Existing law defines a truant as any pupil subject to compulsory full-time education or to compulsory continuation education who is absent from school without a valid excuse 3 full days in one school year, or tardy or absent for more than any 30-minute period during the schoolday without a valid excuse on 3 occasions in one school year, or any combination thereof. Existing law provides that a pupil who is required to be reported as a truant is subject to specified penalties for the first to 4th instances that a truancy report is issued to a pupil, and, under certain circumstances, he or she may be judged a ward of the juvenile court. Existing law provides that a parent, guardian, or other person having control of or charge of any pupil who is a truant or chronic truant is guilty of, among other things, an infraction and subject to specified penalties for the first to 3rd or subsequent convictions. Existing law provides that any minor pupil who is a habitual truant, is irregular in attendance at school, or is habitually insubordinate or disorderly during attendance at school may be referred to a school attendance review board or to the probation department for services if the probation department has elected to receive these referrals. Existing law, under specified circumstances, authorizes a school attendance review board to notify the district attorney or the probation officer, or both, if the district attorney or the probation officer has elected to participate in a truancy mediation program, as specified. Existing law, under specified circumstances, also authorizes a school attendance review board or probation officer to direct the county superintendent of schools to request a petition on behalf of the pupil in the juvenile court of the county. This bill would require a state or local agency conducting a truancy-related mediation or prosecuting a pupil or a pupil's parent or legal guardian pursuant to these provisions, among others, to provide the school district, school attendance review board, county superintendent of schools, probation department, or any other agency that referred the truancy-related mediation, criminal complaint, or petition with the outcome of each referral, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local officials, 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, 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.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law regulates the sale, transfer, possession, and ownership of firearms, including prohibiting specified persons from owning or possessing firearms. Existing law, among other things, generally prohibits a person subject to a domestic violence protective order from owning or possessing a firearm while that order is in effect. This bill would authorize a court to issue a temporary emergency gun violence restraining order if a law enforcement officer asserts and a judicial officer finds that there is reasonable cause to believe that the subject of the petition poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm and that the order is necessary to prevent personal injury to himself, herself, or another, as specified. The bill would require a law enforcement officer to serve the order on the restrained person, if the restrained person can reasonably be located, file a copy of the order with the court, and have the order entered into the computer database system for protective and restraining orders maintained by the Department of Justice. The bill would require the presiding judge of the superior court of each county to designate at least one judge, commissioner, or referee who is required to be reasonably available to issue temporary emergency gun violence restraining orders when the court is not in session. This bill would additionally authorize a court to issue an ex parte gun violence restraining order prohibiting the subject of the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition when it is shown that there is a substantial likelihood that the subject of the petition poses a significant danger of harm to himself, herself, or another in the near future by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm and that the order is necessary to prevent personal injury to himself, herself, or another, as specified. The bill would require the ex parte order to expire no later than 21 days after the date on the order and would require the court to hold a hearing within 21 days of issuing the ex parte gun violence restraining order to determine if a gun violence restraining order that is in effect for one year should be issued. The bill would require a law enforcement officer or a person at least 18 years of age who is not a party to the action to personally serve the restrained person the ex parte order, if the restrained person can reasonably be located. The bill would authorize a court to issue a gun violence restraining order prohibiting the subject of the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition for a period of one year when there is clear and convincing evidence that the subject of the petition, or a person subject to an ex parte gun violence restraining order, as applicable, poses a significant danger of personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm and that the order is necessary to prevent personal injury to himself, herself, or another, as specified. The bill would authorize the renewal of the order for additional one-year periods and would permit the restrained person to request one hearing to terminate the order during the effective period of the initial order or each renewal period. The bill would require a court, upon issuance of a gun violence restraining order, to order the restrained person to surrender to the local law enforcement agency all firearms and ammunition in his or her custody or control, or which he or she possesses or owns. The bill would require the local law enforcement agency to retain custody of the firearm or firearms and ammunition for the duration of a gun violence restraining order. The bill would require the court to notify the Department of Justice when any gun violence restraining order has been issued, renewed, dissolved, or terminated. The bill would also require the court, when sending that notice, to specify whether the person