Existing law, the California Lighting Efficiency and Toxics Reduction Act, prohibits a person from manufacturing for sale or selling in the state specified general purpose lights that contain levels of hazardous substances prohibited by the European Union pursuant to the RoHS Directive. This bill would require a manufacturer of household mercury-containing lamps, on or before April 1, 2013, individually or through a stewardship organization, to prepare and submit to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery for approval a household mercury-containing lamp stewardship plan to establish a recovery program for the management of end-of-life household mercury-containing lamps. The bill would define terms, including defining the term stewardship fee as an amount added to the retail purchase price of a mercury-containing household lamp. The bill would require the plan to include the payment of a stewardship fee at the point of sale and would specify a procedure for the department's approval of the amount of the stewardship fee. This bill would constitute a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIII A of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. The department would be required to review the plan and approve the plan within 90 days of receipt. The department would be authorized to recover the reasonable cost of the plan review by requiring the payment of a plan review fee and to expend the funds, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the costs of implementing this plan review. The bill would require the manufacturer or designated stewardship organization to implement a program consistent with a plan approved by the department. The department would be required to post on its Internet Web site a list of manufacturers for which the department has reviewed and approved a plan and to update the site, as specified. The bill would require a retailer that distributes or sells household mercury-containing lamps to consumers in the state to monitor the department's Internet Web site to determine if the sale of a manufacturer's mercury-containing lamp is listed as being in compliance. The bill would prohibit a manufacturer or retailer, on and after November 1, 2013, from selling or offering for sale a household mercury-containing lamp in the state unless the manufacturer is included on the above-described list, except as provided in a specified procedure. The bill would also require a retailer to add the stewardship fee to the retail purchase price of a household mercury-containing lamp, and remit the fee to the manufacturer or stewardship organization manufacturer. A retailer would also be required to document the stewardship fee as a separate line item on the customer's receipt, and to include specified information on that receipt. This bill would require, on or before July 1, 2014, and annually thereafter, a manufacturer or its designated stewardship organization to demonstrate to the department that it has achieved continuous meaningful improvement to the extent practicable in implementing the program, and the department would be required to direct a manufacturer or its designated stewardship organization to terminate the program implementing its plan if it finds that the program is not proportionately contributing to the packaging, transportation, and recycling of end-of-life household mercury-containing lamps in the state. The bill would also require a manufacturer or its designated stewardship organization, by July 1, 2014, and annually thereafter to submit a report to the department describing the program implementing the plan. The department would be required to review the annual report and issue a finding of whether the program is in compliance within 90 days of receipt. The bill would authorize the department to enforce the bill's provisions, including the imposition of administrative civil penalties and would make a statement of legislative intent regarding the application of state and federal antitrust laws.
Existing law establishes the Green Ribbon Science Panel and authorizes the panel to take various actions in assisting the Department of Toxic Substances Control with regard to identifying, evaluating, and responding to chemicals of concern in consumer products. This bill would authorize the panel to form subgroups to consider and report to the full panel and the department on specific priority topics identified by the department. The bill would limit the total meetings held by all subgroups to not more than 10 during a fiscal year and would require that meetings conducted by a subgroup be held in a cost-effective manner to minimize the costs incurred by the meetings.
Existing law requires the Legislature to pass a Budget Bill making appropriations for the support of state government for the ensuing fiscal year. This bill would amend the Budget Act of 2011 to require the Director of Finance to forecast General Fund revenues for the 2011–12 fiscal year by December 15, 2011, and to determine whether that revenue forecast or the Legislative Analyst's November 2011 General Fund revenue forecast is higher. Under this bill, the Director of Finance would be required to make reductions to specified items of appropriation if the higher revenue forecast is less than $87,452,500,000 and to make additional reductions to specified items of appropriation if the higher revenue forecast is less than $86,452,500,000. This bill would also provide that items of appropriation in the Budget Act of 2011 shall be reduced as appropriate to reflect any funds used from the Trial Court Security Account, the Social Services Subaccount, or from other accounts or subaccounts of the Local Revenue Fund 2011, and would require the Director of Finance to allocate the necessary reductions to each item of appropriation to accomplish the reductions required by this bill. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a Budget Bill.
