-womens-prisons>.) In 2024, 130 individuals formerly incarcerated at the California Institution for Women (CIW) and CCWF filed a lawsuit against CDCR and 30 current and former correctional officers alleging that they were sexually abused while in prison. (Id.) The lawsuit alleges that the sexual abuse occurred throughout the prisons, including in cells, closets, and storage rooms, and alleges a variety of sexual abuse, including groping, forced oral copulation, and rape. (Id.)

In 2023, a former correctional officer at CCWF was arrested for sexually assaulting 13 incarcerated individuals over nine years and charged with 96 counts of rape, sodomy, sexual battery, and rape under color of authority. (Jeremy Childs, Ex-corrections officer accused of raping 13 inmates in California women’s prison (May 25, 2023) available at <https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-05-25/ex-corrections-officer-accused-of-raping-inmates-at-california-womens-prison>.) He was found guilty on 59 of those counts earlier this year. (Elize Manoukian, Former guard at California women’s prison found guilty of 59 counts of sexual abuse (Jan. 15, 2025) available at <https://www.kqed/com/news/12022075/former-guard-california-womens-prison-found-guilty-59-counts-sexual-abuse>.)

Also earlier this year, six women filed a lawsuit alleging that that a gynecologist at CIW abused them. (Anabel Sosa, Lawsuit accuses gynecologist at California women’s prison of abusing patients for years (Feb. 5, 2025) available at <https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-02-05/gynecologist-womens-prison-abuse-lawsuit>.) The women claim that they “endured abusive pap smears and biopsies and coerced exams, including breast and anal examinations, and that those who crossed him…faced retaliation, including withholding of medical treatment.” (Id.)

The 2023-2024 Budget Act established “a sexual assault response and prevention working group and ambassador program” and allocated funds to CDCR as well as the Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition to support the working group in identifying best practices for whistleblower protections and trauma-informed care and support to survivors. The working group consisted of CDCR leadership and staff, correctional officers, community-based organizations led by formerly incarcerated people, representatives from the Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition, and individuals who have survived sexual assault while in custody. The working group met over a six-month period. Two reports were produced as a result of the working group: one authored by CDCR required by the Budget Act and one authored by the community-based organizations that were members of the working group.

The community report on the working group primarily focused on the women’s prisons, CIW and CCWF.^[1] The report made several recommendations fitting into five categories: expedited release of survivors, culture shifting, services for survivors, the investigation and reporting process, and accountability. (Id. at p. 6.)

This bill requires CDCR to take a number of actions in all of the women’s prisons to improve the safety of the incarcerated population. Specifically, this bill requires CDCR to install fixed cameras by January 1, 2028, in all designated locations that have been ordered by the court or the Legislature; install thermal sensor cameras that track body movements in bathrooms used by incarcerated individuals; and eliminate solo shifts for correctional officers. This bill additionally requires CDCR to construct and establish one new building with 100 additional single-cell housing units at CCWF. This bill also authorizes a correctional lieutenant at a prison to transfer an incarcerated person to restrictive housing upon their request.

This bill also makes a number of changes related to a correctional officer or other prison employee and their public retirement benefits if the person is convicted of sexually assaulting a person incarcerated in one of the state’s prisons. Specifically, this bill requires a correctional officer or other prison employee convicted of sexually assaulting an incarcerated person to forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in any public retirement system in which that public employee is a member, and prohibits such a person from accruing further benefits in that public retirement system. However, the bill does provide that if the conviction is reversed, the employee is entitles to either recover the forfeited rights and benefits, or redeposit any contributions and interest that would have accrued during the forfeiture period and recover the full amount of the forfeited rights and benefits. Notably, this bill states that it applies retroactively and prospectively to any public employee covered by the provisions in the bill, regardless of the employee’s date of hire. This bill is double referred to the Senate Labor Committee, and this section of the bill will be analyzed in depth by that committee.

1. Argument in Support

The California Correctional Peace Officers Association writes:

This legislation is crucial in addressing and preventing the rare but serious cases of sexual abuse involving correctional staff and those held in custody by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR).

Every individual, regardless of their incarceration status, has the right to be free from sexual violence and abuse. Ensuring the safety of women in California prisons not only upholds their basic human rights but is the duty of the state and correctional peace officers providing oversight in our prison facilities.

