(1) Existing law requires an operator of a store, as defined, to establish an at-store recycling program that provides to customers the opportunity to return clean plastic carryout bags to that store. This requirement is repealed on January 1, 2013. Existing law prohibits a city, county, or other local public agency from taking specified regulatory actions with regard to the recycling of plastic carryout bags. This bill would repeal those at-store recycling program requirements on January 1, 2012, and would repeal, on January 1, 2011, the provision preempting local regulatory action. The bill would, as of January 1, 2012, prohibit stores that have a specified amount of sales or retail floor space from providing a single-use carryout bag to a customer. The bill would require these stores, from January 1, 2012, until June 30, 2013, to provide a specified type of reusable bag and after July 1, 2013, to only provide reusable bags that meet certain criteria. The bill would require these stores to make reusable bags available for purchase. The bill would allow a store, on and after January 1, 2013, to provide reusable bags to customers at no cost only when combined with a time limited store promotional program. The bill also would authorize a store, as of January 1, 2011, to provide recycled paper bags, but would require the store to charge the consumer, on and after January 1, 2012, the actual average cost of the recycled paper bag. The bill would require these stores, on and after January 1, 2012, to provide a plastic collection bin for its customers, for the purpose of collecting and recycling single-use plastic bags and reusable bags. The bill would, on and after July 1, 2013, additionally impose these prohibitions and requirements on convenience food stores, foodmarts, and certain other specified stores. The bill would, beginning January 1, 2013, require a reusable grocery bag producer to submit to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery a biennial certification, including a certification fee established by the department, that certifies that each type of reusable grocery bag that is imported, manufactured, sold or distributed in the state and provided to a store for sale or distribution meets specified requirements. The bill would require the department to deposit the certification fees into the Reusable Bag Account, which would be established by the bill in the Integrated Waste Management Fund. The bill would require that moneys in the account be expended by the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement the certification requirements. A violation of these certification requirements would be subject to an administrative civil penalty assessed by the department. The department would be required to deposit these penalties into the Penalty Subaccount, which the bill would create in the Reusable Bag Account, for expenditure by the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement the certification requirements. The bill would require the department, by January 1, 2015, to submit a report to the Legislature regarding the implementation of the bill's provisions. The bill would repeal this report requirement on January 1, 2016. This bill would, as of January 1, 2011, preempt local regulations on the use and sales of reusable bags, single-use carryout bags, recycled paper bags, or other specified bags at stores, as defined. The bill would allow a city, county, city and county or the state to impose civil penalties for a violation of the bill's requirements, except for the certification requirements. The bill would require these civil penalties to be paid to the office of the city attorney, city prosecutor, district attorney, or Attorney General, whichever office brought the action, and would allow the penalties collected by the Attorney General to be expended by the Attorney General, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to enforce the bill's provisions. (2) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 creates the Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan Subaccount in the Integrated Waste Management Account and continuously appropriates the funds deposited in the subaccount to the department for making loans for the purposes of the Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan Program. Existing law makes the provisions regarding the loan program, the creation of the subaccount, and expenditures therefrom inoperative on July 1, 2011, and repeals them as of January 1, 2012. This bill would appropriate $2,000,000 from the Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan Subaccount in the Integrated Waste Management Account to the department for the purposes of providing loans and grants for the creation and retention of jobs and economic activity in the manufacture and recycling of plastic bags that use recycled content.
Existing law prohibits the manufacture, sale, or distribution in commerce of certain toys and child care articles, as defined, if those products contain specified types of phthalates in concentrations exceeding 110 of 1%. Existing law also requires manufacturers to use the least toxic alternative when replacing phthalates in their products and would prohibit manufacturers from replacing phthalates with certain carcinogens and reproductive toxicants. The bill would enact the Toxin-Free Infants and Toddlers Act, which would, except as specified, prohibit, on and after January 1, 2012, the manufacture, sale, or distribution in commerce of any bottle, cup, or liquid, food, or beverage in a can, jar, or plastic bottle that contains bisphenol A, or that is lined with a material that contains bisphenolA, at a level above 0.1 parts per billion (ppb) . It would also, except as specified, prohibit, on and after July 1, 2012, the manufacture, sale, or distribution of liquid infant formula in a can or plastic bottle containing bisphenolA or lined with a material containing it. The bill would also require manufacturers to use the least toxic alternative when replacing bisphenolA in containers in accordance with this bill. This bill would repeal these provisions if the Department of Toxic Substances Control adopts a specified regulatory response.
