Existing law establishes the California Environmental Protection Agency and the Natural Resources Agency as agencies in the state government. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, generally requires that all meetings of a state body be open and public. This bill would require that each department, board, and commission of the Natural Resources Agency, except as specified, and each department, board, and office of the California Environmental Protection Agency Web cast all onsite public meetings, in a manner that enables listeners and viewers to ask questions and provide public comment by telephone or electronic communication commensurate with those attending the meeting. The bill would require the agencies to make the recording of a Web cast available online for no less than 3 years for subsequent viewing by interested members of the public.
Existing law prohibits a law enforcement official, as defined, from detaining an individual on the basis of a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement hold after that individual becomes eligible for release from custody, unless, at the time that the individual becomes eligible for release from custody, certain conditions are met, including, among other things, that the continued detention of the individual on the basis of the immigration hold would not violate any federal, state, or local law, or local policy, and that the individual has been convicted of, or arrested for, specified crimes. This bill would instead require a law enforcement official to detain an individual on the basis of a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement hold for up to 48 hours, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, after that individual becomes eligible for release from custody if that individual has been convicted of, or arrested for, specified crimes and if the continued detention of the individual on the basis of the immigration hold would not violate any federal law. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement officers, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require a local agency that violates these provisions to pay a fine of $100,000, to be collected by the Attorney General, and would allow the Attorney General to commence a civil action to enforce the fine. The bill would require proceeds of the fine to be deposited in the Restitution Fund, a continuously appropriated fund. By increasing deposits to be made to a continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Existing law, the Brady-Jared Teen Driver Safety Act of 1997, provides for the issuance of a driver's license to an applicant who is at least 16 years of age but under 18 years of age pursuant to the provisional licensing program. Under existing law, a person licensed under this program is prohibited, during the first 12 months after issuance of a provisional license, from driving during the hours of 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. or from transporting passengers who are under 20 years of age, subject to specified exceptions. Under existing law, a violation of these provisions is an infraction. This bill would prohibit a person with a provisional license, from engaging in those prohibited activities until the provisional period ends when the person reaches 18 years of age. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing provisions of the California Constitution establish the University of California as a public trust under the administration of the Regents of the University of California. The University of California system includes 10 campuses, which are located in Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, Los Angeles, Merced, Riverside, San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Barbara, and Santa Cruz. This bill would require the University of California to obtain certain information regarding alternative investments from each private equity fund, venture fund, hedge fund, or absolute return fund in which the University of California provides or has provided funds for investment.
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various healing arts licensees by various boards, as defined, within the Department of Consumer Affairs, including the Board of Psychology. Under existing law, until January 1, 2017, the board is vested with the power to enforce the Psychology Licensing Law, and consists of 9 members, 4 of whom are public members and 5 of whom are licensed psychologists. Existing law requires the board to post information on its licensees, as specified, including, among others, psychological assistants. Existing law specifies that a quorum of the board requires 5 members. This bill would, on and after July 1, 2017, increase the number of members on the board to 11, and would increase the number of members for a quorum to 6 members. The bill would require the 2 new members to meet certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that one of the new members is licensed as a psychologist and qualified to practice behavior analysis, as defined. This bill would establish the Behavior Analyst Act. The bill would require a person to apply for and obtain a license from the board prior to engaging in the practice of behavior analysis, as defined, either as a behavior analyst or an assistant behavior analyst. The bill would require these applicants to, among other things, meet certain educational and training requirements, and submit fingerprints for both a state and federal criminal background check. The bill would require an assistant behavior analyst applicant to provide proof to the board of ongoing supervision by a licensed behavior analyst or a licensed psychologist who is qualified to practice behavior analysis, as specified. The bill would provide that those licenses expire 2 years after the date of issuance and would authorize the renewal of unexpired licenses if certain requirements are met, including the completion of specified continuing education. The bill would also require an applicant to certify, under penalty of perjury, that he or she is in compliance with that continuing education requirement. By expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would also require a behavior analysis technician, as defined, who practices under the direction and supervision of a licensed behavior analyst, a licensed assistant behavior analyst, or a licensed psychologist who is qualified to practice behavior analysis, to submit, among other things, an application subject to board approval, fingerprints for a state and federal criminal background check, and payment of an annual application fee. This bill would, until January 1, 2021, vest the board with the power to enforce the Behavior Analyst Act, and would require the board to, among other things, post information regarding licensed behavior analysts and licensed assistant behavior analysts, as specified. The bill would, until January 1, 2021, create the Behavior Analyst Committee within the jurisdiction of the board, and would require the committee to be comprised of 5 members who shall be appointed as specified. The bill would authorize the committee to make recommendations to the board regarding the regulation of the practice of behavior analysis in the state. This bill would define certain terms for these purposes. The bill would require the board to conduct disciplinary hearings, as specified. The bill, on and after July 1, 2018, would make it unlawful to, among other things, practice behavior analysis without being licensed by the board, except as specified. This bill would make a licensee or health care facility, as defined, that fails or refuses to comply with an authorized client request or court order for the medical records of a client subject to a specified civil penalty, except as specified. The bill would also make a licensee or health care facility with multiple violations of those court orders subject to a crime. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make a violation of any of these provisions a misdemeanor punishable by 6 months in the county jail or a fine not to exceed $2,500, or by both imprisonment and a fine. By creating a new crime, this bill would result in a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Cannella Environmental Farming Act of 1995, requires the Department of Food and Agriculture to establish and oversee an environmental farming program to provide incentives to farmers whose practices promote the well-being of ecosystems, air quality, and wildlife and their habitat. This bill would require the department, upon an appropriation of moneys therefor, to establish a grant program to fund voluntary projects that increase carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas emissions reductions on working lands, as defined. The bill would require the department, in consultation with the Department of Conservation, the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, the State Air Resources Board, and the Department of Water Resources, to develop and adopt project solicitation and evaluation guidelines for the program, as specified.
