The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of greenhouse gases. The state board is required to adopt a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions level in 1990 to be achieved by 2020, and to adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emission reductions. The act authorizes the state board to adopt by regulation, after a public workshop, a schedule of fees to be paid by the sources of greenhouse gas emissions regulated pursuant to the act. The fee revenues are deposited into the Air Pollution Control Fund and are available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes of carrying out the act. The state board is authorized to adopt market-based compliance mechanisms, as defined, meeting specified requirements to be used for compliance with those regulations. The state board is required, before including any market-based compliance mechanism, to maximize additional environmental and economic benefits for California, as appropriate. This bill would require the state board, if the state board allows the use of market-based compliance mechanisms, to limit the use of compliance offsets, as defined, that meet specific criteria, to no more than 10% of the greenhouse gas emission reductions expected from market mechanisms during the compliance period. The bill would require the state board to apply the limit as a percentage of each regulated party's reported emissions in a compliance period. The bill would require the state board to impose an administrative fee pursuant to the fee authority described above for deposit into the fund to pay for expenses related to state board administration of the compliance offset program, upon appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would incorporate changes to Section 38505 of the Health and Safety Code proposed by both this bill and SB 104, which would become operative only if both bills are enacted and this bill is enacted after SB 104.
Sponsored bills
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of health facilities, including long-term health care facilities, by the State Department of Public Health. Violation of these provisions constitutes a misdemeanor. Existing law also requires long-term health care facilities to implement a theft and loss program, as specified, including a written patient personal property inventory. This bill would require, as part of the written patient personal property inventory in long-term health care facilities, a listing, by a unique identification number, of all patient-owned mobility, hearing, or breathing equipment, including, but not limited to, canes, walkers, wheelchairs, hearing aids, and oxygen equipment. Because the bill would create a new crime, 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.
(1) Existing law requires the governing board of a school district maintaining one or more high schools to appoint to its membership one or more nonvoting pupil members if pupils petition the governing board to make those appointments. This bill would require the governing board to appoint the pupil member or members within 30 days of receiving the petition, or at its next regularly scheduled meeting if no meeting is held within those 30 days, as specified. Because the bill would require school districts to provide a higher level of service, it would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the governing board to adopt a resolution authorizing a pupil advisory board to assist the pupil member or members in executing duties relating to serving on the board. (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, 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.
(1) The federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) , provides $4.3 billion for the State Incentive Grant Fund (Race to the Top Fund) , which is a competitive grant program designed to encourage and reward states that are implementing specified educational objectives. The ARRA requires a Governor to apply on behalf of a state seeking a Race to the Top grant, and requires the application to include specified information. The United States Secretary of Education has issued regulations and guidelines regarding state eligibility under the Race to the Top program. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature, as well as findings and declarations of the Legislature relating to the Race to the Top program. This bill would authorize the Superintendent of Public Instruction to enter into a memorandum of understanding with a local educational agency that is consistent with the requirements established by the bill and the regulations and guidelines for the Race to the Top program. This bill would require the state plan or plans submitted to the United States Secretary of Education for the Race to the Top program to meet specified substantive and procedural requirements. The bill would also require the Department of Finance to provide appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature with a copy of the plan or plans within 10 days of submission to the United States Secretary of Education for the Race to the Top program. The Department of Finance, in conjunction with the Superintendent, would, within 30 days of receipt of any federal Race to the Top program funds, and prior to their allocation, be required to develop and submit to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature an expenditure plan, as specified. This bill would require the Superintendent, on or before January 1, 2011, to contract with an independent evaluator relating to the implementation of the state plan to be submitted in application for a Race to the Top Fund competitive grant award. This bill would require the Superintendent, on or before September 1, 2010, to convene a working group consisting of specified members to develop parameters of the evaluation and make specified recommendations relating to the selection of the independent evaluator. This bill would require the Superintendent, on or before June 1, 2014, to provide the final evaluation to the Legislature, the Governor, and the state board, and authorize the department to use federal Race to the Top program funds for this evaluation. This bill would provide that the evaluation provisions shall become inoperative on July 1, 2014, and as of January 1, 2015, are repealed unless a later enacted statute becomes