Existing law provides for a public postsecondary education system in this state. This system consists of the University of California, the California State University, and the California Community Colleges. Existing law authorizes these institutions to require that mandatory systemwide fees and tuition, among other fees, be paid by enrolled students. Existing law establishes the Student Aid Commission as the primary state agency for the administration of state-authorized student financial aid programs available to students attending all segments of postsecondary education. This bill would require the Student Aid Commission and the Legislative Analyst to conduct a study of the effects of enacting, in future legislation, a Pay it Forward, Pay it Back Pilot Program and would designate the Legislative Analyst as the lead agency in charge of preparing the study. The study would evaluate a pilot program designed to provide an additional option for students to finance the costs of their education, by paying the costs of upfront tuition, fees, and room and board, for enrollment at institutions of higher education, for admitted resident students who sign a binding contract to, upon graduation, pay 2 to 4%, inclusive, of their annual adjusted gross incomes to the state or the institution for a specified number of years, as provided. The bill would further specify that the pilot program could vary by institution. This bill would require the study to, among other things, identify at least one campus of each segment of public higher education and one campus of a nonprofit private postsecondary educational institution to participate in the pilot program and establish an immediate source of funding for the first 15 to 20 years, inclusive, of the pilot program, as provided. The bill would require that the study be presented for consideration by the Legislature, and would require the Student Aid Commission to submit a report on the study to the Assembly Committee on Higher Education and the Senate Committee on Education on or before September 30, 2015. The bill would also make legislative findings and declarations related to these provisions.
Sponsored bills
(1) The Gambling Control Act provides for the licensure of certain individuals and establishments that conduct controlled games, as defined, and for the regulation of these gambling activities by the California Gambling Control Commission. The Department of Justice has related investigatory and enforcement duties under the act. Any violation of these provisions is punishable as a misdemeanor, as specified. This bill would establish a framework to authorize intrastate Internet poker, as specified. The bill would authorize eligible entities to apply to the commission for a 10-year nontransferable license to operate an intrastate Internet poker Web site offering the play of authorized Internet poker games to registered players within California, as specified. The bill would require that the license be automatically renewed every 10 years upon application, as specified. The bill would prohibit the offer or play of any gambling game provided over the Internet that is not an authorized Internet poker game permitted by the state pursuant to this bill. The bill would prohibit, among others, a federally recognized California Indian tribe that operates a gaming facility that accepts bets from players within the state but who are not physically present on Indian lands when making bets from operating an Internet poker Web site. The bill also would provide that it is unlawful for a person to patronize, or to own or operate, a place of public accommodation within this state in which computer terminals, laptop computers, hand-held devices, or similar devices are made available for accessing Internet Web sites to play gambling games, or where those devices are otherwise empowered or enabled to access Internet Web sites to play gambling games. The bill would provide that it is unlawful for a person to aggregate computers or other access devices in a public setting within this state for the purpose of playing a gambling game on the Internet, or to promote, facilitate, or market that activity. The bill would provide that any violation of these provisions is punishable as a misdemeanor. By creating new crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the commission, and any other state agency with a duty pursuant to these provisions, to adopt regulations within 270 days after the operative date of this bill, in consultation with the department and federally recognized California Indian tribes, to implement these provisions, and to facilitate the operation of intrastate Internet poker Web sites and expedite the state's receipt of revenues. The bill would require a license applicant to apply to the commission and pay a registration fee sufficient to cover all costs associated with the issuance of the license, for deposit into the Internet Poker Fund, as created by the bill, to be continuously appropriated to the department and the commission in the amounts reasonably necessary to investigate and evaluate the suitability of the licensee's subcontractors. An applicant that is a federally reorganized Indian tribe also would be required to submit a limited waiver of its sovereign immunity. This bill would require the payment of an unspecified annual regulatory fee, for deposit into the Internet Poker Fund, to be continuously appropriated for the actual costs of license oversight, consumer protection, state regulation, problem gambling programs, and other purposes related to this bill. The bill would require each licensee to pay a one-time license fee in the amount of $5,000,000 for deposit in the General Fund. The license fee would be credited against quarterly fees equivalent to 5% of the licensee's gross gaming revenue proceeds, as specified. The bill would require an applicant for an intrastate Internet Poker license to provide documentation establishing that the applicant is qualified to pay the one-time license fee from its own assets, or its owner's assets, or through credit extended to the entity, as specified. This bill would establish the Unlawful Gambling Enforcement Fund as a special fund within the General Fund for purposes of ensuring adequate resources for law enforcement charged with enforcing the prohibitions and protections of the provisions described above. The bill would authorize the Attorney General, and other public prosecutors, as specified, to bring a civil action to recover a civil penalty in an