California public safety overhauls show promise, but problems remain

A contentious program that shifted control of some state prisoners to local governments dramatically reduced the prison population in California, but the decrease was not enough to meet a federal court order, according to a report released Monday.

It was only after statewide voters last fall approved reduced penalties for certain drug and property crimes that the prison population fell below the mandated target, said the new analysis by the Public Policy Institute of California. It has remained there since January, more than a year ahead of schedule.

Public safety realignment, launched four years ago, was considered one of Gov. Jerry Brown’s largest political and policy hurdles since he returned to the Governor’s Office in 2011. Brown, responding to the prison reduction order, argued that local authorities were better positioned to deal with alleviating the overcrowding crisis. But his critics, including law-and-order Republicans and some in law enforcement, asserted the changes would lead to a spike in crime.

PPIC makes no wholesale claims about the efficacy of the program. However, it provides a snapshot of its early effects as new reforms continue to take hold, including November’s successful Proposition 47 that changed most nonviolent property and drug crimes to misdemeanors from felonies.

“Realignment has largely been successful, but the state and county correctional systems face significant challenges,” wrote Magnus Lofstrom and Brandon Martin, the authors of the study. “The state needs to regain control of prison medical care, which is now in the hands of a federal receiver. And the state and counties together must make progress in reducing stubbornly high recidivism rates.”

The report found no dramatic change in recidivism rates. There also was no evidence that realignment has increased violent crime in California.

The lone area where crime increased was in auto thefts. Researchers estimate that the overhaul led to car thefts increasing by more than 70 per 100,000 residents. The car theft rate is about 17 percent higher than it would have been without realignment, the report states.

Although the realignment shift drove county jail populations close to historical highs, the program also has changed the profile of those incarcerated. The report found that by early 2014, some 1,761 inmates were serving sentences of more than five years, up from 1,155 in 2013.

Still, while county jail populations increased since 2011, the growth was far smaller than the prison population drop.

Researchers suggest various alternative crime-prevention strategies such as boosting policing, behavioral therapy and targeted intervention for high-risk youths.

Via: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article36881103.html 

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article36881103.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article36881103.html#storylink=cpy

Another Prop. 30 income tax increase now aiming for 2016

A group of health and youth advocates on Monday introduced a ballot initiative to expand and make permanent the Proposition 30 income tax increases on the state’s highest earners.

The proposal, led by the California Hospital Association, the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West and Common Sense Kids Action, is the second tax measure aiming for next year’s ballot that would extend the 2012 income tax increase.

Similar to Proposition 30, the latest measure would increase taxes on couples earning at least $580,000 annually. Those taxes were set to expire at the end of 2018. It also would impose even higher income tax rates for so-called “super-earner” couples that make more than $2 million a year.

Half of the estimated $10 billion a year in annual revenues would go to K-14 education; 40 percent to California’s Medi-Cal program for low-income people; and the remainder to prekindergarten and early childhood development programs. And it calls for a “rainy day” budget reserve modeled on last fall’s Proposition 2.

California has more kids living in poverty and greater income inequality than virtually any other state, Jim Steyer of Common Sense Kids Action said in a statement announcing the tax increase. Steyer said the measure asks the wealthiest to “pay a little more so we can make the investments every California kid needs to have a great start in life.”

Money from the Invest in California’s Children Act could go to any number of health care-related programs, including to reimburse physicians and other health care workers, who see Medi-Cal patients or to replace a tax on managed-care organizations that expires June 30.

The move creates the potential for another tax-hike clash between well-heeled and well-connected interest groups operating across the state. In 2012, Proposition 30 championed by Gov. Jerry Brown appeared on the same ballot as the unsuccessful Proposition 38 tax hike supported largely by Molly Munger.

It’s unclear whether Brown, who is termed out in 2018, will get involved this time. He said repeatedly that his 2012 tax measure was temporary and should remain so.

Last week, the coalition including the California Teachers Association, Service Employees International Union, and other public safety and public employees’ unions, introduced their version of a Proposition 30 income-tax extension that would run through 2030. The estimated $7 billion to $9 billion in annual proceeds would be deposited into an account for K-14 schools.