operative, as specified. (2) The Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999 requires the Superintendent, with approval of the state board, to develop the Academic Performance Index (API) , consisting of a variety of indicators, to be used to measure the performance of schools. Existing law requires the Superintendent to develop, and the state board to adopt, expected annual percentage growth targets for all schools based on their API baseline score and prescribes a minimum percentage growth target of 5% annually. The act also establishes the Immediate Intervention/Underperforming Schools Program (IIUSP) . Schools that score below the 50th percentile on certain achievement tests are invited to participate in the program and are provided program funding. Twenty-four months after receiving IIUSP funding, a school that fails to meet its growth targets each year, but demonstrates significant growth, as determined by the state board, continues to participate in the program for an additional year and to receive funding. If a school fails to meet its growth targets each year and does not demonstrate significant growth, it is deemed a state-monitored school and the Superintendent is required to take specified actions with regard to the school. This bill would require the Superintendent to apportion federal Race to the Top program funds pursuant to a specified expenditure plan for low-achieving schools. The bill, commencing with the 2011–12 fiscal year, would require the Superintendent to apportion block grant funds based on the number of certificated personnel employed in eligible school districts that have one or more schools under their jurisdiction and charter schools, that are low-achieving, as defined. School districts and charter schools that receive funds pursuant to these provisions would be required to expend the funds for specified purposes relating to professional development for teachers, administrators, and schoolsite staff. School districts and charter schools receiving funds also would be required to annually report specified information to the State Department of Education relating to the expenditure of these funds. This bill would require the Superintendent to establish a list of persistently lowest-achieving schools, as defined, according to specified criteria. The bill, except as specified, would require the governing board of a school district, county office of education, or charter school to implement, for any school identified by the Superintendent as persistently lowest-achieving, one of four interventions for turning around lowest-achieving schools described in federal regulations and guidelines for the Race to the Top program, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a persistently lowest-achieving school implementing specified intervention models to participate in a school-to-school partnership program by working with a mentor school that has successfully transitioned from a low-achieving school to a higher-achieving school. The regional consortia authorized under a specified statute would, using specified federal funds, be required to provide, in collaboration with the department, at a minimum, technical assistance and support to local educational agencies with one or more persistently lowest-achieving schools to assist with the implementation of the duties specified for any of the 4 interventions. This bill would require the governing board of a local educational agency, with regard to any school identified as low-achieving, as defined, but not identified as persistently lowest-achieving, as defined, which continues to fail to make adequate yearly progress under the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act after one full school year, and where at least one-half of the parents or guardians of pupils attending the school and the elementary or middle schools that normally matriculate into a middle or high school, as applicable, sign a petition requesting the local educational agency to implement a strategy to reform that school, to (a) place that request as an item on the agenda of a regularly scheduled public hearing no later than 90 days following receipt of that request, (b) hear that agenda item at that regularly scheduled meeting, and (c) allow public testimony and comment on that agenda item. (3) Existing law requires the governing board of a school district to develop and adopt objective evaluation and assessment guidelines for certificated employees. This bill would require each participating local educational agency that executes a memorandum of understanding with the State of California pursuant to the federal Race to the Top program to have in place or establish a rigorous, transparent, and fair evaluation system for its school principals. (4) Existing law requires the Controller, in consultation with the Department of Finance and the State Department of Education, to develop a plan to review and report on financial and compliance audits. Existing law requires the Controller to propose the content of an audit guide and authorizes a supplement to the audit guide to be suggested in the audit year to address issues resulting from new legislation in that year that changes the conditions of apportionment. Existing law requires the Controller to submit the proposed content of the audit guide and any supplement to the Education Audits Appeal Panel for review and possible amendment, and requires the Education Audits Appeal Panel to adopt the audit guide and any supplement pursuant to the rulemaking procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act. This bill would require the Controller to propose, and the Education Audits Appeal Panel to adopt, a charter school supplement to the audit guide in order to provide guidance to auditors regarding which sections of the school district and county office audit guide apply to charter schools and to create specific guidance related to the unique nature of charter schools. The bill also would make conforming changes. The Charter Schools Act of 1992 (Charter Schools Act) authorizes any one or more persons to submit a petition to the governing board of a school district to establish a charter school that operates independently from the existing school district structure as a method of accomplishing specified goals. The act limits the maximum number of charter schools authorized to operate