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 (Knox-Keene Act) , provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of insurers by the Department of Insurance, including health insurers. Existing law makes the violation of a final order by the Insurance Commissioner relating to rates imposed by certain insurers, other than health insurers, subject to assessment of a civil penalty and makes the willful violation by those insurers of specified rate provisions a misdemeanor. Under existing law, no change in premium rates or coverage in a health care service plan or a health insurance policy may become effective without prior written notification of the change to the contractholder or policyholder. Existing law prohibits a plan and insurer during the term of a group plan contract or policy from changing the rate of the premium, copayment, coinsurance, or deductible during specified time periods. This bill would require approval by the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance of an increase in the amount of the premium, copayment, coinsurance obligation, deductible, and other charges under health care service plan contracts or health insurance policies, other than Medicare supplement, dental-only, or vision-only contracts or policies. The bill would require a plan or insurer to submit to the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance, respectively, an application for a rate increase that would be effective on or after January 1, 2012, and would require review of the application in accordance with regulations that each department would be required to adopt no later than January 1, 2012. The bill would subject a rate increase that became effective January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2011, inclusive, to review by the appropriate department. The bill would require each department to notify the public of a rate application and would deem the application approved within 60 days of the date of that notice unless the department holds a hearing on the application, as specified. The bill would authorize the initiation of, and intervention in, proceedings relating to rate approvals and the award of advocacy fees and costs in those proceedings in specified circumstances. The bill would require the departments to work together in implementation of these provisions and to take specified actions in order to ensure coordination and consistency in implementation. The bill would authorize each department to assess a charge in connection with its costs associated with a rate application. The bill would direct the deposit of these fees into the respective department's Health Rate Approval Fund, which would be created by the bill, and would make those funds available to each department for those purposes, upon appropriation. The bill would specify that a violation of its provisions is punishable by criminal sanctions under the Knox-Keene Act and under provisions applicable to insurers and, therefore, 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.
(1) Existing law requires that, for private and public works of improvement, and in a public works contract, a prime contractor or subcontractor pay to any subcontractor, not later than 10 days after receipt of each progress payment, unless otherwise agreed to in writing, the respective amount allowed the contractor on account of the work performed by the subcontractors, to the extent of each contractor's interest therein, as prescribed. This bill would, instead, require that those amounts be paid not later than 7 days after receipt of each progress payment. (2) Existing law requires, with regard to a contract entered into on or after January 1, 1995, in order to enforce a claim upon any payment bond given in connection with a public work, that a claimant give the 20-day public works bond preliminary notice, as provided. Existing law further authorizes a claimant, if the 20-day public works preliminary bond notice was not given as prescribed by statute, to enforce a claim by giving written notice to the surety and the bond principal, as provided, within 15 days after recordation of a notice of completion, or if no notice of completion has been recorded, within 75 days after completion of the work of improvement. This bill would, instead, with regard to a contract entered into on or after January 1, 2011, require that the written notice to be given to the surety and the bond principal be given prior to the completion, as defined, of the project, or recordation of a notice of completion, as specified. (3) Existing law authorizes the Department of General Services, or any other department with authority to enter into contracts, to contract with suppliers for goods and services and for public works. Existing law provides that in a contract relating to the construction of a public work of improvement between the public entity and original contractor, the original contractor and a subcontractor, and in a contract between a subcontractor and any subcontractor thereunder, the percentage of retention proceeds withheld cannot exceed the percentage specified in the contract between the public entity and the original contractor. This bill would instead, until January 1, 2015, prohibit retention proceeds from exceeding 5% of the payment, as specified, for those contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2011, between a public entity, as defined, and an original contractor, between an original contractor and a subcontractor, and between all subcontractors thereunder. (4) Existing law contains various provisions relating to contracts for the performance of public works of improvement, including provisions for the payment of progress payments and the disbursing and withholding of retention proceeds. Existing law prohibits progress payments upon these contracts from being made in excess of 95% of the percentage of actual work completed plus a like percentage of the value of material delivered, as specified, and requires the Department of General Services to withhold not less than 5% of the contract price until final completion and acceptance of the project. This bill would instead prohibit progress payments upon these contracts from being made in excess of 100% of the percentage of actual work completed, and would require the Department of General Services to withhold not more than 5% of the contract price until final completion and acceptance of the project, except as specified. (5) The bill would incorporate additional changes made by SB 189 contingent upon the enactment of that bill.
