Asm. Mike Gatto

This measure would designate the week of April 18 to 24, 2015, as "California Week of Remembrance for the Armenian Genocide of 1915–1923," commemorate the week of remembrance through the Armenian Genocide Commemorative Project, call upon Congress and the President of the United States to recognize the atrocities committed against the Armenian people, and call upon the Republic of Turkey to acknowledge the facts of the Armenian Genocide and work toward a just resolution.

The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws, including a credit against those taxes for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, in an amount equal to a specified percentage of either 20% or 25%, respectively, of the qualified expenditures, as defined, attributable to the production of a qualified motion picture in California, or, where the qualified motion picture has relocated to California or is an independent film, as provided. Existing law imposes specified duties on the California Film Commission related to the administration of the credits, including a requirement to allocate the tax credits until July 1, 2017, and limits the aggregate amount of credits that may be allocated to qualified motion pictures in any fiscal year to $100,000,000, through the 2016–17 fiscal year. This bill, under the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, would, among other things, remove the sunset provisions, thus extending the credit indefinitely, revise the limit on the aggregate amount of credits that may be allocated in a fiscal year to $____, revise how the credit amount is determined for specified qualified motion pictures, provide that credit amount for television series shall be 20% of qualified expenditures, provide that the credit amounts may be increased based on specified criteria, and reserve up to $____ and $____ for television series and for specified productions that perform postproduction in the state. This bill would also, under both laws for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2014, allow a credit against tax in an amount as provided in a written agreement between the California Film Commission and the taxpayer, not to exceed 5% of an investment made by the taxpayer in a qualified film and digital media infrastructure project, as defined, located in this state. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.

Existing law requires the conservator of a person to be responsible for the care, custody, control, and education of the conservatee, except when the court, in its discretion, limits the powers and duties of the conservator, as specified. This bill would require the conservator of an elder or dependent adult to inform the relatives of the conservatee whenever the conservatee dies or is admitted to a medical facility for acute care for a period of 3 days or more and would require the conservator, in the event of the death of the conservatee, to inform the relatives of any funeral arrangements and the location of the conservatee's final resting place. Existing law authorizes a conservator or a trustee of an elder or dependent adult, an attorney-in-fact of an elder or dependent adult, a person appointed as a guardian ad litem for an elder or dependent adult, or another person legally authorized to seek a protective order on behalf of an elder or dependent adult who has suffered physical abuse, neglect, financial abuse, abandonment, isolation, abduction, or other treatment with resulting physical harm or pain or mental suffering, or the deprivation by a care custodian of goods or services that are necessary to avoid physical harm or mental suffering. This bill would allow a relative of the first degree to bring a petition for a visitation order to enjoin a respondent from keeping an elder or dependent adult in isolation from contact with the petitioner. The bill would allow the court to appoint counsel to represent the proposed visitee if the proposed visitee has not retained an attorney or is unable to retain an attorney and requests the appointment of counsel. If an attorney is appointed, the bill would require the court to fix a reasonable sum for the compensation and expenses of the proposed visitee's counsel. The bill would allow the court to order the nonprevailing party to pay the fees and costs of the proposed visitee's counsel and would require the county to pay to the extent the person is unable to pay. By requiring the county to pay these costs, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make these provisions operative on January 1, 2016, and would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2019. Because a violation of a court order issued pursuant to the above provisions would be punishable as contempt, a misdemeanor, this bill would create a new crime and would thereby 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 provisions of the California Constitution provide for the Legislature and electors to propose amendments or revisions to the Constitution. Any proposed constitutional amendment or revision submitted to the voters becomes effective if it is approved by a majority of votes cast. This measure would increase the vote requirement from a majority to 55% of the votes cast for the electors to amend or revise the Constitution, except that this measure would permit the electors by a majority vote to approve an amendment or revision if the sole effect is to reverse one or more changes made to the Constitution by a previous amendment or revision that, prior to the adoption of this measure, was adopted by a majority vote.

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.

