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 5 - An Act to Amend Sections 33050, 52055.740, 52055.770, and 52055.780 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 44661.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Sections 44660, 44661, 44662, and 44664 Of, and to Add Sections 44662.1, 44662.5, 44662.6,44662.7, and 44662.8 To, the Education Code, and to Amend Section 17581.6 of the Government Code, Relating to Teachers, and Making an Appropriation Therefor.

Teachers: best practices teacher evaluation system. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
(1)Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district or a county board of education, as specified, after a public hearing on the matter, to request the State Board of Education to waive all or part of any section of the Education Code or any regulation adopted by the state board that implements a provision of the Education Code that may be waived, except for specified provisions.… More
(1)Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district or a county board of education, as specified, after a public hearing on the matter, to request the State Board of Education to waive all or part of any section of the Education Code or any regulation adopted by the state board that implements a provision of the Education Code that may be waived, except for specified provisions.

This bill would include additional specified provisions of the Education Code, relating to teacher evaluation and the Quality Education Investment Act of 2006, that may not be waived.

(2)Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that governing boards of school districts establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of the performance of all certificated personnel within each school district of the state. Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study and to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance on a continuing basis as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils toward the established standards and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments, the instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee, the employee’s adherence to curricular objectives, and the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee’s responsibilities.

This bill would provide that the provisions described above would become inoperative on July 1, 2014. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. Commencing on July 1, 2014, the bill would require the governing board of each school district to adopt and implement a locally negotiated best practices teacher evaluation system, described as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices that are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would authorize the state board, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction and appropriate education stakeholder groups, to adopt nonregulatory guidance to support the implementation of a best practices teacher evaluation system by school districts, as specified. The bill would, on or before May 1, 2013, require the governing board of each school district, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, to seek comment on the development and implementation of the best practices teacher evaluation system, and, on or before May 1 of each year prior to local negotiations required by law, to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would require the governing board of each school district to disclose the provisions of the best practices teaching evaluation system at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The bill would also require the governing board of each school district to establish and define job responsibilities for certificated, noninstructional employees and evaluate and assess their performance in relation to those responsibilities. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis in adult education classes.The bill would require that funds appropriated pursuant to a provision of law for the 2013–14 fiscal year be distributed to school districts, as specified, for the purpose of implementing the best practices teacher evaluation system, and would require these school districts to use the funds, as specified.The bill would also provide that the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system do not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time the best practices teacher evaluation system becomes operative.(3)Existing law requires that an evaluation and assessment of the performance of a certificated employee be made on a continuing basis, as provided, including at least every 5 years for personnel with permanent status who have been employed at least 10 years with the school district, are highly qualified, as specified, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards.

This bill would require the evaluation and assessment of the above personnel at least every 3 years, except as locally negotiated and provided in the best practices teacher evaluation system.

(4)The existing Quality Education Investment Act of 2006 effectuates the intent of the Legislature to implement the terms of the proposed settlement agreement of a specified legal action, to provide for the discharge of the minimum state educational funding requirement, to improve the quality of academic instruction and the level of pupil achievement in schools whose pupils have high levels of poverty and complex educational needs, to develop exemplary school district and school practices to create working conditions to attract and retain well-qualified teachers and administrators, and to focus school resources solely on instructional improvement and pupil services. The act requires county superintendents of schools to annually review participant schools and their data to determine compliance with the program requirements, including, among others, specified class size requirements. The act requires, among other things, $450,000,000 per fiscal year to be appropriated from the General Fund for specified purposes for each of the 2008–09, 2011–12, and 2014–15 fiscal years, inclusive, and requires those funds to be allocated, as specified, to Sections A and B of the State School Fund. A provision of the act appropriates $218,322,000 for the 2013–14 fiscal year, for allocation by the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges and the Superintendent, as specified, from the General Fund.

