Existing law requires that the housing element of a community's general plan contain a program that sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period that the local government is undertaking, or intends to undertake, to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element through the utilization of appropriate federal and state financing and subsidy programs, and the utilization of moneys in a low- and moderate-income housing fund, as specified. Existing law also requires the program to accommodate at least 50% of the very low and low-income housing need on sites designated for residential use and for which nonresidential uses or mixed-uses are not permitted, as specified. This bill would authorize a city or county to accommodate the very low and low-income housing need on sites designated for mixed uses if those sites allow 100% residential use and require that residential use occupy 50% of the total floor area of a mixed-use project. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65583.2 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1537 that would become operative if this bill and AB 1537 are both enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Sponsored bills
Existing law specifies the methods for a political party to qualify to participate in a primary election. Existing law provides that a party is qualified to participate in a primary election if, at the last preceding gubernatorial election, there was polled for any one of its candidates for any office voted on throughout the state, at least 2% of the entire vote of the state. Existing law also provides that a party is qualified to participate in a primary election if, on or before the 135th day before the primary election, it appears to the Secretary of State, as a result of examining and totaling the statement of voters transmitted by county elections officials, that voters equal in number to at least 1% of the entire vote of the state at the last gubernatorial election have declared an intention to affiliate with that party. This bill would revise these provisions for a party to qualify to participate in a primary election. This bill would provide that a party is qualified if, at the last preceding gubernatorial primary election, the sum of the votes cast for all of the candidates for an office voted on throughout the state who disclosed a preference for that party on the ballot was at least 2% of the entire vote of the state for that office. Notwithstanding this provision, the bill would authorize the party to inform the Secretary of State that it declines to have the votes cast for a candidate counted towards the 2% qualification threshold. This bill would also provide that a party is qualified to participate if it appears to the Secretary of State that voters equal in number to at least 0.33% of the total number of voters registered on the 154th day before the primary election have declared their preference for that party. If a political party did not qualify to participate in a presidential primary election, but nevertheless seeks qualification to participate in the following presidential general election, existing law specifies the methods for the party to qualify to participate in the general election. Existing law provides that a party is qualified to participate in a presidential general election if, at the last preceding gubernatorial election, there was polled for any one of its candidates for any office voted on throughout the state at least 2% of the entire vote of the state. Existing law also provides that a party is qualified to participate in a presidential general election if, on or before the 102nd day before the general election, it appears to the Secretary of State, as a result of examining and totaling the statement of voters transmitted by county elections officials, that voters equal in number to at least 1% of the entire vote of the state at the last gubernatorial election have declared an intention to affiliate with that party. This bill would revise these provisions for a party to qualify to participate in a presidential general election. This bill would provide that a party is qualified if, at the last preceding gubernatorial primary election, the sum of the votes casts for all of the candidates for an office voted on throughout the state who disclosed a preference for that party on the ballot was at least 2% of the entire vote of the state for that office. Notwithstanding this provision, the bill would authorize the party to inform the Secretary of State that it declines to have the votes cast for a candidate counted towards the 2% qualification threshold. This bill would also provide that a party is qualified to participate if it appears to the Secretary of State that voters equal in number to at least 0.33% of the total number of voters registered on the 123rd day before the presidential general election have declared their preference for that party. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 5100 and 5151 of the Elections Code, as proposed by SB 1043, to be operative only if SB 1043 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2015, and this bill is chaptered last.
