HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04172012 - SD.10RECOMMENDATION(S):
CONSIDER a position of "Watch" on AB 1831 (Dickinson): Local Government: Hiring
Practices, as recommended by the Legislation Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact to the County from adopting a position of "Watch" on this bill.
BACKGROUND:
Bill Summary :
AB 1831 would prohibit a local agency from inquiring into or considering the criminal
history of an applicant or including any inquiry about criminal history on any
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 04/17/2012 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
Contact: L. DeLaney,
925-335-1097
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on
the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: April 17, 2012
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
SD.10
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Legislation Committee
Date:April 17, 2012
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Consider a Position of "Watch" on AB 1831 (Dickinson): Local Government: Hiring Practices
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
initial employment application. The bill would authorize a local agency to consider an
applicant's criminal history after the applicant's qualifications have been screened and the
agency has determined the applicant meets the minimum employment requirements, as
stated in any notice issued for the position. AB 1831 would not apply to a position for
which a local agency is otherwise required by law to conduct a criminal history
background check.
Background:
AB 1831 would “ban the box,” which would remove the standard question that requires
the applicant to disclose his or her criminal history from a local agency initial
employment application. The 2011 Public Safety Realignment (as enacted by AB 109,
AB 117 and additional 2011 trailer bills) provides that state inmates convicted of a
non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offense are supervised post-release by county
Probation departments. In addition, low-level felony offenders with no prior violent,
serious or sex offense are supervised under county custody in lieu of the state Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Proponents argue that employment of eligible people
with a conviction history can assist the success of Realignment at the local level, as
studies have shown that stable employment significantly lowers recidivism and promotes
public safety. Proponents are also concerned that otherwise qualified individuals are often
discouraged from applying for work in the public and private sectors because of a
conviction history inquiry on the initial application.
The National League of Cities’ Institute for Youth, Education & Families and the
National Employment Law Project (NELP) partnered together and released a strategy
guide called "Cities Pave the Way: Promising Reentry Policies that Promote Local Hiring
of People with Criminal Records." According to the guide, over the past five years, cities
nationwide have reshaped their municipal hiring policies to give opportunities to
individuals released from prison who are looking for a job. According to the guide the
most promising local policies that promote the hiring of people with criminal records
were assembled. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley was quoted as saying, “Implementing
this new policy won’t be easy, but it’s the right thing to do…we cannot ask private
employers to consider hiring former prisoners unless the city practices what it preaches.”
According to the study, the following communities have banned the box: Alameda
County, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Francisco.
Current Law:
Under current law, employers must provide qualifications standards and other selection
criteria that are job-related and consistent with business necessary. During the hiring
process, employers are prohibited from seeking information about:
An arrest or detention that did not result in a conviction;
An arrest for which the individual is out on bail pending trial;
A copy of an applicant’s criminal records.
Candidates for peace officer positions are partially exempted from these protections, are
subject to additional criminal background checks, and can be denied employment based
on criminal background history.
Author’s Comments:
According to the author’s office, AB 1831 strives to reduce unnecessary barriers to
employment for the nearly seven million adult Californians with a conviction history
struggling to find work. Not only will this increase public safety, but it will also help fuel
a strong economic recovery. AB 1831 will align city and county hiring practices with the
policy of the State Personnel Board by removing any inquiry into a conviction history on
an initial job application and delaying any
background check until the employer has determined that the applicant’s qualifications
meet the job requirements.
The provision does not apply to positions for which the agency is required by law to
conduct a criminal background check, such as positions in law enforcement, positions
working with children, the elderly or disabled, and other sensitive positions.
With this bill, California’s cities and counties will take an important step toward
becoming model employers, leading the way for the private sector to allow people with a
conviction history to compete fairly for employment without compromising safety and
security on the job.
Staff Comments:
AB 1831 would remove local discretion to decide whether or not to “ban the box” for the
initial round of the application process. This bill potentially increases costs to public
employers by mandating that employers wait until the second screening to ask about
criminal convictions.
The author's office have indicated their willingness to amend the portion of the bill that
relates to the exemption for positions required by law to have a criminal background
check. The Board may wish to consider supporting the
bill if it is amended to reflect that local agencies have different policies for which
positions are subject to background checks. This would allow local agencies the
flexibility to decide which positions should be subject to the “ban the box” policy on the
initial employment application.