Existing law provides for local health care districts that are authorized to own and operate certain health facilities, including hospitals. Each health care district has specific duties and powers respecting the creation, administration, and maintenance of the districts, including to purchase, receive, take, hold, lease, use, and enjoy property of every kind and description of property within the district. Existing law permits the Sonoma Valley Health Care District, upon the approval of its board of directors, to use a prescribed design-build procedure set forth in a specific code section when assigning contracts for the construction of a building and improvements directly related to a hospital or health facility building at the Sonoma Valley Hospital. Under existing law, that code section would be repealed on January 1, 2011, unless that date is deleted or extended. This bill would also allow the Corcoran District Hospital, upon approval by its board of directors, to use the above-mentioned design-build procedure described in that code section to award contracts for the construction of an outpatient care facility , but would make these provisions inoperative if the project does not meet specified requirements. Existing law requires that, under the existing design-build procedure, a health care district would be required to pay a fee into the continuously appropriated State Public Works Enforcement Fund, the moneys in which are used by the Department of Industrial relations to enforce applicable prevailing wage and labor requirements. Because this bill would authorize additional fees to be paid into a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would constitute an appropriation. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Corcoran District Hospital.
Existing law provides that commencing February 1, 2011, a vendor shall not sell or otherwise transfer ownership of any handgun ammunition without, at the time of delivery, legibly recording specified information regarding the purchaser or transferee, and maintaining the record for a period of not less than 5 years, as specified. Existing law provides that violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. Existing law also provides that the records shall be subject to inspection by any peace officer and certain others, as specified, for purposes of an investigation where access to those records is or may be relevant to that investigation, when seeking information about persons prohibited from owning a firearm or ammunition, or when engaged in ensuring compliance with laws pertaining to firearms or ammunition, as specified. This bill would require the information described above in connection with the transfer of handgun ammunition be legibly or electronically recorded. The bill would provide that commencing February 1, 2011, except for investigatory and enforcement purposes described above, no ammunition vendor shall provide the required information to any 3rd party without the written consent of the purchaser or transferee. The bill would also provide that records may be copied for investigatory or enforcement purposes by any person authorized to inspect those records, as specified, and that copies shall be transmitted to local law enforcement if required by local law. The bill would also provide that any required ammunition records that are no longer required to be maintained shall be destroyed in a manner that protects the privacy of the purchaser or transferee who is the subject of the record. The bill would provide that violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. This bill would provide that commencing February 1, 2011, except for investigatory and enforcement purposes described above, no ammunition vendor shall provide the required information to any 3rd party, or use the information for any purpose other than as is required or authorized by statute or regulation, without the written consent of the purchaser or transferee. The bill would also provide that any required ammunition records that are no longer required to be maintained shall be destroyed in a specified manner. The bill would provide that violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require ammunition vendors, commencing February 1, 2011, to provide written notice to the local police chief, or if the vendor is in an unincorporated area, to the county sheriff, of the vendor's intent to conduct business in the jurisdiction, and to obtain any regulatory or business license required by the jurisdiction for ammunition sellers. A violation of this provision would be a misdemeanor. The bill would also provide that no public agency may make public the information obtained from the record of the ammunition transaction. Existing law requires certain information to be collected by firearms dealers in connection with the transfer of firearms and submitted to the Department of Justice, as specified. This bill would provide that no firearms dealer shall provide the information required by those provisions to any 3rd party, or use the information for any purpose other than as is required or authorized by statute or regulation, without the written consent of the purchaser or transferee, except for purposes of 3rd-party electronic submission to the department. The bill would also provide that any of these records that are no longer required to be maintained, if destroyed, shall be destroyed in a specified manner. Existing law provides that commencing February 1, 2011, the delivery or transfer of ownership of handgun ammunition may only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the deliverer or transferor being provided bona fide evidence of identity from the purchaser or other transferee. This bill would also provide that handgun ammunition may be purchased over the Internet or through other means of remote ordering if a handgun ammunition vendor in California initially receives the ammunition and processes the transfer, as specified. Existing law defines "handgun ammunition" for most purposes as ammunition principally for use in handguns, notwithstanding that the ammunition may also be used in some rifles. This bill would instead define "handgun ammunition" for those purposes as any variety of ammunition of a caliber specified in a list added by this bill, notwithstanding that the ammunition may also be used in some rifles, and would provide that "handgun ammunition" does not include blanks or ammunition designed and intended to be used in an "antique firearm," as defined. This bill would incorporate additional amendments to Section 12077 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1810, contingent on the prior enactment of that 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law authorize various credits, deductions, exclusions, exemptions, and other tax benefits with respect to the taxes imposed by those laws. This bill would require a taxpayer, as described, doing business in California that claims a business tax incentive, as provided, to submit to the Franchise Tax Board on the original return specified information, including the number of employees employed by the taxpayer in the state. The bill would also require, in cases in which a taxpayer has a disqualifying event resulting in a net decrease in the number of full-time employees for a business tax incentive added by statute on or after January 1, 2011, the business tax incentive to be recaptured, and the taxable amount computed in accordance with specified procedures.
