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.

SB 1530 - An Act to Amend Sections 44932, 44936, 44939, 44940, and 44944 of the Education Code, Relating to School Employees.

School employees: dismissal, suspension, and leave of absence procedures. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
(1)Under existing law, a permanent school employee is prohibited from being dismissed, except for one or more of certain enumerated causes, including for immoral or unprofessional conduct and unsatisfactory performance. Upon a charging that there exists cause for the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee, existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to give notice to… More
(1)Under existing law, a permanent school employee is prohibited from being dismissed, except for one or more of certain enumerated causes, including for immoral or unprofessional conduct and unsatisfactory performance. Upon a charging that there exists cause for the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee, existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to give notice to the employee of its intention to dismiss or suspend the employee, as specified. Existing law prohibits the governing board of a school district from giving notice of dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee between May 15 and September 15 of any year.

This bill would include serious or egregious unprofessional conduct, as specified, as a ground for dismissal of a permanent school employee, and would except from the prohibition of giving notice to the employee between May 15 and September 15 proceedings where the charges involve specified offenses.

(2)Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to immediately suspend a permanent employee under specified conditions, including immoral conduct, and give the employee notice of the suspension, as specified.

This bill would include serious or egregious unprofessional conduct, as defined, within the conditions that a governing board may immediately suspend a permanent employee.

(3)Existing law provides that a certificated employee may be charged with a mandatory leave of absence offense for certain specified sex offenses or controlled substance offenses with the exception of marijuana, mescaline, peyote, or tetrahydrocannabinols. Existing law also provides that a certificated employee may be charged with an optional leave of absence offense for certain offenses, including controlled substance offenses, as specified, with the exception of marijuana, mescaline, peyote, or tetrahydrocannabinols. Existing law requires the governing board of a school district to immediately place a certificated employee on compulsory leave of absence if the employee is charged with a mandatory leave of absence offense.

This bill would remove marijuana, mescaline, peyote, and tetrahydrocannabinols as exceptions to the controlled substance offenses for which a certificated employee may be charged with a mandatory leave of absence offense or an optional leave of absence offense.

Because this bill would increase the number of employees subject to immediate placement on compulsory leave of absence, thereby increasing the duties of school districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(4)Existing law requires that a requested hearing on the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee be conducted by a Commission on Professional Competence, as specified, and provides that the decision of the commission is deemed to be the final decision of the governing board of a school district. Existing law prohibits testimony from being given and evidence from being introduced relating to matters that occurred more than 4 years prior to the filing of the notice, and prohibits a decision relating to the dismissal or suspension of an employee from being made based on charges or evidence relating to matters that occurred more than 4 years before the filing of the notice of charges for the dismissal or suspension of the employee.

This bill would, for hearings on the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee that involve certain sex offenses, controlled substance offenses, or child abuse offenses, as specified, require these hearings to be conducted solely by an administrative law judge of the Office of Administrative Hearings and would provide that the decision of the administrative law judge related to these specified offenses would be advisory, and require the final decision regarding the discipline of the employee to be determined by action of the governing board of the school district, as specified. The bill would require the governing board, before making its final determination, to allow the employee to submit a written statement or response or, at the election of the governing board, an oral statement concerning the disciplinary action, and to only consider the record produced during the hearing conducted by the administrative law judge, and would require the governing board’s final determination to be subject to review and appeal, as specified. The bill also would exempt hearings that involve these specified offenses from the prohibition on giving testimony and introducing evidence relating to matters that occurred more than 4 years before the date of the filing of the notice, and would, for hearings that involve the specified offenses, permit a decision relating to the dismissal or suspension of an employee to be made based on charges or evidence related to matters occurring more than 4 years before the date of the filing of the notice of charges for the dismissal or suspension of the employee.

(5)This bill also would make nonsubstantive and conforming changes to these provisions.

(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:
The bill was voted on by an Assembly committee on June 27, 2012. 
Senate Vote: On Passage

PASSED on May 29, 2012.

voted YES: 33 voted NO: 4
3 voted present/not voting

An Act to Amend Sections 44932, 44936, 44939, 44940, and 44944 of the Education Code, Relating to School Employees.

SB 1530 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
(1)Under existing law, a permanent school employee is prohibited from being dismissed, except for one or more of certain enumerated causes, including for immoral or unprofessional conduct and unsatisfactory performance. Upon a charging that there exists cause for the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee, existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to give notice to the employee of its intention to dismiss or suspend the employee, as specified. Existing law prohibits the governing board of a school district from giving notice of dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee between May 15 and September 15 of any year.

This bill would include serious or egregious unprofessional conduct, as specified, as a ground for dismissal of a permanent school employee, and would except from the prohibition of giving notice to the employee between May 15 and September 15 proceedings where the charges involve specified offenses.