That campaign is being run by Gale Kaufman, who at the time stressed its temporary nature along with its promise to help maintain a balanced budget, and to prevent deep cuts to programs affecting students, seniors, working families and health care.

Both measures would allow the sales tax increase in Proposition 30 to expire in 2016.

The measure unveiled Monday is being guided by the SCN Strategies team led by Ace Smith, who ran the original Proposition 30 campaign and Brown’s gubernatorial campaigns. Its proponents stressed the need for sustained education and heath care funding given the state’s crowded classrooms and its near-bottom rankings on Medicaid spending.

If both measures qualify for the ballot and pass, the one with the most votes would prevail.







Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article35998542.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article35998542.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article35998542.html#storylink=cpy

Via: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article35998542.html

Jerry Brown signs new post-redevelopment bill

Four years after approving legislation that ended the anti-blight redevelopment program in California, Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday signed a bill giving local agencies a way to pay for similar projects.

Assembly Bill 2, by Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville, authorizes local governments in economically depressed areas to use certain tax revenue for public works and affordable housing improvements and to help businesses.

Alejo said in a prepared statement that the bill signing was a “major victory for our state’s most disadvantaged communities.”

Brown also signed Senate Bill 107, which supporters said it will make it easier for agencies to retain money used for affordable housing programs, while also expanding the type of loans for which local agencies can seek reimbursement.

The bills come after a dispute between local officials and Brown over the winding down of redevelopment, a decades-old program that had been popular with local officials but criticized by Brown and others as a subsidy for developers. Redevelopment agencies ceased to exist Feb. 1, 2012.

“These important new measures enacted today will help boost economic development in some of our most disadvantaged and deserving communities,” Brown said in a prepared statement.

Brown’s office announced the bill signings before traveling to Seattle for climate talks Tuesday afternoon with several other governors and Chinese officials, including President Xi Jinping.

Via: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article36193152.html

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article36193152.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article36193152.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article36193152.html#storylink=cpy

Jerry Brown signs bill banning grand juries in police use-of-force cases

Gov. Jerry Brown has signed legislation prohibiting the use of grand juries in California in cases where police officers use lethal force, a response to distrust of the grand jury process following the deaths of unarmed black men in other states.

Proponents of Senate Bill 227 argued the grand jury process is too secretive and allowed prosecutors to avoid decision-making responsibility in politically charged cases.

“One doesn’t have to be a lawyer to understand why SB 227 makes sense,” the bill’s author, Sen. Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, said in a prepared statement after Brown announced signing the bill Tuesday. “The use of the criminal grand jury process, and the refusal to indict as occurred in Ferguson and other communities of color, has fostered an atmosphere of suspicion that threatens to compromise our justice system.”

Law enforcement groups representing district attorneys and police chiefs opposed the bill. The Democratic governor signed the measure without comment.

Brown also signed Senate Bill 411, clarifying that people can shoot video of police.

“Today, California makes it unequivocal – you have the right to record,” Sen. Ricardo Lara, the bill’s author, said in a prepared statement.

Via: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article30736917.html

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article30736917.html#storylink=cpy

For first time in 15 years, California likely to avoid short-term borrowing from Wall Street

California can handle all of its cash flow needs in-house, State Controller Betty Yee said Monday, the first time since before the dot-com bust that that the state will make it through a fiscal year without turning to Wall Street for short-term loans to smooth the ebb-and-flow of tax revenue.

The state has used “revenue anticipation notes,” known as RANs, in every year since the 2000-01 fiscal year. After that, Silicon Valley billions gave way to shortfalls, and the state suffered chronic budget problems for much of the next decade, including a low point during the recession that hit in 2008.

Monday, Yee’s office reported that the $5.7 billion in state revenue last month was virtually identical to what lawmakers predicted in the June budget package. In addition, the state has “unused borrowable resources” in various special funds totaling $26.1 billion, about 11 percent more than anyone expected.

That is more than enough money to cover the state’s short-term cash needs when general fund spending temporarily exceeds revenue, Yee’s office said, without any need for RANs – and the interest expense that comes with using them.

