The Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act provides for the creation in any county of a local transportation authority and authorizes the imposition by the authority, by ordinance, of a retail transactions and use tax, subject to approval of the ordinance by 23 of the voters. Existing law provides for the authority to adopt a transportation expenditure plan for the proceeds of the tax, and requires the entire adopted transportation expenditure plan to be included in the voter information guide sent to voters. This bill, upon the request of an authority, would exempt a county elections official from including the entire adopted transportation expenditure plan in the voter information guide, if the authority posts the plan on its Internet Web site, and the sample ballot and the voter information guide sent to voters include information on viewing an electronic version of the plan on the Internet Web site, as prescribed, and for obtaining a printed copy of the plan by calling the county elections office. The bill would require the county elections official to mail a printed copy of the plan at no cost to each person requesting a copy, if the county elections official exercises this authority.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as a regional agency in the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) as a separate entity governed by the same governing board as MTC and makes BATA responsible for the programming, administration, and allocation of toll revenues from the state-owned toll bridges in the San Francisco Bay area. Existing law authorizes BATA to increase the toll rates for certain purposes, including to meet its bond obligations, provide funding for certain costs associated with the bay area state-owned toll bridges, including for the seismic retrofit of those bridges, and provide funding to meet the requirements of certain voter-approved regional measures. Existing law provided for submission of 2 regional measures to the voters of 7 bay area counties in 1988 and 2004 relative to specified increases in bridge auto tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges, subject to approval by a majority of the voters. This bill would require the City and County of San Francisco and the other 8 counties in the San Francisco Bay area to conduct a special election, to be known as Regional Measure 3, on a proposed increase in the amount of the toll rate charged on the state-owned toll bridges in that area to be used for specified projects and programs. The bill would require BATA to select the amount of the proposed increase, not to exceed $3, to be placed on the ballot for voter approval. If approved by the voters, the bill would authorize BATA, beginning 6 months after the election approving the toll increase, to phase in the toll increase over a period of time and to adjust the toll increase for inflation after the toll increase is phased in completely. The bill would specify that, except for the inflation adjustment, providing funding to meet the requirements of voter approved regional measures, and as otherwise specified in statute, the toll increase adopted pursuant to the results of this election may not be changed without the statutory authorization of the Legislature. By requiring this election, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require BATA to reimburse from toll revenues, as specified, the counties and the City and County of San Francisco for the cost of submitting the measure to the voters. This bill would require BATA to establish an independent oversight committee within 6 months of the effective date of the Regional Measure 3 toll increase with a specified membership, to ensure the toll revenues generated by the toll increase are expended consistent with a specified expenditure plan. The bill would require BATA to submit an annual report to the Legislature on the status of the projects and programs funded by the toll increase. (2) Existing law authorizes BATA to vary the toll structure on each of the bay area state-owned toll bridges and to provide discounts for vehicles classified by BATA as high-occupancy vehicles. This bill would additionally authorize BATA to provide discounts for vehicles that pay for tolls electronically or through other non-cash methods and to charge differential rates based on the chosen method. This bill, with respect to the Regional Measure 3 toll increase, would require BATA to provide a 50% discount on the amount of that toll increase on the 2nd bridge crossing for those commuters using a two-axle vehicle, who pay tolls electronically or through other noncash methods and who cross 2 bridges during commute hours, as specified. Existing law, if BATA establishes high-occupancy vehicle lane fee discounts or access for vehicles classified by BATA as high-occupancy vehicles for any bridge, requires BATA to collaborate with the Department of Transportation to reach agreement on how the occupancy requirements shall apply on each segment of highway that connects with that bridge. This bill would instead require BATA to establish those occupancy requirements in consultation with the department. (3) Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) , governed by a board of directors, with specified powers and duties relative to the construction and operation of a rapid transit system. This bill would create the Independent Office of the BART Inspector General within BART. The bill would provide for the board of directors to nominate 3 persons to the Governor and for the Governor to appoint one of those nominees to serve as the Inspector General for a 4-year term. The bill would require the Inspector General to be removed from office by the board of directors, subject to the approval of the Governor, under certain circumstances. The bill would specify the duties and responsibilities of the Inspector General and would require the Inspector General to submit an annual report to the board of directors and the Legislature. The bill would provide for the office to receive $1,000,000 from an allocation of bridge toll revenue from BATA and, in the second and subsequent years of operation of the office, would authorize BATA to increase that amount, as specified. The bill would make these provisions operative upon an affirmative vote to increase tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges pursuant to Regional Measure 3 or related provisions. (4) Existing law authorizes the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) to conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane program on 2 corridors included in the high-occupancy vehicle lane system in Santa Clara County. Existing law authorizes a HOT lane established as part of this program on State Highway Route 101 to extend into the County of San Mateo as far as the high-occupancy lane in the County of San Mateo existed as of January 1, 2011, subject to agreement