Children's Rights

LOS ANGELES – California Attorney General Kamala D. Harris today unveiled the first state-wide statistics on California’s truancy crisis which reveal that, last year alone, 1 million elementary school students were truant and 250,000 elementary school students missed 18 or more school days at a cost of $1.4 billion in lost funds to California school districts.

These findings are part of a report, In School and On Track, issued today by Attorney General Harris in Los Angeles where statewide education, public policy and law enforcement leaders were convened to discuss this crisis and identify concrete solutions.

“The California Constitution guarantees every child the right to an education, yet we are failing our youngest children, as early as kindergarten,” Attorney General Harris said. “These are children as young as five years old who are out of school, falling behind, and too many of them never catch up. This crisis is not only crippling for our economy, it is a basic threat to public safety.  It’s time for accountability and to craft real solutions at every level - from parents to school districts, to law enforcement - to solve this problem.”

According to the report, elementary school truancy is at the root of the state’s chronic criminal justice problems. According to the report, missing large amounts of school is one of the strongest predictors of dropping-out, even more so than suspensions or test scores. Annually, dropouts cost California taxpayers an estimated $46.4 billion in incarceration, lost productivity and lost taxes.

Information broken down by school district and county is available here: https://oag.ca.gov/truancy and: https://oag.ca.gov/truancy/ch1

Key Findings from In School and On Track:

• In California last year, 1 million elementary school students were truant and 250,000 students missed 18 or more school days.
• In some California elementary schools, 92% of students were truant last year.
• California school districts are losing $1.4 billion in funding due to truant students.

Solutions from In School and On Track:

• California must create a statewide system to collect student attendance records.
• School districts must improve the way truant students are monitored.
• School administrators must meet with parents or guardians immediately when a child is truant.
• Law enforcement must focus on early, positive intervention to empower parents and students.
• Parents must be held accountable, including prosecution in the most severe cases.

Attorney General Harris was joined at the symposium by: Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey, California Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson, Compton City Mayor Aja Brown, Dr. Robert Ross, President & CEO of the California Endowment, Tom Saenz, President and General Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and Hedy Chang, Director of Attendance Works.

The California Attorney General’s office will issue this report annually.  The office’s Civil Rights Enforcement Section spent 7 months researching this crisis and convening stakeholders to devise solutions.

As the District Attorney of San Francisco, Attorney General Harris started a citywide truancy initiative in 2006.  In the course of investigating factors contributing to the city’s violent crime rate, she found that 94% of San Francisco homicide victims under age 25 were high school dropouts.  Then-District Attorney Harris formed a partnership with the school district to inform parents that they had a legal duty to ensure that their children attended school, provide parents of chronically truant students with wrap-around services and school-based mediation, and prosecute parents in the most severe cases where other interventions did not work.

Over a two-year period, then-District Attorney Harris’s initiative reduced truancy among elementary students in San Francisco by 23%, according to the San Francisco Unified School District.  The initiative also served as a model for SB 1317 (Leno), which defined “chronic truancy” for the first time under state law and established the initiative’s model of combining meaningful services with smart sanctions in the California Penal Code.  The bill was sponsored by then-District Attorney Harris and was enacted in law in 2010.

The report is available in its entirety online at: https://oag.ca.gov/truancy

SAN FRANCISCO --- Attorney General Kamala D. Harris today warned Californians about potential scams targeting young immigrants seeking to participate in the federal government’s recently launched Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

Beginning today, certain young immigrants who were brought to United States as children and meet several key guidelines may request consideration of deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal, and, as a result, may be eligible for work authorization. To learn more about the Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, please visit the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ website: http://www.uscis.gov.

While the California Attorney General’s Office has not yet received any citizen complaints of scams directly related to this new program, immigrants are often the target of consumer scams and should be vigilant in seeking assistance related to the Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

To combat the threat of scams, Attorney General Harris has provided the following information and tips as eligible immigrants begin to apply for consideration:

If you are seeking help from an attorney:

• Is the person offering legal services a lawyer licensed by the State Bar of California? You can check out an attorney online at http://www.calbar.ca.gov/ or by calling 1-800-843-9053.

