Assembly Bill 52: Public accommodations: construction-related accessibility claims. It’s by Assemblyman Adam Gray, D-Merced, and would:

• Protect small businesses from financial exploitation and encourage compliance with construction-related requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
• Reduce statutory damages in claims against small businesses if the business corrected any violations within 180 days.

Assembly Bill 54: Public accommodations: construction-related accessibility standards: tax credit. It’s by Assembly Republican Leader Kristin Olsen, R-Modesto, and would:

• Aim to deter costly and unnecessary lawsuits against businesses by providing small businesses a 60 day opportunity to cure, if construction-related accessibility standards related to an alleged Americans with Disabilities Act violation had changed within three years.

Assembly Bill 1486: Civil rights: disability access. It’s by Assembly member Catharine Baker, R-San Ramon, and would:

• Provide that a State Architect certification of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act would serve as presumptive evidence that public building and facilities are in compliance with the Act.

Senate Bill 67: Disability Access: statutory damages. It’s by state Sen. Cathleen Galgiani, D-Stockton, and would:

• Exempt small businesses from statutory damages for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
• Extend the opportunity to cure technical violations from 60 to 120 days.

“The largest premiums are found in generic jobs such as custodians, garage attendants, security officers, and the like. The average DWP security officer, for instance, makes 288 percent more than a non-DWP security officer working in the Los Angeles Metropolitan area. Overall, the weighted average wage premium for DWP employees performing generic jobs was 90 percent over their counterparts in the Los Angeles area. For all jobs, and including the value of benefits such as pensions and employer paid health insurance costs, the premium for DWP employees as estimated to be 155 percent higher – that is, 2.5 times as much – than for employees performing work with similar job descriptions in the Los Angeles area.

“Applying these premiums to the number of employees at the DWP, the total cost to rate-payers of the DWP paying above market wages is estimated to be $392.8 million a year.”

The result of the extra pay ends up being borne by ratepayers. As the Los Angeles Times reported:

“Meanwhile, residents of Los Angeles face yet another rate hike, only a couple of years after an 11.1 percent increase in electricity rates. DWP officials have recently suggested that they plan to seek recurring rate hikes of at least 2 percent per year beginning this year to fix infrastructure. But CityWatch is reporting that Angelenos should expect rate hikes of 5 percent to 8 percent a year, for each of the next five years. Residents in January paid 57 percent more for electricity than the national average, according to the BLS.”

Here’s the Table from the study showing the pay discrepancies.

The problem is the new owner, in addition to qualifying for the mortgage, also has to qualify for the lease on the panels. Reported the Washington Post:

“Some would-be buyers balk when they learn that they’ll need to qualify on credit to take over your solar lease payments for the next 15 to 17 years. Others say they like the house but won’t sign a contract unless you buy out the remaining lease payment stream — $15,000 or $20,000 or more — because they’re worried that the solar equipment will become obsolete or won’t save as much on electricity bills as advertised.”

“Issues such as these are popping up increasingly in California and other states and are interfering with sales and closings, according to real estate industry experts.”

As with other areas of technology, solar panels are getting better and cheaper every year. So picking up a long-term lease on a rapidly depreciating asset might not be such a great investment.

The Post’s advice:

“Be aware of the potential complexities that can occur when you lease, rather than buy, solar panels. If you opt for a lease, understand your long-term obligations, and talk to your current utility company about the savings claimed. Most important: If you’ve got a leased system and plan to sell, contact the leasing company well in advance to learn about lease transfer and buyout options. That way, you’ll be ready if prospective buyers have problems with your panels.”

Charters are public schools that generally work outside the statewide schools system, cutting out much of the red tape. The picture shows the future Accelerated Charter Elementary School at 3914 S. Main Street in Los Angeles.

Now a group of legislators closely linked to the public-employee unions is seeking to put new limits on charters. A key goal is to force all the charters to be run as nonprofits, taking away a key reform model.