unspecified amount against a person who engages in those prohibited activities described above, or other specified unlawful gambling activities involving lotteries and slot machines. The bill would provide for an unspecified percentage of revenues from civil penalties collected to be deposited into the fund and used for law enforcement activities pursuant to these provisions, upon appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would require the commission, in consultation with the department, the Treasurer, and the Franchise Tax Board, to issue a report to the Legislature describing the state's efforts to meet the policy goals articulated in this bill within one year of the operative date of this bill and, annually, thereafter. The bill would also require the Bureau of State Audits, at least 4 years after the issue date of any license by the state, but no later than 5 years after that date, to issue a report to the Legislature detailing the implementation of this bill, as specified. This bill would prohibit the state from affirmatively electing to be subject to a federal Internet gambling law, as specified, and would require the state to opt out of, or would prohibit the state from opting into, any federal Internet gambling scheme. The bill would provide that if the state violates these prohibitions, a licensee shall not be required to pay the one-time license fee or the quarterly fees described above and would require the state to refund within 30 days all unused license fees paid to the state, as specified. The bill would authorize a licensee to enforce this provision in state court. The bill also would prohibit the state from participating in any Internet gambling agreement between states or foreign jurisdictions. This bill authorizes the department to revoke or suspend any license or work permit upon reaching a finding that the licensee or employee is in violation of the provisions described above, or any regulation adopted pursuant to these provisions. However, the bill would prohibit a tribal licensee from having its license suspended or revoked, or be fined or otherwise penalized for complying with any applicable federal law or regulation when operating an Internet poker Web site on Indian lands. The bill would specify that to the extent that any state requirement is more strict than any applicable federal law requirement, the tribal licensee is required to comply with the state requirement. (2) Existing law, subject to exceptions, generally prohibits the possession and use of a "slot machine or device," as defined, and prohibits certain other acts and transactions pertaining to slot machines or devices. Existing law provides varying definitions of "slot machine or device" for these purposes. A violation of these provisions is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would provide that an "electronic sweepstakes device," as defined, is a slot machine or device within the meaning of these provisions. By expanding the scope of existing crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The bill would provide that its provisions are not severable. (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. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to permit private, nonprofit, eligible organizations to conduct raffles as a funding mechanism to support beneficial and charitable works, if, among other conditions, at least 90% of the gross receipts from the raffle go directly to beneficial or charitable purposes in California. The California Constitution further authorizes the Legislature to amend the percentage of gross receipts required to be dedicated to beneficial or charitable purposes by a statute passed by a23 vote of each house of the Legislature. Existing statutory law implements those provisions and requires the Department of Justice to administer and enforce those provisions. This bill would authorize a raffle conducted by an eligible organization, as defined, for the purpose of directly supporting specified beneficial or charitable purposes in California, or financially supporting another private, nonprofit, eligible organization, as defined, that performs those purposes if, among other requirements, each ticket sold contains a unique and matching identifier, 50% of the gross receipts generated from the sale of raffle tickets are used to benefit or provide support for beneficial or charitable purposes, as defined, the other 50% is paid to the winner, and the winners of the prizes are determined by a manual draw, as specified. The bill would authorize an electronic device to be used to sell tickets. This bill would define an eligible organization as a private, nonprofit organization established by, or affiliated with, a team from specified sports organizations that has been qualified to conduct business in California for at least one year prior to conducting a raffle and is exempt from taxation pursuant to specified provisions of federal and California law. The bill would require, if an eligible organization conducts a raffle for purposes of financially supporting another private, nonprofit, eligible organization, the eligible organization conducting the raffle to distribute to the other eligible organization all proceeds not paid out to the winners within 15 days of conducting the raffle. The bill would require an eligible organization to disclose to all ticket purchasers the designated private, nonprofit organization for which the raffle is being conducted. This bill would also prohibit an eligible organization from conducting a raffle without first having obtained and thereafter maintained a registration from the Department of Justice, as specified. This bill would authorize the department to issue regulations to enforce these provisions, to assess an annual registration fee of $10 to be deposited in the General Fund to cover the actual costs of establishing and operating this registration system, and would require the department to maintain a database of registrants, with specified exemptions, and conduct specified proceedings in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act. The bill would require, prior to March 31, 2017, the Department of Justice to conduct a study, and report that study to the Assembly Committee on Governmental Organization, that includes, among other things, whether and how the money raised from raffles conducted pursuant the bill's provisions has impacted charitable giving by the eligible organizations. The bill would repeal its provisions on December 31, 2017.