subject to the gun violence restraining order was present in court to be informed of the contents of the order or if the person failed to appear. The bill would require proof of service of the order to be entered into the California Restraining and Protective Order System, as specified. The bill would make it a misdemeanor to file a petition for an ex parte gun violence restraining order or a gun violence restraining order issued after notice and a hearing, knowing the information in the petition to be false or with the intent to harass. The bill would also provide that a person who owns or possesses a firearm or ammunition with the knowledge that he or she is prohibited from doing so by a gun violence restraining order is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be prohibited from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition for a 5-year period, commencing upon the expiration of the existing gun violence restraining order. By creating new crimes and by requiring new duties of local law enforcement, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law states the grounds upon which a search warrant may be issued, including when the property or things to be seized include a firearm or any other deadly weapon that is owned by, or in the possession of, or in the custody or control of, specified persons. This bill would allow a search warrant to be issued when the property or things to be seized are firearms or ammunition or both that are owned by, in the possession of, or in the custody or control of, a person who is the subject of a gun violence restraining order if a prohibited firearm or ammunition or both is possessed, owned, in the custody of, or controlled by a person against whom a gun violence restraining order has been issued, the person has been lawfully served with that order, and the person has failed to relinquish the firearm as required by law. The bill would also require the law enforcement officer executing a search warrant issued upon that ground to take custody of any firearm or ammunition that is in the restrained person's custody or control or possession or that is owned by the restrained person, which is discovered pursuant to a consensual or other lawful search and would provide rules for executing the search warrant when the location to be searched is jointly occupied by the restrained person and one or more other persons. (3) Existing law requires specified law enforcement officers to take temporary custody of any firearm or deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a lawful search when present at the scene of a domestic violence incident involving a threat to human life or physical assault. This bill would apply the requirements described above to law enforcement officers serving a gun violence restraining order. The bill would also apply those requirements when the law enforcement officer is a sworn member of the Department of Justice who is a peace officer. (4) Existing law requires the Department of Justice to request public and private mental hospitals, sanitariums, and institutions to submit to the department information necessary to identify persons who are prohibited from having a firearm because the person has been admitted to a facility, is receiving inpatient treatment, and is a danger to himself, herself, or others. Existing law requires the department to only use the information for certain specified purposes. This bill would additionally authorize the department to use the above-described information to determine the eligibility of a person who is the subject of a petition for the issuance of a gun violence restraining order to acquire, carry, or possess firearms, destructive devices, or explosives. (5) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 18250 of the Penal Code, proposed by SB 1154, to be operative only if SB 1154 and this bill are chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2015, and this bill is chaptered last. (7) 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. (8) The provisions of this bill would be effective January 1, 2016.
Existing law authorizes the establishment of county and local school attendance review boards, and authorizes a school district to refer a pupil to a school attendance review board or the probation department for, among other things, truancy. Existing law, under specified circumstances, authorizes a school attendance review board or probation officer to direct the county superintendent of schools to request a petition on behalf of the pupil in the juvenile court of the county. Existing law requires the governing board of a school district to adopt rules and regulations to require appropriate officers and employees of the school district to gather and transmit to the county superintendent of schools the number and types of referrals to school attendance review boards and of requests for petitions to the juvenile court. This bill would instead require the governing board of each school district that has established a local school attendance review board to adopt rules and regulations to require appropriate officers and employees of the school district to gather that information for the prior school year, and would expand the information required to be gathered to include, among other things, the number of pupils referred to a school attendance review board who improved their attendance and the number of pupils and parents or guardians referred to community services, as specified. The bill would require the information to be disaggregated by specified subgroups, including gender, ethnicity, and foster youth status. The bill would require the governing board of each school district to make available on its Internet Web site, if one is available, the contents of those school attendance review board reports no later than September 15 of every year. The bill would require the State Department of Education to maintain current Internet Web site links to the Internet Web sites of school attendance review board reports, and would require the governing board of each school district that posts school attendance review board reports to provide to the department current uniform resource locators for those Internet Web sites. The bill would make these provisions operative beginning June 1, 2015.