(2)Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to immediately suspend a permanent employee under specified conditions, including immoral conduct, and give the employee notice of the … More
(1)Under existing law, a permanent school employee is prohibited from being dismissed, except for one or more of certain enumerated causes, including for immoral or unprofessional conduct and unsatisfactory performance. Upon a charging that there exists cause for the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee, existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to give notice to the employee of its intention to dismiss or suspend the employee, as specified. Existing law prohibits the governing board of a school district from giving notice of dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee between May 15 and September 15 of any year.

This bill would include serious or egregious unprofessional conduct, as specified, as a ground for dismissal of a permanent school employee, and would except from the prohibition of giving notice to the employee between May 15 and September 15 proceedings where the charges involve specified offenses.

(2)Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to immediately suspend a permanent employee under specified conditions, including immoral conduct, and give the employee notice of the suspension, as specified.

This bill would include serious or egregious unprofessional conduct, as defined, within the conditions that a governing board may immediately suspend a permanent employee.

(3)Existing law provides that a certificated employee may be charged with a mandatory leave of absence offense for certain specified sex offenses or controlled substance offenses with the exception of marijuana, mescaline, peyote, or tetrahydrocannabinols. Existing law also provides that a certificated employee may be charged with an optional leave of absence offense for certain offenses, including controlled substance offenses, as specified, with the exception of marijuana, mescaline, peyote, or tetrahydrocannabinols. Existing law requires the governing board of a school district to immediately place a certificated employee on compulsory leave of absence if the employee is charged with a mandatory leave of absence offense.

This bill would remove marijuana, mescaline, peyote, and tetrahydrocannabinols as exceptions to the controlled substance offenses for which a certificated employee may be charged with a mandatory leave of absence offense or an optional leave of absence offense.

Because this bill would increase the number of employees subject to immediate placement on compulsory leave of absence, thereby increasing the duties of school districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(4)Existing law requires that a requested hearing on the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee be conducted by a Commission on Professional Competence, as specified, and provides that the decision of the commission is deemed to be the final decision of the governing board of a school district. Existing law prohibits testimony from being given and evidence from being introduced relating to matters that occurred more than 4 years prior to the filing of the notice, and prohibits a decision relating to the dismissal or suspension of an employee from being made based on charges or evidence relating to matters that occurred more than 4 years before the filing of the notice of charges for the dismissal or suspension of the employee.

This bill would, for hearings on the dismissal or suspension of a permanent employee that involve certain sex offenses, controlled substance offenses, or child abuse offenses, as specified, require these hearings to be conducted solely by an administrative law judge of the Office of Administrative Hearings and would provide that the decision of the administrative law judge related to these specified offenses would be advisory, and require the final decision regarding the discipline of the employee to be determined by action of the governing board of the school district, as specified. The bill would require the governing board, before making its final determination, to allow the employee to submit a written statement or response or, at the election of the governing board, an oral statement concerning the disciplinary action, and to only consider the record produced during the hearing conducted by the administrative law judge, and would require the governing board’s final determination to be subject to review and appeal, as specified. The bill also would exempt hearings that involve these specified offenses from the prohibition on giving testimony and introducing evidence relating to matters that occurred more than 4 years before the date of the filing of the notice, and would, for hearings that involve the specified offenses, permit a decision relating to the dismissal or suspension of an employee to be made based on charges or evidence related to matters occurring more than 4 years before the date of the filing of the notice of charges for the dismissal or suspension of the employee.

(5)This bill also would make nonsubstantive and conforming changes to these provisions.

