In December 2015, when the state Department of Motor Vehicles released draft regulations for the testing of driverless vehicles, California tech firms were stunned by their onerousness. Google immediately objected to a proposed requirement that drivers always had to be behind the wheel of autonomous test vehicles.

Soon after, a consortium including TechNet, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, the Bay Area Council, the Wireless Association, the Consumer Technology Association, the Information Technology Industry Council and the Auto Alliance issued a statement pleading with the administration of Gov. Jerry Brown to encourage, not discourage, the nascent driverless vehicle industry.

Instead, the DMV initially decided to allow each of the state’s 480-plus incorporated cities and 58 counties to set up their own rules for such testing – potentially creating an immense maze for driverless vehicle companies.

To the relief of executives with Google, Uber, Lyft, Volvo and 40-plus other companies interested in testing their vehicles in the Golden State, the state government reconsidered its position. Beginning in April 2018, new DMV rules allowed for autonomous vehicles to be tested without a human behind the wheel. So far, only one company has met DMV’s standards and obtained a permit for such tests – Mountain View’s Waymo. But far more could qualify in coming years.

Now, there is a fresh sign of the DMV’s willingness to embrace new vehicular technology. On April 12, the agency released draft regulations allowing for testing of autonomous delivery vehicles. Heavy-duty vehicles that weigh more than 10,000 pounds are not allowed, but standard cars, trucks and vans can be tested. The DMV will only issue permits for fully autonomous testing to companies that have met the same safety standards that Waymo did. The rules are expected to be finalized by December.

Driverless deliveries may face less public anxiety

With polls showing millions of Americans are very nervous about riding in driverless vehicles, tech and marketing experts told The Verge website in January they were much more likely to gain initial acceptance for delivery purposes.

Robot deliveries with much smaller vehicles have already proven instant hits. San Francisco-based startup Starship Technologies has enjoyed huge success since January, when its 25 robots began deliveries on the 800-acre campus of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. Navigating campus paths and sidewalks at 4 miles per hour, the robots deliver small coolers capable of holding up to 20 pounds of groceries. Students use an app to direct the robots where to go and are sent access codes to open the coolers. Starship collects $1.99 per order.

A March 25 Washington Post story depicted university officials as initially unsure what sort of reception the robots would get. But on the first day of deliveries, “the machines were flooded by so many dinner orders that school officials had to pull the plug, shutting off orders so that robots weren’t operating late into the night, far behind schedule,” the Post reported.

Since then, they’ve become an accepted convenience of campus life at the university.

S.F. firm’s college delivery robots only the start

In late March, Starship announced that an even bigger order of food-delivery robots, 30-plus, had been shipped to a second U.S. college – Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff. Unlike George Mason, NAU leaders were so confident the robots would be a hit with students that the university issued a press release quoting NAU President Rita Cheng as welcoming them to campus.

But much bolder plans are in the works. The Verge’s report in January noted that Burlingame-based startup Udelv was partnering with Walmart on an autonomous grocery-delivery service that will use the sort of vehicles that the California DMV is now crafting rules for. Home-food delivery services could be a $100 billion annual industry by 2025, the tech website reported.

The Udelv report came shortly after Cruise – GM’s autonomous vehicle company – announced it was teaming with San Francisco-based DoorDash on the same sort of food-delivery venture.

But Californians need not rely on anecdotes to confirm their hunch. California State Auditor Elaine Howle last month released an audit that confirms the abuse-racked nature of the Department of Motor Vehicles’ disability parking system. The auditor sampled 96 applications for disability placards and plates and found that 70 of the applications lacked sufficient information to confirm that the applicant was really qualified for the permit.

Furthermore, Howle found that 26,000 placard holders were older than 100, even though the state’s entire population of centenarians is 8,000. The DMV does little double-checking and authorizes few sting operations to catch cheaters. It hands out multiple replacement placards for “lost” placards. Nine people, the auditor explained, received 16 or more replacements over a three-year period and two received more than 20.

The DMV “has not canceled permanent placards for thousands of individuals who are likely deceased,” according to the audit. “In addition, local parking enforcement lacks immediate access to DMV’s placard information, limiting its ability to verify placards during its enforcement activities.” And obviously sworn law-enforcement agencies have better things to do with their time than policing placards. The auditor suggests the creation of a DMV database to facilitate enforcement, and that it work with health boards to be sure applicants meet disability standards.

