BILL ANALYSIS SB 1322 Page 1 SENATE THIRD READING SB 1322 (Lowenthal) As Amended July 14, 2008 Majority vote SENATE VOTE : 24-16 EDUCATION 7-3 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Mullin, Brownley, Coto, |Ayes:|Leno, Caballero, Davis, | | |Eng, Hancock, Karnette, | |DeSaulnier, Furutani, | | |Solorio | |Huffman, Karnette, | | | | |Krekorian, Lieu, Ma, | | | | |Nava, Solorio | | | | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Garrick, Huff, Nakanishi |Nays:|Walters, Emmerson, La | | | | |Malfa, Nakanishi, Sharon | | | | |Runner | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Deletes various references to communism in the context of using school property and the dismissal of school district, community college, and public employees. This measure also clarifies exemptions regarding communism as part of the required oath of allegiance for public officers and employees, and offers an alternative oath of allegiance, as specified. Specifically, this bill: 1)Repeals the requirement that a group or organization provide a written statement to the school district specifying that it will not use school district property to overthrow the government of the United States (U.S.) or of the state and that it will not conduct a communist action, as specified. This measure, instead, authorizes the school district to require the group or organization to provide information it deems reasonable to determine the group will not use school property to overthrow the government. 2)Repeals statute authorizing the dismissal or suspension of school district, community college, and public employees for being members of the Communist Party, as specified. 3)Clarifies that public employees (excluding elected or SB 1322 Page 2 appointed officials) or applicants seeking public employment are permitted to decline to take and subscribe to the oath required under the state constitution due to religious beliefs that conflict with his/her ability to take the oath without reservation, and instead shall take an alternative oath, as specified, provided that he/she is willing and able to uphold the U.S. and state constitutions. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor absorbable costs, likely less than $100,000 in General Fund Proposition 98 funds, to school districts to establish a process to review information provided by a group or organization seeking to use district property. These costs may be offset due to the savings of repealing current statute that requires school districts to ensure that a group or organization has submitted a written statement pledging not to overthrow the government in applying to use district property. COMMENTS : According to the author, references to communism in statute are antiquated and the threat of a communist takeover no longer exists. Moreover, the author contends that this bill is about protecting constitutional freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom of political affiliation, and the freedom not to testify against oneself. This bill does not diminish current law with regard to the dismissal of school, community college and public employees for advocating, or belonging to a group that advocates the overthrow of the government. Moreover, this bill does not affect current law that prohibits a teacher from advocating or teaching communism with the intent to indoctrinate or to inculcate in the mind of any pupil a preference for communism. While California joins other states in providing for the dismissal of teachers who advocate the overthrow of the government, California is the only state that provides for the dismissal of a teacher for being a member of the Communist Party. Current law includes a cross-reference to health and welfare benefits provisions as a reason for suspension and notice of dismissal for permanent school employees. Those health and welfare benefits provisions do not reference any possible violations. It appears that the cross-reference is outdated and irrelevant to the suspension and dismissal of school employees. This bill deletes this cross-reference and those changes should be considered technical clean-up. SB 1322 Page 3 This bill would delete the requirement for a person who intends to use school property on behalf of an organization to deliver a signed statement, signed under penalty of perjury, that the organization is not a Communist action or Communist front organization, or does not, to the best of the person's knowledge, advocate the overthrow of the government of the U.S. or of the State of California by force, violence, or other unlawful means. The bill would instead permit local school boards to require the furnishing of information as it deems necessary to determine that the use of school property for which application is made would not violate the provisions set forth in the Civic Center Act. This bill would allow public employees, except elected or appointed officials, to decline to take the loyalty oath based on religious beliefs that conflict with the employee's ability to sign the oath "without mental reservation," provided that the employee's objection to the oath is not related to his or her willingness and ability to uphold the Constitution and other laws of the State of California and/or willingness and ability to complete the duties of employment for which he or she is being considered. A public employee who declines to take the loyalty oath is instead required to take and subscribe to an alternative oath, which has deleted portions of the existing oath but affirms the employee's willingness to uphold the constitution and the laws of the U.S. and the State of California and to faithfully discharge the duties of his or her employment. These proposed changes to the loyalty oath address two recent cases within the CSU system in which instructors who were members of the Quaker religion were denied employment because the oath conflicted with their religious conviction to avoid violence. In one case, Marianne Kearney-Brown was fired from her position at Cal State East Bay when she inserted the word "non-violently" before signing her oath so that it read that she would "non-violently support and defend the Constitution of the United States?." She was told by the CSU that adding the word "non-violently" was inconsistent with the oath and that she would be terminated unless she signed the oath unaltered. The University of California allows employees to attach personal statements to the oath to indicate religious beliefs. SB 1322 Page 4 Analysis Prepared by : Irene Wan / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0006018