This bill would revise the class size requirement for kindergarten and grades 1 to 3, inclusive, to be no more than an average of 20 pupils per class in each grade level at each schoolsite, provided that any grade 1 to 3 classroom at that schoolsite has no more than 22 pupils. The bill would instead require $450,000,000 per fiscal year to be appropriated from the General Fund for specified purposes for each of the 2008–09 and 2011–12 fiscal years, and would, commencing with the 2013–14 fiscal year, appropriate $89,000,000 to the Superintendent, as specified, for purposes of the act. The bill would, commencing with the 2013–14 fiscal year and continuing annually thereafter, require the Superintendent to allocate, as specified, certain appropriated funds that are not allocated to schools with kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, in a fiscal year due to program termination or otherwise, except funds allocated in the 2013–14 fiscal year for purposes of implementing the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would instead appropriate $361,000,000 for the 2013–14 fiscal year, for allocation, as specified, from the General Fund, including $313,000,000 for transfer by the Controller to Section A of the State School Fund for allocation by the Superintendent.

(5)Under the California Constitution, whenever the Legislature or a state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any local government, including a school district and a community college district, the state is required to provide a subvention of funds to reimburse the local government, with specified exceptions. Existing law, commencing with the 2012–13 fiscal year, requires certain funds appropriated in the annual Budget Act for reimbursement of the cost of a new program or increased level of service of an existing program mandated by statute or executive order to be available as a block grant to school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education to support specified state-mandated local programs and permits those entities to elect to receive that block grant funding in lieu of claiming mandated costs pursuant to the state claims process.

This bill would, as of July 1, 2014, add specified mandated programs, including the best practices teacher evaluation system, to the state-mandated local programs supported by the block grant funding.

(6)By requiring school districts to perform additional duties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

(7)Funds appropriated by this bill would be applied toward the minimum funding requirements for school districts and community college districts imposed by Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution. Hide
 
Status:
The bill was voted on by a Senate committee on August 29, 2012. 
Assembly Vote: On Passage

PASSED on June 1, 2011.

voted YES: 47 voted NO: 25
8 voted present/not voting

Other Votes:

An Act to Amend Sections 33050, 52055.740, 52055.770, and 52055.780 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 44661.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Sections 44660, 44661, 44662, and 44664 Of, and to Add Sections 44662.1, 44662.5, 44662.6,44662.7, and 44662.8 To, the Education Code, and to Amend Section 17581.6 of the Government Code, Relating to Teachers, and Making an Appropriation Therefor.

AB 5 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
(1)Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district or a county board of education, as specified, after a public hearing on the matter, to request the State Board of Education to waive all or part of any section of the Education Code or any regulation adopted by the state board that implements a provision of the Education Code that may be waived, except for specified provisions.

This bill would include additional specified provisions of the Education Code, relating to teacher evaluation and the Quality Education Investment Act of 2006, that may not be waived.

(2)Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that governing boards of school districts establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of the performance of all certificated personnel within each school district of the state. Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study and to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance on a continuing basis as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils toward the established standards and, if applicable,… More
(1)Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district or a county board of education, as specified, after a public hearing on the matter, to request the State Board of Education to waive all or part of any section of the Education Code or any regulation adopted by the state board that implements a provision of the Education Code that may be waived, except for specified provisions.

This bill would include additional specified provisions of the Education Code, relating to teacher evaluation and the Quality Education Investment Act of 2006, that may not be waived.

(2)Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that governing boards of school districts establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of the performance of all certificated personnel within each school district of the state. Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study and to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance on a continuing basis as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils toward the established standards and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments, the instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee, the employee’s adherence to curricular objectives, and the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee’s responsibilities.