There’s a strong incentive for people to game the system. Disability placards not only allow people to park near the front of a store, but they allow them to park free in metered spaces for unlimited periods of time. For people who work in downtown areas, this amounts to free commuter parking every day – something that can be worth hundreds of dollars a month. There are fines and even misdemeanor penalties for cheating, but there’s little enforcement.

The report also details how the privilege has expanded over time. “In 1959 the Legislature gave those needing the aid of a wheelchair or who had lost the use of both legs the right to park for an unlimited time in zones with time limits,” according to the auditor. Then the Legislature included “those who had lost the use of one or both legs or who needed the aid of a mechanical device” and then “legs” was expanded to “limbs.” Many other disabilities were added including lung disease and legal blindness.

Other states have put limits on the placards, but disability rights activists in California have generally opposed reform proposals. They don’t want to see any genuinely disabled people denied a placard, but critics note that the abuse of the system, as documented by the auditor, serves to undermine the public’s support for the program and sympathy for those who really need them. It leads to frustration and antagonistic feelings toward those who park in these spots and could eventually cause a backlash.

The situation is reminiscent of a newly publicized phenomenon – the misuse of “service animal” designations so that some people can, apparently, bring along their pet dogs (or cats or bunnies) to restaurants, airplane cabins other places that otherwise forbid them. News reports point to online applications for “emotional support” animals – and lenient standards that allow your regular-old Pomeranian to be declared a service dog.

Many of the auditor’s parking recommendations could apply to service dogs and other areas where people game a system designed to help the disabled or needy. The DMV doesn’t disagree with these recommendations, either. They involve better databases, more double-checking of applications, purging the system of the deceased, adding fees, increasing sting operations, hiking penalties for cheating and coming up with different categories of benefit.

The auditor also suggests that the DMV establish “a process to review medical provider signatures.” Most of the auditor’s suggestions involved the DMV, but there’s a role for the Legislature, also. “To assist DMV in more accurately identifying deceased individuals with active permanent placards, the Legislature should amend state law to require DMV to use the U.S. Social Security Administration’s Death Master File to inform its efforts to identify and cancel deceased individuals’ placards,” the audit suggested.

It’s probably wrong, however, to put too much blame on the DMV, given that the bulk of its efforts involve processing licenses and registrations – not policing the potential bad behavior of so many Californians. Indeed, one might chalk this problem up to a general failure in public morals, as people increasingly see these special-benefit programs as systems to be gamed rather than as a means to help those who really need the help.

Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org.

In it’s announcement, the DMV emphasized that changing technological standards had shifted expectations. “The draft regulations would expand the state’s existing autonomous vehicle testing program to keep pace with the rapid development of the technology,” Bloomberg BNA reported, citing the Department of Motor Vehicles. “The newly proposed rules would not require a human in the car, a change from the current rules.” The news was a boon for competitors in the crowded driverless space, which includes key legacy manufacturers as well as new tech entrants. “Tesla Motors Inc., Ford Motor Co., Nissan Motor Co., Honda Motor Co., Alphabet Inc.’s Google, Volkswagen AG and Baidu Inc., are among the 23 manufacturers on the list of approved participants for the California testing program,” Bloomberg BNA noted. 

The list also included “self-driving startups such as Zoox, Drive.ai, AutoX and PlusAI,” Fortune reported, along with “China-funded electric vehicle startups NextEV and Faraday Future. Earlier this week, California granted a testing permit to ride services firm Uber Technologies after a legal standoff last December.”

Hailing robots

The Uber grant signaled a real sea change in life on California roads. Although autonomous cars could fan out across roads as soon as this year, the bulk of consumer experiences was expected to shift away from owned cars to pay-per-use. “Among other things, the revisions would permit ride-hailing services to pick up passengers in cars without human drivers on board,” Car and Driver observed. “For now, these rides would remain solely in the realm of testing, and companies providing them would be prohibited from charging fees for those services. Nonetheless, the prospect of ride-hailing services like Uber or Lyft picking up riders in autonomous vehicles within a matter of months is the latest sign of just how quickly the autonomous age may be approaching.”

Both tech and safety advocates have found reason to cheer the promised transformation. “Some 3,000 people die on its roads every year, and self-driving cars could eliminate the human error that causes 90 percent of crashes,” according to Wired. “They could make more people more mobile, reduce emissions (maybe), and boost the economy.” 

