This measure would proclaim January 26, 2015, as India Republic Day, and would urge all Californians to join in celebrating India Republic Day.
(1) Existing law, until January 1, 2015, creates the California Massage Therapy Council and provides for the voluntary certification of massage practitioners and massage therapists by the council. Existing law specifies the requirements for the council to issue to an applicant a certificate as a massage practitioner or massage therapist, including completion of a curricula in massage and related subjects at an approved school. Existing law requires the council to immediately suspend, on an interim basis, the certificate of a certificate holder, if the council receives notice that the certificate holder has been arrested for and charged with, specified crimes, including soliciting or engaging in an act of prostitution or an act punishable as a sexually related crime. This bill would make the records of the council open to public inspection pursuant to the California Public Records Act. The bill would require an approved or registered school to notify its students if the council has removed council approval of the school. The bill would also require the council to notify the city, county, or city and county where a certificate holder is operating when the council has revoked a massage certificate. (2) Existing law authorizes a city, county, or city and county to charge a massage business or establishment a business licensing fee that is no higher than the lowest fee that is applied to other individuals and businesses providing professional services, as defined. Existing law prohibits a local building code or physical facility requirements applicable to a massage business or establishment from requiring an unlocked door when there is no staff available to ensure security of clients and massage staff who are behind closed doors. Existing law makes an owner or operator of a massage business or establishment who is a certificate holder responsible for the conduct of all employees or independent contractors working on the business premises. This bill would, instead, authorize a city, county, or city and county to charge a massage business or establishment a business licensing fee that is no higher than the average fee that is applied to other individuals and businesses providing professional services. The bill would delete the prohibition against an ordinance requiring an unlocked door as described above. The bill would require an owner or operator to be responsible, as described above, regardless of whether the owner or operator is a certificate holder. (3) Existing law authorizes a city, county, or city and county to enact an ordinance that provides for the licensing and regulation of the business of massage. This bill would expressly authorize the ordinance to prohibit an individual or entity from operating a massage business without a valid massage business license, as defined, to require that, during a massage business' operating hours, a certificate holder be present, the massage business display a list of its employees and independent contractors certificate holders, and that each employee or independent contractor present his or her state-issued identification card or United States passport to a law enforcement officer upon request. The bill would also expressly authorize the ordinance to require a massage business to provide the list of certificate holders to the enacting body, and to prohibit sexual conduct at a massage business' premises. The bill would require the legislative body to transmit a copy of the ordinance to the council. (4) Existing law authorizes a licensing body to deny a license if there is proof that the massage personnel, owners, and operators have been convicted of specified crimes, including soliciting or engaging in an act of prostitution. This bill would authorize a licensing body to deny a local massage business license if the council or licensing body of another jurisdiction has revoked the applicant's massage certificate or massage business license, respectively, the council has disciplined the applicant for unprofessional conduct or other specified acts, or the massage business is located where a previous massage business was located and the massage business license of that previous massage business was revoked. This bill would authorize a local licensing body to suspend a massage business license if the owner, operator, or an employee of a massage business is arrested for specified crimes, including soliciting or engaging in an act of prostitution, for a period up to and including any administrative and judicial hearing regarding the violation, and would require the licensing body to reinstate the massage business license within 60 days of a decision finding the person not guilty of the alleged violation. This bill would authorize a licensing body to revoke a local massage business license if the council or licensing body of another jurisdiction has revoked the owner's or operator's massage certificate or massage business license, respectively, or the council has disciplined the owner or operator for unprofessional conduct or other specified acts.
The California Clean Energy Jobs Act, an initiative approved by the voters at the November 6, 2012, statewide general election as Proposition 39, made changes to corporate income taxes and, except as specified, provides for the transfer of $550,000,000 annually from the General Fund to the Clean Energy Job Creation Fund for 5 fiscal years beginning with the 2013–14 fiscal year. Moneys in the Clean Energy Job Creation Fund are available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes of funding eligible projects that create jobs in California, improving energy efficiency and expanding clean energy generation. Existing law, among other things, provides for allocation of available funds to job training and workforce development. Existing law appropriates $3,000,000 from the fund to the California Workforce Investment Board to develop and implement a competitive grant program for eligible community-based and other training workforce organizations preparing disadvantaged youth or veterans for employment. This bill would additionally require the California Workforce Investment Board to require a grant recipient to report to the board specified information. The bill would require the board, after the first year of implementation of the program, to review and assess the program in achieving the job training and workforce development goals, identify problems and barriers, and provide solutions to improve program performance.
Existing law creates the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development and requires that the office serve the Governor as the lead entity for economic strategy and the marketing of California on issues relating to business development, private sector investment, and economic growth. Existing law prohibits an employer from ordering a mass layoff, relocation, or termination, as defined, of an industrial or commercial facility employing a prescribed number of people without first giving 60 days' written notice to, among others, affected employees and the Employment Development Department, as specified. This bill would require the Employment Development Department, upon receipt of the written notice, to forward a copy of the notice to the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development. The bill would also require the Employment Development Department and the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development each to post the notice on their Internet Web sites.