(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 44932, 44936, 44939, 44940, and 44944 of the Education Code, Relating to School Employees.
Author(s)
Alex Padilla
Co-Authors
    Subjects
    • School employees: dismissal, suspension, and leave of absence procedures
    Major Actions
    Introduced2/24/2012
    Referred to Committee
    Passed Senate Committee on Education4/18/2012
    Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations5/14/2012
    Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations5/24/2012
    Passed Senate5/29/2012
    Passed Senate5/29/2012
    Passed Senate5/29/2012
    Failed passage in Assembly Committee on Education6/27/2012
    Passed Assembly Committee on Education6/27/2012
    Bill History
    Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
    select this voteSenate Committee on EducationDo pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.4/18/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Education
    9 voted YES 0 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsPlaced on Appropriations Suspense file.5/14/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
    7 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsDo pass as amended.5/24/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
    5 voted YES 2 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenateSenate 3rd Reading SB1530 Padilla Amend By Huff Lay on Table5/29/2012This bill PASSED the Senate
    23 voted YES 14 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenateSenate 3rd Reading SB1530 Padilla Amend By Huff Lay on Table5/29/2012This bill PASSED the Senate
    23 voted YES 14 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
    currently selectedSenateSenate 3rd Reading SB1530 Padilla5/29/2012This bill PASSED the Senate
    33 voted YES 4 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssembly Committee on EducationDo pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.6/27/2012This motion DID NOT PASS the Assembly Committee on Education
    5 voted YES 2 voted NO 4 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssembly Committee on EducationSet first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.6/27/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Education
    11 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    ActionDateDescription
    Introduced2/24/2012
    2/24/2012Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
    2/26/2012From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 27.
    2/27/2012Read first time.
    3/22/2012Referred to Com. on ED.
    3/27/2012From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on ED.
    3/28/2012Set for hearing April 11.
    4/11/2012Hearing postponed by committee.
    4/12/2012Set for hearing April 18.
    select this voteVote4/18/2012Do pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.
    4/25/2012From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0. Page 3232.) (April 18).
    4/26/2012Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
    5/04/2012Set for hearing May 14.
    select this voteVote5/14/2012Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.
    5/14/2012Placed on APPR. suspense file.
    5/18/2012Set for hearing May 24.
    select this voteVote5/24/2012Do pass as amended.
    5/24/2012From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 3598.) (May 24).
    5/25/2012Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
    5/29/2012Amendments by Senator Huff tabled on motion of Senator Corbett. (Ayes 23. Noes 14. Page 3657.) Amendments by Senator Huff tabled on motion of Senator Corbett. (Ayes 23. Noes 14. Page 3657.) Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 33. Noes 4. Page 3665.) Ordered to the Assembly.
    select this voteSenate Vote on Passage5/29/2012Senate 3rd Reading SB1530 Padilla Amend By Huff Lay on Table
    select this voteSenate Vote on Passage5/29/2012Senate 3rd Reading SB1530 Padilla Amend By Huff Lay on Table
    currently selectedSenate Vote on Passage5/29/2012Senate 3rd Reading SB1530 Padilla
    5/30/2012In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
    6/18/2012Referred to Com. on ED.
    select this voteVote6/27/2012Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
    select this voteVote6/27/2012Set first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.
    6/27/2012Set, first hearing. Failed passage in committee. Reconsideration granted.

    Total contributions given to Senators from interest groups that…

    27 Organizations Supported and 7 Opposed; See Which Ones

    Organizations that took a position on
    An Act to Amend Sections 44932, 44936, 44939, 44940, and 44944 of the Education Code, Relating to School Employees.: Senate 3rd Reading SB1530 Padilla

    27 organizations supported this bill

    Alliance for a Better Community
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Association of California School Administrators
    Jim Sanders (2013, June 28). CA Democratic Lawmakers Kill Teacher Discipline Bill Union Opposed. Sacramento Bee. Retrieved July 5, 2013, from http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/06/ca-democratic-lawmakers-kill-teacher-discipline-bill-unions-opposed.html.
    Burbank Unified School District
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California Association of Suburban School Districts
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California School Boards Association
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Child Abuse Prevention Center
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Children Now
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    City of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    City of Santa Ana Police Department
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Crime Victims Action Alliance
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Crime Victims United of California
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Education Trust-West
    Senate Rules Committee (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Fresno Unified School District
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Humboldt County Office of Education
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Inyo County Office of Education
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Lake County Office of Education
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Los Angeles Unified School District
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Nury Martinez, Los Angeles School Board Member, District 6
    Senate Rules Committee (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Orange County Department of Education
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Partnership for Los Angeles Schools
    Senate Rules Committee (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Riverside County School Superintendents' Association
    Senate Rules Committee (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Riverside County Superintendent of Schools
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Tamar Galatzan, Los Angeles School Board Member
    Senate Rules Committee (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Tony Cardenas, Los Angeles City Councilman, 6th District
    Senate Rules Committee (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Visalia Unified School District
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Youth Policy Institute
    Senate Rules Committee (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

    7 organizations opposed this bill

    California Federation of Teachers
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California Labor Federation
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California School Employees Association
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    California Teachers Association
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Peace Officers Research Association of California
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
    Sacramento City Teachers Association
    SCTA (2013, July 2). Organizing Update: SB 1530 — Unfair Teacher Dismissal Bill — Rejected by Assembly Panel. Retrieved July 5, 2013, from SCTA.
    United Teachers Los Angeles
    (2012, May 25). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved August 6, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

    Need proof?

