Leno bill requires anti-theft software

by Brian Leubitz

Gov. Brown signed Sen. Leno’s SB 962 today addressing the growing epidemic of smartphone theft in California. SB 962 requires all smartphones sold in California to come pre-equipped with theft-deterring technological solutions to render the devices useless if stolen. The bill is the first of its kind in the nation prompting every consumer to enable a kill switch as the default setting during the initial setup of a new smartphone. Sen. Leno then went full Colbert in his assesment of the bill:

“California has just put smartphone thieves on notice,” said Senator Leno, D-San Francisco. “Starting next year, all smartphones sold in California, and most likely every other state in the union, will come equipped with theft deterrent technology when they purchase new phones. Our efforts will effectively wipe out the incentive to steal smartphones and curb this crime of convenience, which is fueling street crime and violence within our communities.”

On a more serious side, this bill, in some ways, is just legislating what has been happening already. However, many lower end phones may not have seen this feature for several years. It isn’t any huge issue to add it at this point, but this makes it the law in the state.  And because this is California, phone makers will just end up making all phones comply with this law.

This was quite a controversial bill, but ultimately, Leno and SF DA George Gascón built a coalition that could get this law passed. It is a big step in not only protecting property, but also encouraging public safety in general.

Measure would bring discretion back to sentencing

by Brian Leubitz

At the height of the war on drugs, while Nancy Reagan was leading the charge to “Just Say No”, the federal government and most states passed some harsh legislation punishing drug offenses. That worked to crowd our prisons, but hasn’t really changed much in the fight against illegal narcotics. Some of the laws were blatantly racist, and have already been removed. Other reforms are pending, with the notable example of the Attorney General’s strongly symbolic speech in San Francisco.

Three weeks after AG Holder announced the nation’s plan to scale back prison sentences for low-level drug crimes, the California Assembly has passed legislation authored by Senator Mark Leno that reforms California’s drug sentencing laws for simple possession. SB 649 allows counties to significantly reduce incarceration costs by giving prosecutors the flexibility to charge low-level, non-violent drug offenses as misdemeanors or felonies (known as a wobbler). The bill, which passed the Assembly with a bipartisan vote, also gives judges discretion to deem a non-violent drug possession offense to be either a misdemeanor or felony after consideration of the offense and the defendant’s record.

“We know we can reduce crime by offering low-level offenders rehabilitation and the opportunity to successfully reenter their communities, but we are currently doing the opposite,” said Senator Leno, D-San Francisco. “We give non-violent drug offenders long terms, offer them no treatment while they’re incarcerated, and then release them back into the community with few job prospects or options to receive an education. SB 649 gives local governments the flexibility to choose reduced penalties so that they can reinvest in proven alternatives that benefit minor offenders and reserve limited jail space for serious criminals.”

If signed by the governor, SB 649, the Local Control in Sentencing Act, will significantly reduce jail spending and allow local governments to dedicate resources to probation, drug treatment and mental health services that have proven most effective in reducing crime. It will also help law enforcement rededicate resources to more serious offenders. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates reducing penalties for drug possession will save counties about $159 million annually.

This legislation is a good, common sense start to drug sentencing. It gives both prosecutors and judges some discretion over sentencing, and allows them to take in context for those decisions. And when you add in the context of the prison overcrowding crisis, some common sense is very helpful.

California Disclose ACT grows grassroots network

by Brian Leubitz

I don’t ordinarily post updates on every petition on legislation. There are just too many of them. However, the online and offline petitions for the California DISCLOSE Act are worthy of a mention.

On SignOn.org, MoveOn’s online petition site, three petitions already have over 53,000 signatures. Here are the links, where you can add your own name if you are so inclined:

Russ Feingold’s Progressives United Petition: Over 35K signatures

Clean Money Campaign’s petition: Over 16K signatures

Pat Johnstone, of Marin OFA and other grassroots fame: Nearly 1K signatures and nearly 500

This is in addition to the hard copy petitions that Clean Money Campaign and other volunteers have been gathering. If you were at the CDP convention over the last few years, you would have seen some of those petitions going around. By this point, the signature totals on those are probably enormous.

The California DISCLOSE Act is a simple proposal to require political funders to announce who they really are in political advertisements. It won’t stop anybody from spending gobs of cash on an initiative, or setting up an Independent Expenditure committee to promote or attack legislative candidates. However, it will force them to take ownership and responsibility for the words that they speak.

SB 52 would require clear disclosure of political funding

by Brian Leubitz

In a state like California, big political campaigns tend to come down to the ads. Yes, field and grassroots outreach makes a huge difference, but a huge onslaught of money can kill a good ballot measure or campaign before you can really do the grassroots part of the campaign.

