Well, it took many years, and Gil Cedillo wasn't the one to pass it, but drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants is going to happen in California.
Two decades after California barred illegal immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses, Gov. Jerry Brown Thursday signed legislation that restores the privilege, ending a policy battle that liberal Democrats had been fighting -- and losing -- for years. (Oakland tribune)
In the end, this bill makes Californians safer. It makes all Californians who use the roads safer, as there aren't a big group of drivers without licenses. And it makes people feel more human:
Striking Low-income Workers Had Pay Reducing Contract Imposed While Top Earners Get Increases
by Brian Leubitz
Janet Napolitano is just moving into her new offices in the East Bay Office of the UC President. And right on her first day, she got a letter calling out the treatment of some of the lowest paid workers in the system. But let's back it up, and give some background. From the Davis Enterprise:
The University of California this week notified the union representing about 8,300 service gardeners, food service workers and custodians that would impose its final offer after more than a year of negotiations.
"Having completed all stages of the bargaining process, including state-assisted mediation and fact-finding, the university is legally entitled to implement its last proposal," said Dwaine Duckett, UC's vice president for systemwide human resources and programs, in a statement. ...
UC will impose a new pension and retiree health benefits program that includes an increase in the university's contribution from 10 to 12 percent and an employee contribution increase from 5 to 6.5 percent.(Davis Enterprise)
Of course, for workers that are making an average of $35,000 per year, that increase is a big deal. According to their union, AFSCME 3299, the imposed contract is a 1.5% reduction in pay at a time when the top earners are getting 3% pay increases.
Now, Napolitano obviously wasn't involved in that background, but she is getting a talking to from legislators about the imposition of a contract on a group of workers that represent the most diverse and lowest income of UC employees. From the letter, authored by new Assembly member Lorena Gonzales and signed by nine more legislators:
UC has applied a different standard to its patient care and service workers - 90% of whom are immigrants and people of color. Service workers are the only ones that have been singled out for a wage freeze. These womenand men are already the lowest-paid UC employees.
We recognize and respect that UC's administrative staff are people of good will. We are confident that they are not consciously singling out employees of color. But we also recognize that most often discriminatory practices evolve from equitable theories.
Whatever the reason, whatever the recent history, singling out the University's largest population of minority workers for the harshest treatment at the bargaining table sends a deeply disturbing message. Nothing could be less consistent with the values you have embodied throughout your career. (Full Letter on Scribd)
Labor negotiations are never easy, whether for the top employees or for the critical employees who make the educational environment possible at UC. But it is critical that all employees be treated fairly, and that is what this letter is all about.
This is hardly the only major contentious issue facing Napolitano as she enters the office, but it is clearly one worthy of her immediate attention.
Nearly twenty California newspapers and a coalition of thousands agree that AB 711 is common-sense public policy
by Robin Swanson
Assembly Bill 711, a bill by Assemblymembers Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) and Dr. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) to require non-lead ammo for hunting, makes so much good common sense that is supported by dozens of groups from across the spectrum, from the California Medical Association to Children Now to the American Federation of County, State and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), not to mention being endorsed by almost every major newspaper in our state (see below).
And yet the opponents of the bill are asking the public to ignore decades of science proving that lead is a poison that is bad for humans and our environment, instead resorting to classic "slippery slope" arguments and trying to create other red herrings.
So I'd like to get back to the basics, because despite working in politics for a very long time, I still believe that common sense wins the day:
Lead is bad.
The Centers for Disease Control has said that there is no safe level of lead exposure for humans. That why we've banned it in everything from paint, to gasoline to children's toys. Eating lead particles left in game meat shot with lead ammunition is bad for you. It's bad for animals, like the California Condor, Golden Eagles and 130 other wild species, too.
Lead ammo is also bad.