Existing law requires the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, on or before September 1, 2011, to adopt emergency regulations to establish a fire prevention fee in an amount not to exceed $150 to be charged on each structure, defined as a building used or intended to be used for human habitation, on a parcel that is within a state responsibility area. This bill would delete the definition of "structure" for purposes of the fire prevention fee and instead use "habitable structure," which the bill would define to mean a building that contains one or more dwelling units that can be occupied for residential use, as provided. The bill would also include the definition of "person" and "owner of a structure," as provided. The bill would require the fee to be levied upon the owner of a habitable structure identified by the department as located within the state responsibility area if that person owns the habitable structure on July 1 of the year for which the fee is due. The bill would authorize the board to exempt from the fire prevention fee any habitable structure that is subsequently deemed uninhabitable as a result of a natural disaster during the year the fee is due if certain conditions are met. Existing law requires the board to adjust the fire prevention fee annually using prescribed methods. This bill would instead authorize the board to adjust the fee using those methods. Existing law establishes the State Responsibility Area Fire Prevention Fund and requires the board to report to the Legislature every January 1 on the status and uses of the fund. This bill would instead require the board to report to the Legislature every January 31. Existing law authorizes a person from whom the fire prevention fee is determined to be due to petition for a redetermination of whether the fee applies to that person within 30 days after service upon the person of a notice of determination. Existing law requires the petition for redetermination to be in writing and be sent to the department, the board, and the State Board of Equalization. This bill would, if a petition for redetermination is filed after the expiration of the 30-day time period, authorize the petition to be treated as an administrative protest or claim for refund if the department determines that the facts presented indicate that the fire prevention fee originally determined may have been excessive or the amount or the application of the fee may have been the result of an error by the department, its agent, or the State Board of Equalization. This bill would delete the requirements that the petition for redetermination be sent to the board and the State Board of Equalization. Existing law requires a penalty of 20% of the fee determined to be due to be added to the amount due and payable for each 30-day period in which the fee remains unpaid. This bill would prohibit the above penalty from being imposed or added after January 1, 2015, to any fee that remains unpaid or any fee that is not paid when due and payable. The bill would instead add a penalty of 10% to the amount due in accordance with existing law relating to late fee payments.
Existing law authorizes the creation by a city, county, or city and county of an infrastructure financing district, as defined, for the sole purpose of financing public facilities, subject to adoption of a resolution by the legislative body and affected taxing entities proposed to be subject to division of taxes and 23 voter approval. Existing law authorizes the legislative body to, by majority vote, initiate proceedings to issue bonds for the financing of district projects by adopting a resolution, subject to specified procedures and 23 voter approval. Existing law requires an infrastructure financing plan to include the date on which an infrastructure financing district will cease to exist, which may not be more than 30 years from the date on which the ordinance forming the district is adopted. Existing law prohibits a district from including any portion of a redevelopment project area. Existing law, the Polanco Redevelopment Act, authorizes a redevelopment agency to take any action that the agency determines is necessary and consistent with state and federal laws to remedy or remove a release of hazardous substances on, under, or from property within a project area, whether the agency owns that property or not, subject to specified conditions. Existing law also declares the intent of the Legislature that the areas of the district created be substantially undeveloped, and that the establishment of a district should not ordinarily lead to the removal of dwelling units. This bill would authorize the creation by a city, county, city and county, or joint powers authority of an infrastructure and revitalization financing district, as defined, and the issuance of debt with 23 voter approval. The bill would authorize the creation of a district for up to 40 years and the issuance of debt with a final maturity date of up to 30 years, as specified. The bill would authorize a district to finance projects in redevelopment project areas and former redevelopment project areas and former military bases. The bill would authorize the legislative body to dedicate any portion of its funds received from the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund to the district, if specified criteria are met. The bill would authorize the formation of a district to finance a project or projects on a former military base, if specified conditions are met. The bill would authorize a district to fund various projects, including, among others, watershed land used for the collection and treatment of water for urban uses, flood management, levees, bypasses, open space, habitat restoration, brownfields restoration, environmental mitigation, purchase of land and property for development purposes, including commercial property, hazardous cleanup, former military bases, and specified transportation purposes. The bill would authorize a district to implement hazardous cleanup pursuant to the Polanco Redevelopment Act, as specified. The bill would impose a specified reporting requirement on districts. The bill would state that it is the intent of the Legislature that the establishment of a district should not ordinarily lead to the removal of existing functional, habitable, and safe dwelling units, as specified. The bill would define the term "public works" for purposes of these provisions. This bill would incorporate additional substantive changes in Section 33459 of the Health and Safety Code made by SB 470, to become operative if SB 470 and this bill become effective on or before January 1, 2014, and this bill is enacted last.