Via: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article30659625.html

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article30659625.html#storylink=cpy

Kevin de León joins immigrants to advocate for health care expansion

Health care for undocumented immigrants wasn’t part of Gov. Jerry Brown’s revised budget proposal last week, but that hasn’t slowed the campaign for SB 4. The proposal – a priority of legislative Democrats that currently sits in the Senate Appropriations Committee as lawmakers consider the expected annual cost of between $175 million and $740 million – tops the agenda for the 19th annual Immigrant Day. 

Immigrant rights advocates will be at the Capitol to lobby for SB 4, as well as AB 622, which would prohibit employers from using the federal E-Verify system to check the immigration status of current workers or applicants who have not yet received a job offer; AB 953, to expand limits on racial profiling; and a $20 million budget proposal to assist Californians applying for citizenship or deferred action.

The day will kick off at 9:15 a.m. with an interfaith ceremony on the west steps of the Capitol, followed by a rally at 9:45 a.m. featuring state Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, D-San Diego, and Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville.

Via: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article21135027.html

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article21135027.html#storylink=cpy

Statewide Day of Action Budget Revise Press Conference & Rally

Join us May 14 & 15, 2015 for

Statewide Day of Action

Budget Revise Press Conference & Rally

Sacremento - May 14

State Capitol, South Steps

When: 11:00 am or

Following Budget Release

Contact: Pete Woiwode, 510-504-9552

pete@communitychange.org

Los Angeles - May 14

300 S. Spring Street, 90013

When: 12:00 pm

Contact: Aurora Garcia, 562-519-3106

agarcia@communitychange.org

San Jose - May 15

1381 S. First street, 95110

When: 10:00 am

Contact: Pete Woiwode, 510-504-9552

pete@communitychange.org

Riverside - May 15

3737 Main street, 92501

When: 1:00 pm

Contact: Maribel Nunez,  562-569-4051

mnunez@communitychange.org

Brown seeks money for fixing roads as gas tax value plunges

California lawmakers are looking at new ways to pay for crumbling roads, bridges and highways as the traditional repair fund from gasoline taxes dries up.

Revenue from gasoline taxes have been sliding as more fuel-efficient and electric cars hit aging roads. That's contributing to an annual $5.9 billion backlog in state highway repairs.

Gov. Jerry Brown's administration is studying whether to tax drivers by miles traveled instead of gas guzzled. Changing the system could take more than five years, and lawmakers are calling for more money to repave roads and fill potholes in the meantime.

They are considering a dollar-a-week fee on most drivers, a temporary gas tax hike, re-directing money used to pay off state debt back to road projects and converting carpool lanes into paid toll ways.

Lawmakers in Congress and statehouses across the nation are grappling with transportation funding shortfalls. In California, Brown's vision for an eco-friendly fleet using half as much gasoline by 2030 is clashing with how the state pays for infrastructure.

"We have not had in the last 25 years a revenue source in transportation that is stable, ongoing and commensurate with our needs," said Brian Kelly, Brown's top transportation aide. "We have fallen further and further behind."

Road maintenance is primarily funded by an 18-cent a gallon gasoline tax, which hasn't increased since 1994. Collections fell from $2.87 billion in 2003 to $2.62 billion in 2013. Drivers pay even more in taxes at the pump for local, federal and new state projects.

State officials say they need more money each year because of the rising costs of fixing roads. About 16 percent of the highways were in poor condition in 2013, according to the California Department of Transportation.

"We are looking at getting revenue in place now to stem the blood flow because our roads are falling apart before our eyes," said Jim Earp, director of the California Alliance for Jobs, which represents construction companies and trade unions.

Hiking taxes and fees requires two-thirds support from the Legislature, including Republicans. Brown in his inaugural address called on both parties to come together on transportation funding, as they did when they developed a $7.5 billion water plan last year.

Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, on Wednesday announced legislation to raise an additional $2 billion a year for transportation, including an annual $52 fee for most drivers. While the details aren't worked out, Atkins said the fee could be charged as part of insurance plans and vehicle registration.

Electrical vehicle drivers who don't pay gas taxes and truckers could also pay more.