(1) Under the California Disaster Assistance Act the state share may be up to 100% for costs connected with certain events only if the local agency has adopted a local hazard mitigation plan in accordance with specified federal law. Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires that a city, county, or city and county general plan contain a safety element for the protection of the community from specified safety risks, and authorizes a city, county, or a city and county to adopt with its safety element a federally specified local hazard mitigation plan that includes specified elements. This bill would eliminate the requirement that adoption of the federally specified local hazard mitigation plan include required specified elements. (2) Existing law authorizes a county board of supervisors to provide by ordinance for the reassessment of property that is damaged or destroyed, without fault on the part of the assessee, by a major misfortune or calamity, upon the application of the assessee or upon the action of the county assessor with the board's approval. With respect to certain counties that have adopted reassessment ordinances and have been declared by the Governor to be in a state of emergency as a result of certain events, existing law provides for state allocations of the estimated amounts of the reductions in property tax revenues resulting in certain fiscal years from reassessments under those ordinances. Existing law also continuously appropriates, without regard to fiscal years, moneys in the Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties for purposes of funding these state allocations. This bill would provide for similar state allocations with respect to property tax revenue reductions resulting from a reassessment for damages incurred within the County of Santa Barbara, which was declared by the Governor to be in a state of emergency due to the wildfires that commenced in November 2008 or May 2009, within the Counties of Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino, which were declared by the Governor to be in a state of emergency due to the wildfires that commenced in November 2008, within the County of Placer, which was declared by the Governor to be in a state of emergency due to the wildfires that commenced in August 2009, and within the County of Kern, which was declared by the Governor to be in a state of emergency due to the wildfires that commenced in July 2010. By requiring moneys continuously appropriated from the Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties to be allocated for the new purpose of reimbursing these counties for these property tax revenue reductions, this bill would make an appropriation. (3) Existing property tax law provides, pursuant to a specified provision of the California Constitution, for a homeowners' property tax exemption in the amount of $7,000 of the full value of a "dwelling," as defined. This bill would also provide that any dwelling that (1) qualified for the exemption prior to August 30, 2009, was damaged or destroyed by the wildfires in the County of Placer, as declared by the Governor to be in a state of emergency in August 2009, and has not changed ownership since August 30, 2009, and (2) qualified for the exemption prior to July 26, 2010, was damaged or destroyed by the wildfires in the County of Kern, as declared by the Governor to be in a state of emergency in July 2010, and has not changed ownership since July 26, 2010, may not be denied the exemption solely on the basis that the dwelling was temporarily damaged or destroyed or was being reconstructed by the owner, or was temporarily uninhabited as a result of restricted access to the property due to wildfires. The California Constitution requires the Legislature, in each fiscal year, to reimburse local governments for the revenue losses incurred by those governments in that fiscal year as a result of the homeowners' property tax exemption. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to make this required reimbursement in the annual Budget Act. By requiring local tax officials to implement new exemption criteria, 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. (4) The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law provide for the carryover to specified taxable years of specified losses sustained as a result of certain disasters occurring in California in an area determined by the President of the United States to warrant specified federal assistance, or proclaimed by the Governor to be in a state of emergency. This bill would extend these provisions to losses sustained in the County of Placer as a result of the wildfires that commenced in August 2009 and in the County of Kern as a result of the wildfires that commenced in July 2010. This bill would authorize a taxpayer to make an election to claim a deduction for those losses on the tax return for the preceding year. (5) Existing law requires the auditor of a county which was the subject of the Governor's proclamation of a state of emergency to certify to the Director of Finance an estimate of the total reduction in property tax revenues resulting from the reassessment by the county assessor of those properties that are eligible as a result of disasters, and requires the director to verify the county auditor's estimate and certify that amount to the Controller for allocation to the county. This bill would prohibit, for any fire disaster occurring after January 1, 2010, the Department of Finance from certifying a county auditor's estimate of the total reduction in property tax resulting from the reassessment by the county assessor of eligible properties