• If you cannot afford a private attorney, the Board of Immigration Appeals provides a list of attorneys who provide immigration services either for free or for very little cost. This list is available online at http://www.justice.gov/eoir/probono/states.htm. You can also contact your local legal aid office. For a referral, visit www.lsc.gov and click on the Find Legal Assistance tab.

If you are seeking help from an immigration consultant:

• Immigration consultants are required to register with the California Secretary of State’s Office, and to post a $50,000 bond. You can check out an Immigration Consultant online at http://www.sos.ca.gov/business/sf/bond_search/ or by calling 1-916-653-3984.

• It is against the law for an immigration consultant to give legal advice. An immigration consultant can only give you non-legal help, such as translating your answers to questions on U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services forms.

• Get a written contract signed and dated by the immigration consultant. Make sure the contract lists the full name and contact information for the immigration consultant, the services you were promised and how much you have agreed to pay. The contract must be written in both English and your language. You have the right to cancel the contract within 72 hours of signing the contract. You must cancel the contract in writing. Give only copies of original documents to the immigration consultant; keep your originals in a safe place.

If you have a complaint against an Immigration Consultant, please contact the California Attorney General’s Office. You can file a complaint online at https://oag.ca.gov/contact/consumer-complaint-against-business-or-company or by mailing your complaint to Office of the Attorney General, Public Inquiry Unit, P.O. Box 944255, Sacramento, CA 94244-2550.

CALEXICO -- The California Department of Justice is asking for help in locating the family members of a child found wandering the streets in Mexicali, Mexico.

Michael Anthony Perez Hernandez is a 5-year old Hispanic male, 3’ 6” in height, 40 pounds, with brown hair and black eyes. The child was found by a Hispanic female adult in May 2011, in the downtown area of Mexicali. The child was dropped off at Social Services in Mexicali (DIF). DIF has been trying to identify and contact the child’s parents.

On March 22, 2012, DIF, through the San Diego, Children Welfare Services asked the Foreign Prosecutions and Law Enforcement Unit (FPLEU) within the Justice Department to assist in locating the child’s family. Authorities believe the child is from the Imperial Valley/Calexico area, since he has described local landmarks. The child identified his parents as Jorge Perez and Evelyn Hernandez, grandparents as Angela and Juan, and claimed to have 4 siblings. Michael only speaks Spanish.

The child is not currently listed in the California Missing and Unidentified Persons System.

If anyone has information regarding Michael Anthony Perez Hernandez or his family members, please contact FPLEU Special Agents Guillermo Auyon and San Diego County Child Welfare Specialist Francisco Llerandi or at (858) 514-6911.

The FPLEU assists state and local law enforcement agencies in the location and prosecution of suspects who are Mexican nationals accused of committing violent crimes in California and flee to Mexico to avoid arrest and prosecution in California. Additionally, the Department of Justice is the point of contact in cases arising under the Hague Convention on the civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Child Abduction Unit has designated the FPLEU as the law enforcement point of contact for all Hague cases. In this capacity, FPLEU is also responsible for handling all child recoveries and returns.

The child’s photo is also attached to the online version of this release at www.oag.ca.gov.

During this National Week of Action on School Discipline, I encourage local and state policymakers to consider the range of alternatives to suspension and expulsion. We need to hold kids accountable and help them learn from their mistakes, but also keep them in school and on course to graduate. As a career prosecutor, I know that frequent use of out-of-school suspension for non-violent offenses can set the stage for the type of chronic truancy that leads to students dropping out of school and becoming victims of crime.

That is why I am pleased to recognize this National Week of Action on School Discipline from October 1-8 in California and across the United States.

SACRAMENTO -- Attorney General Kamala D. Harris announced today that George Samuel Bronk, 23, of Citrus Heights, was sentenced on Friday to more than four years in state prison for stalking women on the social networking site Facebook.

Bronk plead guilty in Sacramento Superior Court to seven felonies, including computer intrusion, false impersonation and possession of child pornography. Bronk received four years, eight months in state prison and will have to register as a sex offender.