of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. This bill would delete the authorization for a HOT lane to extend into the specified portion of San Mateo County as part of a value pricing program established on 2 corridors in Santa Clara County. The bill would instead authorize VTA to specifically conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll lane program on State Highway Route 101 in San Mateo County in coordination with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, as prescribed. (5) 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 the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law sets forth various requirements for the issuance of diplomas conferred upon a pupil as evidence of graduation from high school. Existing law establishes the Golden State Seal Merit Diploma for the purpose of recognizing pupils who have mastered the high school curriculum. Existing law also establishes the State Seal of Biliteracy, awarded by the Superintendent of Public Instruction in accordance with specified criteria, to recognize high school graduates who have attained a high level of proficiency in speaking, reading, and writing in one or more languages in addition to English. This bill would require the Superintendent, on or before January 1, 2020, to recommend to the State Board of Education criteria for awarding a State Seal of Civic Engagement to pupils who have demonstrated excellence in civics education and participation and have demonstrated an understanding of the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and the democratic system of government. The bill would require the Superintendent to consider, among other criteria, the successful completion of history, government, and civics courses, including courses that incorporate character education, and voluntary participation in community service or extracurricular activities. The bill would require the state board, on or before January 31, 2021, to adopt, reject, or modify the criteria recommended by the Superintendent. The bill would require the Superintendent to prepare and deliver to participating school districts the seal insignia to be affixed to the diploma or transcript of a pupil awarded the State Seal of Civic Engagement. The bill would also require participating school districts to maintain records in order to identify pupils who have earned the State Seal of Civic Engagement and to affix the appropriate insignia to the diploma or transcript of those pupils.
(1) Existing law establishes procedures for the formation of health care districts and regional open-space districts or authorities and prescribes the powers, functions, and duties of those districts or authorities, including competitive bidding requirements relating to the construction of facilities or other buildings. Existing law authorizes certain types of local agencies and other entities to use the design-build process when contracting for the construction of a building or improvements directly related to construction of certain facilities or buildings in those entities' jurisdictions, as specified. Existing law sets forth the procurement process for design-build projects, as specified, and requires specified information submitted by design-build entities to be certified under penalty of perjury. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2023, the Peninsula Health Care District, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, and the Santa Clara Valley Open-Space Authority to use the design-build process for the construction of facilities or other buildings in those entities, as specified. Because the bill would expand the application of the procurement process to additional design-build entities, the bill would expand the crime of perjury, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law, except as specified, authorizes a local agency, with approval of its governing body, to procure design-build contracts for public works projects in excess of $1,000,000, awarding the contract either the low bid or the best value, provided that those provisions do not apply to any projects on the state highway system. This bill would exempt the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and the Santa Clara Valley Open-Space Authority from the minimum project limitation of $1,000,000. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Peninsula Health Care District, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, and the Santa Clara Valley Open-Space Authority. (3) Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2020, the Counties of Alameda, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Solano, and Yuba to select a bidder on the basis of best value, as defined, for construction projects in excess of $1,000,000. Existing law requires that bidders verify specified information under oath. This bill would expand this authorization to include the County of San Mateo. By expanding the bidders required to verify specified information under oath, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. The bill would additionally authorize these counties to use a best value construction contracting method to award individual annual contracts, not to exceed three $3,000,000, adjusted annually to reflect the percentage change in the California Consumer Price Index, for repair, remodeling, or other repetitive work to be done according to unit prices, as defined. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for County of San Mateo. (4) 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 defines and regulates dating service contracts. Existing law requires a dating service contract to be in writing and requires that a copy of the contract be provided to the buyer at the time he or she signs the contract. Existing law further requires that a dating service contract contain a conspicuous statement, placed as specified, regarding the right of the buyer to cancel the agreement. Existing law establishes procedures for cancellation, including providing that cancellation occurs when the buyer gives written notice of cancellation by mail, telegram, or delivery to the seller at the address specified in the agreement or offer. This bill would establish specific alternate provisions for a dating service contract with an online dating service, as defined. The alternate provisions would include requirements regarding entering into a contract online, providing an electronic copy of the contract to the buyer, and including a version of the conspicuous statement in the online contract. The bill would also provide for different terms of contract for online dating service contracts and for the cancellation of such a contract by email. The bill would additionally impose prescribed requirements on an online dating service to maintain both a reference or link to information on dating safety awareness and a means to report the behavior of other online dating service users.