"Over 60,000 metric tons of lead is used annually in the production of lead ammunition in the United States. Thus, lead-based ammunition is likely the greatest, largely unregulated, source of lead knowingly discharged into the environment in the US," said Dr. Don Smith, Professor, Department of Microbiology and Environmental Toxicology, UC Santa Cruz. "In contrast, other significant sources of lead in the environment, such as leaded gasoline, lead-based paint, and lead-based solder, are recognized as hazardous and have been substantially reduced or eliminated over the past 50 years."
Dr. Smith led a recent effort that attracted the signatures of more than 30 nationally respected scientists, who reached consensus on the need to remove lead from ammunition used in hunting.
Lead ammo is mean.
"
It only takes a tiny amount of lead to poison animals, causing immense suffering before killing them, and unfortunately, I see these animals in my clinic all too often," said Dr. Vickie Joseph, a Placer County veterinarian who specializes in wildlife health. "Lead is toxic to vertebrate physiological systems, including the central and peripheral nervous, renal, cardiovascular, reproductive, immune and hematologic systems, and it is recognized as a carcinogen in California. Lead poisoning can cause an inability to fly, starvation, weakness, lethargy, vomiting, diarrhea, anemia, blindness, seizures and death."
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1991 began to require the use of non-lead shot like steel for hunting ducks and geese across the United States, California began requiring lead-free ammo in the condor zone in 2008, and the National Park Service in 2009 announced the goal of eliminating the use of lead ammunition.
There are already manufacturers of non-lead ammunition in the state of California, and thousands and thousands of waterfowl hunters in California already use non-lead ammunition.
And if this isn't enough, the following newspaper editorials agree with the bill's sponsors including Audubon California, Defenders of Wildlife and The Humane Society of the United States in calling for enactment of AB 711... (over the flip)
Well, the House GOP has gone ahead and leaped over the brink in their vain attempts to stop the President's Affordable Care Act and forced a government shutdown. It's a sad state of affairs, and particularly mournful for our very own Yosemite National Park, forced to close as it gets a closeup from the millions of Google users who view the "Google Doodle":
So Yosemite National Park is sitting there, all majestic in the outfit it planned just for the occasion - its 123rd Anniversary, today, Oct. 1 - but something isn't right. There are no party guests, no cake and not a celebratory banner in sight, because the federal government is shut down today.
All that remains are the best wishes from Google, which marks Yosemite's anniversary today with a Doodle Tribute. Meanwhile tourists will be kept from visiting that and all the national parks around the country today.
Park police will be on duty to make sure no shenanigans go down, but the visitors center will be closed and all campers have been escorted off the grounds. (Consumerist)
There are many other blogs to read for some very good opinions on the shutdown, but for those Californians who wanted to see the majesty of Half-Dome, well, they will have to wait. Apparently the Republicans are too busy being held hostage to their right wing fringe to get real work done.
Everyday, schools in California and across the nation are unable to educate far too many of our students for one simple reason: our youngest students aren't in class. Some estimates say that approximately one million California elementary school students were truant during the 2012-13 school year.(1)
Truancy makes a profound difference in the safety of our communities. When our students drop out or fail to attend school, we spend additional billions in incarceration and lose productivity and tax revenues. One prominent study showed that for some chronically truant students, just one additional school day missed could reduce their chance of graduating by up to 7%.(2) Children who lack that educational foundation are more likely to end up at risk of becoming involved in crime, both as victims and as offenders.
I have long focused on combating truancy because I see a direct connection between public education and public safety. To really make the changes we need, all adults, - districts, law enforcement, schools, parents, communities - are accountable to find solutions. Only by working together can we find the solutions that our students need.
State to begin enrollment in "Obamacare" plans for 2014
by Brian Leubitz
House Republicans look like they are willing to shut the government down to put the brakes on ObamaCare, but that won't actually change Covered California's plan to open up shop tomorrow.
Indeed, Covered California - the state's version of the federal health care law - is preparing to begin enrolling customers in its health insurance exchange on Tuesday. Parts of the government would close on the same day if lawmakers in Washington don't act on legislation to extend discretionary spending. ...