Support-Opposition (as of 3/23/12):
Support:
National Employment Law Project (Sponsor)
California National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of California
Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of San Francisco Bay Area
“All Of Us Or None” (AOUON)
Legal Services for Prisoners With Children (San Francisco)
A New Way of Life Reentry Project (South Central Los Angeles)
The Legal Aid Society – Employment Law Center (San Francisco)
Rubicon Programs (East Bay)
Opposition:
Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA)
California State Sheriffs' Association
California Fire Chiefs Association (initial oppose position)
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Board does not adopt a position on this bill, there will be no official policy position
on which to advocate.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Supervisor Glover made a motion seconded by Supervisor Gioia to adopt a formal
position in support of AB 1831. The motion failed for a lack of majority. (AYES: III,
IV; NOES: I, V; ABSENT: II; ABSTAIN: None) ADOPTED a position of "Watch"
(i.e. monitor) AB 1831 by unanimous vote of the Supervisors present.
ATTACHMENTS
AB 1831 (Dickinson) Bill Text
CSAC Letter of Concern on AB 1831
california legislature—2011–12 regular session
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1831
1
2
Introduced by Assembly Member Dickinson
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Swanson)
February 22, 2012
1
2
An act to add Section 50085.3 to the Government Code, relating to
local government.
legislative counsel’s digest
AB 1831, as introduced, Dickinson. Local government: hiring
practices.
Existing law requires the hiring practices and promotional practices
of a local agency, as defined, to conform to the Federal Civil Rights
Act of 1964 and prohibits any local agency from, as a part of its hiring
practices or promotional practices, employing any educational
prerequisites or testing or evaluation methods which are not job-related
unless there is no adverse effect.
This bill would prohibit a local agency from inquiring into or
considering the criminal history of an applicant or including any inquiry
about criminal history on any initial employment application. The bill
would authorize a local agency to consider an applicant’s criminal
history after the applicant’s qualifications have been screened and the
agency has determined the applicant meets the minimum employment
requirements, as stated in any notice issued for the position. The bill
would not apply to a position for which a local agency is otherwise
required by law to conduct a criminal history background check.
The bill would also express a legislative finding and declaration that
reducing barriers to employment for people who have previously
offended, and decreasing unemployment in communities with
99
concentrated numbers of people who have previously offended, is a
matter of statewide concern, and that therefore, all cities and counties,
including charter cities and counties, would be subject to the provisions
of the bill.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares that reducing
barriers to employment for people who have previously offended,
and decreasing unemployment in communities with concentrated
numbers of people who have previously offended, is a matter of
statewide concern. Therefore, this act shall apply to all cities and
counties, including charter cities and charter counties. The
Legislature further finds and declares that, consistent with the
Criminal Justice Realignment Act of 2011 (Chapter 39 of the
Statutes of 2011), increasing employment opportunities for people
who have previously offended will reduce recidivism and improve
economic stability in our communities.
SEC. 2. Section 50085.3 is added to the Government Code, to
read:
50085.3. (a) A local agency shall not inquire into or consider
the criminal history of an applicant or include any inquiry about
criminal history on any initial employment application. A local
agency may consider an applicant’s criminal history after the
applicant’s qualifications have been screened and the agency has
determined the applicant meets the minimum employment
requirements, as stated in any notice issued for the position.
(b) This section shall not apply to a position for which a local
agency is otherwise required by law to conduct a criminal history
background check.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring that
a local agency conduct a criminal history background check.
O
99
— 2 —AB 1831
March 29, 2012
The Honorable Cameron Smyth
Chair, Assembly Local Government Committee
State Capitol, Room 4098
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: AB 1831 (Dickinson): Local government: hiring practices
As Introduced on 2/22/12 – CONCERNS
Set for Hearing April 11, 2012 – Assembly Local Government Committee
Dear Assembly Member Smyth,
On behalf of the California State Association of Counties (CSAC), I write to express our
concerns with AB 1831, by Assembly Member Dickinson. AB 1831 would prohibit a local
agency from inquiring about criminal history on an initial employment application. CSAC is
aware of four counties that either do not make such an inquiry or are modifying their
application process to remove the inquiry from their initial application. Because these four
counties have initiated this effort without a legislative mandate, they have been able to
design a process that addresses each county’s needs. Unfortunately, AB 1831 removes
that local discretion.
There are numerous positions and classifications within county employment for which full
background checks are completed, including sworn and non-sworn staff in the Sheriff’s
department, crime lab staff, social workers and staff in the child protective services, child
support, and elder abuse areas, and staff working in treasurer and tax collector functions.
In some counties, all prospective employees undergo a background check. We think it
would be impractical to amend AB 1831 with a list of every kind of position for which it
would be most efficient to continue to collect criminal history information at the first stage
of the application process, however we look forward to working with the author to
determine whether there is a way to achieve the goal of AB 1831 while preserving local
discretion over hiring practices.
Sincerely,
Eraina Ortega
Legislative Representative
cc: The Honorable Roger Dickinson, California State Assembly
Members and Consultant, Assembly Local Government Committee