"For all of the conveniences the Internet offers, it has also opened a new frontier for crime. Cyber-predators, like Mr. Bronk, must be held accountable for their criminal activities,' Attorney General Harris said. 'Let this be an example for all those who will stoop to steal other people's identities.'

From December 2009 through September 2010, Bronk accessed e-mail accounts and Facebook pages of people in 17 states, as well as residents of England. He essentially found answers to the women’s e-mail security questions in information they had posted on their Facebook sites.

Bronk searched the victim’s “sent mail” folder for nude or semi-nude photographs and videos, which he often sent to the victim’s entire e-mail address book. He also gained access to some victims’ Facebook accounts by clicking the “Forgot Your Password?” link and asking for a new password to be sent to the victim's e-mail account, which he now controlled. In many cases, he posted the photographs to victims’ Facebook pages and to other Internet sites and made comments on the Facebook sites of friends.

Superior Court Judge Lawrence Brown rejected a defense request for probation and sentenced Bronk to state prison. Judge Brown sentenced Bronk to four years in state prison for the crimes of computer intrusion and false impersonation and then added an additional consecutive term of eight months for Bronk's possession of child pornography.

The investigation began after one victim contacted the Connecticut State Police, and the agency then contacted the California Highway Patrol because the suspect appeared to be operating here. The CHP requested the Attorney General's assistance.

On the hard drive of Bronk’s desktop computer, which was confiscated from his Citrus Heights home during a search in September, investigators found more than 170 files containing explicit photographs of women, including a film actress, whose e-mail accounts he had commandeered. Finding victims, however, proved a challenge. CHP and Attorney General agents were able to use location tagging information embedded on the photographs on Bronk’s hard drive to assist in identifying victims, and e-mailed 3,200 questionnaires to potential victims asking them to come forward.

Some 46 victims did, including one who described Bronk’s actions as “virtual rape.”

OAKLAND – Continuing his fight to ensure the safety of equipment used by children, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today filed a lawsuit against several companies involved in manufacturing children’s bounce houses because some of the inflatable structures contain unsafe amounts of lead.

Testing done by the Center for the Environmental Health and the Attorney General’s office found that some of the vinyl in the bounce houses contains lead levels that violate both federal and state regulations.

“Kids at birthday parties can spend hours playing in bounce houses,” Brown said. “The goal of our lawsuit is to eliminate any chance they will be exposed to lead while they’re jumping around having a good time.”

Bounce houses are large inflatable structures designed for children to play in and on. Facilities that feature indoor inflatables are popular sites for children’s parties, serving millions of children a year. Companies also rent inflatables for use at children’s parties.

In February and March 2010, the Attorney General’s office received notices from the Center for Environmental Health alleging that its testing showed parts of some bounce houses were contaminated with high levels of lead, ranging from 5,000 parts per million (ppm) to 29,000 ppm. Federal limits on lead in children’s products are 90 ppm for painted surfaces and 300 ppm for all other parts.

Today’s lawsuit is intended to force these companies to stop using lead-containing vinyl immediately and to cease selling the lead-containing products. In addition, the action is intended to warn purchasers of these products, and require party places and rental companies to post warnings.

The main exposure pathway from the bounce house to the child is hand-to-mouth. Lead is transferred from the vinyl to a child’s hand during play and then to the mouth.

There is no safe exposure to lead. The tested levels of lead are not high enough by themselves to cause acute health problems, but some people, especially children, who are exposed to lead from a variety of sources can suffer health problems. For that reason, it’s important to eliminate sources of lead whenever possible.

Companies named in the lawsuit include:

Bay Area Jump
Cutting Edge Creations
Funtastic Factory, known as einflatables.com
Magic Jump
Leisure Activities Co.
Thrillworks
The Inflatable Store
Jump for Fun, Inc.
Jump for Fun National, Inc.

In the past year, Brown has initiated several enforcement actions against manufacturers and retailers for lead in products designed for children.

In July, Brown reached a settlement with artificial turf manufacturers to lower lead levels in turf fields and playgrounds. In June, Brown demanded that Rainbow and 5-7-9 stores remove from shelves jewelry with parts containing as much as 97% lead.