The Personal Income Tax Law allows various credits against the tax imposed by that law. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2014, and before January 1, 2019, allow a credit against that tax for amounts paid or incurred by a qualified teacher, as defined, for instructional materials and classroom supplies, as defined, not to exceed $250. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
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.
Existing law recognizes that all persons, including all persons involuntarily confined, have a fundamental right against enforced interference with their thought processes, states of mind, and patterns of mentation through the use of organic therapies and prohibits administering or subjecting to organic therapy a person confined or detained in state prison, as specified, without the person's consent. This bill would make nonsubstantive, technical changes to the latter provision.
(1) Existing law prohibits the taking of private property without the payment of just compensation and permits a person to maintain an action in inverse condemnation for the purpose of obtaining compensation for a taking. Existing law applies the doctrine of comparative fault for the purpose of apportioning responsibility and reducing damages to the extent a plaintiff is found partially at fault. This bill would apply the doctrine of comparative fault to inverse condemnation actions and would require a court or arbitrator to reduce the compensation paid to a plaintiff in an inverse condemnation proceeding in direct proportion to his or her percentage of fault, if any, in the damaging of property that constitutes a taking, as specified. (2) Existing law governs offers by a party to compromise a dispute that is to be resolved by trial or arbitration. Existing law provides in this regard, among other things, that if the defendant makes an offer that the plaintiff does not accept, and the plaintiff fails to obtain a more favorable judgment or award, the plaintiff is prohibited from recovering his or her postoffer costs and is required to pay the defendant's costs from the time of the offer. Existing law also awards to the plaintiff in an inverse condemnation proceeding reasonable costs actually incurred because of that proceeding in the trial court, or in any appellate proceeding, in which the plaintiff prevails on any issue in that proceeding. This bill would provide, notwithstanding the latter provision, that if the defendant in an inverse condemnation action, on or after January 1, 2014, makes an offer that the plaintiff does not accept, and the plaintiff fails to obtain a judgment or award, the plaintiff shall not recover his or her postoffer costs and shall pay the defendant's postoffer costs. Additionally, the bill would provide that the plaintiff may be required to pay the defendant's costs for expert witnesses. Alternatively, if the plaintiff rejects the offer and fails to obtain a more favorable judgment or award, the bill would prohibit the plaintiff from recovering his or her postoffer costs, but would provide that the plaintiff shall not be ordered to pay the defendant's postoffer costs.
Existing law designates various persons as peace officers, including probation officers, parole officers, and parole agents, and provides that their authority extends to certain duties, including to the conditions of parole, probation, or postrelease community supervision of a person in the state on parole, probation, or postrelease community supervision, the escape of an inmate or ward from a state or local institution, the transportation of persons on parole, probation, or postrelease community supervision, and violations of law that are discovered while performing their duties. Existing law categorizes a probation officer as a peace officer who may carry firearms only if authorized by his or her employing agency, and under the terms and conditions specified by his or her employing agency. This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
This measure would call upon all Californians to observe César Chávez's birthday, March 31, as a day of public service, to recognize the hard work and self-sacrifice that farmworkers go through to feed all the families in our state, and to learn from César Chávez's life and his mission of nonviolence, social justice, and selfless service to others.
Existing law requires the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to establish parole reentry and assessment programs for inmates in state prison, in order to assess the inmate prior to release and to assist with the inmate's reentry into the community while on parole. This bill would require the department to establish a voluntary prerelease reentry program for inmates in prison, to commence no later than 6 months prior to the inmate's release from prison. The program would include, among other things, education programs, transition programs including employment services and skills, and cognitive behavior therapy, including substance abuse treatment and anger management.