Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Governance Eligibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legal counsel briefs ISERS trustees on resignation of appointee Kathleen Lang and county‑appointed seat eligibility debate
Summary
ISERS legal counsel reported that Kathleen Lang resigned after discovering she was not an elector and outlined a broader, unsettled legal question over whether county retirees may serve in county‑appointed trustee seats; staff will bring a written memo and options to the board next month.
ISERS legal counsel reported to trustees on May 21, 2025 that Kathleen Lang had tendered her resignation after discovering she did not meet an elector requirement for county‑appointed trustee seats, and counsel outlined ongoing ambiguity across California county retirement systems about whether a county retiree may occupy a county‑appointed seat.
Why it matters: The eligibility rules for appointed trustee seats determine who can serve and help preserve the public trust in the appointment process. The issue affects the board’s composition and the county’s appointment procedures.
Counsel summarized the legal landscape and pending legislation. Counsel noted that PEPRA (the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act) removed supplemental defined‑benefit plans for certain hires and that a separate pending Assembly bill, AB 569, had been introduced to permit public employers and unions to negotiate supplemental defined‑benefit arrangements; counsel said the bill’s progress had been paused in the legislature. Counsel also mentioned SB 853 (a separate, Sackers‑reported bill) and said the board would be provided fuller written materials next month.
On the specific county‑seat question, counsel cited County Employers’ Retirement Law language (section 315,210.1 as referenced) that appointments must be persons “not connected in any capacity with county government” and said the phrase’s meaning has drawn divergent interpretations. Counsel reported there are at least six county retirement systems that have concluded a retiree is not “connected” and therefore may be appointed, and five that have taken the opposite view. Counsel said the matter had prompted spirited conversation among other pension counsel and emphasized ambiguity in existing authority: “The question is, well, can a retiree of the County Retirement System be in one of those seats?” he told trustees.
Counsel recommended that staff compile the existing opinions, the position of the county (which had reviewed the original appointment materials) and the application materials used by the county and present a written agenda item for the board at the next meeting so trustees can consider whether the board wishes to take a position or develop a policy.
Trustees asked for the county’s application and the job announcement that referenced elector status and asked that the written materials include the attorney general opinion and subsequent analyses. Counsel said he would include the materials and return next month.
Ending: Counsel will prepare a written agenda packet with statutory language, past legal opinions, the county application and a summary of positions taken by other counties so the board can discuss and consider whether to adopt a policy or provide input to the county on appointment criteria.