Assembly Republican Leader Kristin Olsen, R-Modesto, says she's not opposed to new revenue and charging people who don't pay for road repair, but changes should be balanced with cuts in spending and other taxes. Republicans have blasted the California Department of Transportation for having too many employees and want to redirect money from the $68 billion bullet train project, a personal priority of Brown's.

Brown said last month he would not "pre-empt the discussions" by publicly supporting legislative proposals.

Ellen Hanak, a senior fellow with the Public Policy Institute of California, says the key to a successful compromise is pressure from drivers and businesses fed up with poor road conditions.

"Like water, these are not red and blue issues, people care about transportation in red and blue and purple places," Hanak said. "A basic funding gap is something that affects everybody."

Transportation industry groups took steps to place a vehicle license fee hike for infrastructure on the November 2014 ballot, but abandoned it after finding little support. Earp, the leader of the construction group, says outside organizations may try to take a funding measure to voters in 2016 if the Legislature is unable to pass a deal.

Outside of the capitol, a committee of government and industry officials is looking at replacing the gas tax with a mileage fee. The idea is having drivers pay their share of wear-and-tear on roads, similar to paying water bills by the meter instead of flat rates.

Owners of electrical and hybrid vehicles are avoiding the burden of fixing roads, some transportation observers say.

"It's the more affluent people driving these vehicles getting out of paying their fair share," said Bill Higgins, executive director of the California Association of Councils of Government.

The tricky part is how to measure road use. Instead of simple odometer readings, many road use charge proposals include GPS devices that raise concerns about the government tracking driver habits.

"Your lives are encoded rather reliably in what you do in your car," said Lee Tien, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation who is pushing for non-GPS alternatives on the road usage charge committee.

California hasn't committed to such a tax, which Oregon is testing with 5,000 volunteers this summer. The California committee is due to set up its own pilot program and report findings to the Legislature by 2018, setting the stage for a larger battle over whether to make the shift.

Brown, Legislature study ways to avoid UC, Cal State tuition hikes

By MELANIE MASON, PATRICK MCGREEVY AND LARRY GORDON

December 11, 2014

The fate of the proposed tuition increase at University of California campuses now rests in the hands of the governor and state lawmakers, who are aligned in opposition to it but divided over how to scrap it.

The UC regents voted in November to increase tuition by as much as 28% over the next five years, triggering student protests and a chorus of political bellowing, and promised to make higher education funding one of the Capitol's hottest policy debates in the coming year.

The leaders of the state Assembly and Senate have offered plans to defeat the proposed increase and raise government funding for California's public universities.

Brown, a member of the UC Board of Regents, has proposed an annual 4% increase in state funding for the 10 University of California campuses if the current three-year tuition freeze remains in place. He also is pressing the regents to consider cost-saving changes such as offering more online courses and consolidating academic programs that are now duplicated at multiple campuses. Administration officials said the governor will address UC's financial well-being in his budget, to be released in January, but offered no details.

UC President Janet Napolitano has expressed support for some plans offered by legislators and she said she is open to studying Brown's proposals. However, she has said that the governor's proposed 4% increase is not enough to pay UC's payroll and retirement costs or to cover its plans to hire more faculty and enroll 5,000 more California undergraduates over five years.

UC received $2.64 billion in state general fund revenue this year, $460 million less than seven years ago. More than 166,000 undergraduates attend the UC campuses, and tuition is currently about $12,200 for in-state students. Here's a breakdown of the proposal to increase tuition and the alternatives being offered:

The tuition increase

A 14-7 vote by the regents gave Napolitano the authority to raise tuition each year for the next five years, with the amount dependent on state funding. The annual increase could be as high as 5% — which by 2019 could add up to a cumulative 28% increase over the current tuition.

•A third of the money raised by the increase would go toward financial aid programs.

•By 2019-20, tuition could be as high as $15,564 a year if the state does not increase funding.

•The cost of a UC education — tuition, room and board, books and other expenses — currently can total $30,000 for state residents. Students from other states and countries pay a $23,000 premium in addition to tuition.