(1) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, which is administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, establishes an integrated waste management program that requires each county and city and county to prepare and submit to the department a countywide integrated waste management plan. The act requires a business, which is defined as a commercial or public entity, that generates more than 4 cubic yards of commercial solid waste per week or is a multifamily residential dwelling of 5 units or more, to arrange for recycling services. Existing law also requires jurisdictions to implement a commercial solid waste recycling program meeting specified elements. This bill would, commencing April 1, 2016, require a business that generates a specified amount of organic waste per week to arrange for recycling services for that organic waste in a specified manner. The bill would decrease the amount of organic waste under which a business would be subject to those requirements from 8 cubic yards or more to 4 cubic yards or more on January 1, 2017. The bill would also require a business that generates 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week, on and after January 1, 2019, to arrange for organic waste recycling services and, if the department makes a specified determination, would decrease that amount to 2 cubic yards, on or after January 1, 2020. This bill would require the contract or work agreement between a business and a gardening or landscaping service to require the organic waste generated by those services to comply with the requirements of this act. This bill would require each jurisdiction, on and after January 1, 2016, to implement an organic waste recycling program to divert organic waste from the businesses subject to this act, except as specified with regard to rural jurisdictions, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program by imposing new duties on local governmental agencies. The bill would require each jurisdiction to report to the department on its progress in implementing the organic waste recycling program, and the department would be required to review whether a jurisdiction is in compliance with this act. This bill would authorize a local governmental agency to charge and collect a fee from an organic waste generator to recover the local governmental agency's costs incurred in complying with this act. This bill would require the department to identify and recommend actions to address permitting and siting challenges and to encourage the continued viability of the state's organic waste processing and recycling infrastructure, in partnership with the California Environmental Protection Agency and other specified state and regional agencies. The bill also would require the department to cooperate with local jurisdictions and industry to provide assistance for increasing the feasibility of organic waste recycling and to identify certain state financing mechanisms and state funding incentives and post this information on its Internet Web site. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, requires a person who discharges waste into the waters of the state in violation of waste discharge requirements or other order or prohibition issued by a California regional water quality control board or the State Water Resources Control Board to clean up the waste or to abate the effects of the waste. Existing law authorizes the regional board to expend available moneys to perform any cleanup, abatement, or remedial work required under those circumstances. This bill would prohibit the state board, regional board, or an employee of the state board or regional board from being held liable in a civil proceeding for trespass or any other act that is necessary to carry out an investigation, cleanup, abatement, or other remedial work. This bill would also prohibit the state board, regional board, or any authorized person from incurring any obligation to undertake additional investigation, cleanup, abatement, or other remedial work solely because of its decision to undertake that work. The bill would require that these provisions apply to a claim against a public entity presented on or after January 1, 2015, or, if no claim is presented, to a cause of action in a civil complaint or a writ petition filed on or after January 1, 2015. The bill would also make various technical, nonsubstantive changes.
The Senior Citizens and Disabled Citizens Property Tax Postponement Law, until February 20, 2009, authorized a claimant, as defined, to file a claim with the Controller to postpone the payment of ad valorem property taxes, if household income, as defined, did not exceed specified amounts. That law authorized the Controller, upon approval of the claim, to either make a payment directly to specified entities, or to issue the claimant a certificate of eligibility that constituted a written promise of the state to pay the amount specified on the certificate, as provided. That law required these payments to be made out of specified funds appropriated to the Controller, and also required certain repaid property tax postponement payments to be paid into an impound account and transferred, as specified, to the General Fund. That law also required all sums paid by the Controller for postponed property taxes to be secured by a lien in favor of the State of California. Existing law, on and after February 20, 2009, prohibits a person from filing a claim for postponement, and prohibits the Controller from accepting applications for postponement, under the Senior Citizens and Disabled Citizens Property Tax Postponement Law. This bill would make inoperative the prohibition against a person filing a claim for postponement and the Controller from accepting applications for postponement under the program as of July 1, 2016, and would repeal this prohibition on January 1, 2017. This bill would authorize a claim for postponement to be filed after September 1 of the fiscal year in which the postponement is claimed and on or before April 10 of that fiscal year, as specified. This bill would limit the household income amount of a claimant to $35,000 and would exclude losses and nonexpenses from "income" for purposes of these provisions. This bill would also exclude mobilehomes and houseboats from the scope of these provisions, and make conforming changes to related provisions. The Senior Citizens Mobilehome Property Tax Postponement Law provides for all amounts postponed in the case of a mobilehome to be due if the claimant dies, unless the surviving spouse or other person eligible to postpone continues to occupy the mobilehome. This bill would limit this exception to the circumstance in which the surviving spouse who was previously approved continues to occupy the mobilehome. This bill would create in the State Treasury a Senior Citizens and Disabled Citizens Property Tax Postponement Fund and would require the fund to be interest-bearing at a specified rate. This bill would delete the requirement that funds be placed in an impound account and would, instead, require that repaid property tax postponement payments be directly deposited into the newly created fund. The bill would require the Controller to transfer any moneys in the fund in excess of specified amounts to the General Fund each year. The bill would require any impound account funds remaining upon the enactment of this bill to be transferred to the fund. The bill would continuously appropriate these funds to the Controller for purposes of administering the property tax postponement program, as specified. Existing law authorizes the Controller to establish a fee to implement these provisions, not to exceed $10. This bill would authorize the Controller to charge a fee not exceeding $30. Existing law authorizes the Controller to subordinate the lien for postponed property taxes if the Controller determines subordination is appropriate. This bill would eliminate that