SB 850 aims to enhance the safety of our correctional facilities by improving departmental procedures, and infrastructure, as well as imposing stricter penalties on CDCR staff found guilty of sexually assaulting an incarcerated person.

The bill introduces essential reforms to our California prison system, which include:

1. The construction of 100 new single-cell units at the Central California Women’s Facility
2. Allowing incarcerated women the option to request a single-cell unit
3. Prohibiting solo shifts for correctional officers in all women’s prisons
4. Installing heat-sensitive cameras in restrooms for increased monitoring
5. Ensuring that all fixed cameras mandated by courts or the legislature are installed by 2028
6. Retroactively revoking the pensions of any correctional staff member convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate.

CCPOA has long advocated for policies that enhance safety, ensure adequate staffing, and provide the necessary tools and resources for officers to perform their duties effectively. SB 850 aligns with these goals and reinforces our commitment to maintain the highest standards of conduct. …

1. Argument in Opposition

According to the Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition:

…Respectfully, we must oppose the bill unless it is amended …

Despite our concerns, we do want to recognize the provisions of the bill that would be impactful and create a deterrent to staff abuse. SB 850 would boldly hold convicted abusers accountable by revoking the pension of any correctional officer who is convicted of sexually assaulting an inmate. …

…

Sexual harassment and assault are a part of everyday life in women’s prisons … Sexual harassment, abuse, and assaults of incarcerated people in women’s prisons at the hands of correctional officers and other staff have been continuous and relentless in California, with currently and formerly incarcerated women and trans people of all genders reporting and documenting this violence. …

Following lawsuits, media coverage, and a briefing at the State Capitol hosted by the Legislative Women’s Caucus, the California Budget Act of 2023 created the opportunity for advocates to form the Sexual Abuse Response and Prevention Working Group to address this rampant sexual violence. This working group published a Community Report in March 2024, outlining a series of policy recommendations which were based on insights and analysis from over 700 people incarcerated at CCWF and CIW who’s lived experiences provide invaluable perspective about which corrective and protective actions create safety or generate harm.

SB 850 seeks to address this crisis with a series of policies … While we recognize that these were all very well-intentioned, we find that some of these proposed statutory changes would have limited effect, and some would actually be detrimental to the health and safety of the women and trans people of all genders imprisoned in CDCR facilities. …

Elimination of solo shifts for correctional officers in all women’s prisons:

…[E]vidence has shown over the years that staff are able to relatively easily commit sexual assaults when other staff are nearby. Some staff are even complicit … CDCR has also struggled recently to maintain adequate staffing, resulting in frequent lockdowns and decreased access to yard time and rehabilitative programming across multiple facilities, including CCWF.

…

Requirement for heat-sensitive cameras in bathrooms for incarcerated people:

…Assaults by staff members happen in many different areas with limited camera surveillance, including often in staff restrooms… As such, cameras in the residents’ bathrooms would not be a meaningful deterrent to staff abuse.

At the same time, the cameras would have a huge impact on the privacy of the people living in these facilities. …

…

Requirement for fixed cameras ordered by courts of the legislature to be completed by 2028:

…[W]e have serious concerns about the blanket increase of surveillance within CDCR facilities, as it is more likely to be used punitively against incarcerated individuals than it is to hold abusive staff accountable.

Creation of process for incarcerated individuals to request a single cell unit:

…[S]ingle-cell units do have safety concerns [risk of increased sexual violence and risks associated with isolation]… To avoid unintended consequences, this process would need to be amended to allow for these individuals to opt-out and return to multiple occupancy units at any time.

…

We must also emphasize that this bill’s mandate to expand prisons through the construction of new units at CCWF is an investment in a failed and abusive system. Incarceration is inherently violent, and despite the efforts of many, no carceral system has been able to eliminate staff abuse. As such, we must acknowledge that the only way to truly protect women and trans people of all genders from abuse by prison staff is for them to remain in their community and not enter the prison population. …

…Release is the only effective remedy for ensuring that survivors of staff abuse are free from retaliation and retraumatization as a result of remaining within the abusive prison system.

-- END --

1. (Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition et al., California Women’s Prisons—Sexual Abuse Response and Prevention Working Group, Community Report to the Legislature (Mar. 2024) available at <https://assets.nationbuilder.com/swactionfund/pages/342/attachments/original/1709747546/CA_Women’s_Prisons_—_Sexual_Abuse_Response_and_Prevention_Working_Group.pdf?1709747546>.) ↑