This bill would provide that the provisions described above would become inoperative on July 1, 2014. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the nature of effective teachers and of the teaching profession. Commencing on July 1, 2014, the bill would require the governing board of each school district to adopt and implement a locally negotiated best practices teacher evaluation system, described as one in which each teacher is evaluated on a continuing basis on the degree to which he or she accomplishes specific objectives and multiple observations of instructional and other professional practices that are conducted by trained evaluators. The bill would authorize the state board, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction and appropriate education stakeholder groups, to adopt nonregulatory guidance to support the implementation of a best practices teacher evaluation system by school districts, as specified. The bill would, on or before May 1, 2013, require the governing board of each school district, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, to seek comment on the development and implementation of the best practices teacher evaluation system, and, on or before May 1 of each year prior to local negotiations required by law, to seek comment on the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would require the governing board of each school district to disclose the provisions of the best practices teaching evaluation system at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The bill would also require the governing board of each school district to establish and define job responsibilities for certificated, noninstructional employees and evaluate and assess their performance in relation to those responsibilities. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to certificated personnel who are employed on an hourly basis in adult education classes.The bill would require that funds appropriated pursuant to a provision of law for the 2013–14 fiscal year be distributed to school districts, as specified, for the purpose of implementing the best practices teacher evaluation system, and would require these school districts to use the funds, as specified.The bill would also provide that the provisions of the best practices teacher evaluation system do not supersede or invalidate a teacher evaluation system that is locally negotiated and that is in effect at the time the best practices teacher evaluation system becomes operative.(3)Existing law requires that an evaluation and assessment of the performance of a certificated employee be made on a continuing basis, as provided, including at least every 5 years for personnel with permanent status who have been employed at least 10 years with the school district, are highly qualified, as specified, and whose previous evaluation rated the employee as meeting or exceeding standards.

This bill would require the evaluation and assessment of the above personnel at least every 3 years, except as locally negotiated and provided in the best practices teacher evaluation system.

(4)The existing Quality Education Investment Act of 2006 effectuates the intent of the Legislature to implement the terms of the proposed settlement agreement of a specified legal action, to provide for the discharge of the minimum state educational funding requirement, to improve the quality of academic instruction and the level of pupil achievement in schools whose pupils have high levels of poverty and complex educational needs, to develop exemplary school district and school practices to create working conditions to attract and retain well-qualified teachers and administrators, and to focus school resources solely on instructional improvement and pupil services. The act requires county superintendents of schools to annually review participant schools and their data to determine compliance with the program requirements, including, among others, specified class size requirements. The act requires, among other things, $450,000,000 per fiscal year to be appropriated from the General Fund for specified purposes for each of the 2008–09, 2011–12, and 2014–15 fiscal years, inclusive, and requires those funds to be allocated, as specified, to Sections A and B of the State School Fund. A provision of the act appropriates $218,322,000 for the 2013–14 fiscal year, for allocation by the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges and the Superintendent, as specified, from the General Fund.

This bill would revise the class size requirement for kindergarten and grades 1 to 3, inclusive, to be no more than an average of 20 pupils per class in each grade level at each schoolsite, provided that any grade 1 to 3 classroom at that schoolsite has no more than 22 pupils. The bill would instead require $450,000,000 per fiscal year to be appropriated from the General Fund for specified purposes for each of the 2008–09 and 2011–12 fiscal years, and would, commencing with the 2013–14 fiscal year, appropriate $89,000,000 to the Superintendent, as specified, for purposes of the act. The bill would, commencing with the 2013–14 fiscal year and continuing annually thereafter, require the Superintendent to allocate, as specified, certain appropriated funds that are not allocated to schools with kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, in a fiscal year due to program termination or otherwise, except funds allocated in the 2013–14 fiscal year for purposes of implementing the best practices teacher evaluation system. The bill also would instead appropriate $361,000,000 for the 2013–14 fiscal year, for allocation, as specified, from the General Fund, including $313,000,000 for transfer by the Controller to Section A of the State School Fund for allocation by the Superintendent.

(5)Under the California Constitution, whenever the Legislature or a state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any local government, including a school district and a community college district, the state is required to provide a subvention of funds to reimburse the local government, with specified exceptions. Existing law, commencing with the 2012–13 fiscal year, requires certain funds appropriated in the annual Budget Act for reimbursement of the cost of a new program or increased level of service of an existing program mandated by statute or executive order to be available as a block grant to school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education to support specified state-mandated local programs and permits those entities to elect to receive that block grant funding in lieu of claiming mandated costs pursuant to the state claims process.

This bill would, as of July 1, 2014, add specified mandated programs, including the best practices teacher evaluation system, to the state-mandated local programs supported by the block grant funding.