(1) Existing law, until 2020, 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 bill, as of July 1, 2015, would prohibit stores that have a specified amount of sales in dollars or retail floor space from providing a single-use carryout bag to a customer, with specified exceptions. The bill would also prohibit those stores from selling or distributing a recycled paper bag at the point of sale unless the store makes that bag available for purchase for not less than $0.10. The bill would also allow those stores, on or after July 1, 2015, to distribute compostable bags at the point of sale only in jurisdictions that meet specified requirements and at a cost of not less than $0.10. The bill would require these stores to meet other specified requirements on and after July 1, 2015, regarding providing reusable grocery bags to customers, including distributing those bags only at a cost of not less than $0.10. The bill would require all moneys collected pursuant to these provisions to be retained by the store and be used only for specified purposes. The bill, on and after July 1, 2016, would additionally impose these prohibitions and requirements on convenience food stores, foodmarts, and entities engaged in the sale of a limited line of goods, or goods intended to be consumed off premises, and that hold a specified license with regard to alcoholic beverages. The bill would allow a retail establishment to voluntarily comply with these requirements, if the retail establishment provides the department with irrevocable written notice. The bill would require the department to post on its Internet Web site, organized by county, the name and physical location of each retail establishment that has elected to comply with these requirements. The bill would require the operator of a store that has a specified amount of sales in dollars or retail floor space and a retail establishment that voluntarily complies with the requirements of this bill to comply with the existing at-store recycling program requirements. The bill would require, on and after July 1, 2015, a reusable grocery bag sold by certain stores to a customer at the point of sale to be made by a certified reusable grocery bag producer and to meet specified requirements with regard to the bag's durability, material, labeling, heavy metal content, and, with regard to reusable grocery bags made from plastic film on and after January 1, 2016, recycled material content. The bill would impose these requirements as of July 1, 2016, on the stores that are otherwise subject to the bill's requirements. The bill would prohibit a producer of reusable grocery bags made from plastic film from selling or distributing those bags on and after July 1, 2015, unless the producer is certified by a 3rd-party certification entity, as specified. The bill would require a reusable grocery bag producer to provide proof of certification to the department. The bill would require the department to provide a system to receive proofs of certification online. The department would be required to publish on its Internet Web site a list of reusable grocery bag producers that have submitted the required certification and their reusable grocery bags. The bill would require the department to establish an administrative certification fee schedule, which would require a reusable grocery bag producer providing proof to the department of certification or recertification to pay a fee. The bill would require that all moneys submitted to the department pursuant to these fee provisions be deposited into the Reusable Grocery Bag Fund, which would be established by the bill, and continuously appropriated for purposes of implementing these proof of certification and Internet Web site provisions, thereby making an appropriation. The bill would also require a reusable grocery bag producer to submit applicable certified test results to the department. The bill would authorize a person to object to a certification of a reusable grocery bag producer by filing an action for review of that certification in the superior court of a county that has jurisdiction over the reusable grocery bag producer. The bill would require the court to determine if the reusable grocery bag producer is in compliance with the provisions of the bill and, based on the court's determination, would require the court to direct the department to either remove or retain the reusable grocery bag producer on its published Internet Web site list. The bill would allow a city, county, or city and county, or the state to impose civil penalties on a person or entity that knows or reasonably should have known it is in violation of the bill's 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. The bill would declare that it occupies the whole field of the regulation of reusable grocery bags, single-use carryout bags, and recycled paper bags provided by a store and would prohibit a local public agency from enforcing or implementing an ordinance, resolution, regulation, or rule, or any amendment thereto, adopted on or after September 1, 2014, relating to those bags, against a store, except as provided. (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 from the subaccount inoperative on July 1, 2021, and repeals them as of January 1, 2022. 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 for the creation and retention of jobs and economic activity in California for the manufacture and recycling of plastic reusable grocery bags that use recycled content. The bill would require a recipient of a loan to agree, as a condition of receiving the loan, to take specified actions. (3) The bill would require the department, no later than March 1, 2018, to provide a status report to the Legislature on the implementation of the bill's provisions.
Existing law gives public school employee organizations the right to represent their members in their employment relations with public school employers, and limits the scope of representation to matters relating to wages, hours of employment, and other terms and conditions of employment, as defined. Existing law provides that all other matters are reserved to the public school employer and may not be a subject of meeting and negotiating. This bill would require a public school employer to give reasonable written notice to the exclusive representative of the employer's intent to make any change to matters within the scope of representation of those employees represented by the exclusive representative for purposes of providing the exclusive representative a reasonable amount of time to negotiate proposed changes with the public school employer. The bill would also make nonsubstantive changes to this provision. By imposing new duties on public school employers, the bill would constitute 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.