Existing law authorizes the governing board of a community college district to admit to any community college under its jurisdiction as a special part-time or full-time student in any session or term any student who is eligible to attend community college pursuant to authorization given by the governing board of a school district, as specified. Existing law requires the governing board of the community college district to assign a low enrollment priority to the special part-time or full-time students, except for a student attending a middle college high school if the student is seeking to enroll in a community college course that is required for the student's middle college high school program. This bill would also except from the low enrollment priority requirement a student attending an early college high school if the student is seeking to enroll in a community college course that is required for the student's early college high school program. Existing law, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, authorizes a community college district to include high school pupils who attend a community college as special part-time or full-time students in its report of full-time equivalent students only if those pupils are enrolled in community college classes that meet certain criteria, including that if the class is a physical education class, no more than 10% of its enrollment may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students. Existing law prohibits a community college district from receiving state apportionments for special part-time and full-time students enrolled in physical education courses in excess of 5% of the community college district's total reported full-time equivalent enrollment of special part-time and full-time students. This bill would, until January 1, 2021, provide that a student attending a middle college high school or early college high school, who is enrolled in a community college physical education course that is required for the student's middle college or early college high school program, is not to be considered as a special part-time or full-time student for purposes of the 10% and 5% limits described above. Existing law requires the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to prepare and submit to the Department of Finance and the Legislature, on or before March 1 of each year, a report on the amount of full-time equivalent students (FTES) claimed by each community college district for special part-time and special full-time students for the preceding academic year in specified class categories. This bill would, until January 1, 2021, additionally require that report to include the amount of FTES claimed by each community college district for students attending a middle college high school or early college high school for the preceding academic year in degree-applicable physical education courses.
Existing property tax law requires the county auditor, in each fiscal year, to allocate property tax revenue to local jurisdictions in accordance with specified formulas and procedures, and generally provides that each jurisdiction shall be allocated an amount equal to the total of the amount of revenue allocated to that jurisdiction in the prior fiscal year, subject to certain modifications, and that jurisdiction's portion of the annual tax increment, as defined. Existing property tax law also requires that, for purposes of determining property tax revenue allocations in each county for the 1992–93 and 1993–94 fiscal years, the amounts of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to the county, cities, and special districts be reduced in accordance with certain formulas. It requires that the revenues not allocated to the county, cities, and special districts as a result of these reductions be transferred to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in that county for allocation to school districts, community college districts, and the county office of education. Beginning with the 2004–05 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, existing law requires that each city, county, and city and county receive additional property tax revenues in the form of a vehicle license fee adjustment amount, as defined, from a vehicle license fee property tax compensation fund that exists in each county treasury. Existing law requires that these additional allocations be funded from ad valorem property tax revenues otherwise required to be allocated to educational entities. This bill would modify these reduction and transfer provisions, for the 2015–16 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, by providing for a vehicle license fee adjustment amount calculated on the basis of changes in assessed valuation. By imposing additional duties upon local tax officials with respect to the allocation of ad valorem property tax revenues, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires each county to provide cash assistance and other social services to needy families through the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program using federal Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) block grant program, state, and county funds. Existing law specifies the amounts of cash aid to be paid each month to CalWORKs recipients. Existing law establishes the Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) program, under which counties provide payments to foster care providers on behalf of qualified children in foster care. Under existing law, a child who is placed in the approved home of a relative is eligible for AFDC-FC if he or she is eligible for federal financial participation in the AFDC-FC payment, as specified. Existing law establishes the Approved Relative Caregiver Funding Option Program in counties choosing to participate, for the purpose of making the amount paid to relative caregivers for the in-home care of children placed with them who are ineligible for AFDC-FC payments equal to the amount paid on behalf of children who are eligible for AFDC-FC payments. This bill would revise provisions of the Approved Relative Caregiver Funding Option Program to, among other things, authorize a relative caregiver to receive payments on behalf of a child pursuant to the program, regardless of whether the child resides, or will be residing, outside of the participating county pursuant to his or her placement. The bill would establish procedures for the distribution of payments to relative caregivers, as specified. The bill would also require that an infant supplement, as specified, be paid under the CalWORKs program and the Approved Relative Caregiver Funding Option Program to a teen parent who is placed with his or her child in the home of a relative caregiver and is the subject of a voluntary placement agreement or subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, as provided. Under existing law, if the county welfare department places a child who is in temporary custody or subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court with a relative or nonrelative extended family member, as defined, the county is required to evaluate and approve