in the state each year, as specified. This bill would delete that numerical limitation. The Charter Schools Act specifies the procedures for the submission, review, and approval or denial of a petition to establish a standard or countywide charter school. The act authorizes the governing board of a school district to deny a charter petition only if the board makes written factual findings that support certain facts regarding the petition. This bill, in addition, would authorize a governing board to deny a petition to establish a standard or countywide charter school if it makes a written factual finding that other charter schools in operation for at least 3 consecutive years and operated by the petitioner have met any of the following criteria: (A) the charter school has demonstrated academic achievement equivalent to a persistently lowest-achieving school, as specified; (B) the charter schoolcompleted its first renewal cycle and was not renewed by the authorizing entity, the county board of education, or the state board, as applicable; or C) the school has had its charter revoked, and the charter was not restored by the county board of education or the state board, as applicable. The Charter Schools Act limits the duration of charters to a period not to exceed 5 years and authorizes the chartering authority to grant one or more subsequent renewals for an additional period of 5 years. The act specifies the criteria a charter school is required to meet in order to receive a renewal of its charter. Commencing January 1, 2005, or after a charter school has been in operation for 4 years, whichever date occurs later, the act requires a charter school to meet at least one of several specified criteria prior to receiving a charter renewal, including a determination by the entity that granted the charter that the academic performance of the charter school is at least equal to the academic performance of the public schools that the charter school pupils would otherwise have been required to attend, as well as the academic performance of the schools in the school district in which the charter school is located, taking into account the composition of the pupil population that is served at the charter school. This bill would delete that criterion and replace it with a criterion relating to attaining positive growth on the charter school's API score. The bill would require a chartering authority, consistent with the federal Race to the Top guidelines, to consider the degree to which a charter school serves pupil populations that are similar to local district pupil populations, especially relative to high-need pupils. The bill would prohibit a chartering authority from granting a renewal of a charter school for longer than a 3-year period if that charter school is in program improvement or if a charter school is in year 5 of program improvement, except as specified. The Charter Schools Act requires a charter petition to include a reasonably comprehensive description of the manner in which annual, independent financial audits will be conducted. The act requires a charter school to transmit a copy of its annual, independent financial audit report for the preceding fiscal year to its chartering entity, the Controller, the county superintendent of schools of the county in which the charter school is sited, except as specified, and the department by December 15 of each year. This bill would require the Controller, by December 31 of each fiscal year, to publish a directory of certified public accountants and public accountants deemed by the Controller to be qualified to conduct audits of charter schools. The bill would require each audit of a charter school to be conducted by a certified public accountant or public accountant selected by the charter school from the directory. The bill would specify that it is unlawful for a public accounting firm to provide audit services to a charter school if the lead audit partner, or coordinating audit partner, having primary responsibility for the audit, or the audit partner responsible for reviewing the audit, has performed audit services for that charter school in each of the 6 previous fiscal years, except as provided. (5) Existing law, the Leroy Greene California Assessment of Academic Achievement Act (hereafter the Greene Act) , requires the Superintendent to design and implement a statewide pupil assessment program, and requires school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education to administer to each of its pupils in grades 2 to 11, inclusive, certain achievement tests, including a standards-based achievement test pursuant to the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program. This bill would require the Superintendent to develop recommendations for the reauthorization of the statewide pupil assessment program that include a plan for transitioning to a system of high-quality assessments, as defined. This bill would require the advisory committee that is established to advise the Superintendent and the state board on specified matters relating to the Public School Performance Accountability Program to make recommendations by January 1, 2011, to the Legislature, the Governor, and the state board on, among other things, the establishment of a methodology of generating a measurement of group and individual academic performance growth by utilizing individual pupil results from a longitudinally valid achievement assessment system, as specified. The Greene Act requires the Superintendent to adopt statewide content and performance standards in the core curriculum areas of reading, writing, mathematics, history/social science, and science, as specified. The Greene Act authorizes the state board to modify any proposed content standards or performance standards prior to adoption, and to adopt content and performance standards in individual core curriculum areas as those standards are submitted to the state board. This bill would eliminate this authority and instead require the Superintendent, to develop a set of academic content standards in language arts and mathematics. The standards would be required to meet specified criteria. The Superintendent, on or before August 2, 2010, would be required to present these standards to the state board, and to present to the Governor, and the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature, specified