Earlier this year, Target removed teddy bears from its stores after Brown notified the company that lead was found in the product. In November 2009, Brown warned several retailers, including Walmart, Sears and Walgreens, to remove several products designed for children that were found to contain excessive levels of lead.

A copy of today’s complaint is attached.

OAKLAND – Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced a settlement with Sottera, one of the country’s largest electronic cigarette producers, to prevent the company from targeting minors and claiming that electronic cigarettes are a safe alternative to smoking.

"Electronic cigarette companies have targeted minors with fruit-flavored products and misleading claims that their products are safe,' Brown said. 'This settlement will stop Sottera from marketing these dangerous and addictive products to kids.”

Brown and Sottera reached the settlement without litigation based on Sottera’s willingness to adopt measures that address Brown’s concerns about the dangers of its electronic cigarettes. In January this year, Brown filed suit against the nation’s other leading e-cigarette retailer, Smoking Everywhere. That lawsuit is proceeding in Alameda County Superior Court.

Electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes, are battery-operated devices with nicotine cartridges designed to look and feel like conventional cigarettes. Instead of actual smoke, e-cigarettes produce a vapor from the nicotine cartridge that is inhaled by the user. Sottera and other electronic cigarette makers have claimed in advertisements and other marketing materials that the e-cigarettes have no carcinogens, no tar, no second-hand smoke, and are therefore safe.

However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined that electronic cigarettes contain a variety of dangerous chemicals, including nicotine, carcinogens such as nitrosamines and, in at least one case, diethylene glycol, commonly known as antifreeze.

The products are often marketed with advertisements, and flavors like strawberry, chocolate, mint, banana and cookies-and-cream, that are designed to appeal to a youthful target audience.

Today’s settlement prohibits Sottera from marketing to minors and from making false or misleading claims about electronic cigarettes. Specifically, the company has agreed that it will not:

• Sell electronic cigarettes to minors. Its website will be age-restricted, and a customer will need to provide a government ID before making a purchase. Retail products will be behind a counter. Any advertising will note the age restriction.
• Sell flavored electronic cigarette cartridges, such as strawberry, mint or bubblegum, that could appeal to minors.
• Advertise its product as a smoking cessation device unless the FDA approves it as such.
• Sell cartridges that contain vitamins unless the company obtains competent and reliable scientific evidence to support an implied health claim.
• Claim that the product is safer than cigarettes, contains no tobacco, no tar, no carcinogens or no second-hand smoke unless there is competent reliable scientific evidence to support the claims.

Sottera also agreed to adopt and implement quality control standards for its products to preclude the presence of harmful substances. The company will regularly be subject to independent audits.

Sottera will also provide a Proposition 65 warning that its products contain nicotine, a chemical known by the State of California to cause birth defects or reproductive harm. The warning will include additional information about risks associated with nicotine, including that it is addictive and toxic if swallowed. The warning will appear on product packaging, Sottera’s website and at retail sites.

Sottera will also pay $85,000 in penalties and fees.

A copy of the consent judgment is attached.

OAKLAND – Continuing his fight to reduce children’s exposure to lead, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced a settlement that requires two of the largest makers and installers of artificial turf to eliminate nearly all lead from their products.

“Because schools, public parks and daycare centers use artificial turf, it’s critical that we minimize the amount of lead it contains,” Brown said. “Today’s agreement will get the lead out of artificial turf in playgrounds and ball fields around the state.”

The settlement requires Georgia-based Beaulieu, LLC, the country’s largest supplier of artificial turf to retailers, and Field Turf, USA, the nation’s largest maker and installer of artificial turf fields, to reformulate their products to reduce lead levels to negligible amounts.

The agreement follows a landmark settlement last year with AstroTurf, LLC. Collectively, the three companies control most of the artificial turf market, and their settlements with Brown’s office establish the nation’s first enforceable standards applicable to lead in artificial turf.

Brown brought the case in 2008 against these companies for excessive lead levels after testing by the Center for Environmental Health found high concentrations of lead in their products. Brown’s office confirmed these findings in independent tests.

Today’s settlement requires Beaulieu and FieldTurf to change their products so that they contain less than 50 parts per million lead. Lab results found some artificial turf products with more than 5,000 parts per million, which is more than 10 times state and federal guidelines for content in children’s products. Lead is added to the products to keep colors vibrant.