The Assembly proposal

Speaker Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) proposed an additional $50 million in state funding for the UC system to avoid tuition increases; the California State University colleges would get extra money as well.
The plan also would:

•Increase Cal Grant financial aid for lower-income families and require UC to maintain existing aid.

•Speed up the Middle Class Scholarship program to cut fees for qualifying families by more than 20% in the 2015-2016 school year.

•Increase UC enrollment of California students by 10,000 over five years and cap enrollment of out-of-state students at 2014-2015 levels.

•Increase the tuition premium for out-of-state students by $5,000, which would raise an additional $100 million annually.

Atkins also vowed to take a "zero-based" approach to crafting the UC budget next year. That would build the system's budget from zero, rather than from previous years' spending, and would mean scrutinizing each line item in the proposed plan. Assembly Republican Leader Kristin Olsen of Modesto supports the zero-based budgeting. Also, Assembly member Young Kim (R-Fullerton) has proposed legislation that would freeze tuition at the state's public colleges and universities as long as the temporary state tax increase under Proposition 30, approved by voters in 2012, remains in effect.

The Senate proposal

Democrats have offered a plan to eliminate the tuition increase, expand enrollment at the UC and Cal State systems and provide grants as incentives to Cal State students who stay on track to complete their degrees in four years. The plan was proposed by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles).

It would cost the state $342 million next year, rising to $434 million. Money would come from taking $580 million over three years from the Middle Class Scholarship program, instituting a 17% increase in the premium charged to out-of-state students and siphoning $156 million from the general fund the first year, dropping to $66 million in the third year.

The plan would also:

•Increase UC enrollment by 5,000 students and Cal State enrollment by 10,500 students next year, at an additional total cost of $113 million per year.

•Provide $75 million each to UC and Cal State annually to pay for more courses and counseling services so students can graduate on time.

•Provide up to $4,500 in "completion incentive grants" to motivate Cal State students to carry a full load of at least 15 credits so that they can graduate in four years, rather than the current average of six years. Students would get a $1,000 grant for completing 30 units by the first year, an additional $1,500 for completing 60 units by the second year and an additional $2,000 for completing 90 units by the third year.

•Fund 7,500 additional Cal Grant competitive awards for older, nontraditional students.

•Repeal this year's scheduled 11% cut to Cal Grants for about 29,000 students attending private and nonprofit universities.

•Encourage corporations and individuals to invest in the College Access Tax Credit Fund, which provides $500 million in tax credits for charitable donations to the fund. The money would go to double funding of Cal Grant Access Awards for community college students.

•Phase out the Middle Class Scholarship program, which in its first year provided tuition credits for 73,000 students from families with incomes between $80,000 and $150,000. Current recipients would continue to get funds until they graduate, but no other students would be allowed into the program. The credits average $1,112 for those enrolled at UC and $628 at Cal State.

Neither the governor nor the California Legislature has the authority to force the UC regents to rescind the tuition increase. However, they do have power over state funding provided to the university system, giving them political leverage.

via: http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-pol-uc-tuition-explainer-20141211-story.html#page=1

Election 2014 FAQ: Prop 2 — state budget and rainy day fund

Proposition 2 is a constitutional amendment put on the ballot by the California legislature to change the rules governing the state's rainy day fund. It also contains a new statute that will affect how schools manage their own reserve funds. 

Who's behind this ballot measure?

In 2004, voters passed Proposition 58, a cornerstone of then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's plan to help fix the state budgeting process. Prop 58 established a rainy day fund known as the Budget Stabilization Account (BSA) to help the state weather downturns in the economy. Since a significant portion of the general fund comes from income taxes, a bad year for residents means less money for the state.

Prop 2 modifies the rules that govern how the state contributes money to the BSA and, in turn, how money in the account is used. It was authored by former Assembly Speaker John A. Perez (D-Los Angeles). The final vote to place it on the ballot was unanimous in both houses — 36-0 in the state Senate and 78-0 in the Assembly.

What would it do?