Existing law authorizes counties and cities to form infrastructure financing districts, in accordance with a prescribed procedure, and requires that a district finance only public capital facilities of communitywide significance, as specified. This bill would, in addition to public capital facilities, require a district to finance affordable housing facilities and economic development projects. The bill would provide that with respect to a district proposing to implement a specified plan, an election would not be required to form a district, adopt an infrastructure financing plan, or issue bonds pursuant to existing law.
(1) Existing law provides for the furnishing of utility services by public utilities, as defined, subject to the regulatory authority of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) , including the supplying of electrical service by electrical corporations. Existing law authorizes the furnishing of utility services by publicly owned public utilities, including municipal corporations, which are subject to control by their governing bodies, and municipal utility districts, public utility districts, and irrigation districts, which are subject to control by their boards of directors. This bill would require each large electrical corporation, as defined, and large local publicly owned electric utility, as defined, to provide maps and other information identifying and designating zones within their respective service territories that are optimal for deployment of distributed generation, as provided. The bill would require the PUC and large local publicly owned electric utilities to develop rules for the implementation of this requirement, as provided. By imposing requirements on local publicly owned electric utilities that are not imposed on electrical corporations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require priority to be given for distributed generation projects proposed to be located within a zone designated pursuant to these provisions. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill require action by the PUC to implement its requirements, a violation of these provisions would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the definition of a crime. (2) 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 requires the Franchise Tax Board to make a refund to a taxpayer of any overpayment of taxes. Existing law authorizes taxpayers to contribute their refunds for the support of specified funds or accounts. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to revise taxpayer form instructions for tax returns to include information about the ability of a taxpayer to directly deposit a portion of a refund into the Golden State Scholarshare College Savings Trust, as defined. This bill would require the Scholarshare Investment Board to provide the Franchise Tax Board with a description of that trust program before a date specified by the Franchise Tax Board, and that the revisions be completed in the most cost-effective manner.
The Administrative Procedure Act governs the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations by state agencies and for the review of those regulatory actions by the Office of Administrative Law. The act requires that an agency identify, in the notice of proposed action for a regulation, an estimate, prepared in accordance with instructions adopted by the Department of Finance, of the cost or savings to a state agency. Existing law designates the state board as the state agency with authority over the regulation of air pollution from motor vehicles. This bill would additionally require the state board to estimate the cost or savings to the state in revenues that are lost or gained as a result of a regulation adopted or amended by the state board imposing requirements relating to diesel-fueled heavy-duty on-road or off-road motor vehicles that would make equipment obsolete, where that equipment would otherwise have a remaining depreciable life. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to provide to the state board, and update every 5 years, the average tax rate to be applied to the amount of the estimated accelerated deduction due to reduced asset life attributable to the regulation for an increase in business depreciation.
The California Constitution regulates the issuance of debt by the state and requires that debt in excess of $300,000 for which the state will be generally obligated be submitted to, and approved by, the voters. This bill would create the Master Plan for Infrastructure Financing and Development Commission, consisting of specified members, and would require the commission to prepare and submit a strategy and plan for infrastructure development in California that meets certain criteria to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 2013. This bill would provide that the commission would dissolve 30 days after submission of its final report. This bill would repeal these provisions upon the dissolution of the commission. The bill would provide that these provisions become operative only if the funds required to support the commission are appropriated and made available in the annual Budget Act.