    View citations of support and opposition

    Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Senators in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2012.
    Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

    Contributions by Legislator

    Namesort iconPartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
    That Supported
    $ From Interest Groups
    That Opposed
    Vote
    Elaine AlquistDCA-13$0$10,450
    Joel AndersonRCA-36$6,000$37,525
    Tom BerryhillRCA-14$8,500$33,400
    Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
    Ron CalderonDCA-30$0$38,250
    Anthony CannellaRCA-12$3,000$27,050
    Ellen CorbettDCA-10$3,200$54,704
    Lou CorreaDCA-34$5,000$80,752
    Kevin De LeonDCA-22$8,650$128,181
    Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$6,310$91,454
    Bob DuttonRCA-31$1,000$30,300
    Bill EmmersonRCA-37$7,500$37,850
    Noreen EvansDCA-2$3,200$91,119
    Jean FullerRCA-18$4,000$15,000
    Ted GainesRCA-1$7,900$8,625
    Loni HancockDCA-9$7,000$115,405
    Tom HarmanRCA-35$5,550$22,600
    Ed HernandezDCA-24$12,614$99,806
    Bob HuffRCA-29$6,698$62,050
    Christine KehoeDCA-39$6,600$23,300
    Doug La MalfaRCA-4$150$5,000
    Mark LenoDCA-3$5,350$89,549
    Ted LieuDCA-28$60,021$171,692
    Carol LiuDCA-21$7,000$45,695
    Alan LowenthalDCA-27$0$0
    Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$4,000$35,850
    Alex PadillaDCA-20$6,000$64,700
    Fran PavleyDCA-23$2,750$193,750
    Curren PriceDCA-26$8,200$45,200
    Michael RubioDCA-16$6,000$60,892
    Sharon RunnerRCA-17$0$9,305
    Joe SimitianDCA-11$4,000$16,500
    Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$5,800$139,250
    Tony StricklandRCA-19$8,000$20,500
    Juan VargasDCA-40$13,600$94,850
    Mimi WaltersRCA-33$4,000$1,000
    Lois WolkDCA-5$1,200$50,550
    Rod WrightDCA-25$5,500$76,400
    Mark WylandRCA-38$11,799$21,900
    Leland YeeDCA-8$2,200$81,800

    Add Data Filters:

    Legislator Filters
    Legislator Filters
    Show All
    NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
    That Supported
    $ From Interest Groups
    That Opposed
    Vote
    Elaine AlquistDCA-13$0$10,450
    Joel AndersonRCA-36$6,000$37,525
    Tom BerryhillRCA-14$8,500$33,400
    Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
    Ron CalderonDCA-30$0$38,250
    Anthony CannellaRCA-12$3,000$27,050
    Ellen CorbettDCA-10$3,200$54,704
    Lou CorreaDCA-34$5,000$80,752
    Kevin De LeonDCA-22$8,650$128,181
    Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$6,310$91,454
    Bob DuttonRCA-31$1,000$30,300
    Bill EmmersonRCA-37$7,500$37,850
    Noreen EvansDCA-2$3,200$91,119
    Jean FullerRCA-18$4,000$15,000
    Ted GainesRCA-1$7,900$8,625
    Loni HancockDCA-9$7,000$115,405
    Tom HarmanRCA-35$5,550$22,600
    Ed HernandezDCA-24$12,614$99,806
    Bob HuffRCA-29$6,698$62,050
    Christine KehoeDCA-39$6,600$23,300
    Doug La MalfaRCA-4$150$5,000
    Mark LenoDCA-3$5,350$89,549
    Ted LieuDCA-28$60,021$171,692
    Carol LiuDCA-21$7,000$45,695
    Alan LowenthalDCA-27$0$0
    Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$4,000$35,850
    Alex PadillaDCA-20$6,000$64,700
    Fran PavleyDCA-23$2,750$193,750
    Curren PriceDCA-26$8,200$45,200
    Michael RubioDCA-16$6,000$60,892
    Sharon RunnerRCA-17$0$9,305
    Joe SimitianDCA-11$4,000$16,500
    Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$5,800$139,250
    Tony StricklandRCA-19$8,000$20,500
    Juan VargasDCA-40$13,600$94,850
    Mimi WaltersRCA-33$4,000$1,000
    Lois WolkDCA-5$1,200$50,550
    Rod WrightDCA-25$5,500$76,400
    Mark WylandRCA-38$11,799$21,900
    Leland YeeDCA-8$2,200$81,800

    Interest Groups that supported this bill

    $ Donated
    Education$159,320
    Welfare & social work$34,500
    Municipal & county government organizations$21,900
    Public school teachers, administrators & officials$18,372
    Minority & ethnic groups$14,000
    Children's rights$6,100
    Public official (elected or appointed)$4,100

    Interest Groups that opposed this bill

    $ Donated
    Police & fire fighters unions and associations$1,108,000
    State & local government employee unions$707,723
    Teachers unions$344,330
    Labor unions$72,150
    Loading…
    Date Range of Contributions
    Enter a custom date range