Individual legislator voting records for this vote are not currently available. Includes all politicians who were in office at any point during the 2011-2012 Legislature.

AB 165 - An Act to Amend Sections 14501, 35186, and 41020 Of, and to Add Article 5.5 (Commencing with Section 49010) to Chapter 6 of Part 27 of Division 4 of Title 2 Of, the Education Code, and to Amend Section 905 of the Government Code, Relating to Pupil Fees.

Pupil fees. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
(1)Existing law requires the Legislature to provide for a system of common schools by which a free school is required to be kept up and supported in each district. Existing law prohibits a pupil enrolled in school from being required to pay a fee, deposit, or other charge not specifically authorized by law.

This bill would prohibit a pupil enrolled in a public school from being… More
(1)Existing law requires the Legislature to provide for a system of common schools by which a free school is required to be kept up and supported in each district. Existing law prohibits a pupil enrolled in school from being required to pay a fee, deposit, or other charge not specifically authorized by law.

This bill would prohibit a pupil enrolled in a public school from being required to pay a pupil fee, as defined, for participation in an educational activity, as defined, as specified. The bill would provide that this prohibition is not to be interpreted to prohibit solicitation of voluntary donations, voluntary participation in fundraising activities, or school districts, schools, and other entities from providing pupils prizes or other recognition for voluntarily participating in fundraising activities. The bill would specify that these provisions apply to all public schools, including, but not limited to, charter schools and alternative schools, are declarative of existing law, and should not be interpreted to prohibit the imposition of a fee, deposit, or other charge otherwise allowed by law.

The bill would require a superintendent of a school district, county superintendent of schools, or chief executive officer, or a person in the equivalent position, of a charter school, commencing with the 2011–12 fiscal year, and each fiscal year thereafter, to determine, within the first 8 weeks after the first day pupils attend school for that school year, or during a specified time period for the 2011–12 fiscal year, whether an unlawful pupil fee has been, or is being, charged in the current fiscal year, or on or after January 1, 2012, for the 2011–12 fiscal year. If the superintendent of a school district, county superintendent of schools, or chief executive officer, or a person in the equivalent position, of a charter school makes this determination, the bill would require him or her to present the determination at a public hearing or meeting of the applicable governing board or body at which the governing board or body would be required to identify the nature of the violation and take action to provide full reimbursements to all affected pupils, parents, or guardians within a specified time period. The bill would require the hearing or meeting to meet specified requirements. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law requires the Controller, in consultation with the Department of Finance and the State Department of Education, to develop a plan to review and report on financial and compliance audits, and with representatives of other entities, to recommend the statements and other information to be included in the audit reports filed with the state by local educational agencies, and to propose the content of an audit guide.

This bill would require a compliance audit, commencing with audits of the 2011–12 fiscal year, to include the verification of compliance with the prohibition against the imposition of pupil fees for participation in educational activities in violation of specified law. Notwithstanding specified law, the bill would require this verification to be added to the audit guide commencing with audits of the 2011–12 fiscal year. The bill also would allow for the adoption of emergency regulations to achieve this goal and would require charter schools to be subject to those audits to ensure compliance with the prohibition against the imposition of unlawful pupil fees.

(3)Existing law requires a school district to use its uniform complaint process to help identify and resolve any deficiencies related to instructional materials, emergency or urgent facilities conditions that pose a threat to the health and safety of pupils or staff, teacher vacancy or misassignment, and intensive instruction and services provided to pupils who have not passed one or both parts of the high school exit examination after the completion of grade 12. Existing law provides certain complainants the right to file an appeal to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, who is required to provide a written report to the State Board of Education that describes the basis for the complaint and, as appropriate, proposes a remedy. A notice regarding the appropriate subjects of a complaint is required to be posted in each classroom in each school in the school district and a complaint regarding those deficiencies is required to be filed with the principal of the school or his or her designee, except as specified.