(1) Existing law requires a revenue limit to be calculated for each county superintendent of schools, adjusted for various factors, and reduced, as specified. Existing law reduces the revenue limit for each county superintendent of schools for the 2011–12 fiscal year by a deficit factor of 19.892%. This bill instead would set the deficit factor for each county superintendent of schools for the 2011–12 fiscal year at 20.041%. (2) The Child Care and Development Services Act, administered by the State Department of Education, provides that children who are 10 years of age or younger, children with exceptional needs, children 12 years of age or younger who are recipients of child protective services or at risk of abuse, neglect, or exploitation, children 12 years of age or younger who are provided services during nontraditional hours, children 12 years of age or younger who are homeless, and children who are 11 and 12 years of age, as funding permits, as specified, are eligible, with certain requirements, for child care and development services. This bill would instead provide that children from infancy to 13 years of age and their parents are eligible, with certain requirements, for child care and development services. (3) Existing law, effective July 1, 2011, requires the State Department of Education to reduce the maximum reimbursable amounts of the contracts for the Preschool Education Program, the General Child Care Program, the Migrant Day Care Program, the Alternative Payment Program, the CalWORKs Stage 3 Program, and the Allowance for Handicapped Program by 15%, as specified. This bill would instead provide that the reduction in the maximum reimbursable amounts of the contracts for the programs listed above would be 11%, as specified. (4) Existing law requires that a child who is 11 or 12 years of age and who is otherwise eligible for subsidized child care and development services, except for his or her age, be given first priority for enrollment, and in cases of programs operating at full capacity, first priority on the waiting list for a before or after school program, as specified. Existing law also requires contractors to provide each family of an otherwise eligible 11 or 12 year old child with information about the availability of before and after school programs located in the family's community. This bill would instead provide that the preferred placement for children who are 11 or 12 years of age and who are otherwise eligible for subsidized child care and development services is in a before or after school program. The bill would specify criteria for the provision of subsidized child care services for children who are 11 and 12 years of age. (5) Existing law requires that the cost of state-funded child care services be governed by regional market rates, and establishes a family fee schedule reflecting specified income eligibility limits. Existing law revises the family fee schedule that was in effect for the 2007–08, 2008–09, 2009–10, and 2010–11 fiscal years to reflect an increase of 10% to existing fees, and requires the State Department of Education to submit an adjusted fee schedule to the Department of Finance for approval in order to be implemented by July 1, 2011. This bill would delete the provision requiring the fee schedule to reflect a 10% increase in family fees. (6) Existing law requires the county superintendent of schools to determine a revenue limit for each school district in the county and requires the amount of the revenue limit to be adjusted for various factors. Existing law reduces the revenue limit for each school district for the 2011–12 fiscal year by a deficit factor of 19.608%. This bill instead would set the deficit factor for each school district for the 2011–12 fiscal year at 19.754%. (7) Under existing law county offices of education receive certain property tax revenues. Existing law requires a revenue limit to be calculated for each county superintendent of schools and requires the amount of the revenue limit to be adjusted for various factors, including the amount of property tax revenues a county office of education receives. This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to determine the amount of excess property taxes available to county offices of education and would require the auditor-controller of each county to distribute those amounts first to the school districts in the county for purposes of revenue limits in amounts that do not exceed the amounts that would reduce the state General Fund apportionments for revenue limits for those school districts to zero, and then to distribute any remaining funds to one or more community college districts within the county, as determined by the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, for purposes of general purpose apportionments, as specified. After those distributions are made, the bill would require any remaining funds to be distributed to local educational agencies within the county for the purpose of providing educationally related mental health services required pursuant to specified federal law and then to the county for the operation of health and human services programs pursuant to a plan developed jointly by the Director of Finance and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. By imposing additional duties on local agency officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (8) Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to allocate, for the 2010–11 and 2011–12 fiscal years, a supplemental categorical block grant to a charter school that begins operation in the 2008–09, 2009–10, 2010–11, or 2011–12 fiscal year. Existing law requires that this supplemental categorical block grant equal $127 per unit of charter school average daily attendance as determined at the 2010–11 2nd principal apportionment for schools commencing