as a result of those disasters unless the county demonstrates compliance with specified requirements at the time the fire disaster occurred. (6) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes the California Workforce Investment Board (CWIB) to assist the Governor in the development, oversight, and continuous improvement of California's workforce investment system. Existing law establishes the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) that is vested with duties, powers, purposes, responsibilities, and jurisdiction relating to health planning and research development. Existing law provides for various programs to research the need for, and develop programs to improve, the quality and availability of health workers in the state. This bill would establish the Health Workforce Development Fund consisting of moneys received from federal and private sources, as specified. The bill would authorize the fund to be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for prescribed purposes relating to health workforce development and would require the CWIB and the OSHPD to report specified information to the Legislature annually from April 1, 2012, to April 1, 2016, inclusive. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law generally prohibits the state, or a county, city, district, or other political subdivision, or any public officer or body acting in its official capacity on behalf of any of those entities, from being required to pay any fee for the performance of an official service. Existing law exempts from this provision any fee or charge for official services required pursuant to specified provisions of law relating to water use or water quality. This bill would expand the exemption to other provisions relating to water use, including provisions that require the payment of fees to the State Water Resources Control Board (board) for official services relating to statements of water diversion and use. (2) The California Constitution requires the reasonable and beneficial use of water. Under the public trust doctrine, the board, among other state agencies, is required to take the public trust into account in the planning and allocation of water resources and to protect the public trust whenever feasible. The board and the California regional water quality control boards (regional boards) are required to set forth water quality objectives in state and regional water quality control plans. Existing law establishes the Water Rights Fund, which consists of various fees and penalties. The moneys in the Water Rights Fund are available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the administration of the board's water rights program. This bill would authorize the board to issue, on its own motion or upon the petition of an interested party, an interim relief order in appropriate circumstances to implement or enforce these and related provisions of law. A person or entity that violates any interim relief order issued by the board would be liable to the board for a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $5,000 for each day in which a violation occurs. These funds would be deposited in the Water Rights Fund. (3) Existing law authorizes the board to investigate all streams, stream systems, lakes, or other bodies of water, take testimony relating to the rights to water or the use of water, and ascertain whether water filed upon or attempted to be appropriated is appropriated under the laws of the state. Existing law requires the board to take appropriate actions to prevent waste or the unreasonable use of water. Under existing law, the board makes determinations with regard to the availability of recycled water. This bill would authorize the board, in conducting an investigation or proceeding for these purposes, to order any person or entity that diverts water or uses water to submit, under penalty of perjury, any technical or monitoring report related to the diversion or use of water by that person or entity. By expanding the definition of the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the board, in connection with the investigation or proceeding, to inspect the facilities of any person or entity to determine compliance with specified water use requirements. (4) Existing law authorizes the board, upon the submission of a petition signed by a claimant to water of any stream system requesting a determination of rights among the claimants to that water, to enter an order granting the petition. After granting the petition, the board is required to investigate the stream system to gather information necessary to make a determination of the water rights of that stream system. This bill would authorize the board to initiate a determination of rights under its own motion if after a hearing it finds that the public interest and necessity will be served by a determination of rights. (5) Existing law declares that the diversion or use of water other than as authorized by specified provisions of law is a trespass. Existing law authorizes the administrative imposition of civil liability by the board for a trespass in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which the trespass occurs. Moneys generated by the imposition of civil liability under these provisions are deposited in the Water Rights Fund. This bill would provide that a person or entity committing a trespass may be liable in an amount not to exceed the sum of $1,000 for each day in which the trespass occurs and $1,000 for each acre-foot of water diverted or used other than as authorized by those specified provisions of law. (6) Existing law, with certain exceptions, requires