This bill also would require a school district and a charter school to use its uniform complaint process to help identify and resolve any deficiencies related to the imposition of pupil fees for participation in educational activities, as those terms are defined. The bill also would provide persons with a complaint regarding the imposition of pupil fees the right to file an appeal to the Superintendent and would require the Superintendent to provide the written report to the state board and the complainant no later than 30 working days after the appeal was received by the Superintendent. If the report finds a violation, the bill would require the Superintendent to require the offending school district, charter school, or school to fully reimburse all affected pupils, parents, or guardians. The bill also would require the classroom notice to include certain information about the prohibition against charging pupil fees for participation in educational activities. The bill would require a school district, county office of education, and charter school to establish local policies and procedures, post notices, and implement the uniform complaint process provisions regarding the imposition of pupil fees for participation in educational activities by March 1, 2012. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(4)Existing law requires a county superintendent of schools to provide for an audit of all funds under his or her jurisdiction and requires the governing board of a local educational agency to either provide for an audit of the books and accounts of the local educational agency or make arrangements with the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction over the local educational agency to provide for that auditing. Existing law requires a county superintendent of schools to be responsible for reviewing the audit exceptions contained in an audit of a local educational agency under his or her jurisdiction related to specified topics, and determining whether the exceptions were either corrected or an acceptable plan of correction was developed. Existing law requires the county office of education to review certain audit exceptions upon submission and receipt of a final audit report. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to be responsible for ensuring that local educational agencies have either corrected or developed plans of correction for specified audit exceptions.

This bill, commencing with the 2011–12 audit of local educational agencies, would require the county superintendent of schools to also include in the review of audit exceptions those audit exceptions related to the imposition of pupil fees for participation in educational activities in violation of specified law, and to determine whether the exceptions are either corrected or an acceptable plan of correction is developed. The bill would prohibit an audit exception related to the imposition of unlawful pupil fees from being deemed corrected until the school district, county office of education, or charter school fully reimburses all affected parents, guardians, and pupils. The bill also would require the county office of education to review audit exceptions relating to the imposition of unlawful pupil fees. If, in an audit for a subsequent year, the auditor finds an uncorrected or new audit exception related to the imposition of unlawful pupil fees, the bill would require the auditor to make a specified disclosure and would require the Superintendent to withhold certain payments to the school district, county office of education, or charter school until they provide reimbursement, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(5)Existing law excepts certain claims from the requirement that all claims for money or damages against local public entities be presented in accordance with specified law.

This bill would additionally except specified claims for reimbursement of pupil fees for participation in educational activities.

(6)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. Hide
 
Status:
This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law
Assembly Vote: On Passage

PASSED on September 6, 2011.

voted YES: 51 voted NO: 24
5 voted present/not voting

An Act to Amend Sections 14501, 35186, and 41020 Of, and to Add Article 5.5 (Commencing with Section 49010) to Chapter 6 of Part 27 of Division 4 of Title 2 Of, the Education Code, and to Amend Section 905 of the Government Code, Relating to Pupil Fees.

AB 165 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
(1)Existing law requires the Legislature to provide for a system of common schools by which a free school is required to be kept up and supported in each district. Existing law prohibits a pupil enrolled in school from being required to pay a fee, deposit, or other charge not specifically authorized by law.

This bill would prohibit a pupil enrolled in a public school from being required to pay a pupil fee, as defined, for participation in an educational activity, as defined, as specified. The bill would provide that this prohibition is not to be interpreted to prohibit solicitation of voluntary donations, voluntary participation in fundraising activities, or school districts, schools, and other entities from providing pupils prizes or other recognition for voluntarily participating in fundraising activities. The bill would specify that these provisions apply to all public schools, including, but not limited to, charter schools and alternative schools, are declarative of existing law, and should not be interpreted to prohibit the imposition of a fee, deposit, or other charge otherwise allowed by law.

The bill would require a superintendent of a school… More
(1)Existing law requires the Legislature to provide for a system of common schools by which a free school is required to be kept up and supported in each district. Existing law prohibits a pupil enrolled in school from being required to pay a fee, deposit, or other charge not specifically authorized by law.

This bill would prohibit a pupil enrolled in a public school from being required to pay a pupil fee, as defined, for participation in an educational activity, as defined, as specified. The bill would provide that this prohibition is not to be interpreted to prohibit solicitation of voluntary donations, voluntary participation in fundraising activities, or school districts, schools, and other entities from providing pupils prizes or other recognition for voluntarily participating in fundraising activities. The bill would specify that these provisions apply to all public schools, including, but not limited to, charter schools and alternative schools, are declarative of existing law, and should not be interpreted to prohibit the imposition of a fee, deposit, or other charge otherwise allowed by law.