operations in the 2008–09, 2009–10, or 2010–11 fiscal year and at the 2011–12 2nd principal apportionment for schools commencing operations in the 2011–12 fiscal year. Existing law prohibits a locally funded charter school that converted from a preexisting school between the 2008–09 and 2011–12 fiscal years, inclusive, from receiving these funds. This bill instead would provide that, to the extent funds are provided, for the 2010–11 to the 2014–15 fiscal years, inclusive, a supplemental categorical block grant would be allocated to charter schools commencing operations during or after the 2008–09 fiscal year. The bill would provide that a locally or direct funded charter school, not just a locally funded charter school, that converted from a preexisting school between the 2008–09 and 2014–15 fiscal years, inclusive, would be prohibited from receiving these funds. The bill would provide that for, the 2010–11 to the 2014–15 fiscal years, inclusive, the supplemental categorical block grant received by eligible charter schools would equal $127 per unit of charter school average daily attendance for charter schools commencing operations during or after the 2008–09 fiscal year, as specified. (9) Existing law requires school districts, county offices of education, and special education local plan areas to comply with state laws that conform to the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) , in order that the state may qualify for federal funds available for the education of individuals with exceptional needs. Existing law requires school districts, county offices of education, and special education local plan areas to identify, locate, and assess individuals with exceptional needs and to provide those pupils with a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment, and with special education and related services as reflected in an individualized education program (IEP) . Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to administer the special education provisions of the Education Code and to be responsible for assuring provision of, and supervising, education and related services to individuals with exceptional needs as required pursuant to the federal IDEA. Existing law authorizes referral, through a prescribed process, of a pupil who is suspected of needing mental health services to a community mental health service. Existing law requires the State Department of Mental Health or a designated community mental health service to be responsible for the provision of mental health services, as defined, if required in a pupil's IEP. This bill would make these provisions concerning referral for mental health services inoperative as of July 1, 2011, would repeal them as of January 1, 2012, and would make other related conforming changes. (10) Existing law, for the 2008–09 to the 2014–15 fiscal years, inclusive, provides that the governing board of a school district is not required to provide pupils with instructional materials by a specified period of time following adoption of those materials by the State Board of Education. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change in this provision by changing its section number. (11) Existing law, the Ortiz-Pacheco-Poochigian-Vasconcellos Cal Grant Program (Cal Grant Program) , establishes the Cal Grant A and B Entitlement Awards, the California Community College Transfer Entitlement Awards, the Competitive Cal Grant A and B Awards, the Cal Grant C Awards, and the Cal Grant T Awards under the administration of the Student Aid Commission, and establishes eligibility requirements for awards under these programs for participating students attending qualifying institutions. Existing law imposes requirements on qualifying institutions, requiring the commission to certify by October 1 of each year the institution's latest 3-year cohort default rate as most recently reported by the United States Department of Education. Existing law provides that an otherwise qualifying institution that did not meet a specified 3-year cohort default rate would be ineligible for new Cal Grant awards at the institution. Under the Cal Grant Program, for the 2012–13 academic year and every academic year thereafter, an otherwise qualifying institution with a 3-year cohort default rate that is equal to or greater than 30% is ineligible for initial or renewal Cal Grant awards at the institution, except as specified. This bill instead would specify that an otherwise qualifying institution with a 3-year cohort default rate that is equal to or greater than 30% is ineligible for initial and renewal Cal Grant awards at the institution, except as specified. (12) Under the California Constitution, whenever the Legislature or a state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any local government, the state is required to provide a subvention of funds to reimburse the local government, with specified exceptions. Existing law provides that no local agency or school district is required to implement or give effect to any statute or executive order, or portion thereof, that imposes a mandate during any fiscal year and for the period immediately following that fiscal year for which the Budget Act has not been enacted for the subsequent fiscal year if specified conditions are met including that the statute or executive order, or portion thereof, has been specifically identified by the Legislature in the Budget Act for the fiscal year as being one for which reimbursement is not provided for that fiscal year. Existing law provides that only certain specified mandates are subject to that provision. This bill would specify 2 additional mandates relating to community college districts to those that are subject to the provision. (13) The Administrative Procedure Act, among other things, sets forth procedures for the development, adoption, and