There is no safe exposure to lead. In lengthy or high exposures, it is toxic to many organs and tissues including the heart, bones, intestines and kidneys. Since excessive exposure can interfere with development of the nervous system, it is particularly dangerous in children and can cause permanent learning and behavior disorders.

Lead in artificial turf usually enters the human body hand-to-mouth. Children playing on it get lead onto their hands and stick them into their mouths. Hand washing is a good way of reducing exposure.

In addition to reformulating their products, Beaulieu agreed to pay for wipe-testing of products in California daycare facilities, schools and playgrounds that were purchased after October 2004. FieldTurf took action in 2003 to reduce lead in its turf products. This settlement requires it to replace turf fields installed in California before November 2003 at a discount if they test high for lead, and also to reduce the lead content of its new products.

The Los Angeles City Attorney and Solano County District Attorney joined Brown in the case against the three companies. AstroTurf paid $170,000 in penalties, grants and fees, and agreed to improve its products. Beaulieu will pay $285,000 and FieldTurf will pay $212,500.

In the past year, Brown has initiated several enforcement actions against manufacturers and retailers for lead in products designed for children.

In June, Brown demanded that Rainbow and 5-7-9 stores remove from their shelves jewelry with parts containing as much as 97% lead. Earlier this year, Target removed teddy bears from its stores after Brown notified the company that lead was found in the bears. In November 2009, Brown warned several retailers, including Walmart, Sears and Walgreens, to remove from their store shelves several products designed for children found to contain excessive levels of lead.

Copies of the artificial turf settlements are attached.

OAKLAND — Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today issued a consumer alert warning of a “serious health hazard” after he demanded that retail stores Rainbow and 5-7-9 remove from their shelves jewelry with parts containing as much as 97% lead, a potentially fatal health hazard, especially for young children.

“This jewelry represents a serious health hazard,” Brown said, “and it is especially dangerous if a child gets a hold of it and puts it in his or her mouth. Some of these bangles are almost solid lead. The jewelry must be banished from retailers’ shelves once and for all.”

Some pieces of the lead-infested jewelry were labeled “KIDS” and one piece was marked “lead free” although its clasp contained more than 80% lead.

There is no safe level of lead exposure. In 2006, a four-year-old Minnesota boy died after he swallowed a pendant from jewelry that was more than 90% lead, and it became stuck in his intestinal tract.

In a letter to the stores’ corporate parent, Rainbow Apparel, Brown said, “Some of the jewelry had components that would be highly toxic, and potentially lethal, if ingested, and all of it contains sufficient lead to contribute to long-term health risks.”

California law bans the sale of jewelry that fails to comply with strict limits on the amount of lead it contains. The law was the result of a 2006 settlement of a lawsuit brought by the Attorney General and two environmental groups, Center of Environmental Health and As You Sow.

In that settlement, Rainbow and other retailers agreed to stop selling jewelry containing more than traces of lead. But four times in a little more than a year, the Attorney General has sent notices of violation to Rainbow for breaking the law and the terms of the settlement by selling jewelry made of lead.

Using a fund created in the 2006 settlement, the Center for Environmental Health monitors the stores. In May, it purchased 16 items containing lead from Rainbow stores in Northern California. Fifteen of the pieces contained more than 50% lead. One was 97% lead, and one labeled “KIDS” and “lead free” had a clasp that contained 81% lead. It’s all inexpensive costume jewelry made in China.

Brown’s letter to Rainbow Apparel follows:

June 24, 2010

RE: NOTICE OF VIOLATION to Rainbow Apparel of America, Inc.

This is a Notice of Violation to Rainbow Apparel of America, Inc., Rainbow Apparel Distribution Center Corp., A.I.J.J Enterprises, Inc., and The New 5-7-9 and Beyond, Inc. (collectively, “Rainbow Parties”). I am writing to you about jewelry purchased at Rainbow and 5-7-9 stores in northern California that exceeds the lead standards established in a consent judgment that applies to the Rainbow Parties, and that violates California Health and Safety Code section 25214.2(b)(3). This letter constitutes a Notice of Violation pursuant to Section 4.2 of the consent judgment. A copy of the consent judgment is available on our web site, at http://ag.ca.gov/prop65/pdfs/amendedConsent.pdf.