The bill would require a superintendent of a school district, county superintendent of schools, or chief executive officer, or a person in the equivalent position, of a charter school, commencing with the 2011–12 fiscal year, and each fiscal year thereafter, to determine, within the first 8 weeks after the first day pupils attend school for that school year, or during a specified time period for the 2011–12 fiscal year, whether an unlawful pupil fee has been, or is being, charged in the current fiscal year, or on or after January 1, 2012, for the 2011–12 fiscal year. If the superintendent of a school district, county superintendent of schools, or chief executive officer, or a person in the equivalent position, of a charter school makes this determination, the bill would require him or her to present the determination at a public hearing or meeting of the applicable governing board or body at which the governing board or body would be required to identify the nature of the violation and take action to provide full reimbursements to all affected pupils, parents, or guardians within a specified time period. The bill would require the hearing or meeting to meet specified requirements. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law requires the Controller, in consultation with the Department of Finance and the State Department of Education, to develop a plan to review and report on financial and compliance audits, and with representatives of other entities, to recommend the statements and other information to be included in the audit reports filed with the state by local educational agencies, and to propose the content of an audit guide.

This bill would require a compliance audit, commencing with audits of the 2011–12 fiscal year, to include the verification of compliance with the prohibition against the imposition of pupil fees for participation in educational activities in violation of specified law. Notwithstanding specified law, the bill would require this verification to be added to the audit guide commencing with audits of the 2011–12 fiscal year. The bill also would allow for the adoption of emergency regulations to achieve this goal and would require charter schools to be subject to those audits to ensure compliance with the prohibition against the imposition of unlawful pupil fees.

(3)Existing law requires a school district to use its uniform complaint process to help identify and resolve any deficiencies related to instructional materials, emergency or urgent facilities conditions that pose a threat to the health and safety of pupils or staff, teacher vacancy or misassignment, and intensive instruction and services provided to pupils who have not passed one or both parts of the high school exit examination after the completion of grade 12. Existing law provides certain complainants the right to file an appeal to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, who is required to provide a written report to the State Board of Education that describes the basis for the complaint and, as appropriate, proposes a remedy. A notice regarding the appropriate subjects of a complaint is required to be posted in each classroom in each school in the school district and a complaint regarding those deficiencies is required to be filed with the principal of the school or his or her designee, except as specified.

This bill also would require a school district and a charter school to use its uniform complaint process to help identify and resolve any deficiencies related to the imposition of pupil fees for participation in educational activities, as those terms are defined. The bill also would provide persons with a complaint regarding the imposition of pupil fees the right to file an appeal to the Superintendent and would require the Superintendent to provide the written report to the state board and the complainant no later than 30 working days after the appeal was received by the Superintendent. If the report finds a violation, the bill would require the Superintendent to require the offending school district, charter school, or school to fully reimburse all affected pupils, parents, or guardians. The bill also would require the classroom notice to include certain information about the prohibition against charging pupil fees for participation in educational activities. The bill would require a school district, county office of education, and charter school to establish local policies and procedures, post notices, and implement the uniform complaint process provisions regarding the imposition of pupil fees for participation in educational activities by March 1, 2012. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(4)Existing law requires a county superintendent of schools to provide for an audit of all funds under his or her jurisdiction and requires the governing board of a local educational agency to either provide for an audit of the books and accounts of the local educational agency or make arrangements with the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction over the local educational agency to provide for that auditing. Existing law requires a county superintendent of schools to be responsible for reviewing the audit exceptions contained in an audit of a local educational agency under his or her jurisdiction related to specified topics, and determining whether the exceptions were either corrected or an acceptable plan of correction was developed. Existing law requires the county office of education to review certain audit exceptions upon submission and receipt of a final audit report. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to be responsible for ensuring that local educational agencies have either corrected or developed plans of correction for specified audit exceptions.