California, one of 14 states rolling out its own marketplace, will mark opening day with a series of events in Sacramento, Fresno, San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego. The federal government will oversee the launch in the remaining states.(SacBee)
In fact, if you want to see how much, roughly, your health insurance will cost under the new law, it is already available. Just head over to CoveredCA.com and click on "Shop and Compare" to get a few quotes for ACA-eligible plans.
If you have employer insurance, this won't really change much for you. However, for those of us with individual plans, the new exchange will open up new options.
Green living is the future. But the power of our everyday actions to aid the environment can only be unleashed when green choices become a bigger part of our lives.
This is why Electric Vehicle (EV) Week is so important. All week, events from San Francisco to Silicon Valley are showcasing the potential for electric vehicle technology to change the world - one car at a time. Before the week is over, I urge Governor Jerry Brown to sign legislation maintaining a vital incentive for Californians to buy electric vehicles.
As is the case with any new technology, electric cars must compete on both cost and convenience. Although my efforts to expand electric vehicle tax credits are ongoing, the governor has a chance to ensure that electric vehicles are significantly more convenient than other cars.
If signed into law, AB 266 and SB 286 will extend the Clean Air Vehicle Sticker Program for 5 years. It gives plug-in drivers a fast pass through traffic as an incentive to invest in electric vehicle technology. More specifically, the owners of plug-in cars may drive alone in carpool lanes and for free in carpool lanes converted to toll roads. But first they must obtain and place on their vehicle a set of special stickers from the DMV.
AB 266 extends the validity of the "white sticker," which extends these fast pass benefits to owners of electric and other zero-emission vehicles. SB 286 extends the "green sticker" that is available to plug-in hybrid owners. Without these bills, the sticker program expires in 15 months. That would be a huge loss.
Across California, there are nearly 30,000 white-stickered cars and 16,000 green-stickered cars. As a percentage, it's a rounding error among the 28 million vehicles on our roads. We need to up these numbers to get cleaner air, reduce the incidence of respiratory disease, and confront climate change.
California has the toughest clean air and clean fuel standards in the nation. Yet, transportation continues to be the source of 40 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions and smog. Clearly, we must think beyond petroleum and encourage more Californians to buy cleaner cars. Electric cars.
Governor Brown agrees. Last year, he signed an executive order outlining an aspirational goal for California to have 1.5 million zero emission vehicles on its roads by 2025. We have a long way to go and a short time to get there.
This is one among many reasons why we must extend the sticker program. California's car market is booming. Sales estimates are projected to be 1.7 million new cars this year - nearly double their recessionary low in 2009. Consumer barriers to electric technology are decreasing. Car manufacturers are offering more and less expensive electric cars than ever. And, Californians can finally finance the cost and in-home installation of accelerated charging equipment with a car dealership when purchasing an electric car.
Furthermore, as the home of many electric car companies, extending this program will keep good green jobs right here in California by sending a firm signal to manufacturers that we want to nurture this industry.
We need to build on this momentum and create a mindset for Californians to consider the environment when buying a car. This is the future. We must embrace it so that electric vehicle technology can take off rapidly.
While overtime pay has been required for decades in most industries, domestic workers have always been exempted. While the logic is far from clear, home health care workers, nannies and other home care workers were simply left out of the arrangement. AB 241 changes that:
"Domestic workers are primarily women of color, many of them immigrants, and their work has not been respected in the past," said Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco), the bill's author. "Now they will be entitled to overtime, like just about every other California working person."(LA Times)
Now, that is not to say that AB 241 goes as far as Asm. Ammiano wanted to go with his domestic workers bill. Last year's AB 889, which was vetoed by the governor (veto message here), would have guaranteed meal breaks and other rights. However, this bill does commission a study to review the totality of working conditions for domestic workers to be completed by 2017 and that could provide the data for further protections.
All that being said, overtime is a great first step for domestic workers, and groups like Mujeres Unidas y Activas celebrated the victory yesterday at the signing.