New frameworks

Driverless car companies were not released from key regulatory obligations at the sometimes blurry nexus of state and federal rules. “If companies test vehicles without conventional controls, they have to show the California DMV that they have approval from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,” Bloomberg reported, citing California DMV Chief Counsel Brian Soublet. “NHTSA said in early 2016 that self-driving software systems, not just humans, can be considered drivers.”

But federal regulators, in turn, will be looking to California’s unfolding experience for cues going forward. “The DMV’s rules are going to shift a big part of the conversation to the federal level,” University of South Carolina driverless expert Bryant Walker Smith told Wired. “Federal regulators seem eager to advance autonomy (chiefly for the safety benefits), so what happens on California’s roads may well be replicated across the U.S., and even internationally,” the magazine added. 

That has meant a special burden for Sacramento, where the ins and outs of insurance and other questions must be hammered out a step at a time. “California state lawmakers are starting the long process of deciding who should be held responsible when these new vehicles crash on state roadways or are potentially hacked by criminals,” as Capital Public Radio reported. “The California State Senate Committee on Insurance heard testimony on those questions and others at the state Capitol [March 8]. The informational hearing raised more questions than it answered.”

“The commercial side of the DMV is so backlogged that if you finished your truck driving courses today, you’d have to wait 56 business days for an appointment to take your driver’s license test,” according to the office of Assemblyman Jim Patterson, R-Fresno. Would-be truck drivers have contacted him for help, complaining people will camp outside the DMV overnight to be able to get a place in line and get their test taken.

The DMV recently disputed the long wait times, telling a local TV station its Fresno office is offering appointments within six days. This contradicts the response received by Patterson’s office, who were told of eight-week waits, excepting occasional last-minute appointment openings.

The director of the Fresno Department of Transportation sent a corroborating letter to Assemblyman Patterson noting similar challenges the city’s bus service faced over the past two years navigating new drivers through the DMV process.

“In November 2016, the delays were so long that the department sent drivers to Sacramento,” wrote Fresno Department of Transportation Director Brian Marshall. “The department paid wages and overnight lodging for 15 drivers.” Only two drivers, however, were able to get tested, even after making the trek to Sacramento.

Marshall supports new legislation, authored by Assemblyman Freddie Rodriguez, D-Pomona, and co-authored by Patterson, allowing third-party testing of drivers. The state currently accepts third-party testing and licensing in a variety of areas. For instance, Californians can handle many DMV functions at American Automobile Association offices, while Realtors are tested and licensed through quick third-party processes.

In an interview Tuesday, Patterson said the DMV had not made significant progress on the issue until legislators introduced Assembly Bill 301. This legislation “seeks to reduce the severe backlog in availability of commercial Driver’s License (CDL) skills test appointments at the DMV by expanding current law to allow additional third parties, including training schools and government entities, to conduct skills tests,” according to the legislative fact sheet. Unions would be authorized to offer the tests, as well as municipalities and independent schools.

Patterson says the DMV’s current efforts to reduce wait times to four weeks is still unacceptable. “There are 30,000 unfilled trucking driving jobs in this state,” he said. “People are begging to get their licenses so they can go to work. We need to do everything we can to make sure that happens.”

The assemblyman indicated the gravity of this statewide problem. According to June DMV self-reporting data, wait times were approximately 50 days to get an appointment in Arleta, Fresno, Fremont, Ukiah and Lancaster. According to the fact sheet, “wait times in California ranged from a minimum of 19 business days before the next available appointment, to a high of 61 business days. In December 2016, 17 of the state’s 23 locations that provide CDL skills tests had wait times longer than three weeks with the longest wait being in Montebello at 65 business days, or 13 weeks.”

The legislation points to a nationwide truck-driving shortage, which is why 39 other states allow some form of third-party commercial-truck license tests. Under the bill, the DMV would have the authority to approve the private testing sites.

Critics of the current DMV process are concerned about the implications for would-be drivers, who can’t always afford to wait two months before they get started on the job. And then there are the taxpayer implications, as the Fresno transportation situations makes clear. Simply stated, taxpayers are paying drivers, who can’t work until they get through the licensing process, along with the cost implications for firms that rely on commercial truck drivers.

The DMV on February 22 dedicated a new truck-test center in Gardena that “will conduct approximately 7,000 drive tests and process 4,000 commercial driver licenses related applications annually. The office is staffed with 23 employees,” according to the agency’s statement. That may help reduce the backlog in parts of Southern California by consolidating operations that were spread around the region, although the legislation’s backers argue third-party testing offers more hope for quickly fixing the statewide problem – and that using third-party vendors is less costly for taxpayers than creating new centers.