authorization and make other conforming changes. Existing law requires that the owner's equity interest in the residential dwelling be at least 20% of the full value of the property at the time the claimant files an initial postponement claim in order to be eligible to participate in the postponement program. This bill would increase the equity requirement to at least 40% for each postponement claim. Existing law requires the repayment of postponed taxes in specified circumstances. This bill would, in addition, require repayment if the claimant refinances the dwelling or has elected to participate in a revenue mortgage program for the dwelling. The bill would require the tax collector or the assessor to notify the Controller if assessment records applicable to property for which taxes have been postponed reveal a change in ownership within 60 days of processing that change, and require that the county tax collector or assessor notify the Controller within 60 days of all property subject to a "Notice of Lien for Postponed Property Taxes" and processed for notice of becoming tax defaulted or of the claimant for that property, if residential, transferring ownership or changing his or her mailing address, or having been determined to be deceased. Existing law requires a claim for postponement to be filed after May 15 of the calendar year in which the fiscal year for which postponement is claimed begins, and on or before December 10 of that fiscal year. This bill would instead require a claim for postponement to be filed after September 1 of the calendar year in which the fiscal year for which postponement is claimed begins, and on or before April 10 of that fiscal year. Existing law makes optional certain duties of local agencies related to recordation of the tax lien. This bill would delete that provision, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the notice of lien to be recorded within 14 days of the transfer of funds and notice of lien to the county by the Controller. The bill would impose additional requirements in the case of liens upon mobilehome loans established prior to February 20, 2009, and specify procedures to be followed by the Controller if the obligation secured by the lien is paid in full or otherwise discharged. Existing law requires, if a postponement claim, as specified, is filed timely but before the delinquency date of the first or 2nd installment of property taxes, that any delinquent penalties and interest for the fiscal year be canceled unless the failure to perfect the claim was due to willful neglect on the part of the claimant or representative, in which case the certificates of eligibility for the fiscal year can be used to pay delinquent taxes only if accompanied by sufficient amounts to pay the delinquent interest and penalties. This bill would instead require, if a postponement claim is filed timely before the delinquency date of the 2nd installment of property taxes on the secured roll, that any delinquent penalties, costs, fees, and interest accrued for the fiscal year be canceled. This bill would instead require, in the event of willful neglect to perfect the claim, that an electronic funds transfer for that current fiscal year be used to pay only the delinquent taxes. This bill would authorize the tax collector, if the payment amount sufficient to pay all of the delinquent penalties, costs, fees, and interest is not received by the tax collector within 30 days from the date of the electronic funds transfer, to return the electronic funds transfer to the Controller to deny the postponement claim. This bill would require the Controller to provide a specified notification to the claimant and a copy of the notification to the tax collector. This bill would also require the Controller, upon written request of the tax collector, to provide the tax collector with information that is required for the preparation and enforcement of the sale of tax-defaulted property. The bill would require the tax collector or assessor, in the case of a tax-defaulted property sale, to include the outstanding balance of the property tax postponement loan in the minimum bid. The bill would require that, in the event that the property fails to receive the minimum bid and the minimum bid is reduced, all moneys paid to the Controller's office and county tax collector be a proportionate allocation of the total moneys owed. The bill would also require the tax collector or his or her designee to certify, under penalty of perjury, that the information is requested for these purposes. This bill would also provide that any information provided to the tax collector is not a public record and is not open to public inspection. By requiring the tax collector to make a certification under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the crime of perjury thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. Existing law authorizes a tax collector, 5 years or more after a nonresidential commercial property has become tax defaulted, to sell the property, as specified. This bill would authorize a county to adopt conditions and procedures to delay the sale of property that it deems may be eligible to file a property tax postponement claim, as specified, and to cancel any delinquent penalties, costs, fees, and interest associated with these properties. Existing law requires the price at which certain tax-defaulted property may be offered for sale to be the total amount necessary to redeem the property, plus costs. This bill would require the outstanding balance, as defined, of any property tax postponement loan to also be included in the price described above. Existing law requires, after certain other amounts have been satisfied, the proceeds from the sale of tax-defaulted property to be distributed to taxing agencies in specified proportions to each assessment fund with the remaining balance to each tax fund. This bill would require the proceeds remaining after the distributions described above to be distributed to the State Controller for the outstanding balance of any property tax postponement loan. 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. 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes the Department of Veterans Affairs, which is responsible for administering various programs and services for the benefit of veterans. Existing law provides for the licensure of residential care facilities for the elderly, community care facilities, and residential care facilities for persons with chronic, life-threatening illness by the State Department of Social Services. Existing law exempts from these provisions specified facilities, including general acute care hospitals and clinics. Existing law authorizes the California State Auditor, upon the request by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee and to the extent funding is available, to audit a state or local governmental agency, as defined, or any other publicly created entity. This bill would establish the Medical Foster Home Pilot Program and would, commencing June 1, 2015, and until January 1, 2018, authorize a United States Department of Veterans Affairs (USDVA) facility to establish a medical foster home that is not subject to licensure or regulation as a residential care facility for the elderly, a community care facility, or a residential care facility for persons with chronic, life-threatening illness provided that specified federal requirements are satisfied, the USDVA facility establishing the home agrees to be subject to the jurisdiction of the California State Auditor, and the USDVA obtains criminal background information for caregivers and specified individuals residing in the home. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature that the California State Auditor, through a request to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, conduct an audit evaluating the pilot program created by this bill no sooner than January 1, 2016, as specified.