or deny the home for purposes of AFDC-FC eligibility. This bill would instead require the county, immediately following the placement of a child in the home of a relative, to initiate an application for CalWORKs on behalf of the child using a shortened CalWORKs application and simplified CalWORKs eligibility standards. The bill would require the county, concurrently with initiating the application for CalWORKs, to evaluate and approve or deny the home for purposes of AFDC-FC eligibility, and, if the child is found to be ineligible for AFDC-FC, would require the placing agency to initiate and complete the applications for, and determine eligibility for, the Approved Relative Caregiver Funding Option Program, as specified, and screen the child for eligibility for the federal Supplemental Security Income program. The bill would also require the county social worker or eligibility worker to explain to the relative, either in person or by telephone, the eligibility requirements and benefit amounts for the AFDC-FC and CalWORKs programs, and the Approved Relative Caregiver Funding Option Program if the county has opted into the program, as well as any actions the relative could take to affect the child's eligibility for those programs. By requiring county employees to provide these services, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires that every youth who is in foster care and nearing emancipation be screened by the county for potential eligibility for the federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. This bill would require that every youth who is in foster care and has been determined to be ineligible for AFDC-FC benefits be screened by the county for potential eligibility for the SSI program. By imposing this additional duty on counties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would instead provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of implementing the bill. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law requires the State Department of Public Health, in cooperation with the State Department of Education, to establish a Public School Health Center Support Program to assist health centers in schools and school districts. Existing law establishes a grant program within the Public School Health Center Support Program to provide technical assistance and funding for the expansion, renovation, and retrofitting of existing school health centers and the development of new school health centers. These provisions also provide funding for sustainability grants in amounts between $25,000 and $125,000. Existing law authorizes school health centers to provide physical, mental, and oral health assessments, screenings, and services. This bill would rename the program the School-Based Health and Education Partnership Program. The bill would instead provide funding for the expansion and renovation of existing school health centers. The bill would change the amount of the sustainability grants that are available pursuant to the program to between $50,000 and $100,000, but would make those grants available on a one-time basis and would revise the purposes for which they may be used. The bill would also authorize population health grants in amounts between $50,000 and $125,000 for a funding period of up to 3 years, as specified. The bill would authorize school health centers to provide alcohol and substance abuse assessments, screening, and services. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 124174.6 of the Health and Safety Code proposed by AB 766 that would become operative if this bill and AB 766 are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2016, and this bill is chaptered last.
Under existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, the State Department of Developmental Services is authorized to contract with regional centers to provide services and supports to individuals with developmental disabilities. Existing law requires an entity that receives payments between $250,000 and $500,000 per year from one or more regional centers to obtain an independent audit or review of its financial statements and requires an entity that receives payments that are equal to or more than $500,000 per year to obtain an independent audit. Existing law exempts payments made using usual and customary rates for services provided by regional centers from these requirements. This bill would instead require an entity to obtain an independent audit or review report of its financial statements relating to payments made by regional centers if it receives payments between $500,000 and $2,000,000 from one or more regional centers and would authorize these entities to apply for, and require the regional center to grant, a 2-year exemption from this requirement if the regional center does not find issues in the audit or review that have an impact on regional center services. The bill would also require an entity to obtain an independent audit if it receives payments that are equal to or more than $2,000,000 and would authorize these entities to apply for, and require the regional center to grant, a 2-year exemption from the audit requirement if the audit resulted in an unmodified opinion, an unmodified opinion with additional communication, or a qualified opinion with issues that are not material and pervasive. The bill would require a regional center to notify the department of any exemption it grants to an entity that receives a qualified opinion report. The bill would also exempt social security benefit payments from these requirements.
Under existing law, a person is guilty of sexual battery, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail or in the state prison for 2, 3, or 4 years, if he or she touches an intimate part of another person for the purpose of sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse, while the victim is unconscious of the nature of the act because the perpetrator fraudulently represented that the touching served a professional purpose. Existing law makes the crime punishable by 2, 3, or 4 years in the state prison if committed against a minor by a person with a prior conviction for sexual battery. This bill would expand the crime of sexual battery to apply to a person who performs professional services that entail having access to another person's body, who touches an intimate part of the that person's body while performing those services and the touching was against the person's will and for the purpose of sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law defines rape as an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person not the spouse of the perpetrator under any of several circumstances. Existing law also defines the crimes of sodomy, oral copulation, and sexual penetration. This bill would expand the definitions of each of those crimes to include when any of those acts are performed against a victim's will by a professional whose services entail having access to the victim's body, if the conduct is performed by the professional while performing those services. By expanding the scope of these crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