Using a grant from the Jewelry Testing Fund created under the consent judgment, the Center for Environmental Health purchased sixteen different pieces of jewelry with excess lead at your stores. Most of the pieces contained plated metal components with more than 80 percent lead, and two of the pieces had more than 95 percent lead. The consent judgment prohibits plated metal components with more than six percent lead. (§ 3.2.2.1.) One of the violations is for a plastic faux leather bracelet with 955 parts per million lead, which is nearly five times above the standard of 200 ppm. (§ 3.2.2.3.) Similarly troubling is the fact that one of the necklaces is labeled “lead free” even though its pendant contains 80 percent lead, and several of the pieces are marked “KIDS” below the bar code.

Enclosed with this letter is a table that lists the reference number for each piece of jewelry, a description of the jewelry, the date and location where the jewelry was purchased, the component with lead, and the lead level. Photographs of each piece of jewelry and the test results also are enclosed. We will provide additional documentation from the lab upon request.

This is the fourth notice of violation for illegal jewelry we have sent the Rainbow Parties in little over a year. Previously we sent notices of violation on May 22, 2009, October 5, 2009, and January 29, 2010. Each time the company has responded that it shares the Attorney General’s concern regarding the sale of jewelry with excess lead, but each time more jewelry is discovered that violates the consent judgment and California’s ban on lead-containing jewelry. We understand that the Rainbow Parties have instructed their vendors to provide compliant jewelry, and after each notice of violation it has addressed the violation with the vendors involved. But clearly that is not enough. Some of the jewelry at issue here has components that would be highly toxic, and potentially lethal, if ingested, and all of it contains sufficient lead to contribute to long-term health risks. Moreover, labeling jewelry as “lead free” when it contains a component with 80 percent lead raises additional concerns about false and misleading advertising. The company must do more to stop selling jewelry that is potentially dangerous and that violates the law.

We therefore request, in addition to responding to this notice under section 4.2.3 of the consent judgment, that you and your client meet with our office to discuss what steps the company will take to ensure that it stops selling jewelry with excess lead. Please contact me to schedule a meeting. Further, in your written response to the notice of violation, we ask that you provide specific data about the amount of the each kind of jewelry offered for sale, sold, and removed from shelves in California stores.

Sincerely,

EDMUND G. BROWN JR.
Attorney General

Photos of some of the pieces of jewelry found to be in violation are attached.

OAKLAND – Following nearly five years of court battles, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed today to grant the request of California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to review a state law prohibiting the sale or rental of violent video games to children.

Brown petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case last year after California’s ban was struck down in federal court. The case is expected to be heard by the high court later this year.

“It is time to allow California’s common-sense law to go into effect and help parents protect their children from violent video games,” Brown said.

California’s petition for a writ of certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in May 2009 on behalf of the state of California. The case stems from a 2005 California law that requires violent video games to be labeled with an “18”, prohibits the sale or rental of these games to minors, and authorizes fines of up to $1,000 for each violation.

The Video Software Dealers Association (now part of the Entertainment Merchants Association) filed suit in federal court to block the law before it could go into effect.

On August 6, 2007, the U.S. District Court for Northern California invalidated California’s law. Brown immediately appealed the ruling. On February 20, 2009, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling.

Brown’s petition asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up this case and overturn the appellate court decision.

The petition argued that violent material in video games should be subject to the same flexible legal standard the courts have applied to limitations on sexually explicit material sold to children – that it is lawful for the state to determine that some content is harmful to children.

Currently, states may regulate the sale of sexually explicit magazines to children, but their authority to place similar limits on the sale of extremely violent video games is in dispute.

The U.S. Supreme Court has never addressed the question of whether extremely violent material sold to children can be treated the same as sexually explicit material. Brown’s petition asked the Court to resolve this question and hold that states can place reasonable restrictions on the distribution of extremely violent material to children.

A copy of Brown’s petition, filed last May, is attached.