Reported the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin:

“The public is paying for them,” Assemblyman Roger Hernandez, D-West Covina, said afterward. “The accountability ought to be there and the protection for the employees ought to be there.”

Four Democrats, flanked by representatives of the California Teachers Association, the California Federation of Teachers and the California Labor Federation, announced four new pieces of legislation the legislators said will ensure the charter schools fulfill their stated mission.

Hernandez introduced Assembly Bill 787, which would not allow charter schools to be run for profit. Instead, it allows a charter school to operate as, or be operated by, a nonprofit public benefit corporation. …

Assemblyman Mike Gipson, D-Compton, introduced Assembly Bill 709, which explicitly states that charter school board meetings are covered by California’s open meeting law, the Ralph M. Brown Act. …

State Sen. Mark Len, D-San Francisco … introduced Senate Bill 322, which would make it explicit that charter schools are to comply with a number of other laws covering public schools. …

State Sen. Tony Mendoza, D-Montebello, introduced Senate Bill 329, which tweaks the language of existing law regarding accounting in public school districts.

Red tape

Charter-school defenders claim all the new red tape would defeat the purpose of charter schools, which are highly popular with students and parents. In a statement, the CCSA responded to the flurry of new bills:

The proposed legislation highlighted today by the California Teachers Association (CTA) intentionally misrepresents the realities of charter schools in order to stem the success of our growing movement of charter schools in California. Fortunately, the success of charter schools speaks for itself, and is well documented by independent research. Parents, the broader public and responsible policy makers all understand that charter schools are public schools and that charter schools are performing very well with students, providing life changing opportunities to the students who need them the most. That is why there are more than 91,000 students on waiting lists for California charter schools.

This proposed legislation attempts to spread misperceptions about charter public schools. And we believe current laws address concerns raised and these proposals are unnecessary.

The truth is that all charters schools are public schools just like traditional district schools. They are tuition-free and open to any student who wishes to attend. Charter public schools give parents and students a choice in their education. They are diverse and reflect the communities they serve. Charter public schools are held accountable by their authorizer (usually the local school district) and by the families they serve.

Test scores

A key for the CCSA is test scores:

Perhaps most importantly though, and missing from the overarching discussion, is that charter public schools are getting strong academic results with the students they serve, and in many cases are performing better in comparison to traditional district schools, and remarkably so with the neediest students. As recently as last week, Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO), the nation’s foremost independent analyst of charter school effectiveness, released a comprehensive Urban Charter Schools Report and offers unprecedented insight into the effectiveness of charter public schools. Similar to the findings from the report, Charter School Performance in California that CREDO also released, we are once again encouraged that independent research confirms California’s charter schools are performing well, especially with historically underserved students, and are improving over time (see also: Charter School Performance in Los Angeles). These strong academic results are clearly a driving force for the parents who are making their voices heard in their desire to send their kids to charter schools.

Gov. Brown

If these bills pass, a key hurdle will be getting a signature from Gov. Jerry Brown, long a charter supporter. While mayor of Oakland, he even started two charters, the Oakland Military Institute and Oakland School for the Arts.

Just after he was elected in 2010, a spokesman said, “The governor is very proud of the two schools he founded in Oakland more than a decade ago. These schools have served  thousands of Bay Area students — many the first in their family to go on to college — and he remains committed to their success.”

Now a 30 percent tax break might be given to those retrofitting older buildings to make them quake-proof. Assembly Bill 428 is by Assemblyman Adrin Nazarian, D-Sherman Oaks, and would grant the tax credit “for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2016, and before January 1, 2021.”

The bill is being supported by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. The Los Angeles Times quoted him:

“We as a city cannot do this alone,” Garcetti told reporters at a news conference Wednesday on the steps of Van Nuys City Hall. “This is a common-sense bill that will set forward a pathway to help building owners, to help landlords and tenants alike, to create a safer and a greater Golden State”….

