Asm. Luis Alejo

This measure would proclaim the month of January 2016 as Human Trafficking Awareness Month, encourage all Californians to become educated about human trafficking and work to eradicate these criminal practices within and beyond our borders, and encourage Members of the Legislature, as well as organizations, businesses, and individuals, to host or sponsor and attend community events in order to bring visibility and support to efforts made by nongovernmental organizations to recognize and combat human trafficking.

Existing property tax law requires the county auditor, in each fiscal year, to allocate property tax revenue to local jurisdictions in accordance with specified formulas and procedures, and generally requires that each jurisdiction be allocated an amount equal to the total of the amount of revenue allocated to that jurisdiction in the prior fiscal year, subject to certain modifications, and that jurisdiction's portion of the annual tax increment, as defined. Existing law provides for the computation, on the basis of these allocations, of apportionment factors that are applied to actual property tax revenues in each county in order to determine actual amounts of property tax revenue received by each recipient jurisdiction. This bill would deem to be correct those property tax revenue apportionment factors that were applied in allocating property tax revenues in the County of San Benito for each fiscal year through the 2001–02 fiscal year. This bill would, however, require property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenue in the County of San Benito for the 2002–03 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter to be determined on the basis of apportionment factors for prior fiscal years that have been corrected or adjusted as would be required if those prior apportionment factors were not deemed correct by this bill. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of San Benito.

Existing law requires the adopted course of study for grades 7 to 12, inclusive, to include, among other subjects, the social sciences. Existing law requires the State Board of Education, with the assistance of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, to establish a list of textbooks and other instructional materials that highlight the contributions of minorities in the development of California and the United States. This bill would require the Superintendent to oversee the development of, and the state board to adopt, a model curriculum to ensure quality courses in ethnic studies. The bill would require the Superintendent to establish an Ethnic Studies Advisory Committee and would require the committee to advise, assist, and make recommendations to the Superintendent regarding the development of the model curriculum. The bill would, beginning the school year following the adoption of the model curriculum, authorize each school district maintaining any of grades 7 to 12, inclusive, to offer, as an elective in the social sciences, a course of study in ethnic studies based on the model curriculum.

The California Constitution prohibits a person from being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or from being denied equal protection of the laws. The United States Constitution prohibits a state from denying to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Existing law establishes various advisory boards and commissions in state government with specified duties and responsibilities. The federal My Brother's Keeper Initiative, launched by the President of the United States in February 2014, required the establishment of the My Brother's Keeper Task Force, an interagency effort to improve the expected educational and life outcomes for and address the persistent opportunity gaps faced by boys and young men of color in the United States. This bill would establish until January 1, 2026, the Interagency Task Force on the Status of Boys and Men of Color, a multiagency advisory body that would serve as a support mechanism for department agency and systems leaders by taking coordinated action in meeting the myriad of challenges facing boys and men of color in California, and assisting the respective departments and agencies in more successfully improving life outcomes for this population. The membership of the task force would include members of the Legislature, as well as representatives of specified agencies, departments, and private entities. The bill would set forth the initial and ongoing responsibilities of the task force, including, among others, an assessment of state program alignment with the objectives of the My Brother's Keeper program, review the action plan of a specified final report of the Assembly Select Committee on the Status of Boys and Men of Color in California, and an assessment of the development of strategies to enhance positive outcomes and eliminate or mitigate negative outcomes for boys and men of color in the state. The bill would establish the Boys and Men of Color Task Force Fund, which would be subject to appropriation by the Legislature, to carry out the bill's requirements in support of the task force, upon appropriation by the Legislature. The bill would authorize the task force to accept federal funds, gifts, donations, grants, or bequests for all or any of its purposes.

(1) Existing sales and use tax laws impose a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from their sales of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state, or on the storage, use, or other consumption of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state, and specify certain exemptions from the amount of tax imposed. This bill, until January 1, 2021, would exempt from these taxes the gross receipts from the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, an energy or water efficient home appliance purchased by a public utility that is provided at no cost to a low-income participant in a federal, state, or ratepayer-funded energy or water efficiency program for use by that low-income participant in the energy efficiency program. The bill would define terms for its purposes. (2) The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing law authorizes districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes generally in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which generally conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Amendments to state sales and use taxes are incorporated into these laws. Section 2230 of the Revenue and Taxation Code provides that the state will reimburse counties and cities for revenue losses caused by the enactment of sales and use tax exemptions. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding Section 2230 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse any local agencies for sales and use tax revenues lost by them pursuant to this bill. (3) This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy, but its operative date would depend on its effective date.