The DMV said that it doesn’t comment on pending legislation and didn’t directly address the specific problems raised by Assemblyman Patterson. “The DMV noticed a higher volume of Commercial Driver License applicants requesting appointments to take the behind-the-wheel skills test,” the agency said. “As a result, on Jan. 7, 2017, the DMV began offering Saturday appointments only to individuals wanting to take this specific exam at nine locations across the state,” it added in response to CalWatchdog’s questions. “The DMV strives to offer commercial drive test exams to our customers within 30 days of making an appointment.”

Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. He is based in Sacramento. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org.

Brown struggles to get support for twin tunnels water project

Happy New Year’s Eve Eve! TGIF. As we look ahead to 2017, we wonder what will happen with Gov. Jerry Brown’s twin tunnel project, for we which he has struggled to gain significant support.

Last week, Brown’s aides treated the release of a massive environmental review that marshaled evidence in support of his $15.7 billion plan to build two 35-mile-long tunnels in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta as an exciting step toward construction of the far-reaching project.

Critics, however, scoffed, saying Brown’s project becomes more unpopular the more it is discussed. In October, when the governor hoped to have consolidated broad support behind the plan, four Northern California members of Congress and eight members of the California Legislature sent letters imploring the federal government to look at what they called fundamental flaws in the project, starting with its shaky financing.

The 90,000-page document hailed by the Brown administration concludes that the two huge tunnels would stabilize statewide water deliveries from the Sacramento River and improve the health of the Delta in a way that was the least problematic of various options now being considered. If approved by state and federal regulators and the Legislature, the project would divert in normal conditions 5 percent more water from the river than is now standard.

The governor told reporters the tunnels had been subject to “more environmental review than any other project in the history of the world.”

CalWatchdog has more.

In other news:

• Immigration: “Two years after the implementation of AB60 on Jan. 1, 2015, an estimated 806,000 undocumented residents have received driver’s licenses, according to Department of Motor Vehicles statistics this month. About 14,000 of these licenses were issued in November alone, the DMV said.” The San Jose Mercury News has more. 

• New laws: “Amid lingering criticism and doubts about the feasibility of enforcement, Californians braced for new legislation taking effect in January that will ban almost all handling of cellphones behind the wheel. Beginning Sunday, law enforcement will be authorized to punish drivers using the devices in accordance with Assembly Bill 1785.” CalWatchdog has more.

• Pensions: This Los Angeles Times headline says it all: “When city retirement pays better than the job.”

• Politics: What will Senate leader Kevin de León do next? The Sacramento Bee has more. 

Legislature:

• Gone till next week. 

Gov. Brown: 

• No public events announced. 

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New follower: @drewtewksbury

Here’s a sampling of some of the significant new laws from last session:

Register your ammo purchases: Californian gun owners will need to deal with a variety of new gun-control limitations after the governor signed a broad package of bills – and voters approved Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s gun-control initiative on Nov. 8. The most potentially far reaching effects will come from the state’s approval of Proposition 63, which has various restrictions and a roll-out of implementation dates over a few years.

Beginning July 1, 2017, the state will implement a ban on high-capacity magazines and will require owners to report any lost or stolen weapons. The much-publicized requirement that ammo buyers pass background checks won’t go into effect until Jan. 1, 2018.

Higher minimum wages and more unpaid leave: “The statewide minimum wage goes from $10 to $10.50 an hour for businesses with 26 or more employees — a rate that will rise to $15 by 2022,” as the Mercury-News explained. That wage hike comes from Senate Bill 3. “Assembly Bill 2393 gives up to 12 weeks of paid parental leave to all K-12 and community college employees, including classified workers and community college faculty,” the newspaper reported.

Restrictions on police use of asset forfeiture: Senate Bill 443 was one of the last bills from last session that the governor signed, but it is widely viewed as one of the most significant changes in state law. Before the new law went into effect, police agencies had the ability to take the cash, cars and even homes from people even if they weren’t convicted of any crime. The authorities needed simply to claim the property was used in the commission of a drug crime. California had fairly tough restrictions in place, but local and state police agencies would partner with federal authorities under the “equitable sharing” program and then they would operate under looser federal law.