Existing law authorizes a legislative body of a city, defined to mean a city or a city and county, to establish an infrastructure financing district, adopt an infrastructure financing plan, and issue bonds, for which only the district is liable, to finance specified public facilities upon approval by 23 of the voters. Existing law authorizes an infrastructure financing district to fund infrastructure projects through tax increment financing, pursuant to the infrastructure financing plan and the agreement of affected taxing entities, as defined. Existing law requires an infrastructure financing plan to include the date on which an infrastructure financing district will cease to exist, that may not be more than 30 years from the date on which the ordinance forming the district is adopted. This bill would additionally authorize the legislative body of a city or a county, defined to include a city and county, to establish an enhanced infrastructure financing district, adopt an infrastructure financing plan, and issue bonds, for which only the district is liable, upon approval by 55% of the voters; to finance public capital facilities or other specified projects of communitywide significance, including, but not limited to, brownfield restoration and other environmental mitigation; the development of projects on a former military base; the repayment of the transfer of funds to a military base reuse authority; the acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for persons of low and moderate income for rent or purchase; the acquisition, construction, or repair of industrial structures for private use; transit priority projects; and projects to implement a sustainable communities strategy. The bill would also authorize an enhanced infrastructure financing district to utilize any powers under the Polanco Redevelopment Act. This bill would require the legislative body to establish a public financing authority, defined as the governing board of the enhanced infrastructure financing authority, comprised of members of the legislative body of the participating entities and of the public, prior to the adoption of a resolution to form an enhanced infrastructure district and infrastructure financing plan. This bill would require proceedings for the establishment of a district to be instituted by the adoption of a resolution of intention that, among other things, states the boundaries of the district, the type of public facilities and development proposed to be financed or assisted by the district, and the need for the district and the goals the district proposes to achieve. If the resolution is adopted by the legislative body after a public hearing, the bill would prohibit the public financing authority from implementing the infrastructure financing plan until specified events occur. This bill would authorize the public financing authority to initiate proceedings to issue bonds, and would require the proposal to issue bonds to be submitted to qualified electors of the proposed district, as specified. By requiring electors to make specified declarations on ballots under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand circumstances under which a person may be convicted of a crime and thereby, would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would authorize an enhanced infrastructure financing district to fund infrastructure projects through tax increment financing, pursuant to the infrastructure financing plan and the agreement of affected taxing entities, as defined. This bill would authorize the creation of an infrastructure financing district for up to 45 years from the date on which the issuance of bonds is approved, as specified. This bill would require an infrastructure financing district to contract for the performance of an independent financial and performance audit every 2 years, as specified. This bill would authorize a city, county, or special district that contains territory within the boundaries of an infrastructure financing district, upon approval of its governing body, to loan moneys to the infrastructure financing district to fund the activities described in the infrastructure financing plan, as specified. This bill would authorize an enhanced infrastructure financing district to finance a project or portion of a project that is located in, or overlaps with, a redevelopment project area or former redevelopment project area, as specified. This bill would prohibit a city or county that created a redevelopment agency from creating a district until specified conditions related to the wind down of the former redevelopment agency have been satisfied. This bill would provide that any debt or obligation of an enhanced infrastructure financing district is subordinate to an enforceable obligation of a former redevelopment agency. This bill would additionally authorize the legislative body of the city forming an enhanced infrastructure financing district to choose to dedicate any portion of its net available revenue, as defined, to the enhanced infrastructure financing district through the infrastructure financing plan, as specified. 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 that contributions to the State Peace Officers' and Firefighters' Defined Contribution Plan cease, prohibits new members from participating in the plan, and requires that the plan be terminated, as prescribed. Existing law requires that moneys in the State Peace Officers' and Firefighters' Defined Contribution Plan Fund be distributed, as specified and in accordance with federal law, including requiring that amounts payable from the fund be rolled over to the Supplemental Contributions Program, if not elected otherwise. This bill would require that the plan be terminated effective June 1, 2014, subject to obtaining appropriate approvals from the Internal Revenue Service. The bill would state that the bill is intended to constitute a governmental plan under federal tax law, as specified. Consistent with specified federal law, the bill would prohibit the corpus or income of the plan's trust from being diverted to purposes other than the exclusive benefit of the members or their beneficiaries or there being a reversion of trust funds, except as federal law permits. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law authorizes an infrastructure financing district to finance only public capital facilities of communitywide significance that provide significant benefits to an area larger than the area of the district, including, among others, highways, interchanges, ramps and bridges, arterial streets, parking facilities, transit facilities, facilities for the collection and treatment of water for urban uses, child care facilities, libraries, and facilities for the transfer and disposal of solid waste. This bill would additionally authorize an infrastructure financing district to finance public capital facilities or projects that include broadband, as defined.
Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which health care services are provided to qualified, low-income persons. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid Program provisions. Existing law provides, to the extent permitted by federal law, that adult day health care (ADHC) be excluded from coverage under the Medi-Cal program. This bill would establish the Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) program as a Medi-Cal benefit and would specify eligibility requirements for participation in the CBAS program. The bill would require that CBAS providers be licensed as ADHC centers and certified by the California Department of Aging as CBAS providers. The bill would require CBAS providers to meet specified licensing requirements and to provide care in accordance with specified regulations. The bill would require that those provisions be implemented only to the extent that federal financial participation is available. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law provides that school districts and county offices of education are responsible for the overall development of a comprehensive school safety plan for each of their constituent schools. Existing law requires the schoolsite council of a school to write and develop the comprehensive school safety plan relevant to the needs and resources of the particular school. Existing law requires schools to forward copies of their comprehensive school safety plans to the school district or county office of education for approval. Existing law encourages comprehensive school safety plans, as they are reviewed and updated, to include clear guidelines for the roles and responsibilities of certain parties with school-related health and safety responsibilities and authorizes the inclusion in these plans of primary strategies for specified purposes. This bill would encourage those guidelines to include protocols to address the mental health care of pupils who have witnessed a violent act at any time, as specified.