This bill, commencing with the 2011–12 audit of local educational agencies, would require the county superintendent of schools to also include in the review of audit exceptions those audit exceptions related to the imposition of pupil fees for participation in educational activities in violation of specified law, and to determine whether the exceptions are either corrected or an acceptable plan of correction is developed. The bill would prohibit an audit exception related to the imposition of unlawful pupil fees from being deemed corrected until the school district, county office of education, or charter school fully reimburses all affected parents, guardians, and pupils. The bill also would require the county office of education to review audit exceptions relating to the imposition of unlawful pupil fees. If, in an audit for a subsequent year, the auditor finds an uncorrected or new audit exception related to the imposition of unlawful pupil fees, the bill would require the auditor to make a specified disclosure and would require the Superintendent to withhold certain payments to the school district, county office of education, or charter school until they provide reimbursement, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(5)Existing law excepts certain claims from the requirement that all claims for money or damages against local public entities be presented in accordance with specified law.

This bill would additionally except specified claims for reimbursement of pupil fees for participation in educational activities.

(6)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. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Amend Sections 14501, 35186, and 41020 Of, and to Add Article 5.5 (Commencing with Section 49010) to Chapter 6 of Part 27 of Division 4 of Title 2 Of, the Education Code, and to Amend Section 905 of the Government Code, Relating to Pupil Fees.
Author(s)
Ricardo Lara
Co-Authors
Subjects
  • Pupil fees
Major Actions
Introduced1/20/2011
Referred to Committee
Passed Assembly Committee on Education4/27/2011
Passed Assembly Committee on Appropriations5/27/2011
Passed Assembly6/02/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Education6/29/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations8/15/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations8/25/2011
Passed Senate9/01/2011
Passed Assembly9/06/2011
Presented to the governor (enrolled)9/14/2011
Vetoed by Governor10/08/2011
Vetoed by Governor10/08/2011
Bill History
Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
select this voteAssembly Committee on EducationDo pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.4/27/2011This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Education
6 voted YES 2 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on AppropriationsDo pass as amended.5/27/2011This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Appropriations
12 voted YES 5 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssemblyAB 165 LARA Assembly Third Reading6/02/2011This bill PASSED the Assembly
53 voted YES 21 voted NO 6 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on EducationDo pass, but re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.6/29/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Education
6 voted YES 1 voted NO 4 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsPlaced on Appropriations Suspense file.8/15/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
8 voted YES 0 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsDo pass as amended.8/25/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
5 voted YES 4 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateAssembly 3rd Reading AB165 Lara By Lowenthal9/01/2011This bill PASSED the Senate
23 voted YES 15 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
currently selectedAssemblyAB 165 LARA Concurrence in Senate Amendments9/06/2011This bill PASSED the Assembly
51 voted YES 24 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
ActionDateDescription
Introduced1/20/2011
1/20/2011Read first time. To print.
1/21/2011From printer. May be heard in committee February 20.
2/03/2011Referred to Com. on ED.
4/13/2011From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.
4/14/2011Re-referred to Com. on ED.
select this voteVote4/27/2011Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
5/04/2011From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (April 27).
5/05/2011Read second time and amended.
5/09/2011Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
5/27/2011In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (May 27). Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
select this voteVote5/27/2011Do pass as amended.
5/31/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
6/02/2011Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 53. Noes 21. Page 1786.)
6/02/2011In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage6/02/2011AB 165 LARA Assembly Third Reading
6/16/2011Referred to Com. on ED.
6/20/2011From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on ED.
select this voteVote6/29/2011Do pass, but re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.
6/30/2011From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (June 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
8/15/2011From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR. In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
select this voteVote8/15/2011Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.
select this voteVote8/25/2011Do pass as amended.
8/29/2011From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 4.) (August 25).
8/30/2011Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
9/01/2011Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 23. Noes 15. Page 2249.).
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage9/01/2011Assembly 3rd Reading AB165 Lara By Lowenthal
9/02/2011In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after September 7 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
9/06/2011Assembly Rule 77 suspended. (Page 2932.) Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 51. Noes 24. Page 2932.).
currently selectedAssembly Vote on Passage9/06/2011AB 165 LARA Concurrence in Senate Amendments
9/14/2011Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
Vetoed10/08/2011Vetoed by Governor.