each person who, after December 31, 1965, diverts water to file with the board a statement of diversion and use. This bill would establish a rebuttable presumption, in any proceeding before the board in which it is alleged that an appropriative right has ceased or is subject to prescribed action, that no use required to be included in a statement of diversion and use occurred unless that use is included in a statement that is submitted to the board within a specified time period. The bill would require a person who files a statement of diversion and use, and certain petitions involving a change in a water right, to pay an annual fee, for deposit in the Water Rights Fund. The bill would include as recoverable costs, for which the board may be reimbursed from the fund upon appropriation therefor, costs incurred in connection with carrying out requirements relating to the statements of diversion and use and the performance of duties under the public trust doctrine and provisions that require the reasonable use of water. (7) Existing law authorizes the board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements, including requirements set forth in a decision or order relating to the unauthorized use of water. Any person who violates a cease and desist order may be liable in an amount not to exceed $1,000 for each day in which the violation occurs. Revenue generated from these penalties is deposited in the Water Rights Fund. This bill would authorize the board to issue a cease and desist order in response to a violation of certain requirements relating to the unauthorized diversion or use of water or of a reporting or monitoring requirement established under a decision, order, or regulation adopted by the board pursuant to various provisions of law, including the public trust doctrine. The bill would increase the civil penalties that apply to a person who violates a cease and desist order by subjecting a violator to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed the sum of $2,500 for each day in which the violation occurs and $2,500 for each acre-foot of water diverted or used in violation of the cease and desist order. The bill would impose civil liability, in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which a violation occurs, for a failure to comply with various reporting or monitoring requirements, including requirements imposed pursuant to the public trust doctrine. The bill would authorize the board to impose additional civil liability, in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which a violation occurs, for the violation of a permit, license, certificate, or registration, or an order or regulation involving the unreasonable use of water. Funds derived from the imposition of these civil penalties would be deposited in the Water Rights Fund. The bill would require the board to adjust for inflation, by January 1 of each year, beginning in 2011, the amounts of civil and administrative liabilities or penalties imposed by the board in water right actions, as specified. The bill would require that, in a proceeding before the board in which it is alleged that an appropriative water right has ceased, or is subject to prescribed action, there would be a rebuttable presumption that no use occurred on or after January 1, 2009, unless that diversion or use was reported to the board within six months after it is required to be filed with the board. (8) Existing law authorizes a local agency whose service area includes a groundwater basin that is not subject to groundwater management to adopt and implement a groundwater management plan pursuant to certain provisions of law. Existing law requires a groundwater management plan to include certain components to qualify as a plan for the purposes of those provisions, including a provision that establishes funding requirements for the construction of certain groundwater projects. This bill would establish a groundwater monitoring program pursuant to which specified entities, in accordance with prescribed procedures, may propose to be designated by the Department of Water Resources as groundwater monitoring entities, as defined, for the purposes of monitoring and reporting with regard to groundwater elevations in all or part of a basin or subbasin, as defined. The bill would require the department to work cooperatively with each monitoring entity to determine the manner in which groundwater elevation information should be reported to the department. The bill would authorize the department to make recommendations for improving an existing monitoring program, require additional monitoring wells under certain circumstances, and require the department, under prescribed circumstances, to perform groundwater monitoring functions for those portions of a basin or a subbasin for which no monitoring entity has agreed to perform those functions under this program. (9) Existing law requires the department to conduct an investigation of the state's groundwater basins and to report its findings to the Governor and the Legislature not later than January 1, 1980. This bill would repeal that provision. The department would be required to conduct an investigation of the state's groundwater basins and to report its findings to the Governor and the Legislature not later than January 1, 2012, and every 5 years thereafter. (10) 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. (11) These provisions would only become operative if AB 39, AB 49, SB 12, and SB 458 of the 2009–10 Regular Session of the Legislature, relating to water use and resource management, are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2010.