The dangers of concrete buildings have been known since the 1971 Sylmar earthquake, when hospital buildings were destroyed. As many as 50 of the more than 1,000 concrete buildings across the city would collapse in a big earthquake, The Times reported in 2013. …

The retrofits could cost as much as $130,000 for wooden apartments and millions for taller concrete buildings.

The bill also is supported by the Apartment Association. of Greater Los Angeles.

The problem with such tax rebates, though, is that they come at the expense of the rest of the state budget. Unless the Legislature cuts spending in other areas, taxes must be raised in other areas to make up the deficit.

Politics is the art of trade-offs. Even something as important as preventing earthquakes is but a part of the equation.

Reported the Detroit News:

Detroit Public Schools is $53 million behind in pension payments, costing the cash-strapped district $7,600 a day in interest penalties — or the equivalent of one child’s annual state funding grant.

Based on its minimal payments, the Detroit school district would be $81 million behind in mandatory pension contributions by July 1, state records show. The cost is exacerbated by $78,000 in fees for each month DPS remains delinquent — depriving the city schools of the equivalent of one teacher’s annual salary and benefits.

The sporadic pension payments, which date to October 2010, are the latest sign of worsening finances for Michigan’s largest school system as it continues to rack up debts and hemorrhage students and cash. Forgoing required contributions for pension payments mirrors a cash-hoarding tactic the city of Detroit pursued in November 2012 — nine months before declaring bankruptcy.

Detroit itself used to be the “Paris of the West.” Its booming auto industry was like Silicon Valley today — highly prosperous, lifting the tide of the state and country. Then general political mismanagement, including unbearable public pension costs, brought hard times, and eventually bankruptcy.

Detroit is less a pattern California will follow than a cautionary tale that public finances matter, and mismanagement can lead to federal bankruptcy court.

Yet overall state prison-guard compensation is up sharply. Reported the San Diego U-T:

Overtime hit a six-year high last year, allowing hundreds of prison system employees to more than double their pay. That’s created a situation in which more than a third of officers make more than $100,000 a year.

The payroll costs for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation have grown $248 million per year higher than they were in 2009, a 5.3 percent increase. During the same period, the population under supervision fell 38 percent.

Going back to 2011, even then California prison guards made twice the pay of their counterparts in Texas, as the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “$71,000 a year, compared with $31,000.”

The California guards’ pay is even higher now — with fewer prisoners to watch behind bars.

The question now is how long this can last. Although a key part of the Democratic Party’s coalition, the prison guards union also competes for money against other public-employee unions, such as the California Teachers Association.

As is being seen in other instances, such as Latinos objecting to the low quality of state schools their kids attend, the Democratic coalition has many fissures. Factions will be fighting over budgets and policy.

During the high-crime era of the 1980s and 1990s, the prison guards held great clout in the state. But with California crimes hitting 50-year lows, as well as sentencing reform initiatives such as Proposition 47, the guards are not as powerful as they once were. Their recent pay increases may become large targets for other factions.

But it looks like he really isn’t running for president.

Of course, in his three charges at the Oval Office — in 1976, 1980 and 1992 — he started late, surged to near victory, then lost. So nothing can be ruled out absolutely until the Democratic primaries are over in 2016.

Yet he said on the “Meet the Press,” “If I could go back in a time machine and be 66, I might jump in. But that’s a counterfactual, so you don’t need to speculate on that.”

If elected, he would be 78 when assuming the presidency — 86 upon leaving it if he served two terms.

The oldest president elected was Ronald Reagan, 69 when elected in 1980, and 77 when he left office. That’s nine years younger than Brown would be if elected.

Reagan, of course, also was a California governor, 1967 to 1975. He served between Gov. Pat Brown, 1959 to 1975, and Pat’s son, Gov. Jerry Brown, whose first period in office was 1975 to 1983.

The Reagan biographies show his staff had to make sure his campaign schedules in 1980 and 1984 were not too grueling. In those days there were newspaper reporters and four major TV networks. But things have gotten more hectic in the intervening 35 years, with social media accelerating the news cycle.