As the Drug Policy Alliance explains, “Starting on January 1, 2017, California law will require a conviction prior to forfeiture in any state case where the items seized are cash under $40,000 or other property such as homes and vehicles regardless of value.” If local or state agencies work with the feds, they could only share in the proceeds if an underlying conviction were obtained. The final compromise still allows law enforcement to keep proceeds of more than $40,000 in cash only – a provision which caused major law enforcement groups to drop their opposition.

Higher fees from the DMV … and more: Two new laws boost the fees for DMV registrations by $10 and for an environmental license plate by the same amount. Another DMV-related law requires drivers to restrain children 2 years or under in a rear-facing car seat unless they weigh 40 pounds or more. Drivers will need to pay attention to a new law dealing with hand-held devices. “Driving a motor vehicle while holding and operating a handheld wireless telephone or a wireless electronic communications device will be prohibited, unless the device is mounted on a vehicle’s windshield or is mounted/affixed to a vehicle’s dashboard or center console in a manner that does not hinder the driver’s view of the road,” according to the agency.

Gaining the ‘right to try’: California became the 32nd state to pass so-called “right to try” legislation, which allows terminally ill people to try experimental drugs that have yet to pass the federal Food and Drug Administration’s full battery of tests. Supporters argued that many people die while waiting for drugs to clear that long and cumbersome process. After Senate amendments, Assembly Bill 1668 includes the caveat that “a health benefit plan, except to the extent the plan provided coverage, is not liable for any outstanding debt related to the treatment or lack of insurance for the treatment.”

Beer and wine at barbershops: Assembly Bill 1322 passed overwhelmingly in both houses of the Legislature. This bill allows beauty salons and barber shops to serve their clients limited quantities of beer or wine at no extra charge without obtaining a license or permit from the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control,” according to the Assembly analysis. The new law still allows local governments to impose restrictions on this practice.

Rescuing Fido from a hot car: Assembly Bill 797 reduces liability for citizens who break a car window to save an animal that is closed in a hot car – provided they first try calling the authorities and the authorities haven’t responded quickly enough.

Legalizing lane-splitting: Anyone who drives on California’s vast network of freeways has noticed motorcyclists’ habit of “lane-splitting,” as they drive between the cars that occupy the lanes. The law had required motorcyclists to ride “as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane,” even though the practice has been widely accepted. Motorcyclists have long argued that this is safer than remaining in one lane and risk being hit from behind. Assembly Bill 51 “would authorize the Department of the California Highway Patrol to develop educational guidelines relating to lane splitting in a manner that would ensure the safety of the motorcyclist, drivers, and passengers, as specified,” according to the state Legislative Counsel.

Ignore those juvenile convictions: Assembly Bill 1843 “Prohibits employers from asking an applicant for employment to disclose information concerning or related to an arrest, detention, processing, diversion, supervision, adjudication, or court disposition that occurred while the person was subject to the process and jurisdiction of juvenile court law, or seek or utilize any such information as a factor in determining any condition of employment,” according to the Assembly analysis. This was a contentious issue that passed on largely partisan lines (Democrats supported; Republicans opposed) given business-community concerns about their ability to screen job applicants.

You must be 21 to smoke or vape: Earlier in the year, the governor signed a package of smoking bills that, most significantly, raises the smoking age to 21. It also raised the age for vaping to 21. That last provision was particularly controversial because some argue e-cigarettes are a safer way for smokers to break their dangerous habit. Those laws went into effect in June.

Offering showers for the homeless: Assembly Bill 1995 would require community colleges that have shower facilities to allow enrolled homeless students to use those showers.

More bathroom choices for the transgendered: California passed a law, Assembly Bill 1772, that requires all businesses and public agencies with single-toilet bathrooms to make them available to people of all genders – a bill viewed more as a symbolic measure offered in the thick of the national debate over bathrooms for transgendered people.

The new Legislature will be back in full swing after the new year.

Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org.

Farm worker OT bill awaits verdict from Gov. Brown

Good morning. Happy Tuesday. But more importantly, happy second-to-last day of the legislative session.

A big ticket item was crossed off the list Monday when a bill expanding overtime pay for farm workers passed the Assembly. It now heads to the governor for a final verdict.

The bill would, over the course of a few years, bring the overtime structure for farm workers in line with that of many other professions by giving overtime past eight hours in a day, where currently the threshold is at 10 hours, and over 40 hours in a week, where it’s currently at 60 hours.