Existing law, the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, provides that a change in voting procedures may not take effect in a state or political subdivision that is covered by the preclearance requirements of the federal act until the change is approved by a specified federal authority. A state or political subdivision is covered by the preclearance requirements of the federal act if it maintained a specified test or device as a prerequisite to voting, and had low voter registration or turnout, in the 1960s and early 1970s. The federal act allows a state or political subdivision covered by the act to obtain an exemption from the preclearance requirements if it satisfies specified criteria. The United States Supreme Court has held that the coverage formula of the federal act is unconstitutional and may not be used as a basis for requiring a jurisdiction to subject a proposed change in voting procedures to federal preclearance. Before that holding, the Counties of Kings, Monterey, and Yuba were covered jurisdictions subject to the federal preclearance requirements. This bill would establish a state preclearance system. Under this system, if a covered political subdivision, as defined, enacts or seeks to administer a voting-related law, regulation, or policy, as specified, that is different from that in force or effect on the date this act is enacted, the governing body of the covered political subdivision would be required to submit the law, regulation, or policy to the Secretary of State for approval. The bill would require the Secretary of State to approve the law, regulation, or policy only if specified conditions are met. The bill would provide that the law, regulation, or policy will not take effect or be administered in the covered political subdivision until the law, regulation, or policy is approved by the Secretary of State, except as specified. The bill would allow the governing body of the covered political subdivision to seek review of the Secretary of State's decision by means of an action filed in the Superior Court of Sacramento. By requiring local governments to seek approval of the Secretary of State for changes to voting procedures, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Existing law, the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA) , prohibits the use of an at-large election in a political subdivision if it would impair the ability of a protected class, as defined, to elect candidates of its choice or otherwise influence the outcome of an election. The CVRA provides that a voter who is a member of a protected class may bring an action in superior court to enforce the provisions of the CVRA, and, if the voter prevails in the case, he or she may be awarded reasonable litigation costs and attorney's fees. The CVRA requires a court to implement appropriate remedies, including the imposition of district-based elections, that are tailored to remedy a violation of the act. This bill would prohibit the use of a district-based election in a political subdivision if it would impair the ability of a protected class, as defined, to elect candidates of its choice. The bill would require a court to implement specified remedies upon a finding that a district-based election was imposed or applied in a manner that impaired the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of its choice.