Total contributions given to Assemblymembers from interest groups that…

5 Organizations Supported and 4 Opposed; See Which Ones

Organizations that took a position on
An Act to Amend Sections 14501, 35186, and 41020 Of, and to Add Article 5.5 (Commencing with Section 49010) to Chapter 6 of Part 27 of Division 4 of Title 2 Of, the Education Code, and to Amend Section 905 of the Government Code, Relating to Pupil Fees.: AB 165 LARA Concurrence in Senate Amendments

5 organizations supported this bill

American Civil Liberties Union
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
American Federation of Teachers
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Association of American Publishers
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California Catholic Conference
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California State PTA
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

4 organizations opposed this bill

California Association of School Business Officials
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Metropolitan Education District
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Riverside County School Superintendents' Association
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
San Bernardino County District Advocates for Better Schools
Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 28). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

Need proof?

View citations of support and opposition

Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Assemblymembers in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2011 – December 31, 2012.
Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

Contributions by Legislator

Namesort iconPartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Katcho AchadjianRCA-33$6,000$0
Luis AlejoDCA-28$16,400$0
Michael AllenDCA-7$55,200$0
Tom AmmianoDCA-13$21,000$0
Toni AtkinsDCA-76$25,200$0
Jim BeallDCA-24$57,800$0
Bill BerryhillRCA-26$6,200$0
Marty BlockDCA-78$83,150$0
Bob BlumenfieldDCA-40$17,950$0
Susan BonillaDCA-11$26,350$0
Steven BradfordDCA-51$17,100$0
Julia BrownleyDCA-41$0$0
Joan BuchananDCA-15$23,900$1,000
Betsy ButlerDCA-53$23,800$0
Charles CalderonDCA-58$0$0
Nora CamposDCA-23$12,400$750
Wilmer Amina CarterDCA-62$0$0
Gilbert CedilloDCA-45$0$0
Wesley ChesbroDCA-1$17,400$0
Connie ConwayRCA-34$7,000$3,900
Paul CookRCA-65$0$0
Mike DavisDCA-48$0$0
Roger DickinsonDCA-9$17,000$0
Tim DonnellyRCA-59$0$0
Mike EngDCA-49$0$0
Mike FeuerDCA-42$0$0
Nathan FletcherRCA-75$0$0
Paul FongDCA-22$54,000$0
Felipe FuentesDCA-39$0$0
Warren FurutaniDCA-55$0$0
Beth GainesRCA-4$0$0
Cathleen GalgianiDCA-17$49,829$0
Martin GarrickRCA-74$0$0
Mike GattoDCA-43$24,600$0
Rich GordonDCA-21$17,250$0
Jeff GorellRCA-37$2,000$0
Shannon GroveRCA-32$0$0
Curt HagmanRCA-60$0$0
Linda HaldermanRCA-29$0$0
Isadore HallDCA-52$20,100$0
Diane HarkeyRCA-73$2,000$0
Mary HayashiDCA-18$0$0
Roger HernandezDCA-57$20,150$0
Jerry HillDCA-19$11,400$0
Alyson HuberDCA-10$0$0
Ben HuesoDCA-79$21,200$0
Jared HuffmanDCA-6$0$0
Kevin JeffriesRCA-66$0$0
Brian JonesRCA-77$3,500$0
Steve KnightRCA-36$0$0
Ricardo LaraDCA-50$20,600$0
Dan LogueRCA-3$0$0
Bonnie LowenthalDCA-54$500$0
Fiona MaDCA-12$0$0
Allan MansoorRCA-68$0$0
Tony MendozaDCA-56$0$0
Jeff MillerRCA-71$3,000$0
Holly MitchellDCA-47$17,100$0
Bill MonningDCA-27$28,000$0
Mike MorrellRCA-63$0$0
Brian NestandeRCA-64$2,000$0
Jim NielsenRCA-2$1,000$0
Chris NorbyRCA-72$2,500$0
Kristin OlsenRCA-25$0$2,750
Richard PanDCA-5$39,500$0
Henry PereaDCA-31$7,900$0
John PerezDCA-46$42,400$7,800
Manuel PerezDCA-80$13,400$0
Anthony PortantinoDCA-44$0$0
Jim SilvaRCA-67$0$0
Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$21,600$0
Cameron SmythRCA-38$0$0
Jose SolorioDCA-69$0$0
Sandre SwansonDCA-16$0$0
Norma TorresDCA-61$11,400$0
David ValadaoRCA-30$0$0
Don WagnerRCA-70$0$0
Bob WieckowskiDCA-20$15,300$3,900
Das WilliamsDCA-35$34,850$1,000
Mariko YamadaDCA-8$12,400$0