Existing law establishes a statewide system of courts with a superior court of one or more judges in each county. Existing law authorizes the Judicial Council to prescribe the methods, means, and standards for electronic collection of data related to court administration, practice, and procedure. This bill would require the Judicial Council, if certain funding is provided, to report to the Legislature, on or before June 1, 2020, on a study of veterans and veterans treatment courts that includes a statewide assessment, as specified, of veterans treatment courts currently in operation and a survey of counties that do not operate veterans treatment courts that identifies barriers to program implementation and assesses the need for veterans treatment courts in those counties. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2021.
(1) Existing law, the Political Reform Act of 1974, provides for the comprehensive regulation of campaign financing and activities. The act requires a committee that supports or opposes ballot measures to name and identify itself using a name or phrase that clearly identifies the economic or other special interests of its major donors of $50,000 or more. The act also requires that the identity of a common employer shared by major donors be disclosed. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) The act defines "expenditure" as a payment, a forgiveness of a loan, a payment of a loan by a 3rd party, or an enforceable promise to make a payment, unless it is clear from the surrounding circumstances that it is not made for political purposes. This bill, which would be known as the California Disclose Act, would describe circumstances in which a payment would be made for political purposes within the meaning of the definition of "expenditure." (3) The act prohibits a candidate or committee from sending a mass mailing unless the name, street address, and city of the candidate or committee are shown on the outside of each piece of mail in the mass mailing, as specified. This bill would additionally require the name of such an entity to be disclosed in a mass electronic mailing, as defined, that the entity sends. The bill would provide that these disclosure requirements do not apply if the mass mailing or mass electronic mailing is paid for by an independent expenditure. (4) The act prohibits a candidate, committee, or slate mailer organization from expending campaign funds to pay for specified telephone calls that advocate support of, or opposition to, a candidate, ballot measure, or both, unless the name of the organization that authorized or paid for the call is disclosed to the recipient of the call during the course of each call. This bill would instead apply these requirements to a candidate, a candidate controlled committee established for an elective office for the controlling candidate, a political party committee, and a slate mailer organization that expends campaign funds to pay for such telephone calls. The bill would provide that these disclosure requirements do not apply if the telephone call is paid for by an independent expenditure. (5) The act also requires advertisements, as defined, to include prescribed disclosure statements, including, among others, a requirement that the disclosure statements include the names of the persons who made the 2 highest cumulative contributions, as defined, to the committee paying for the advertisement. This bill would repeal and recast provisions of the act relating to advertisement disclosure statements. The bill would revise the definition of "advertisement" to exclude a number of communications, including communications that involve wearing apparel, sky writing, and certain electronic media communications, as specified. The bill would also replace existing advertisement disclosure statements with newly prescribed disclosure statements that identify the name of the committee paying for the advertisement and the top contributors to that committee. The bill would define "top contributors" for purposes of these provisions as the persons from whom the committee paying for the advertisement received its 3 highest cumulative contributions, as specified. The bill would exempt certain committees, including committees that make independent expenditures totaling $1,000 or more in a calendar year, from the requirement to disclose the top contributors in advertisement disclosure statements. The bill would also prescribe location and format criteria for the disclosure statements that are specific to radio and telephone, television and video, print, and electronic media advertisements. (6) The act imposes, in addition to other penalties, a fine of up to triple the amount of the cost of an advertisement on a person who violates the disclosure requirements for advertisements. This bill would revise the scope of violations subject to that fine by specifying that it applies to certain disclosure requirements and intentional violations. (7) The act prohibits a person from making a contribution as an intermediary on behalf of another person without disclosing to the recipient of the contribution specified information about both the intermediary and the source of the contribution. The act also prohibits a person from making a contribution to a committee on the condition or with the agreement that it will be contributed to a particular candidate unless the contribution is disclosed in compliance with those requirements for contributions made by an intermediary. This bill would prohibit a person from making a contribution to a committee or candidate that is earmarked unless the contribution is disclosed in compliance with the requirements for contributions made by an intermediary. The bill would also describe circumstances in which a contribution is deemed to be earmarked. The bill would impose additional disclosure requirements in connection with earmarked contributions from one committee to another. (8) Because a violation of the act is punishable as a misdemeanor, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (9) The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing federal law, the National School Lunch Act, establishes a federal subsidy program to provide free and reduced-price meals to eligible children in schools. As a condition of participation, federal law requires the State Department of Education and participating local educational agencies to comply with a provision, known as the Buy American provision, that requires school food authorities, as defined, to purchase, to the maximum extent possible, domestic commodities or products. Existing federal regulations establish procedures for administrative review and compliance with specific program requirements, including the Buy American provision. Under existing state law, the State Department of Education and local educational agencies administer the National School Lunch Act programs. This bill would require the department to take certain actions to monitor and support school food authorities' compliance with the Buy American provision. The bill would state that its provisions are operative only to the extent mandated under federal law.