MUA is so proud of this victory and the role we have played in this work over the past 8 years. We know that the work truly just begins now - the work of educating workers about their rights and employers about their responsibilities, the work of building the base of organized worker to reach the thousands and hundreds of thousands in California, the work of sharing the story and model of our organizing campaign with our sisters across the country who are just starting this journey, the work of winning even more rights and protections for domestic workers, and the work of changing our culture to respect and recognize the work that makes all other work possible.
Not only is Jerry Brown standing up to Arne Duncan on testing, but he's also something of a pioneer in tweaking the school funding formulas. Sure, our per pupil spending is still shockingly low, but with our recovery, we have a little more money to shift around. It's how that shifting is going to work that has brought the state into the disagreement with so-called education reformers.
As I noted in a post last week, California and Washington have taken distinctly different approaches to achievement gaps that increasingly are most closely associated with economic inequality. Rather than focusing on firing "bad" teachers and closing schools, California has moved to direct more resources to low-income districts and increase local decision-making, with sanctions a last resort after support and technical assistance have failed. ...
In March, the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, headed by Brown's appointee Linda Darling-Hammond, pushed back against the federal predilection to ensure teacher quality by de-emphasizing preparation standards in favor of a holy grail of downstream effectiveness measures. The Commission voted to ramp up pre-service training requirements for interns teaching English learners and in-service supervision requirements for all interns, particularly those teaching ELs. And Washington's darlings, Teach for America and the charter school lobby, suffered a rare loss when the credentialing commission determined "innovation" can't excuse putting teachers who know little or nothing about teaching English as a second language in front of English learners.(EdSource)
I had a few friends that went through the TeachForAmerica program, and I know it was an extremely beneficial experience for them. However, it is far from clear that the same can be said to be true for the students. Test results don't really bear it out, and simple common sense should dictate that enthusiasm alone won't replace the years of training that helps to make good teachers for our students.
Moreover, the Governor has been one of the bigger supporters of reforming our testing system, as shown through that recent fight with Sec. Duncan over testing and the new Common Core Curriculum. NCLB has been something of a disaster for our long term competitiveness. It made many of our students good test takers and really solid at learning how to jump through hoops. But "fill in the bubbles" testing gives us a very two-dimensional description of our students. Gov. Brown has been focused on testing that covers more ground and emphasizes the skills that the students need.
These tests are a little more difficult to develop, and in the best case scenario aren't delivered as often. That, of course, doesn't make the education reformers all that happy. But it is in the best interests of our students and our teachers. While some would argue that "America's Greatest Eduation Governor 2013" is too close to CTA, it is clear that he is working with the teachers for the benefit of our students. We need to keep good teachers in the classroom, and encourage below average teachers to become better. The Governor is working with CTA to do that, a laudable goal from any perspective.
The whole EdSource article is worth a read, but if nothing else, this is a solid takeaway:
Is it too much to hope that Washington will begin taking notice and start moving toward the anti-poverty educational policies being pursued in the state where one in eight public school students attend school? Or perhaps the best we can hope for is that continued partisan gridlock in D.C. will continue to create opportunities for California to go its own way.(EdSource)
Not only should California be allowed to develop our own reforms, other states should work to emulate our programs where they prove to be successful. Gov. Brown deserves a lot of credit for his continued strong education record.
In a move to slash the retirement benefits of public employees in California, a group of mostly conservative policy advocates has been working behind the scenes on a possible 2014 ballot initiative. A copy of the still-secret draft initiative, which could dramatically impact the lives of hundreds of thousands of Californians and send a signal nationwide, has been obtained by Frying Pan News. (See the document's text following this article or click here.)
If enacted, the proposed law would allow the state and local governments to cut back retirement benefits for current employees for the years of work they perform after the changes go into effect. Previous efforts to curb retirement benefits for public employees have largely focused on newly hired workers, but the initiative would shrink pensions for workers who are currently on the job.
"This initiative defines that a government employee's 'vested rights' only applies to pension and retiree healthcare benefits earned for service already rendered, and explicitly empowers government employers and the voters to amend pension and retiree healthcare benefits for an employee's future years of service," the private draft states.