(6)By requiring school districts to perform additional duties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

(7)Funds appropriated by this bill would be applied toward the minimum funding requirements for school districts and community college districts imposed by Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Amend Sections 33050, 52055.740, 52055.770, and 52055.780 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 44661.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Sections 44660, 44661, 44662, and 44664 Of, and to Add Sections 44662.1, 44662.5, 44662.6,44662.7, and 44662.8 To, the Education Code, and to Amend Section 17581.6 of the Government Code, Relating to Teachers, and Making an Appropriation Therefor.
Author(s)
Felipe Fuentes
Co-Authors
    Subjects
    • Teachers: best practices teacher evaluation system
    Major Actions
    Introduced12/06/2010
    Referred to Committee
    Passed Assembly Committee on Education3/30/2011
    Passed Assembly Committee on Appropriations5/27/2011
    Passed Assembly6/01/2011
    Passed Senate Committee on Education6/15/2011
    Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations8/13/2012
    Failed passage in Senate Committee on Appropriations8/16/2012
    Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations8/16/2012
    Passed Senate Committee on Education8/29/2012
    Bill History
    Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
    select this voteAssembly Committee on EducationDo pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.3/30/2011This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Education
    8 voted YES 2 voted NO 1 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 0 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
    currently selectedAssemblyAB 5 FUENTES Assembly Third Reading6/01/2011This bill PASSED the Assembly
    47 voted YES 25 voted NO 8 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on EducationDo pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.6/15/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Education
    6 voted YES 0 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsPlaced on Appropriations Suspense file.8/13/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
    7 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsBe re-referred to the Committee on Rules.8/16/2012This motion DID NOT PASS the Senate Committee on Appropriations
    2 voted YES 5 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsDo pass as amended.8/16/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
    5 voted YES 2 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on EducationFrom Committee: That the measure be returned to the Senate floor for consideration.8/29/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Education
    6 voted YES 2 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
    ActionDateDescription
    Introduced12/06/2010
    12/06/2010Read first time. To print.
    12/07/2010From printer. May be heard in committee January 6.
    1/24/2011Referred to Com. on ED.
    3/08/2011From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.
    3/09/2011Re-referred to Com. on ED.
    select this voteVote3/30/2011Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
    3/31/2011From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (March 30).
    4/04/2011Read second time and amended.
    4/05/2011Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
    5/04/2011In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
    5/27/2011From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (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.
    6/01/2011Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 47. Noes 25. Page 1752.)
    6/01/2011In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
    currently selectedAssembly Vote on Passage6/01/2011AB 5 FUENTES Assembly Third Reading
    6/08/2011Referred to Com. on ED.
    6/09/2011From 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 voteVote6/15/2011Do pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.
    6/21/2011From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 15).
    6/22/2011Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
    6/23/2011Measure version as amended on June 22 corrected.
    8/15/2011In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
    8/13/2012In committee: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
    select this voteVote8/13/2012Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.
    select this voteVote8/16/2012Be re-referred to the Committee on Rules.
    select this voteVote8/16/2012Do pass as amended.
    8/20/2012From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 16).
    8/21/2012Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
    8/24/2012Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
    8/27/2012Read second time. Ordered to third reading. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on ED. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) Re-referred to Com. on ED.
    select this voteVote8/29/2012From Committee: That the measure be returned to the Senate floor for consideration.
    8/30/2012From committee: Return to Senate floor for consideration. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (August 29). Ordered to third reading.

    Total contributions given to Assemblymembers from interest groups that…

    $0
    $3,500
    $3,500
    227 times as much
    $795,150
    $795,150

    opposed this bill

    2 Organizations Supported and 2 Opposed; See Which Ones

    Organizations that took a position on
    An Act to Amend Sections 33050, 52055.740, 52055.770, and 52055.780 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 44661.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Sections 44660, 44661, 44662, and 44664 Of, and to Add Sections 44662.1, 44662.5, 44662.6,44662.7, and 44662.8 To, the Education Code, and to Amend Section 17581.6 of the Government Code, Relating to Teachers, and Making an Appropriation Therefor.: AB 5 FUENTES Assembly Third Reading

    2 organizations supported this bill

    Public Advocates
    Assembly Committee on Education (2011, March 14). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved June 5, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    State Superintendent of Public Instruction
    Senate Committee on Education (2011, June 13). Senate Committee Analysis. Retrieved June 5, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