(1) Existing law generally provides that the state, or a county, city, district, or other political subdivision, or any public officer or body acting in its official capacity on behalf of any of those entities, may not be required to pay any fee for the performance of an official service. Existing law exempts from this provision any fee or charge for official services required pursuant to specified provisions of law relating to water use or water quality. This bill would expand the exemption to other provisions relating to water use, including provisions that require the payment of fees to the State Water Resources Control Board (board) for official services relating to statements of water diversion and use. (2) Existing law requires the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to convene a committee to develop and submit to the Governor and the Legislature, on or before December 31, 2008, recommendations for implementing a specified strategic plan relating to the sustainable management of the Delta. This bill would establish the Delta Stewardship Council as an independent agency of the state. The council would be required to consist of 7 members appointed in a specified manner. The bill would specify the powers of the council. The council would be required to establish a consultation process for the purposes of the act. The bill would require a state or local public agency that proposes to undertake certain proposed actions that will occur within the boundaries of the Delta or the Suisun Marsh to prepare, and submit to the council, a specified written certification of consistency with the Delta Plan, created pursuant to AB 39 of the 2009–10 Regular Session, prior to taking those actions. By imposing these requirements on a local public agency, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would establish an appeal process by which a person may claim that a proposed action is inconsistent with the Delta Plan, as prescribed. The bill would impose requirements on the Department of Water Resources in connection with the preparation of a specified Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) . The BDCP would only be permitted to be incorporated in the Delta Plan if certain requirements are met. The bill would establish the Delta Independent Science Board, whose members would be selected by the council. The bill would require the Delta Independent Science Board to develop a scientific program relating to the management of the Delta. The bill would require the State Water Resources Control Board to establish an effective system of Delta watershed diversion data collection and public reporting by December 31, 2010. The bill would require the board to develop new instream flow criteria for the Delta ecosystem, as specified. The board would be required to submit those determinations to the council. The bill would require the board, in consultation with the council, to appoint a special master for the Delta, referred to as the Delta Watermaster. The bill would grant specified authority to the Delta Watermaster. (3) The California Bay-Delta Authority Act establishes the California Bay-Delta Authority in the Resources Agency. The act requires the authority and the implementing agencies to carry out programs, projects, and activities necessary to implement the Bay-Delta Program, defined to mean those projects, programs, commitments, and other actions that address the goals and objectives of the CALFED Bay-Delta Programmatic Record of Decision, dated August 28, 2000, or as it may be amended. This bill would repeal that act. The bill would impose requirements on the council in connection with the repeal of that act. (4) These provisions would only become operative if SB 229, SB 458, AB 39, and AB 49 of the 2009–10 Regular Session of the Legislature, relating to water use and resource management, are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2010.
Existing law requires various state agencies to administer programs relating to water supply, water quality, and flood management in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Johnston-Baker-Andal-Boatwright Delta Protection Act of 1992 (Delta Protection Act) creates the Delta Protection Commission and requires the commission to prepare and adopt a comprehensive long-term resource management plan for specified lands within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Existing law requires the Secretary of the Resources Agency to convene a committee to develop and submit to the Governor and the Legislature, on or before December 31, 2008, recommendations for implementing a specified strategic plan relating to the sustainable management of the Delta. This bill would revise and recast the provisions of the Delta Protection Act to, among other things, reduce the number of commission members to 15 members, as specified. The bill would require the commission to appoint at least one advisory committee consisting of representatives from specified entities to provide input regarding the diverse interests within the Delta. The bill would require the commission to adopt, not later than July 1, 2011, an economic sustainability plan containing specified elements and would require the commission to review and, as determined to be necessary, amend the plan every 5 years. The bill would require the commission to prepare and submit to the Legislature, by July 1, 2010, recommendations on the potential expansion of or change to the primary zone or the Delta. The bill would establish the Delta Investment Fund in the State Treasury. Moneys in the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would be required to be expended by the commission to implement the regional economic sustainability plan. The bill would establish in the Natural Resources Agency the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy. The conservancy would be required to act as a primary state agency to implement ecosystem restoration in the Delta and to support efforts that advance environmental protection and the economic well-being of Delta residents. The bill would specify the composition of the conservancy and grant certain authority to the conservancy, including the authority to acquire real property interests from willing sellers or transferors. The conservancy would be required to use conservation easements to accomplish ecosystem restoration whenever feasible. The conservancy would be required to prepare and adopt a strategic plan to achieve the goals of the conservancy. The strategic plan would be required to be consistent with the Delta Plan and certain other plans. The bill would establish the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy Fund in the State Treasury. Moneys in the fund would be available, upon appropriation, to finance projects, including ecosystem restoration and economic sustainability projects. These provisions would only become operative if AB 39, AB 49, SB 12, and SB 229 of the 2009–10 Regular Session of the Legislature, relating to water use and resource management, are each enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2010.