Those working at the minimum wage have to work several jobs to get by in most of California's communities. The Governor helped that somewhat today:
Gov. Jerry Brown this morning 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. ...
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. (SacBee)
Now, under the current minimum wage, the average Californian needs to work 129 hours to pay for an apartment in the state. To be clear, that is working about 18.5 hours per day, seven days per week. And forget about some of the more expensive communities, like San Francisco where one bedrooms can go up to $3,000 per month for a standard unit in the eastern half of the city.
This bill will help somewhat with this issue, but clearly we need to encourage more affordable housing within easy transit distance of our city cores. And we haven't even gotten to providing greater access to healthy food and quality schools...
All that being said, this is a positive first step for millions of Californians. Congratulations to Gov. Brown, Asm. Alejo, and all those who worked to get this bill passed.
Court is putting finger on the scales toward a settlement
by Brian Leubitz
The Court has been pretty upfront with their displeasure with the progress on prison population reduction. But perhaps they are also less than thrilled with the simple private prisons option and see a ray of light with the proposals that the Senate Democrats brought to the issue. Either way, the Court granted the state four weeks, moving the date back from the end of the year until Jan 27, 2014. (PDF of the order). Here's the important part for that delay:
The December 31, 2013 deadline shall be extended until January 27, 2014, without prejudice to the parties' filing a joint request for a further extension or the Court so ordering. During the meet-and-confer process and until further order of the Court, defendants shall not enter into any contracts or other arrangements to lease additional capacity in out-of-state facilities or otherwise increase the number of inmates who are housed in out-of-state facilities.
Now, four weeks, you are thinking? Well, the judges have a plan for those four weeks. As mentioned in that last paragraph (actually the third of three paragraphs in the order), the state and the plaintiffs in the case were ordered to a negotiation process overseen by First District Court of Appeal Justice Peter Siggins. Justice Siggins will then notify the Three Judge Panel on Oct 21 whether there is hope for a settlement. Specifically, he was tasked with looking at a number of options to reducing populations, which apparently the Court finds preferable to the leasing additional capacity.
The meet-and-confer process shall explore how defendants can comply with this Court's June 20, 2013 Order, including means and dates by which such compliance can be expedited or accomplished and how this Court can ensure a durable solution to the prison crowding problem. The discussions shall specifically include: (a) three strikers; (b) juveniles; (c) the elderly and the medically infirm; (d) Immigration and Customs Enforcement prisoners; (e) the implementation of the Low Risk List; and (f) any other means, including relocation within the state, that are included in defendants' May 2, 2013 List. Justice Siggins and the parties may also discuss any necessary or desirable extension of the December 31, 2013 deadline beyond that provided for in the final paragraph of this order, as well as any other matters they deem appropriate.
These criteria are remarkably similar to a letter written by the ACLU to the Governor on how we could release prisoners without leasing additional capacity. So clearly the court is looking for an option beyond the Governor's plan, and appreciates the dialog that the Legislature had with the Senate's plan. Of course, at the heart of the Senate Democrats plan was a three year delay brought about by a settlement with the plaintiffs.
This is a lot of reading of tea leaves out of a three paragraph order. But if some progress can be made over the next four weeks, maybe we can spend a little more time reforming the heart of the troubling system as the Senate Democrats hoped to do.
Rhode Island town uses Kickstarter approach to government
by Brian Leubitz
While not strictly California news, with the number of California cities in bankruptcy right now, the story of a town in Rhode Island looking to crowdfunding is worth a read:
Central Falls, Rhode Island went bankrupt in 2011 after promising overly generous pensions to city employees. The city pulled itself out of bankruptcy last year and must now stick to a penny-pinching plan with no room for error or for luxuries like trash cans and public art. As a result, the impoverished city is getting creative: it's now raising $10,044 on the civic crowdfunding platform Citizinvestor in order to clean up its main public park. It's raised $245 so far. ([The Verge ])
Lest we think this is all very far away, San Mateo County is using the site to ask for money for fire rings at a county park and several other projects. The site is a bit spartan now, but it seems to be a growing business.