    2 organizations opposed this bill

    California Federation of Teachers
    Assembly Committee on Education (2011, March 14). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved June 5, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    United Teachers Los Angeles
    Assembly Committee on Education (2011, March 29). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved June 5, 2012, 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$0$2,000
    Luis AlejoDCA-28$0$15,400
    Michael AllenDCA-7$0$55,200
    Tom AmmianoDCA-13$0$20,500
    Toni AtkinsDCA-76$0$13,900
    Jim BeallDCA-24$0$57,550
    Bill BerryhillRCA-26$0$0
    Marty BlockDCA-78$0$74,250
    Bob BlumenfieldDCA-40$0$14,150
    Susan BonillaDCA-11$0$22,050
    Steven BradfordDCA-51$0$16,100
    Julia BrownleyDCA-41$0$0
    Joan BuchananDCA-15$0$22,600
    Betsy ButlerDCA-53$0$20,600
    Charles CalderonDCA-58$0$0
    Nora CamposDCA-23$0$11,400
    Wilmer Amina CarterDCA-62$0$0
    Gilbert CedilloDCA-45$0$0
    Wesley ChesbroDCA-1$0$17,400
    Connie ConwayRCA-34$0$0
    Paul CookRCA-65$0$0
    Mike DavisDCA-48$0$0
    Roger DickinsonDCA-9$0$17,000
    Tim DonnellyRCA-59$0$0
    Mike EngDCA-49$0$0
    Mike FeuerDCA-42$0$0
    Nathan FletcherRCA-75$0$0
    Paul FongDCA-22$0$52,500
    Felipe FuentesDCA-39$0$0
    Warren FurutaniDCA-55$0$0
    Beth GainesRCA-4$0$0
    Cathleen GalgianiDCA-17$0$48,900
    Martin GarrickRCA-74$0$0
    Mike GattoDCA-43$0$18,600
    Rich GordonDCA-21$0$13,250
    Jeff GorellRCA-37$0$0
    Shannon GroveRCA-32$0$0
    Curt HagmanRCA-60$0$0
    Linda HaldermanRCA-29$0$0
    Isadore HallDCA-52$0$15,600
    Diane HarkeyRCA-73$0$0
    Mary HayashiDCA-18$0$0
    Roger HernandezDCA-57$0$16,150
    Jerry HillDCA-19$0$6,000
    Alyson HuberDCA-10$0$0
    Ben HuesoDCA-79$0$11,400
    Jared HuffmanDCA-6$0$0
    Kevin JeffriesRCA-66$0$0
    Brian JonesRCA-77$0$0
    Steve KnightRCA-36$0$0
    Ricardo LaraDCA-50$0$19,600
    Dan LogueRCA-3$0$0
    Bonnie LowenthalDCA-54$0$500
    Fiona MaDCA-12$0$0
    Allan MansoorRCA-68$0$0
    Tony MendozaDCA-56$0$0
    Jeff MillerRCA-71$0$0
    Holly MitchellDCA-47$0$16,100
    Bill MonningDCA-27$0$28,000
    Mike MorrellRCA-63$0$0
    Brian NestandeRCA-64$0$0
    Jim NielsenRCA-2$0$0
    Chris NorbyRCA-72$0$1,500
    Kristin OlsenRCA-25$0$0
    Richard PanDCA-5$3,500$37,500
    Henry PereaDCA-31$0$0
    John PerezDCA-46$0$31,900
    Manuel PerezDCA-80$0$13,400
    Anthony PortantinoDCA-44$0$0
    Jim SilvaRCA-67$0$0
    Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$0$19,600
    Cameron SmythRCA-38$0$0
    Jose SolorioDCA-69$0$0
    Sandre SwansonDCA-16$0$0
    Norma TorresDCA-61$0$11,400
    David ValadaoRCA-30$0$0
    Don WagnerRCA-70$0$0
    Bob WieckowskiDCA-20$0$15,300
    Das WilliamsDCA-35$0$26,450
    Mariko YamadaDCA-8$0$11,400

    Add Data Filters:

    Legislator Filters
    Legislator Filters
    Show All
    NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
    That Supported
    $ From Interest Groups
    That Opposed
    Vote
    Katcho AchadjianRCA-33$0$2,000
    Luis AlejoDCA-28$0$15,400
    Michael AllenDCA-7$0$55,200
    Tom AmmianoDCA-13$0$20,500
    Toni AtkinsDCA-76$0$13,900
    Jim BeallDCA-24$0$57,550
    Bill BerryhillRCA-26$0$0
    Marty BlockDCA-78$0$74,250
    Bob BlumenfieldDCA-40$0$14,150
    Susan BonillaDCA-11$0$22,050
    Steven BradfordDCA-51$0$16,100
    Julia BrownleyDCA-41$0$0
    Joan BuchananDCA-15$0$22,600
    Betsy ButlerDCA-53$0$20,600
    Charles CalderonDCA-58$0$0
    Nora CamposDCA-23$0$11,400
    Wilmer Amina CarterDCA-62$0$0
    Gilbert CedilloDCA-45$0$0
    Wesley ChesbroDCA-1$0$17,400
    Connie ConwayRCA-34$0$0
    Paul CookRCA-65$0$0
    Mike DavisDCA-48$0$0
    Roger DickinsonDCA-9$0$17,000
    Tim DonnellyRCA-59$0$0
    Mike EngDCA-49$0$0
    Mike FeuerDCA-42$0$0
    Nathan FletcherRCA-75$0$0
    Paul FongDCA-22$0$52,500
    Felipe FuentesDCA-39$0$0
    Warren FurutaniDCA-55$0$0
    Beth GainesRCA-4$0$0
    Cathleen GalgianiDCA-17$0$48,900
    Martin GarrickRCA-74$0$0
    Mike GattoDCA-43$0$18,600
    Rich GordonDCA-21$0$13,250
    Jeff GorellRCA-37$0$0
    Shannon GroveRCA-32$0$0
    Curt HagmanRCA-60$0$0
    Linda HaldermanRCA-29$0$0
    Isadore HallDCA-52$0$15,600
    Diane HarkeyRCA-73$0$0
    Mary HayashiDCA-18$0$0
    Roger HernandezDCA-57$0$16,150
    Jerry HillDCA-19$0$6,000
    Alyson HuberDCA-10$0$0
    Ben HuesoDCA-79$0$11,400
    Jared HuffmanDCA-6$0$0
    Kevin JeffriesRCA-66$0$0
    Brian JonesRCA-77$0$0
    Steve KnightRCA-36$0$0
    Ricardo LaraDCA-50$0$19,600
    Dan LogueRCA-3$0$0
    Bonnie LowenthalDCA-54$0$500
    Fiona MaDCA-12$0$0
    Allan MansoorRCA-68$0$0
    Tony MendozaDCA-56$0$0
    Jeff MillerRCA-71$0$0
    Holly MitchellDCA-47$0$16,100
    Bill MonningDCA-27$0$28,000
    Mike MorrellRCA-63$0$0
    Brian NestandeRCA-64$0$0
    Jim NielsenRCA-2$0$0
    Chris NorbyRCA-72$0$1,500
    Kristin OlsenRCA-25$0$0
    Richard PanDCA-5$3,500$37,500
    Henry PereaDCA-31$0$0
    John PerezDCA-46$0$31,900
    Manuel PerezDCA-80$0$13,400
    Anthony PortantinoDCA-44$0$0
    Jim SilvaRCA-67$0$0
    Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$0$19,600
    Cameron SmythRCA-38$0$0
    Jose SolorioDCA-69$0$0
    Sandre SwansonDCA-16$0$0
    Norma TorresDCA-61$0$11,400
    David ValadaoRCA-30$0$0
    Don WagnerRCA-70$0$0
    Bob WieckowskiDCA-20$0$15,300
    Das WilliamsDCA-35$0$26,450
    Mariko YamadaDCA-8$0$11,400

    Interest Groups that supported this bill

    $ Donated
    Public official (elected or appointed)$3,500
    Consumer groups$0

    Interest Groups that opposed this bill

    $ Donated
    Teachers unions$795,150
    Loading…
    Date Range of Contributions
    Enter a custom date range