This measure would request the Congress of the United States to, among other things, act immediately to avert federal spending cuts known as "sequestration" to protect the California and national economies.
Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies to wind down the affairs of the dissolved redevelopment agencies. Existing law requires revenues equivalent to those that would have been allocated to each redevelopment agency, had the agency not been dissolved, to be allocated to the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund of each successor agency for making payments on the principal of and interest on loans, and moneys advanced to or indebtedness incurred by the dissolved redevelopment agencies. Existing law requires, from February 1, 2012, to July 1, 2012, inclusive, and for each fiscal year thereafter, the county auditor-controller, after deducting administrative costs, to allocate property tax revenues in each Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund in a specified manner. This bill, for the 2014–15 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, would prohibit any revenues derived from the imposition of a property tax rate, approved by the voters of a city, county, or city and county to make payments in support of pension programs and levied in addition to the general property tax rate, from being allocated to a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund and would, instead, require these revenues be allocated to, and when collected to be paid into, the fund of the city, county, or city and county whose voters approved the tax unless, following a written request with each Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle from the successor agency to the city, county, or city and county whose voters approved the tax, the city, county, or city and county authorizes the use of the revenues by the successor agency to pay any enforceable obligation, as specified. The bill would require any revenues derived from the imposition of a property tax rate as so described that have been pledged as security for the payment of any indebtedness obligation to be allocated to the successor agency to pay that indebtedness obligation, as specified. The bill would require all allocations of revenues derived from the imposition of a property tax rate as so described made by any county auditor-controller prior to July 1, 2014, to be deemed correct, and would prohibit any city, county, city and county, county auditor-controller, successor agency, or affected taxing entity from being subject to any claim, as specified. By adding to the duties of local government officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes criteria for determining if a handgun is unsafe. Existing law generally requires manufacturers to submit samples of new handgun models for testing to determine if they are unsafe or may be approved for sale, as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to compile a roster listing all of the handguns that have been tested and determined not to be unsafe. Other provisions of existing law, subject to exceptions, generally make it an offense to manufacture or sell a handgun that is not safe. This bill would define an owner-authorized handgun as a handgun that has a permanent feature that renders the handgun incapable of being fired except when activated by the lawful owner or owners of the handgun. The bill would specify requirements that an owner-authorized handgun would be required to meet, and would require a manufacturer that has developed an owner-authorized handgun meeting those requirements to submit the handgun for testing, at the manufacturer's expense, before the handgun may be placed on the roster of handguns determined not to be unsafe. If two owner-authorized handguns have been placed on the roster, the bill would, commencing two years from the date that the second handgun was placed on the roster, prohibit the Department of Justice from placing a handgun on the roster that is not an owner-authorized handgun. By expanding the application of provisions of law that define a criminal offense, 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.
Under existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, the State Department of Developmental Services is required to contract with regional centers to provide services and supports to individuals with developmental disabilities and their families. The services and supports to be provided by a regional center to a consumer are contained in an individual program plan (IPP) or individual family service plan (IFSP) , developed in accordance with prescribed requirements. Existing law authorizes a regional center to purchase, pursuant to vendorization or a contract, services or supports for a consumer from an individual or agency that the regional center and consumer, or when appropriate, other specified persons, determines will best accomplish all or any part of that consumer's program plan. This bill would, if a consumer, or his or her parents, legal guardian, conservator, or authorized representative, requests that a service specified in the consumer's individual program plan be provided by a service vendor that has been vendored by another regional center, authorize the service vendor to provide services to the consumer under the same contractual terms as the vendoring regional center if certain requirements are satisfied, including that the service vendor is in good standing with the vendoring regional center and that the service provider provides services at no additional costs to the consumer or the consumer's regional center. Existing law requires a regional center to include specified information on its Internet Web site for the purpose of promoting transparency and access to public information. This bill would require that information to include a list of the services that are provided directly to consumers by the regional center or through service vendors or contractors. The bill would require the list to be in a standardized form, as prescribed by the department, and to be updated at least quarterly.
(1) Existing law, the Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $11,140,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a safe drinking water and water supply reliability program. Existing law provides for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) Under existing law, various measures have been approved by the voters to provide funds for water supply and protection facilities and programs. This bill would enact the Clean, Safe, and Reliable Drinking Water Act of 2014, which, if adopted by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $8,200,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a clean, safe, and reliable drinking water program. This bill would provide for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election.
This measure would declare that the Legislature joins the County of Riverside in opposing base realignment and closure affecting the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Corona Division, and March Air Reserve Base.
