The California Public Records Act requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection and to make copies available upon request and payment of a fee unless those records are exempt from disclosure. The act defines the terms "local agency" and "state agency" for purposes of the act. This bill would revise the definition of the term "local agency" to additionally include specified auxiliary organizations established for the purpose of providing support services and specialized programs for the general benefit of a community college. This bill would revise the definition of the term "state agency" to additionally include specified auxiliary organizations and other specified entities. The bill would exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act the names of individuals who donate to specified entities if those individuals request anonymity. However, the bill would provide that this exemption does not apply if a donor, in a quid pro quo arrangement, receives anything that has more than a nominal value in exchange for the donation. This bill would also provide that it is the intent of the Legislature to reject the court's interpretation of state law regarding the application of the act to auxiliary organizations, such as the CSU Fresno Association, at issue in California State University, Fresno Assn., Inc. v. Superior Court (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 810. The bill would also provide that it is the intent of the Legislature that specified organizations be included in the definition of "state agency" solely for the purposes of the California Public Records Act.
Sponsored bills
Existing law provides that crime victims and derivative victims, as defined, may be awarded compensation by the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board from the State Restitution Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, for the pecuniary losses they suffer as a direct result of criminal acts. The board is required to approve or deny applications, based on recommendations of the board staff, within an average of 90 calendar days and no later than 180 calendar days of acceptance by the board or victim center. This bill would require the board, for purposes of meeting the requirement for the timely processing of applications, to adopt written procedures and timeframes for approving or denying applications and specified procedures for use in communicating with entities when verifying the required information. The bill would require the approval of the office of the State Chief Information Officer for the expenditure of $5,000 or more by the board on or after January 1, 2010, with regard to any technology system that is utilized for the review of applications. The bill would also require the board to inform that office of any proposed changes to the technology systems utilized to review applications and would authorize the office to take appropriate action, as necessary, to review and evaluate those proposed changes.
Existing law relating to the administration of personal income taxes authorizes individual taxpayers to contribute amounts in excess of their tax liability for the support of specified funds or accounts. This bill would allow individual taxpayers to designate on their tax returns, that a specified amount in excess of their tax liability be transferred to the Safely Surrendered Baby Fund, which would be created by this bill. This bill would provide that all moneys contributed to the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be allocated to the Franchise Tax Board and the Controller for reimbursement of costs, as provided, and to the State Department of Social Services for programs to increase public awareness and outreach regarding the Safely Surrendered Baby Law, as specified. This bill would provide that these voluntary contribution provisions are repealed on either January 1 of the 5th taxable year following the taxable year the fund first appears on the personal income tax return or on January 1 of an earlier calendar year, if the Franchise Tax Board estimates that the annual contribution amount will be less than $250,000, or an adjusted amount, as specified, for subsequent taxable years.
The federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) , provides $4.3 billion for the State Incentive Grant Fund (Race to the Top Fund) , which is a competitive grant program designed to encourage and reward states that are implementing specified educational reforms in 4 specified areas: (1) achieving equity in teacher distribution, (2) improving collection and use of data, (3) implementing standards and assessments, and (4) supporting struggling schools. The ARRA requires a Governor to apply on behalf of a state seeking a Race to the Top grant, and requires the application to include specified information. The federal Secretary of Education has issued proposed regulations for the Race to the Top Fund. This bill would require the Governor, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the President of the State Board of Education to ensure that California's application for a grant under the Race to the Top Fund includes specified provisions, including, among others, a limit on the amount of grant funds that may be used for expenditures that occur at the State Department of Education and county offices of education, and for administrative costs of local educational agencies. The bill would require the application to include the 4 core elements identified in the Multiple Pathways approach to school reform, as specified. The bill would require participating local educational agencies, no later than January 1, 2011, to have their governing bodies approve an alternative performance-based incentive compensation package for certificated staff and school administrators, as specified. The bill would require the application to include provisions for the closure of failing schools, beginning in July 2012, and to include a commitment from the State Department of Education to have proposed a new, transparent process for funding California pupils based on a weighted formula. The bill would require the application to include provisions to redesign statewide tests, as specified.