(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. Existing law, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 84 at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,388,000,000 for the purposes of financing safe drinking water, water quality and supply, flood control, natural resource protection, and park improvements. Existing law, the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, approved by the voters as Proposition 1E at the November 7, 2006, general statewide election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,090,000,000 for the purposes of financing disaster preparedness and flood prevention projects. Existing law, the Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 50 at the November 5, 2002, statewide general election, authorizes, for the purposes of financing a safe drinking water, water quality, and water reliability program, the issuance of bonds in the amount of $3,440,000,000. Existing law, the Costa-Machado Water Act of 2000, approved by the voters as Proposition 13 at the March 7, 2000, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $1,970,000,000 for the purposes of financing a safe drinking water, clean water, watershed protection, and flood protection program. Existing law, the Safe, Clean, Reliable Water Supply Act, approved by the voters as Proposition 204 at the November 5, 1996, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $995,000,000 for the purposes of financing a safe, clean, reliable water supply program. Existing law, the Water Conservation and Water Quality Bond Law of 1986, approved by the voters as Proposition 44 at the June 3, 1986, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $150,000,000 for the purposes of financing a water conservation and water quality program. This bill would enact the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $7,120,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill, upon voter approval, would reallocate $425,000,000 of the unissued bonds authorized for the purposes of Propositions 1E, 13, 44, 50, 84, and 204 to finance the purposes of a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law, the Political Reform Act of 1974, provides for the comprehensive regulation of campaign financing, including requiring the reporting of campaign contributions and expenditures and imposing other reporting and recordkeeping requirements on campaign committees. Existing law additionally imposes disclosure statement requirements with respect to advertisements supporting or opposing a candidate or ballot measure paid for by donors making contributions of specified amounts or by independent expenditures and defines several terms and phrases for these purposes. Existing law makes a knowing or willful violation of the Political Reform Act of 1974 a misdemeanor and subjects offenders to criminal penalties. This bill would repeal and recast several definitions. The bill would modify a committee identification requirement and a disclosure statement requirement relating to advertisements for or against any ballot measure paid for by a committee. The bill would impose new disclosure statement requirements for political advertisements regarding a ballot measure that are radio advertisements, prerecorded telephonic messages, television or video advertisements, or mass mailing or print advertisements that would require the identification of identifiable contributors, ballot measures, and other funding details, as specified. By introducing new disclosure requirements, the violation of which would be a misdemeanor, the bill would create a new crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. Existing law creates the Fair Political Practices Commission, and gives it primary responsibility for the impartial, effective administration and implementation of the Political Reform Act of 1974. The bill would require the Fair Political Practices Commission to promulgate regulations related to identifying and reporting persons who are the original sources of funds transferred through committees or other persons to determine identifiable contributors by January 1, 2016. The bill would require the Commission to promulgate regulations prohibiting a recipient of funds transferred by an identifiable contributor from depositing the funds until required applicable reports have been received by the recipient. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 84511 of the Government Code proposed by A.B. 510, that would become operative only if A.B. 510 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2015, and this bill is chaptered last. 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. 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 and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act.

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.

(1) Existing law specifies that no stray dog or cat impounded by a public or private shelter shall be euthanized before 6 business days after the stray dog or cat is impounded, not including the day of impoundment, and requires that the stray dog or cat be released to a nonprofit animal rescue or adoption organization prior to the scheduled euthanasia of the stray dog or cat in certain circumstances, subject to specified exceptions. Existing law requires that a public or private shelter make reasonable efforts to contact the owner of a stray dog or cat that is impounded and notify him or her that his or her dog or cat is impounded and is available for redemption. Existing law requires that a stray dog or cat be held for owner redemption during the first 3 days of the holding period, not including the day of impoundment, and be available for owner redemption or adoption for the remainder of the holding period. This bill would require that any stray dog impounded or stray cat admitted to a shelter pursuant to those provisions be made available for owner redemption, adoption, or release to an animal rescue group or adoption organization during the required holding period, except as provided. The bill would require that any stray dog or cat with identification, as defined, be held exclusively for owner redemption during the entire holding period, and any stray dog without identification be held exclusively during the first 72 hours of the holding period and then may be made available for adoption or release to an animal rescue or adoption organization, and would authorize a public or private shelter to make available for adoption or release to an animal rescue group or adoption organization, any stray cat without identification that is admitted to a public private or shelter at any time. The bill would authorize a public or private shelter to make available for adoption or release to an animal rescue group or adoption organization, each member of a litter of puppies without identification, consisting of 3 or more stray dogs under 4 months of age that originated from the same location. By imposing new duties on local officials with regard to the operation of public pounds and animal shelters, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Under the California Constitution, whenever the Legislature or a state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any local government, the state is required to provide a subvention of funds to reimburse the local government, with specified exceptions. Existing law provides that no local agency shall be required to implement or give effect to any statute or executive order, or portion thereof, that imposes a mandate during any fiscal year and for the period immediately following that fiscal year if specified conditions are met, including that the statute or executive order, or portion thereof, has been specifically identified by the Legislature in the Budget Act for the fiscal year as being one for which reimbursement is not provided for that fiscal year. This bill would authorize a city, county, city and county, or joint powers authority to elect to receive specified state block grant funding provided under the annual Budget Act, and administered by the State Department of Public Health, if the city, county, city and county, or joint powers authority complies with specified procedures for securing funds, and uses any funds received for specified purposes relating to the provision of mandated care for impounded animals in shelters. The bill would provide that the grant funding shall constitute the constitutionally required reimbursement for the provision of that mandated care. The bill would require a city, county, city and county or joint powers authority that elects not to apply for that block grant funding to hold a public hearing, during which it shall be required to make a finding regarding its decision not to apply for that funding. (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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Existing law requires the State Department of Education to incorporate materials relating to civil rights, human rights violations, genocide, slavery, and the Holocaust into publications that provide examples of curriculum resources, consistent with the subject frameworks on history and social science and other requirements. Under existing law, the Legislature encourages the incorporation of survivor, rescuer, liberator, and witness testimony into the teaching of human rights, genocide, and the Holocaust. Existing law establishes the Instructional Quality Commission and requires the commission to, among other things, recommend curriculum frameworks to the State Board of Education. This bill would require the department to incorporate materials related to the Armenian Genocide into those publications, and would require the commission to include the Armenian Genocide in the recommended history-social science curriculum framework when the history-social science framework is revised as required by law. The bill would also specify that the Legislature encourages the incorporation of survivor, rescuer, liberator, and witness oral testimony into the teaching of human rights, the Holocaust, and genocide, including the Armenian, Cambodian, Darfur, and Rwandan genocides. The bill would define oral testimony to mean firsthand accounts of significant historical events presented in a specified format.