Some members opposed on procedural grounds. Assembly rules prohibit a measure from being reintroduced if it had already been defeated during that legislative session — the same measure was defeated in the Assembly earlier this year.

CalWatchdog has more.

In other news:

• “An Aug. 17 California appeals court ruling rejected a public employee union’s claim that its members had a right to “pension spiking,” which the court described as “various stratagems and ploys to inflate their income and retirement benefits.” Public employees often will pad their final salary total with vacation leave, bonuses and “special pay” categories to inflate the pension benefits they receive for the rest of their lives,” reports CalWatchdog.
• “State lawmakers passed a bill Monday to add mandatory prison sentences for certain sexual assaults – a measure inspired by a Santa Clara County Superior Court judge’s decision not to sentence a Stanford University student to prison in a high-profile case this year,” writes the Los Angeles Times.
• “California lawmakers’ response to the controversial series of videos that purported to show Planned Parenthood breaking the law has alienated some liberal allies of the organization, which is now negotiating changes to save its bill in the final days of the session,” writes The Sacramento Bee.
• “The state’s plan to build an initial stretch of high-speed rail line, from San Jose to a map point in the midst of Central Valley farmland, came under renewed attack at an oversight hearing Monday,” reports the Los Angeles Times.

• Who will Gov. Jerry Brown believe: the Mothers Against Drunk Driving or his own Department of Motor Vehicles? Brown will have to choose when deciding whether to sign Senate Bill 1046, a measure that would require drivers convicted of DUI to purchase and install “ignition interlock” devices in their vehicles. CalWatchdog has more.

Assembly:

• In at 10 a.m.

Senate:

• In at 2 p.m.

Gov. Brown:

• No public events announced for today. Will attend 20th Annual Lake Tahoe Summit on Wednesday.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @elmayedda

Who will Gov. Jerry Brown believe: the Mothers Against Drunk Driving or his own Department of Motor Vehicles?

That’s what it boils down to when Brown decides whether to sign Senate Bill 1046, a bill by Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, that’s touted as a crucial tool in keeping drunken drivers off California’s roads and highways.

The measure would require drivers convicted of DUI to purchase and install “ignition interlock” devices in their vehicles. The devices include a breathalyzer. If an unacceptable level of alcohol is detected on a driver’s breath, his or her vehicle’s engine is disabled. First-time offenders would have to install the devices for six months, with longer mandates for subsequent DUI convictions.

Hill and MADD say similar laws in 28 other states have a long track record of deterring drunken driving and reducing recidivism. While lawmakers balked in previous sessions at such a measure, this time opposition evaporated. The bill passed the Assembly 79-0  and the Senate 39-0.

The unanimous votes came despite DMV concerns. In a June report, agency officials said a test program in four counties — Los Angeles, Sacramento, Alameda and Tulare — with about a third of the state’s population arguably deterred new DUI cases but led to a significant increase in accidents among drivers whose vehicles were equipped with ignition interlocks. The increase was determined by comparing the accident rates among drivers with the devices and drivers with suspended licenses who drove illegally.

Bill would end automatic license suspension for DUI

Hill blasted the report to a home-district newspaper as being based on shoddy statistical analysis. But the DMV questioned Hill’s reasoning in turn, saying it was not clear that his bill — which ends automatic suspensions of driving rights for some first-time DUI offenders — was the best way to deal with the issue. The agency asserted that such automatic suspensions, which began in 1990, correlated strongly with a long-term drop in DUI recidivism.

A smarter approach, the DMV said, was to “convene a task force including representatives from the Legislature, judiciary, law enforcement, and other public agencies to develop recommendations for strengthening components of California’s comprehensive DUI countermeasure system.”

The California Attorneys for Criminal Justice also opposed Hill’s bill, saying it would take away discretion in sentencing from judges.

Frank Harris, MADD’s director of government affairs, said critics shouldn’t block a change that he depicted as certain to save lives. “Interlocks are much more effective than just hoping for the best with license suspensions,” Harris told the San Mateo Daily Journal. “MADD welcomes further studies, but that shouldn’t be a reason to hold up a life-changing bill and put forth a better policy for society.”

If Brown signs SB1046, it will take effect in 2019 and expire in 2026.

• 

  Denise Cross / flickr

  Auto voter law to add millions to electorate, diversifies
• Legislature doin’ budget work
• How to become a pot tycoon
• No more low- and zero-emission car subsidies
• What’s going on with Rep. Hunter’s campaign finances?