This measure would proclaim December 3, 2009, to be the Day of the Special Educator, and would urge Californians to recognize the dedication and hard work of special educators in teaching pupils with unique needs.
This measure would provide that the 2009–10 Seventh Extraordinary Session of the Legislature shall stand adjourned sine die at midnight on the date that this measure has been adopted by both houses of the Legislature.
This measure would provide that the 2009–10 Third Extraordinary Session of the Legislature shall stand adjourned sine die on the date that this measure has been adopted by both houses of the Legislature.
The California Adult Day Health Care Act provides for the licensure and regulation of adult day health care centers, with administrative responsibility for the adult day health care program shared among the State Department of Public Health, the State Department of Health Care Services, and the California Department of Aging pursuant to an interagency agreement. The Adult Day Health Medi-Cal Law establishes adult day health care services as a Medi-Cal benefit for Medi-Cal beneficiaries who meet certain criteria. Under existing law, participation in an adult day health care program requires prior authorization by the State Department of Health Care Services. Existing law authorizes the State Department of Health Care Services to implement a moratorium on the certification and enrollment into the Medi-Cal program of new adult day health care centers on a statewide basis or within a geographic area, subject to certain limitations. Existing law provides that the moratorium shall not apply to certain applicants. This bill would add applicants that are requesting expansion, have been Medi-Cal certified as an adult day health care center for at least 2 years, and located within a county having 2.25% or fewer Medi-Cal beneficiaries over 65 years of age using adult day health care services, to the list of applicants that are not subject to the moratorium. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution.
(1) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect, unless the project is exempt from the act. CEQA provides for various exemptions from its requirements. Existing law requires cities and counties to prepare, adopt, and amend general plans containing specified elements. This bill would exempt from CEQA any activity or approval, necessary or incidental to, the development, planning, design, site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval together with any accessory roadway, utility, or other infrastructure improvement to that stadium complex and associated development, for which an application for the project or approval was submitted on or before January 31, 2009, to the City of Industry, if specified requirements are met. The bill would require the city to require the stadium complex and associated development to comply with those mitigation measures that are contained in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program that is adopted by the City of Industry in connection with the stadium complex and associated development. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of the exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill also would exempt from any legal requirement concerning the content of a general plan or consistency with a general plan, and prohibit those requirements from resulting in the invalidation of, the city's approval of, and decisions regarding, specified actions taken with respect to the stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval and any accessory improvements to that stadium complex and associated development. The bill additionally would provide that a consistency determination is not required by the city for any decision with respect to those actions. (2) The bill would have retroactive application. (3) 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. (4) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution.
Under existing law, 2 or more public agencies may enter into an agreement to jointly exercise any power common to the contracting parties, as specified. This bill would provide that the Santa Clara Stadium Authority, a joint powers agency formed by the City of Santa Clara and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara, has the authority to acquire, finance, construct, manage, maintain, and operate a stadium and related facilities suitable for use by a professional football team, in addition to the powers common to the city and the redevelopment agency. The bill prohibits the redevelopment agency from expending property tax increment revenues to operate or maintain the stadium. This bill would authorize the Santa Clara Stadium Authority to let a design-build contract without utilizing a competitive bid process for the stadium construction project, if, among other requirements, a ballot measure endorsing the development of a stadium suitable for use by a professional football team is approved by voters in a citywide election, the design-build contract does not require expenditures from the general fund of the City of Santa Clara, and the design-build contract is not funded by contributions from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clara or a community facilities district except as provided in the bill. The bill would provide that redevelopment agency funds and community facilities district funds may be used to fund subcontracts awarded pursuant to a competitive bidding process established by the joint powers agency. This bill would provide that for state highway improvement projects deemed necessary by the Department of Transportation based on the construction and maintenance of the stadium, the department is the responsible agency for project development services, as specified.