promulgation of regulations by administrative agencies charged with the implementation of statutes. This bill would authorize the State Department of Social Services and the State Department of Education, notwithstanding the procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act, to implement the provisions of the bill that relate to the Child Care and Development Services Act through all-county letters, management bulletins, or other similar instructions. (14) This bill would provide that the implementation of the provisions of the bill related to the provision of child care services would not be subject to the appeal and resolution procedures for agencies that contract with the State Department of Education for these purposes. (15) This bill would express the intent of the Legislature that specified funding in the Budget Act of 2011 related to educationally related mental health services would be exclusively available only for the 2011–12 and 2012–13 fiscal years. (16) This bill would express the intent of the Legislature that the State Department of Education and the appropriate departments within the California Health and Human Services Agency modify or repeal regulations pertaining to the elimination of statutes pursuant to this bill related to mental health services provided by county mental health agencies. The bill would require the State Department of Education and the appropriate departments within the California Health and Human Services Agency to review regulations to ensure appropriate implementation of educationally related mental health services required by the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and of certain statutes enacted pursuant to this bill. The bill would authorize the State Department of Education and the appropriate departments within the California Health and Human Services Agency to utilize the statutory process for adopting emergency regulations in implementing certain statutes enacted pursuant to this bill. (17) This bill would authorize the Controller to defer, as necessary, the June 2012 allocations to the University of California until not later than August 31, 2012, for purposes of cash management. (18) This bill would make conforming changes, correct some cross-references, and make other technical, nonsubstantive changes. (19) 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. (20) Existing law requires the State Department of Education to award grants to school districts, county superintendents of schools, or entities approved by the department for nonrecurring expenses incurred in initiating or expanding a school breakfast program or a summer food service program. This bill would make an appropriation of $1,000 for purposes of these grants. (21) The funds appropriated by this bill would be applied toward the minimum funding requirements for school districts and community college districts imposed by Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution. (22) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
The Community Redevelopment Law authorizes the establishment of redevelopment agencies in communities in order to address the effects of blight, as defined, in those communities and requires those agencies to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and approve a redevelopment plan for each project area. Existing law requires, among other things, that each redevelopment plan be consistent with the community's general plan. Existing law requires each transportation planning agency, as specified, to prepare and adopt a regional transportation plan directed at achieving coordinated and balanced regional transportation systems. Existing law requires that the regional transportation plan include, among other things, a sustainable communities strategy, as specified. Existing law requires the State Air Resources Board to provide affected regions with certain greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. Existing law requires that the sustainable communities strategy set forth a forecasted development plan aimed at meeting the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets established by the State Air Resources Board. Existing law, in the case where a sustainable communities strategy is unable to meet the greenhouse gas reduction targets, requires the responsible metropolitan planning organization to prepare an alternative planning strategy showing how those targets would be achieved through alternative development. This bill would require each redevelopment plan to be consistent with the regional sustainable communities strategy or alternative planning strategy adopted by the metropolitan planning organization or council of government.
Read. Adopted. (Page 1534.)
Existing law provided, until October 1, 1959, for the formation and administration of police protection districts in unincorporated towns, and provides for the continuation of police protection districts formed prior to that date. Existing law provides that a police protection district is to be governed by a district board consisting of 3 elected commissioners. Existing law further provides that a police protection district's police department, its chief of police, and its employees shall have all the rights, duties, privileges, immunities, obligations, and powers of a municipal police department. This bill would grant police protection districts additional powers, including, but not limited to, the ability to adopt rules, regulations, and ordinances, as specified. This bill would specify that a violation of any rule, regulation, or ordinance adopted by a board of police commissioners would be a misdemeanor. The bill would authorize a district to charge a fee to cover the cost of any service that the district provides or the cost of enforcing any regulation for which the fee is charged, as specified.