And yet, money can fly in from parts unknown and make a huge difference in the course of a campaign. See, for example, the huge sums of money dropped in from Maine, Arizona or some other place that we have yet to determine on Prop 32.

Unfortunately, we can’t stop the cash avalanche, but the Clean Money campaign and their allies are working to pass the California DISCLOSE Act, SB 52. As you can see from the image to the right, the law would require clear disclosure of the true source of funds for any advertisements.  It will tell voters who is really funding propositions and Super PAC attack ads.

Here’s a brief explanation from the Clean Money Campaign (CMC):

SB 52 will stop special interests from hiding behind fake names like “Stop Hidden Taxes” or “Stop Special Interest Money Now”.  Political ads will be required to clearly show their three largest funders.  Committee websites will have to show their top ten major funders.

SB 52 will require these disclosures be displayed on the bottom one-third of the TV screen for a full six seconds at the start of ads, so people know who the funders from the beginning.  In fact, the funders must be displayed in a big white font on a solid black background.  No more fine print.

Authored by Senators Mark Leno and Jerry Hill and sponsored by the California Money Campaign, SB 52 will apply to ads for and against ballot measures, and to outside ads for and against candidates – including sham issue ads.  It will tell voters who is really funding propositions and Super PAC attack ads.

Now, SB 52 already has some pretty strong support in both chambers of the legislature, but because this would amend the Political Reform Act of 1974, a voter passed measure, a 2/3 vote of both chambers is necessary. So, the CMC is looking for a little bit of help.  If you’d like to see what you can do, they have a lot of information available at their website or if you’d like to go to the committee hearing tomorrow, you can RSVP on their website.

Looks to reduce costs, make safer communities

by Brian Leubitz

San Francisco has a strong record of trying to work to prioritize rehabilitation over retribution when it comes to sentencing. Sheriff Mike Hennessey, the current and prior DA, as well as a number of other elected leaders have tried to prioritize making our community safer. Sen. Leno also has a track record in the Legislature to prove that.

Senator Mark Leno has introduced new legislation that reforms California’s drug sentencing laws for simple possession. SB 649 allows counties to significantly reduce incarceration costs by giving prosecutors the flexibility to charge low-level, non-violent drug offenses as misdemeanors instead of felonies. The bill also gives judges discretion to deem a non-violent drug possession offense to be either a misdemeanor or felony after consideration of the offense and the defendant’s record. SB 649, which does not apply to anyone involved in selling, manufacturing or possessing drugs for sale, will help alleviate overcrowding in county jails, ease pressure on California’s court system and result in millions of dollars in annual savings for local governments.

“If we want safer communities, our collective goal for low-level drug offenders should be helping to ensure that they get the rehabilitation they need to successfully reenter their communities,” said Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco. “Instead, we sentence them to long terms, offer them no treatment while incarcerated and release them back into our communities with few job prospects.  This proposal gives prosecutors the option to reduce penalties so counties can reinvest in proven alternatives that would benefit minor offenders and save limited jail space for serious criminals.”

In addition to providing greater opportunity for post-release success, Sen. Leno hopes to also use the opportunity to reduce spending on jails and prisons. The LAO has estimated that reducing jail time for simple drug possession offenses could save hundreds of millions of dollars over the next few years. If the rehabilitation services are provided smoothly, this has the potential of being a win-win for the state.

However, given the history of this kind of legislation in the past, look for strong resistance as the bill proceeds through the Legislature.

Sen. Mark Leno’s bill would lower vote requirement for tax increases to 55%

by Brian Leubitz

The lowering of the vote threshold for local taxes has been an early subject of conversation since the Democratic supermajority appeared on the horizon. Sen. Mark Leno’s bill was introduced in early December to do just that.

Today, George Skelton, joins the call to do just that:

Gov. Jerry Brown wants to help inner-city schools at the expense of suburbanites. But there must be a better way to assist the disadvantaged than to trigger class warfare.

And there is. It is to give school districts a better opportunity to raise their own tax revenue.

That could involve reducing the voter threshold needed for levying parcel taxes from two-thirds to 55%. … California needs all types of school reform, including how we generate money for classrooms – without starting an education civil war.

The idea is certainly getting a lot of attention, but it seems anything but certain that Sen. Leno will be able to muster the 2/3 of both houses to get the measure to the ballot. Both Gov. Brown and the legislative leaders are a bit worried about putting anything else on the statewide ballot that smells of tax increase after the success of Prop 30. But, in the end, the measure just evens out taxes with bond measures and allows communities the right to self-govern.

It just seems like common sense to allow communities to choose their own tax rates.