If approved, Prop 2 would:

• Require the state to put matching minimum amounts toward savings (in the BSA) and debt each year for 15 years — specifically, 0.75 percent of general fund revenues. Payments would be larger in years when revenues are higher from capital gains taxes.
• Allow the governor to declare a "budget emergency" in order to reduce the payment amounts in a given year, but only in the case of a natural disaster or if there is not enough money to keep general fund spending at the highest level of the past three years.
• Limit the amount the state could take out of the BSA to the amount needed to cover such a natural disaster or to keep spending up, with a maximum withdrawal of half the BSA. If a budget emergency is declared two years in a row, all of the money can be withdrawn in the second year.
• Increase the maximum size of the BSA to 10 percent of the general fund, which would amount to $11 billion currently — any extra money after the maximum is reached would go toward infrastructure projects.
• Create a state reserve for schools. Money would be contributed only in years when capital gains tax revenues are above average and spending already covers any increases in the number of students and cost of living.
• Create a new law that limits the amount of reserves school districts can keep at the local level (community colleges excluded) — for most school districts, between 3 percent and 10 percent of their annual budget. The law goes into effect only when the state has begun putting money into its school reserve fund, and it could be changed later by the legislature without a vote of the people, since it is not a constitutional amendment.

How is this different from existing laws?

The Legislative Analyst's Office provides a comparison of existing law and Prop 2 in the following areas:

STATE DEBTS

	TODAY'S LAWS	CHANGES MADE IF PROPOSITION 2 PASSES
Required extra spending on existing state debts each year(a)	None.(b)	A minimum of $800 million. Up to $2 billion or more when capital gains tax revenues are strong.(c)

STATE RESERVES

	TODAY'S LAWS	CHANGES MADE IF PROPOSITION 2 PASSES
Basic amount that goes into the Budget Stabilization Account (BSA) each year	A little over $3 billion.	A minimum of $800 million. Up to $2 billion or more when capital gains tax revenues are strong.(c)
When can state put less than the basic amount into the BSA?	Any time the Governor chooses.	Only when the Governor calls a "budget emergency" and the Legislature agrees.(d)
How much can state take out of the BSA?	Any amount available.	Up to the amount needed for the budget emergency. Cannot be more than half of the money in the BSA if there was no budget emergency in the prior year.
Maximum size of the BSA	$8 billion or 5 percent of General Fund revenues, whichever is greater (currently $8 billion).	About 10 percent of General Fund revenues (currently about $11 billion).

SCHOOL RESERVES

	TODAY'S LAWS	CHANGES MADE IF PROPOSITION 2 PASSES
State reserve for schools and community colleges	None.	Money would go into a new state reserve for schools and community colleges in some years when capital gains revenues are strong.
Limit on maximum size of school district reserves	None.	Sets maximum reserves that school districts can keep at the local level in some years.

LAO NOTES:
(a) The term "state debts" includes debts for pension and retiree health benefits and specified debts owed to local governments and other state accounts.

(b) Proposition 58 (2004) requires that half of the money put into the BSA be used to pay down certain state bonds faster. This year’s budget is expected to pay off the rest of those bonds, meaning this requirement will no longer apply beginning with next year’s budget.

(c) After 15 years, debt spending under Proposition 2 becomes optional. Amounts that would otherwise be spent on debts after 15 years instead would be put into the BSA.

(d) Governor could call a budget emergency for a natural disaster or to keep spending at the highest level of the past three years—adjusted for population and cost of living.

How much will it cost taxpayers?

The fiscal impact of Prop 2 is not immediately clear, since it will depend on how it is implemented at the state and local levels moving forward, according to the LAO. However, the LAO estimates that Prop 2:

• Would likely lead to a faster payoff of debts, which in turn could lead to less spending on interest and more money for other budget items.
• Could lessen the "ups and downs" of state spending if, on balance, Prop 2 results in more money being put into the BSA over time.
• Would likely not lead to the establishment of a state reserve account for several years, until the conditions can be met. Money would be deposited only sporadically — in years when the economy is particularly strong.
• Would in many cases lead to schools keeping less in their reserve funds than they currently do, making it more difficult to balance their budgets in down years.

Who's supporting it and why?

The biggest financial supporter of Prop 2 is the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, which has given $500,000 as of September 24.