(1) The Enforcement of Judgments Law provides for the enforcement of money judgments and other civil judgments. Under that law, a judgment creditor may levy upon the property of a judgment debtor to satisfy a judgment, and a levying officer holds the property until the final determination of any exemptions claimed by the judgment debtor. This bill would enact special provisions for the enforcement of judgments against an employer arising from the employer's nonpayment of wages for work performed in this state. The bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to use any of the existing remedies available to a judgment creditor and to act as a levying officer when enforcing a judgment pursuant to a writ of execution, as provided. The bill would also authorize the Labor Commissioner to issue a notice of levy, as specified, if the levy is for a deposit, credits, money, or property in the possession or under the control of a bank or savings and loan association or for an account receivable or other general intangible owed to the judgment debtor by an account debtor. (2) Existing law authorizes the Labor Commissioner to investigate employee complaints and to provide for a hearing in any action to recover wages, penalties, and other demands for compensation. Existing law requires the Labor Commissioner to determine all matters arising under his or her jurisdiction. Existing law makes any employer or other person acting on behalf of an employer who violates or causes to be violated specified provisions regulating hours and days of work in any order of the Industrial Welfare Commission to be subject to a civil penalty, as specified. A violation of the general provisions governing working hours is a crime. This bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to provide for a hearing to recover civil penalties against any employer or other person acting on behalf of an employer, as defined, for a violation of those provisions regulating hours and days of work in any order of the Industrial Welfare Commission, as specified. This bill would provide that any employer or other person acting on behalf of an employer, as defined, who violates, or causes to be violated, any provision regulating minimum wages or hours and days of work in any order of the Industrial Welfare Commission, or violates, or causes to be violated, other related provisions of law is authorized to be held liable as the employer for such violation. Because the bill expands liability and a violation of those provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Under existing law, within a specified period of time after service of notice of an order, decision, or award, the parties are authorized to seek review by filing an appeal to the superior court, where the appeal is required to be heard de novo. This bill, beginning 20 days after a judgment is entered by a court of competent jurisdiction in favor of the Labor Commissioner, or in favor of any employee pursuant to an appeal, would authorize the Labor Commissioner to, with the consent of any employee in whose favor the judgment is entered, collect any outstanding amount of the judgment by mailing a notice of levy upon all persons having in their possession, or who will have in their possession or under their control, any credits, money, or property, belonging to the judgment debtor, or who owe any debt to the judgment debtor at the time they receive the notice of levy. The bill would also require the judgment debtor to be served with a copy of the notice of levy. The bill would require any person who surrenders to the Labor Commissioner any credits, money, or property, or pays the debts owed to the judgment debtor to be discharged from any obligation or liability to the judgment debtor to the extent of the amount paid to the Labor Commissioner as a result of the levy. The bill would make any person noticed with a levy who fails or refuses to surrender any credits, money, or property or pay any debts owed to the judgment debtor liable in his or her own person or estate to the Labor Commissioner in an amount equal to the value of the credits, money, or property or in the amount of the levy, as provided. If a final judgment against an employer arising from the employer's nonpayment of wages for work performed in this state remains unsatisfied after a specified period of time after the time to appeal has expired and no appeal is pending, the bill would prohibit an employer from continuing to conduct business in this state, as specified, unless the employer has obtained a bond from a surety company and has filed a copy of that bond with the Labor Commissioner, as provided. As an alternative to the bond requirement, the bill would authorize the employer to provide the Labor Commissioner with a notarized copy of an accord reached with an individual holding an unsatisfied final judgment. The bill would make any employer conducting business without satisfying the bond requirement subject to a specified civil penalty, as provided. The bill, where an employer is conducting business in violation of the bond requirement, would authorize the Labor Commissioner to issue and serve on such employer a stop order prohibiting the use of employee labor by the employer until the employer complies with the bond requirement provided that the stop order would not compromise or imperil public safety or the life, health, and care of vulnerable individuals. The bill would make the failure of an employer, owner, director, officer, or managing agent of the employer to observe a stop order guilty of a misdemeanor. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Subject to required prior notice to the employer, the bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to create a lien on any real or personal property in California of an employer or a successor employer with respect to real property, as described, that is conducting business without satisfying the bond requirement for the full amount of any wages, interest, and penalties claimed to be owed to an employee, as specified. Existing law generally provides for the licensure and regulation of various types of long-term care facilities by the State Department of Public Health and the State Department of Social Services. If a final judgment against an employer arising from the employer's nonpayment of wages remains unsatisfied after the time to appeal has expired and there is no pending appeal and an employer in the long-term care industry, as specified, is found to be conducting business without obtaining a bond or reaching an accord with an individual holding an unsatisfied judgment, this bill would authorize those departments to deny a new license or the renewal of an existing license. The bill would also authorize the Labor Commissioner to notify those departments of such a violation. The bill would require any individual or business entity that contracts for services in the property services or long-term care industries to be jointly and severally liable for any unpaid wages where the individual or business entity has been provided notice, by any party, of any proceeding or investigation by the Labor Commissioner in which the employer is found liable for those unpaid wages, to the extent the amounts are for services performed under that contract, as provided. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law provides that it is the policy of this state to afford all persons in public schools equal rights and opportunities in the educational institutions of the state, as specified, and further prohibits, and provides remedies for, acts that are contrary to that policy. This bill would establish the California Racial Mascots Act, which would prohibit public schools from using the term Redskins as a school or athletic team name, mascot, or nickname beginning January 1, 2017, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would also provide that this prohibition may not be waived by the State Board of Education. To the extent that this prohibition would impose additional duties on public schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.