(1) Existing law, the State Bar Act, makes it a cause for suspension, disbarment, or other discipline for any member of the State Bar to report suspected immigration status or threaten to report suspected immigration status of a witness or party to a civil or administrative action or his or her family member, as defined, to a federal, state, or local agency because the witness or party exercises or has exercised a right related to his or her employment. This bill would expand that provision to make it a cause for suspension, disbarment, or other discipline for a member of the State Bar to report suspected immigration status or threaten to report suspected immigration status of a witness or party to a civil or administrative action or his or her family member, as defined, to a federal, state, or local agency because the witness or party exercises or has exercised a right related to the hiring of residential real property. (2) Existing law provides that a tenant of real property, property for a term less than life, or the executor of his or her estate, is guilty of unlawful detainer if, among other things, he or she continues in possession, in person or by subtenant, of the property or any part of the property, after the expiration of the term for which it is let to him or her, except as specified. Existing law authorizes a tenant of residential real property to assert as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action based upon a default in the payment of rent that the lessor failed to comply with certain requirements relating to the safety and habitability of the dwelling. This bill would prohibit a lessor from causing a tenant or occupant to quit involuntarily or bring an action to recover possession because of the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant, occupant, or other person known to the lessor to be associated with a tenant or occupant, unless the lessor is complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. The bill would authorize a tenant or occupant to assert as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action that a lessor violated this provision. The bill would also establish a rebuttable presumption that an affirmative defense is successful if the lessor approved the tenant or occupant to take possession of the unit before filing the unlawful detainer action and included in the unlawful detainer action specified claims. (3) Existing law makes it unlawful for a lessor to engage in specified activities for the purpose of influencing a lessee to vacate a dwelling, including using, or threatening to use, force, willful threats, or menacing conduct that interferes with the tenant's quiet enjoyment of the premises and that would create an apprehension of harm in a reasonable person. This bill would also prohibit a lessor from threatening to disclose information regarding or relating to the immigration status or citizenship status of a tenant, occupant, or other person associated with a tenant or occupant for the purpose of influencing a tenant to vacate a dwelling. (4) Existing law prohibits a lessor, or an agent of a lessor, from making any inquiry regarding or based on the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of residential real property, or from requiring a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of the rental property make any statement, representation, or certification concerning his or her immigration or citizenship status. Existing law provides that the prohibitions described above do not prohibit a lessor from complying with any legal obligation under federal law. This bill would also prohibit a lessor, or an agent of a lessor, from disclosing to any person or entity information regarding or relating to the immigration or citizenship status of any tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of the rental property for the purpose of, or with the intent of, harassing or intimidating a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant, retaliating against a tenant or occupant for the exercise of his or her rights, influencing a tenant or occupant to vacate a dwelling, or recovering possession of the dwelling. The bill would clarify that the term "federal law" in the provision described above includes any legal obligation of a lessor under a federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant, and would broaden that provision to include any legal obligation of a lessor under a subpoena, warrant, or other order issued by a court. This bill would make it unlawful for a lessor to disclose to any immigration authority, law enforcement agency, or local, state, or federal agency information regarding or relating to the immigration or citizenship status of any tenant, occupant, or other person known to the lessor to be associated with a tenant or occupant, as provided, for the purpose of, or with the intent of, harassing or intimidating a tenant or occupant, retaliating against a tenant or occupant for the exercise of his or her rights, influencing a tenant or occupant to vacate a dwelling, or recovering possession of the dwelling, unless the lessor is complying with any legal obligation under federal law, or a subpoena, warrant, or order issued by a court. The bill would require a court to order a lessor to pay specified civil penalties in the event of a violation of these provisions to the tenant, and to issue injunctive relief to prevent the lessor from engaging in similar conduct in the future, and would require the court to notify the district attorney of the county in which the real property for hire at issue was located of a potential violation of specified laws relating to extortion. The bill would also require a court to award attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party