Other major financial backers comprise a rather eclectic mix of union, business and private interests, including Reed Hastings of Netflix, insurance provider Health Net, the American Council of Engineering Companies and Abraxis Bioscience.

However, three of the five campaign committees formed to raise money for Prop 2 are also raising money for Prop 1, making it difficult to determine how individual donors' money was actually spent.

Supporters, which include Pérez, Gov. Jerry Brown and Allan Zaremberg, the president of the California Chamber of Commerce, argue that Prop 2 will strengthen the state's rainy day fund and help avoid a boom-and-bust cycle of painful cuts and tax increases. They also argue that a stable budget will offer protection against cuts to education spending.

More: Yes on 2 campaign

Who's opposing it and why?

The grassroots parent organization Educate Our State leads the opposition campaign, though no major financial opposition to Prop 2 had been reported as of September 24.

Educate Our State takes issue in particular with the new law created by Prop 2 that would limit the amount districts can keep in their reserve funds, forcing them to spend any excess once the state's school reserve fund is established. Educate Our State argues that decisions over how to weather economic ups and downs should be made at the local level.

More: No on 2 campaign

…a YES vote means…

You accept the changes to the rules governing the state's rainy day fund, the creation of a state reserve for schools and the new limits on school districts' reserves.

…a NO vote means…

You reject the changes proposed: existing laws will continue to govern the state's Budget Stabilization Account, no state reserve for schools will be created, and school districts will retain full control over their reserve funds.

California Stood Up For Immigrants, Transgender People In 2013

2013 was a big year for the rights of immigrants, workers, women and children in California. The most populous state in the nation, led by Gov. Jerry Brown (D) and a Democratic supermajority in the state Legislature, California this year passed groundbreaking laws that bucked the national trend of restricting abortion rights, rebuked the federal government's aggressive deportation program and led the country on workers' rights.

But 2014 is going to be even better -- that's when the laws start going into effect. Take a look at some of California's landmark laws from this past year below.

TRANSGENDER RIGHTS

In a nationwide first, transgender students in California will be able to choose which restrooms they want to use starting in January. They will also be able to choose between boys' and girls' sports teams.

California is the first state to enact these policies as a state law, but the groundbreaking legislation, which goes into effect Jan. 1, could be suspended within days if opposition groups gather enough signatures to test the law before voters on the November ballot.

PAPARAZZI REFORM

Paparazzi photographers who harass and intimidate celebrities and their children will face stiffer penalties under a new law passed in 2013: a fine of up to $10,000 and up to a year in county jail. Victims can also sue for damages and attorney's fees, according to the Associated Press.

Before the bill passed, celebrity moms Halle Berry and Jennifer Garner joined forces to deliver some emotional testimony about how aggressive photographers regularly frighten their children.

"My 17-month-old baby is terrified and cries," said Garner during the August hearing. "My 4-year-old says, 'Why do these men never smile? Why do they never go away? Why are they always with us?'"

ABORTION RIGHTS

California's new law authorizes nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives and physician assistants to perform aspiration abortions during the first trimester.

California joins Oregon, Montana, Vermont and New Hampshire in allowing nurse practitioners to perform early abortions, the AP reported. In 2013, California was the only state to enact a law expanding abortion access, The New York Times noted.

Legislators also strengthened an existing law that makes it illegal to damage or block access to abortion clinics, the AP reported.

MINIMUM WAGE

California's minimum wage will go from $8 an hour to $9 in July, and it will reach $10 an hour by 2016. California joins 12 other states that are raising their minimum wage in 2014.

TEXTING LOOPHOLE CLOSED

A legislative loophole made it possible for teens to use voice commands like Apple iPhone's Siri to text while driving, and California's lawmakers closed that loophole this year. Adults will still be able to use the hands-free texting feature while driving.

Teens have been banned from using cell phones on the road since 2007, but an apparent loophole opened up in 2012 when legislators passed a bill allowing drivers to use hands-free devices to send text messages and perform other functions, according to the AP.

GUN SAFETY LAWS

California already has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, but lawmakers cracked down even further with laws that strengthen assault weapon permit requirements, require licensed psychotherapists to tell police about patients who threaten violence against others, and make it illegal to purchase gun parts that convert firearms into assault-style rifles.