Good morning! Welcome to Thursday.

California’s electorate could grow by more than 2 million voters once a new law implementing automatic registration through the DMV starts working in 2017, according to a new study.

The study, conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California, predicts that as voter registration increases, so will diversity in the electorate among underrepresented groups.

However, determining how much the electorate will grow largely depends on the rate with which eligible voters decline automatic registration at the DMV, according to the study. 

CalWatchdog has more.  

In other news:

• The Legislature approved a $170.9 billion budget on Wednesday “that increases some funding for social services but stashes more away in a rainy-day fund,” writes the Los Angeles Times.
• And on Thursday, the Legislature will consider bills that implement budget decisions. The Sacramento Bee has more. 
• The San Jose Mercury News has everything you need to know if you’re considering a career in the CA pot industry.
• State lawmakers are ending a program subsidizing individual purchases of low- and zero-emission vehicles. The Los Angeles Times has more. 
• Did Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, pay for his kids’ school lunches with campaign funds? The San Diego Union-Tribune has more. 

Assembly:

• In at 9 a.m. 

Senate: 

• In at 9 a.m. 

Gov. Brown: 

• No public events scheduled.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @kjt231 @dfmworkers

The city of Los Angeles has become a focal point for several different efforts, triggered by raids last month that “swept up more than 100 people from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras who entered the country and stayed illegally,” as the Los Angeles times noted.

“The seizures motivated church leaders nationwide who say they feel compelled to offer physical protection on their premises even if it violates federal law,” as the paper added, with at least three L.A.-area churches “vowing in recent weeks to offer refuge to Central Americans with deportation orders[.]” It is the Obama administration that has taken heat for the roundups:

“Lutherans, Methodists, Catholics and other Christian leaders across the country say they are outraged with the Obama administration’s actions, said Noel Andersen, a grass-roots coordinator with the Church World Service group for refugees. The group has built a network of sanctuaries for Central Americans targeted by ICE.”

Sanctuary schools

At the same time that California churches have shifted toward the approach that defined the state’s so-called “sanctuary cities,” schools and universities have also advanced complementary new policies. Los Angeles Unified Schools, for instance, have declared themselves to be ICE-free zones. “The school board has banned Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from setting foot on any campus without the district’s permission,” according to Fox 11 Los Angeles. Not only must the Superintendent of Schools approve any ICE presence, by the terms of the new vote, but LAUSD lawyers must as well:

“ICE claims that they do not come to schools looking for students, but parents fear sending their kids to school after information they received of ICE agents conducting a series of raids across the U.S. in January targeting Central American immigrants.”

Simultaneously, administrators in the UC system have forged ahead with plans to extend so-called DREAM loans to students who could potentially be deported. “Officials at California’s four-year public universities are reaching out to an estimated 10,000 undergraduate students who might qualify for a special loan aimed at reducing their tuition,” as U-T San Diego reported, “a program that further distinguishes the state as a national trendsetter in providing services to unauthorized immigrants.”

“The California DREAM loan program’s initial $7 million allotment — $5 million for the UC and $2 million for CSU — will be distributed to eligible applicants in the following weeks,” the paper noted. “The state provided half of the sum and the two university systems covered the other half. The loans are for the 2015-16 academic year, and they’re retroactive to last fall.”

Driving policy

As the public education establishment has come to the aid of would-be deportees, the state of California itself has continued to reward those who go public in some fashion with their legal status. California’s program to extend slightly modified drivers license privileges to otherwise undocumented immigrants far outpaced predicted demand. “Under the new law, 605,000 undocumented residents received licenses, accounting for 40 percent of all of the licenses issued last year,” the International Business Times reported. “Exceeding expectations, even more attempted to obtain a license: Around 830,000 undocumented immigrants have applied for a license since Jan. 2, 2015, the first day of the new policy at the Department of Motor Vehicles.”

The state’s aggressive action on normalizing residents who immigrated unlawfully has been rooted in two realities — first, the relatively vast and stable population of long-time residents crossing over from Mexico and Central America, and, second, the prevailing political agenda of Democrats wielding near one-party control over state policy for years on end. “California is among 12 states that now allow immigrants in the country illegally to obtain driver’s licenses, areas covering an estimated 37 percent of that population,” the Times observed, citing a recent Pew report. But California has also surpassed all other states in its percentage of unlawful residents eligible for a license, according to the report.