in an action under these provisions. The bill would prohibit a tenant, occupant, or person known to the landlord to be associated with a tenant or occupant, from waiving his or her rights under these provisions. The bill would authorize a nonprofit organization exempt from federal income taxation to bring an action for injunctive relief under these provisions. (5) Existing law provides that, if a lessor retaliates against a lessee of a dwelling for exercising his or her rights or because of a complaint to an appropriate agency as to tenantability and if the lessee is not in default as to the payment of rent, the lessor may not recover possession, cause the lessee to quit involuntarily, increase the rent, or decrease any services within 180 days of the occurrence of specified events. This bill would provide that a lessor would violate that prohibition if the lessor reported, or threatened to report, the lessee, or individuals known to the lessor to be associated with the lessee, to immigration authorities, but would provide that a lessor would not violate that prohibition if the lessor was complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. (6) Existing law prohibits a lessor from retaliating against a lessee because he or she has lawfully organized or participated in a lessees' association or an organization advocating lessees' rights or has lawfully and peaceably exercised any rights under the law by increasing rent, decreasing services, causing a lessee to quit involuntarily, bringing an action to recover possession, or from threatening to do any of those acts. This bill would provide that a lessor would violate that prohibition if the lessor reported, or threatened to report, the lessee, or individuals known to the lessor to be associated with the lessee, to immigration authorities, but would provide that a lessor would not violate that prohibition if the lessor was complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. (7) Existing law declares that all protections, rights, and remedies available under state law are available to all individuals in the state who have applied for employment or are employed, regardless of immigration status, as specified. Existing law also declares, for the purposes of enforcing state labor, employment, civil rights, and employee housing laws, that a person's immigration status is irrelevant to the issue of liability and that discovery into a person's immigration status is prohibited unless the person seeking to make the inquiry has shown by clear and convincing evidence that the inquiry is necessary to comply with federal immigration law. Existing law also provides that the immigration status of a minor child seeking recovery under any applicable law is irrelevant to the issues of liability or remedy and would prohibit discovery or other inquiry in a civil action or proceeding into a minor child's immigration status, with specified exceptions. This bill would declare that the immigration or citizenship status of any person is irrelevant to any issue of liability or remedy under specified provisions of law relating to the rights of tenants, and would prohibit inquiry being made in a civil action initiated to enforce those laws into a person's immigration or citizenship status unless 2 exceptions to that prohibition apply. (8) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1940.3 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 299 to be operative only if this bill and AB 299 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act, an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, establishes the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission to oversee various mental health programs funded by the act. Proposition 63 requires the State Department of Health Care Services, in coordination with counties, to establish a program designed to prevent mental illnesses from becoming severe and disabling. This bill would establish an advisory committee to the commission for purposes of creating an early psychosis and mood disorder detection and intervention competitive selection process to, among other things, expand the provision of high-quality, evidence-based early psychosis and mood disorder detection and intervention services in this state by providing funding to the counties for this purpose. The bill would require a county that receives an award of funds to contribute local funds, as specified. This bill would prescribe the membership of the advisory committee, including the chair of the commission, or his or her designee. The committee would, among other duties, provide advice and guidance on approaches to early psychosis and mood disorder detection and intervention programs. This bill also would establish the Early Psychosis and Mood Disorder Detection and Intervention Fund within the State Treasury and would provide that moneys in the fund shall be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the commission for the purposes of the bill. The fund would consist of private donations and federal, state, and private grants. The bill would authorize the commission to elect not to make awards if available funds are insufficient for that purpose. The bill would authorize the advisory committee to coordinate and recommend an allocation of funding to the commission for clinical research studies, as specified. The bill would require the results of those studies to be made available annually to the public. The bill would also state that funds shall not be appropriated from the General Fund for the purposes of the bill and that implementation of the grant program shall be contingent upon the deposit into the fund of at least $500,000 in nonstate funds for the purpose of funding grants and administrative costs for the commission.