The bills were written in reaction to mass shootings across the country, including the December 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn. In contrast, the federal government hasn't been able to pass any gun safety laws since the Newtown massacre.

DOMESTIC WORKERS BILL OF RIGHTS

California joined New York and Hawaii in creating statewide protections for domestic workers in 2013. California's law allows domestic workers like nannies and personal health care aides to claim overtime wages for more than nine hours of work a day or 45 hours of work a week.

The law is expected to affect about 100,000 workers, but it's only temporary --legislators will have to vote on whether to renew the law in 2017, KPCC reported. It's also a pared-down version of the bill that was originally proposed in 2011, which included meal and rest breaks.

IMMIGRATION REFORM

The federal government is stalling on immigration reform, and Gov. Jerry Brown made it clear that California isn't going to wait around any longer. Brown signed into law a group of bills this year to protect undocumented immigrants, the most significant of which is the Trust Act.

The Trust Act limits local police's cooperation with the Department of Homeland Security's Secure Communities, a federal deportation program that asks police departments to screen arrestees for immigration status and hold them for the feds if they're found to be undocumented. So far, Secure Communities has deported 100,000 Californians, most of whom did not have a serious criminal record, the Los Angeles Times reported, but the new law will require people to be charged with or convicted of a serious offense before being held for possible deportation by the feds.

Starting in 2015, California's undocumented immigrants will also be able to apply for driver's licenses. California joins Illinois, Colorado, Nevada, Maryland, Connecticut, Oregon, and the District of Columbia in passing the driver's license legislation in 2013, MSNBC reported. New Mexico, Washington and Utah also allow undocumented immigrants to apply for driver's licenses.

via: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/31/new-california-laws-2014_n_4521694.html?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=Politics

Jerry Brown signs bill to raise California minimum wage

Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation to raise California's minimum wage by 25 percent, from $8 an hour to $10 an hour by 2016.

The bill, celebrated by Brown and his labor union allies at an event in Los Angeles, promises the first increase in California's hourly minimum since 2008, when the minimum wage was raised 50 cents to $8.

After appearing in the state's biggest media market this morning, the Democratic governor is scheduled to fly to Oakland to promote the bill at a second event this afternoon.

Assembly Bill 10, by Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville, will raise the minimum wage from $8 to $9 an hour on July 1, 2014, and to $10 on Jan. 1, 2016.

The bill was the only one of 38 bills designated by the California Chamber of Commerce as a "jobs killers" to make it out of the Legislature this year.
The chamber and other business groups said raising the hourly minimum would unfairly increase business costs and jeopardize California's economic recovery.


California is one of 18 states and the District of Columbia that have minimum wages above the federal minimum of $7.25 an hour, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, and California's $10 minimum is likely to be among the highest in the nation in 2016.


Washington currently has the nation's highest state minimum wage, at $9.19 an hour, but that state is one of 10 that provide for automatic adjustments to their minimum wages based on cost of living measures, a provision eliminated from an earlier version of the bill Brown signed.

The California legislation is expected to affect about 1.5 million full-time, year-round workers, about 14 percent of the state's full-time workforce, according to a Bee review of U.S. Census data.

The broader effects of a minimum wage increase are the subject of longstanding debate. The California Budget Project, which advocates for low-income residents, said in a brief this month that California's minimum wage has not kept pace with the rising cost of living and that raising the hourly minimum "would help reverse the decline in the purchasing power of workers' wages."

Proponents of raising the minimum wage say workers who earn more will spend more, stimulating the economy, and will require less government assistance.

Opponents of raising the minimum wage say requiring employers to pay higher wages will force them to offset costs by raising prices, hiring fewer workers or reducing workers' hours.

The National Federation of Independent Business, an advocacy group, released a study in March warning that a minimum wage increase under an earlier version of the California bill could result in the loss of more than 68,000 jobs in California over 10 years.

The Bee's Phillip Reese contributed to this report

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2013/09/jerry-brown-signs-bill-to-raise-california-minimum-wage.html#storylink=cpy