Add Data Filters:

Legislator Filters
Legislator Filters
Show All
NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Katcho AchadjianRCA-33$6,000$0
Luis AlejoDCA-28$16,400$0
Michael AllenDCA-7$55,200$0
Tom AmmianoDCA-13$21,000$0
Toni AtkinsDCA-76$25,200$0
Jim BeallDCA-24$57,800$0
Bill BerryhillRCA-26$6,200$0
Marty BlockDCA-78$83,150$0
Bob BlumenfieldDCA-40$17,950$0
Susan BonillaDCA-11$26,350$0
Steven BradfordDCA-51$17,100$0
Julia BrownleyDCA-41$0$0
Joan BuchananDCA-15$23,900$1,000
Betsy ButlerDCA-53$23,800$0
Charles CalderonDCA-58$0$0
Nora CamposDCA-23$12,400$750
Wilmer Amina CarterDCA-62$0$0
Gilbert CedilloDCA-45$0$0
Wesley ChesbroDCA-1$17,400$0
Connie ConwayRCA-34$7,000$3,900
Paul CookRCA-65$0$0
Mike DavisDCA-48$0$0
Roger DickinsonDCA-9$17,000$0
Tim DonnellyRCA-59$0$0
Mike EngDCA-49$0$0
Mike FeuerDCA-42$0$0
Nathan FletcherRCA-75$0$0
Paul FongDCA-22$54,000$0
Felipe FuentesDCA-39$0$0
Warren FurutaniDCA-55$0$0
Beth GainesRCA-4$0$0
Cathleen GalgianiDCA-17$49,829$0
Martin GarrickRCA-74$0$0
Mike GattoDCA-43$24,600$0
Rich GordonDCA-21$17,250$0
Jeff GorellRCA-37$2,000$0
Shannon GroveRCA-32$0$0
Curt HagmanRCA-60$0$0
Linda HaldermanRCA-29$0$0
Isadore HallDCA-52$20,100$0
Diane HarkeyRCA-73$2,000$0
Mary HayashiDCA-18$0$0
Roger HernandezDCA-57$20,150$0
Jerry HillDCA-19$11,400$0
Alyson HuberDCA-10$0$0
Ben HuesoDCA-79$21,200$0
Jared HuffmanDCA-6$0$0
Kevin JeffriesRCA-66$0$0
Brian JonesRCA-77$3,500$0
Steve KnightRCA-36$0$0
Ricardo LaraDCA-50$20,600$0
Dan LogueRCA-3$0$0
Bonnie LowenthalDCA-54$500$0
Fiona MaDCA-12$0$0
Allan MansoorRCA-68$0$0
Tony MendozaDCA-56$0$0
Jeff MillerRCA-71$3,000$0
Holly MitchellDCA-47$17,100$0
Bill MonningDCA-27$28,000$0
Mike MorrellRCA-63$0$0
Brian NestandeRCA-64$2,000$0
Jim NielsenRCA-2$1,000$0
Chris NorbyRCA-72$2,500$0
Kristin OlsenRCA-25$0$2,750
Richard PanDCA-5$39,500$0
Henry PereaDCA-31$7,900$0
John PerezDCA-46$42,400$7,800
Manuel PerezDCA-80$13,400$0
Anthony PortantinoDCA-44$0$0
Jim SilvaRCA-67$0$0
Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$21,600$0
Cameron SmythRCA-38$0$0
Jose SolorioDCA-69$0$0
Sandre SwansonDCA-16$0$0
Norma TorresDCA-61$11,400$0
David ValadaoRCA-30$0$0
Don WagnerRCA-70$0$0
Bob WieckowskiDCA-20$15,300$3,900
Das WilliamsDCA-35$34,850$1,000
Mariko YamadaDCA-8$12,400$0

Interest Groups that supported this bill

$ Donated
Teachers unions$795,150
Education$124,000
Book, newspaper & periodical publishing$12,000
Democratic-based groups (but not official party committees) and generic liberal/progressive ones$2,179

Interest Groups that opposed this bill

$ Donated
Public school teachers, administrators & officials$21,100
Loading…
Date Range of Contributions
Enter a custom date range