At one point in our history, taxes were used as the "crowdfunding" in order to purchased shared goods and services. Now that we have decided low taxes are more important than a government that can meet our needs, "luxuries" like bike parking and fire rings are supposed to be paid for out of your own good will.
Now, the service does allow for tax deductions, but shouldn't we be focused on fixing the problems that are at the heart of these problems? For years, the "waste, fraud, and abuse" line was trotted out at every turn, with very little actual evidence as taxes were slashed. And now we are dealing with the ramifications, municipalities are forced to seek "out of the box" solutions that rely on good will alone.
Negotiating a fair contract is a complex process that involves hard work and commitment from both labor and management. When both sides bargain in good faith and share a goal of securing a deal, a deal eventually gets done. I've personally been involved in many tough negotiations that ended with a fair deal that both parties could live with. It takes patience and willingness from both sides to compromise.
In the BART negotiations, unfortunately that hasn't been the case. BART management paid Thomas Hock, an out-of-state lawyer with a history of driving disputes to a strike, nearly $400,000 to lead negotiations. Hock and his company have been responsible for seven strikes, 47 unfair labor practice charges and nine discrimination lawsuits. Not exactly a history of committing to compromise in order to secure a deal.
True to form, Hock hasn't been serious about negotiating a resolution at BART that would spare the Bay Area a strike. Instead, he's taken several vacations since he's been on board. When he has bothered to show up at the negotiating table, he's stonewalled. And now Hock and BART management have stopped negotiating altogether and are preparing for a strike.
Even worse, BART is saying that it will run a number of trains during a strike operated by managers who lack the minimum requirements to safely get BART riders to and from their destinations. In essence, BART is willing to sacrifice the safety of riders by pushing this dispute to a strike so that they ultimately get their way. There's no regard for workers. No regard for riders impacted by a strike. It's BART management's way or -- literally -- the clogged highway.
The BART unions have made significant compromises in recent days with the goal of averting a strike, including last week's concession on wages. The unions have come to the table seeking honest, good-faith negotiations to broker a deal before the 60-day cooling off period ends. They've proposed a modest 4.5 percent wage increase over three years after a five-year wage freeze, while offering to contribute more to their health care and retirement. It's a fair proposal given BART's relatively strong financial position. The unions have also sought important safety protections for riders and workers including opening more restrooms and providing for more secure stations at night, only to be rebuffed time and time again by Hock and the BART management team.
There's still time to come to a deal that would avert a strike and ensure the safety of BART riders isn't jeopardized. But the unions can't negotiate by themselves. It's going to take a commitment from both sides to negotiate non-stop, if necessary, to get that done. If Hock and the BART management team continue to refuse to negotiate, there's only one option: a strike. Elected officials and BART directors must demand that management joins the unions at the negotiating table for round-the-clock, good-faith negotiations until a fair settlement is reached.
There's a lot at stake for BART workers and their families as well as the hundreds of thousands of riders that count on BART to get to work, school and other destinations. Workers want to continue doing the job they've done exceedingly well for years. Riders want the trains to keep running. The only thing preventing a deal from getting done is BART management's unwillingness to compromise. To avert a strike, that needs to change.
When Kentucky's legislature adopted a bill intended to transform the Bluegrass State's troubled pension system last spring, state officials were ecstatic. Signing the bill into law on April 4, Democratic governor Steve Beshear hailed it as groundbreaking legislation that would "solve the most pressing financial problem facing our state - our monstrous unfunded pension liability and the financial instability of our pension fund."
Not everyone was convinced.
Critics, who include pension-fund experts, lawmakers and AARP Kentucky, claim the new law will hurt workers, taxpayers and retirees. What's more, they say the law was largely crafted behind the scenes by an unusual alliance between two out-of-state organizations: the Pew Center on the States and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. Some detractors go further and assert that the Arnold Foundation is using Pew's sterling reputation for academic integrity as a fig leaf to hide its own free-market agenda.