Existing law, the California Retail Food Code, establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for retail food facilities and provides for the enforcement of those standards by local health agencies and by the State Department of Public Health, as specified. The code requires farm stands, as defined, to comply with specified requirements governing food safety and sanitation. A violation of the code is a crime. This bill would authorize, except under a specified circumstance, a community food producer or a gleaner, as defined, to sell or provide whole uncut fruits or vegetables, or unrefrigerated shell eggs, directly to the public or to a permitted restaurant if the community food producer meets specified requirements, including that the produce is labeled with the name and address of the community food producer and that egg production is limited to 15 dozen eggs per month. The bill would authorize a city or county health enforcement office to require a community food producer or gleaner to register with the city or county and to provide specified information, including, but not limited to, the name, address, and telephone number of the community food producer or gleaner. The bill would also authorize an enforcement officer to enter into and inspect the operations of a community food producer or gleaner in response to a food safety recall or food safety complaint. The bill would authorize an enforcement officer to issue a cease and desist order for violations of these provisions, which would prohibit the community food producer or gleaner from further sales until the operations of the community food producer or gleaner are reinspected and cleared by the enforcement officer's agency. The bill would also authorize the enforcement officer to recover reasonable costs associated with an inspection from the community food producer or gleaner. Existing law makes it unlawful for an egg handler, as defined, to hold, store, transport, or display eggs that are packed or graded for human consumption unless the eggs are held, stored, transported, or displayed consistent with specified requirements. Existing law provides that certified farmers' markets, as defined, are not required to comply with that provision. This bill would instead provide that direct marketing activities, including certified farmers' markets, community food producers, community-supported agriculture, and farm stands, as each of those terms are defined, are not required to comply with the above-described provision relating to an egg handler. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 113789 of the Health and Safety Code, proposed by SB 170 and SB 1235, that would become operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are chaptered and become effective January 1, 2015, and this bill is chaptered last. Because the bill would create new crimes and would impose additional duties on local food inspectors, 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 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.
Existing law establishes the Department of Food and Agriculture, which is tasked with, among other things, promoting and protecting the agricultural industry of the state, and seeking to enhance, protect, and perpetuate the ability of the private sector to produce food and fiber in a way that benefits the general welfare and economy of the state. Existing law also establishes the California Healthy Food Financing Initiative for the purpose of promoting healthy food access in the state. This bill would create the Office of Farm to Fork within the department, and would require the office, to the extent that resources are available, to work with various entities, including, among others, the agricultural industry and other organizations involved in promoting food access, to increase the amount of agricultural products available to underserved communities and schools in the state. The bill would require the office to, among other things, identify urban and rural communities that lack access to healthy food, and to coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies to promote and increase awareness of programs that promote greater food access. The bill would create the Farm to Fork Account in the Department of Food and Agriculture Fund that would consist of money made available from federal, state, industry, and other sources, and would continuously appropriate the money deposited in the account without regard to fiscal years to carry out the purposes of the Office of Farm to Fork. By creating a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. The bill, until January 1, 2020, would also require the department, in any year in which funds are received into or expended from the Farm to Fork Account, to submit to the Legislature an overview of the account's income and expenditures.