BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1252
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1252 (Corbett)
As Amended May 19, 2010
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :22-8
JUDICIARY 7-2 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Feuer, Brownley, Evans, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Bradford, |
| |Huffman, Jones, Monning, | |Charles Calderon, Coto, |
| |Saldana | |Davis, De Leon, Gatto, |
| | | |Hall, Skinner, Solorio, |
| | | |Torlakson, Torrico |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Hagman, Knight |Nays:|Conway, Harkey, Miller, |
| | | |Nielsen, Norby |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Makes miscellaneous technical and conforming changes
to housing discrimination law. Specifically, this bill :
1)Clarifies that admission preferences based on age, imposed in
connection with a federally-approved housing program, do not
constitute age discrimination in housing.
2)Makes technical revisions to cross reference "source of
income" where it already is among the list of classes
protected for the purpose of clarity and consistency.
3)Increases the maximum civil penalties that may be assessed for
a violation of the FEHA to $16,000, $37,500, and $65,000 for a
person's first, second, and third violations, respectively.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
analysis, any costs to the Department of Fair Employment and
Housing (DFEH), which enforces the FEHA and other civil rights
laws, would be minor and absorbable.
COMMENTS : This bill is sponsored by the Department of Fair
Employment and Housing (DFEH), the state agency responsible for
enforcing the FEHA and other civil rights laws. The FEHA
SB 1252
Page 2
prohibits employment and housing discrimination based on the
protected classes of race, color, religion, sex, sexual
orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial
status, source of income, or disability. The FEHA further
provides that it is a civil right to be able to pursue and
maintain housing or employment without facing discrimination.
According to a work-sharing agreement between the DFEH and the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the FEHA
must remain substantially similar to the Fair Housing Amendments
Act (FHAA) in order for the DFEH to receive complaint referrals
and funding from HUD. According to the DFEH, for the current
contract period the DFEH anticipates receiving over $3 million
dollars from HUD, which it believes could be at risk if this
bill is not enacted.
The FEHA declares that it is unlawful to discriminate on the
basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national
origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, and
disability.
In 1999, housing discrimination on the basis of a person's
"source of income" was added to the statute. However, the list
of protected characteristics in related FEHA housing provisions
was not similarly amended. SB 1252 would address that
inconsistency by adding "source of income" to the list of
protected classes in Government Code Sections 12920, 12921 and
12955.8. This change is technical and non-substantive in
nature, and the author has added intent language to underscore
that point. Nevertheless, two groups have filed opposition
seeking to have that intent language codified, as discussed
below.
State law provides that if a person is found to have engaged in
unlawful discriminatory practices, a civil penalty may be
assessed. Currently, the FEHA states that a civil penalty of up
to $10,000 may be assessed against a violator for a first time
offense. If it is the second violation in five years, a maximum
civil penalty may be imposed of $25,000. If it is the third
violation in seven years, a maximum civil penalty of $50,000 may
be imposed. Similar caps under federal law have recently
increased to $16,000, $37,500, and $65,000, for a person's
first, second, and third violations, respectively. This bill
would keep the FEHA substantially equal to the FHAA by
SB 1252
Page 3
conforming the FEHA caps to federal law.
The FEHA prohibits housing discrimination based on age, with the
exception of housing accommodations specifically designed for
senior citizens. However, FHAA does not expressly prohibit age
discrimination in housing. Instead, the FHAA prohibits the
refusal to sell or rent "?a dwelling to any person because of
race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national
origin." This discrepancy becomes problematic because some
federal housing programs have renter eligibility criteria
requiring that at least one member of the household be 62 years
old or older. Other members of the household may be any age,
and the provider may not refuse to rent to a family with minor
children, as long as one household member is at least 62. This
type of requirement violates California law, which only provides
an exemption for senior housing accommodations to make housing
selections based on a minimum age requirement. Therefore, a
failure to comply with the federal regulation will result in a
loss of funding for housing providers, but compliance with the
federal regulation will result in violation of state law and a
potential DFEH complaint.
SB 1252 would clarify that admission preferences based on age,
imposed in connection with a federally-approved housing program,
do not constitute age discrimination in housing. This
clarification would allow for both FHAA and FEHA to operate
without conflict.
Analysis Prepared by : Kevin G. Baker / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
FN: 0005704