That also could prove a problem for Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state, who would be 69 on election day.

That’s up from the previous yearly subsidy of $100 million.

Other states are having second thoughts about subsidizing their own Tinseltowns. “Last week the Michigan House voted to end the state’s film incentive program, which has spent $500 million to lure movie makers into shooting projects in Detroit and elsewhere,” reported the Wall Street Journal.

Current Wolverine State subsidies are $39 million a year. Adjusting for Michigan’s 10 million population compared to California’s 39 million, the equivalent here would be $152 million.

According to the Journal, “Former Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm promoted the credit to create jobs and develop a permanent film industry.” Although born in Canada, Granholm was raised in California and started out with a Hollywood acting career that didn’t last long. She’s currently receiving a salary partly paid by California taxpayers as a professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

Granholm’s term in office, 2003-2011, was almost exactly concurrent with that of another California actor who supported film subsidies, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

But as the Journal reported, there are problems with the subsidies:

“Michigan’s Senate Fiscal Agency found in 2010 that for every dollar the state spends on the program, it recoups 11 cents. There were 100 fewer film-industry jobs in Michigan in 2013 than there were in 2008, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data dug up by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy’s James Hohman and Jarrett Skorup. By the Michigan Film Office’s own report, the program didn’t create a single permanent job in 2013.”

“Meantime, the state has grappled with a $532 million shortfall in the general fund, due mostly to more than $9 billion in other corporate welfare commitments dished out under Gov. Granholm.”

Michigan, like California, generally is a Democratic state. It last voted for a Republican for president in 1988, the same as California. And it last voted for a Republican to the U.S. Senate in 1994, compared to 1988 for California.

But after Granholm’s tenure, when she presided over the nation’s highest unemployment rate during the Great Recession, Michigan rebelled against Democratic rule for the state itself. Currently it is ruled by a Republican governor, Rick Snyder, and Republican-controlled Legislature.

Yet, the Journal reported, “The bill to end the movie moolah now heads to the Senate, where it could be scuttled by film-subsidy friendly Republicans, despite the GOP’s 27-11 majority. Even Governor Snyder, who has long opposed the film program, seems to be getting stage fright: Last week he told reporters that an abrupt end to the incentives wasn’t ‘the appropriate answer.’”

It may be that, despite the economics of the film subsidies, people can’t help being stagestruck.

Assembly Bill 23 and Senate Bill 5, the Affordable Gas Tax for Families Act. The bills are sponsored, respectively, by Assemblyman Jim Patterson, R-Fresno; and state Sen. Andy Vidak, R-Hanford. The NFIB/CA supports the bills, which in its analysis would:

• Exempt certain categories of persons or entities, such as transportation fuels, from inclusion in the state’s cap-and-trade program.
• Will remove transportation fuels from the cap-and-trade program and eliminate the gas tax.

Unless the tax exemption is passed, according to a recent study by the California Drivers Alliance, the tax potentially could kill over 18,000 jobs and $2.9 billion in economic output in 2015.

Tax Holiday

AB1280: Small Business Tax Holiday. It’s by Assemblyman Brian Maienschein, R-San Diego. The NFIB/CA is a sponsor of the bill, which in its analysis:

• Allows a one-day sales and use tax exemption annually for small businesses that collect less than $200,000 on sales tax the previous year.
• The specific day would be the Saturday following Thanksgiving, also known as “Small Business Saturday.”
• Does not interfere with a local government’s ability to tax.
• Mirrors a similar proposal that has been put forth in Florida this year.

Double Pay

AB67, the Double Pay on the Holiday Act of 2015. It’s by Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego. The NFIB/CA opposes the bill, which in its analysis:

• Defines “family holiday” to mean either December 25 or the fourth Thursday of November each year, the Thanksgiving holiday.
• Provides that any work performed on a family holiday shall be compensated at no less than twice the employee’s regular rate of pay.
• Provides that “employee” does not include an employee covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement that meets specified criteria.