Existing law provides for political subdivisions that encompass areas of representation within the state. With respect to these areas, public officials are generally elected by all of the voters of the political subdivision (at-large) or from districts formed within the political subdivision (district-based) . Existing law, the California Voting Rights Act of 2001, prohibits an at-large method of election to be imposed or applied in a manner that impairs the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of its choice or its ability to influence the outcome of an election, as a result of the dilution or the abridgment of the rights of voters who are members of a protected class, as defined. Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city to submit to voters at any municipal or special election an ordinance providing for the election of members of the legislative body by districts, from districts, by districts with an elective mayor, or from districts with an elective mayor. Under existing law, "by district" means election of members of the legislative body by voters of the district alone and "from district" means election of members of the legislative body who are residents of the district from which they are elected by the voters of the entire city. Existing law prescribes the procedures for the electors to change from the election of these members by district to election from districts or vice versa. This bill would permit the legislative body of a city to provide by ordinance, without submitting the ordinance to the voters of the city for approval, for the election of members of the legislative body by district if the voters of the city previously rejected such an ordinance, as specified. This provision would be repealed on December 31, 2016. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2017, require the legislative body of a city with a population of 100,000 or more, as determined by the most recent federal decennial census, to provide by ordinance, without submitting the ordinance to the voters of the city for approval, for the election of members of the legislative body by district. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2017, permit the legislative body of any other city to provide by ordinance, without submitting the ordinance to the voters of the city for approval, for the election of members of the legislative body by district. The bill would require that the boundary lines of each district be adjusted in accordance with specified provisions of law. By requiring cities to conduct elections for members of their legislative bodies in a specified manner, 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.
Sponsored bills
This measure would urge the President and the Congress of the United States to enact federal legislation to protect the public interest by reviving the separation between commercial banking and speculative activity embodied in the Glass-Steagall Act.
Existing law establishes election dates in each year, which are the second Tuesday of April in each even-numbered year, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March of each odd-numbered year, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in June in each year, and the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each year. Existing law requires all state, county, municipal, district, and school district elections to be held on an established election date, except for a special election called by the Governor, an election held in a chartered city or chartered county, certain school district elections, a local ballot measure or local recall election, and an all-mailed ballot election. Existing law also requires a state, county, municipal, district, and school district election held on a statewide election date to be consolidated with the statewide election; however, the board of supervisors of a county of the first class may deny a request for consolidation under certain circumstances. This bill would require general municipal and general district elections held on or after July 1, 2015, to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in June of even-numbered years, or on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each odd-numbered or even-numbered year, subject to certain exceptions. The bill would provide that these provisions may not be construed to shorten the term of office of any officeholder, as specified, or as altering the date of an election held in a district if the principal act of the district provides for a runoff election. This bill would also provide that, if a board of supervisors of a county of the first class denies a request to consolidate an election, that election shall not be held on the date of the statewide election. By increasing the duties of local elections 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.
Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city, county, or district to enter into contracts for various services, and, among other things, to include within the contract a time within which the whole or any specified portion of the work contemplated is to be completed. This bill would require, with a specified exception, if a contract or memorandum of understanding with a total annual value of $250,000 or more between a private party and a city, county, city and county, or district contains an automatic renewal clause, the legislative body of the city, county, city and county, or district to, on or before the annual date by which the contract may be rescinded, adopt a resolution that either exercises or declines to exercise the option to rescind the contract, as specified.
Existing law establishes a public school system that requires state funding for county superintendents of schools, school districts, and charter schools to be calculated pursuant to a local control funding formula, as specified. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to calculate, for each county superintendent of schools, school district, and charter school, a base entitlement for the transition to the local control funding formula that includes, among other things, the sum of the amount of funding received from appropriations contained in certain budget items of the Budget Act of 2012. This bill would establish the school district and charter school preschool funding formula. The bill would require the Superintendent, commencing with the 2015–16 fiscal year, and each year thereafter, to calculate and apportion a preschool funding grant pursuant to a specified funding formula for each school and charter school that offers kindergarten or first grade in the state. The bill would require the school district and charter school to use the money to fund either existing or startup preschools in the district or at the charter school. The funding formula would provide for supplemental funding based on the number and concentration of 4 year olds enrolled in a school district who are economically disadvantaged, English learners, or foster youth, as defined, or a combination thereof, as provided by each school district. By imposing new mandates on a school district, the bill would establish 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.
Under existing law, various provisions govern conservation programs and authorize public entities to enact water conservation programs to reduce the quantity of water used by persons for the purpose of conserving water supplies. Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, sets forth the emergency powers of the Governor under its provisions. This bill would prohibit a city or county, during a drought emergency declared by the Governor, from enforcing a law or ordinance requiring a resident to water his or her lawn. This bill would provide that a requirement imposed by a governmental entity or a public utility to limit, restrict, or conserve water during a drought emergency declared by the Governor does not constitute a diminution of rent or value of a premise or property.
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 prohibits a person or entity from entering into a contract or agreement for labor or services with specified types of contractors, including warehouse contractors among others, if the person or entity knows or should know that the contract or agreement does not include funds sufficient to allow the contractor to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws or regulations governing the labor or services to be provided. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
Existing law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) , requires each state to establish an American Health Benefit Exchange that facilitates the purchase of qualified health plans by qualified individuals and qualified small employers, and meets certain other requirements. PPACA specifies that an individual who is not a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully present in the United States shall not be treated as a qualified individual and may not be covered under a qualified health plan offered through an exchange. Existing law creates the California Health Benefit Exchange for the purpose of facilitating the enrollment of qualified individual and qualified small employers in qualified health plans as required under PPACA. Existing law governs health care service plans and insurers. A violation of the provisions governing health care service plans is a crime. This bill would create the California Health Exchange Program for All Californians within state government and would require that the program be governed by the executive board that governs the California Health Benefit Exchange. The bill would specify the duties of the board relative to the program and would require the board to, by January 1, 2016, facilitate the enrollment into qualified health plans of individuals who are not eligible for full-scope Medi-Cal coverage and would have been eligible to purchase coverage through the Exchange but for their immigration status. The bill would require the board to provide premium subsidies and cost-sharing reductions to eligible individuals that are the same as the premium assistance and cost-sharing reductions the individuals would have received through the Exchange. The bill would create the California Health Trust Fund For All Californians as a continuously appropriated fund, thereby making an appropriation, would require the board to assess a charge on qualified health plans, and would make the implementation of the program's provisions contingent on a determination by the board that sufficient financial resources exist or will exist in the fund. The bill would enact other related provisions. The bill would require health care services plans and health insurers to fairly and affirmatively offer, market, and sell in the Exchange at least one product within each of 5 levels of coverage, as specified. Because a violation of the requirements imposed on health care service plans would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid Program provisions. The federal Medicaid Program provisions prohibit payment to a state for medical assistance furnished to an alien who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence or otherwise permanently residing in the United States under color of law. This bill would extend eligibility for full-scope Medi-Cal benefits to individuals who are otherwise eligible for those benefits but for their immigration status. The bill would require that benefits for those services be provided with state-only funds only if federal financial participation is not available. Because counties are required to make Medi-Cal eligibility determinations and this bill would expand Medi-Cal eligibility, 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 provides for the creation and regulation of cities. Existing law specifies the powers of the legislative bodies of cities. Existing law requires the city council of a general law city to appoint a chief of police and provides that the police department of the city is under his or her control. Existing law also requires a general law city to establish a fire department for the city. This bill would prohibit the legislative body of a general law city from eliminating its entire police or fire protection department except by an ordinance that is approved by a majority of the voters voting on the issue at a local election.