information relating to these standards. The state board, on or before September 1, 2010, would be required to adopt or reject the standards, as specified. The bill would require the Superintendent to participate in the Common Core State Standards Initiative consortium sponsored by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers or any associated or related interstate collaboration to jointly develop common high-quality standards or assessments aligned with the common set of standards. The bill also would make conforming changes. Existing law makes certain provisions of that act inoperative on July 1, 2011, and repeals all of the act's provisions on January 1, 2012. The bill would make the act inoperative on July 1, 2012, and would repeal the act as of January 1, 2013, except specified provisions, which would become inoperative on July 1, 2016, and would be repealed as of January 1, 2017. By extending the time period during which school districts are required to perform various duties related to the administration of achievement tests, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (6) 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, unemployment compensation benefits are based on wages paid in a base period that is calculated according to the month within which the benefit year begins. This bill would, for new claims filed on or after January 1, 2010, for which a valid claim or benefit year cannot be established under the currently defined base periods, establish alternative base periods, as provided. This bill would also require a claimant to submit specified information regarding wages to the Employment Development Department via an affidavit, under specified conditions. Because this measure would increase the amount of unemployment compensation paid, it would make an additional amount payable from the Unemployment Fund, a continuously appropriated special fund, and thereby would make an appropriation. Because this measure would require specified information to be submitted to the Employment Development Department on an affidavit, the submission of which, if false, is a misdemeanor under existing law, it would impose a state-mandated 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. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution.
The Corporation Tax Law, in specified conformity to federal income tax laws, imposes certain limitations on the use of built-in losses in conjunction with corporate reorganizations. This bill would clarify that a specified federal administrative notice relating to those limitations does not apply for purposes of California law. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution.
Existing law provides for the licensure of health facilities, including general acute care hospitals, acute psychiatric hospitals, and special hospitals, as defined, by the State Department of Public Health. Violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. Existing law requires that, upon the issuance or renewal of a general acute care, acute psychiatric, or special hospital license, the department separately identify on the license each supplemental service, including the address of where each outpatient service is provided and the type of services provided at each outpatient location. Existing law authorizes licensed general acute care hospitals and acute psychiatric hospitals to provide in any alternative setting health care services and programs that may be provided by any other provider of health care outside of a hospital building or which are not otherwise specifically prohibited by provisions of existing law regulating these facilities. It also requires the state department and the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development to adopt and enforce standards which permit these health facilities to use its space for alternative purposes. This bill would, among other things, require the department to approve a completed application by a licensed general acute care hospital that meets specified requirements to add or modify an outpatient clinic service as a supplemental service, add the outpatient service to the hospital license, and issue a new license, within 100 days of receipt of the completed application, unless the applicant does not meet specified requirements. The bill would limit the outpatient clinic service that is the subject of the application to providing only nonemergency primary health care services in a clinical environment to patients who remain in the outpatient clinic for less than 24 hours. The bill would define "outpatient clinic services" for purposes of the bill. By creating a new crime, 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.
The California Stem Cell Research and Cures Act, an initiative measure approved by the voters at the November 2, 2004, general election (Proposition 71) , establishes the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) , the purpose of which is, among other things, to make grants and loans for stem cell research, for research facilities, and for other vital research opportunities to realize therapies, protocols, and medical procedures that will result in the cure for, or substantial mitigation of, diseases and injuries. This bill would create the California Stem Cell and Biotechnology Education and Workforce Development Act of 2009 to establish stem cell and biotechnology education and workforce development as a state priority and to promote stronger links among industry sectors, the CIRM, and California public schools. The bill would require the State Department of Education to post certain information on its Internet Web site, including the CIRM model curriculum on stem cell science, and to communicate to science teachers and school districts the availability of this curriculum.
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation by the State Department of Public Health of long-term health care facilities, including skilled nursing facilities. Existing law creates the State Health Facilities Citation Penalties Account in the Special Deposit Fund, with the moneys in this account to be used, upon appropriation, for prescribed purposes. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2011, require skilled nursing facilities to post, in accordance with prescribed requirements, the overall facility rating information determined by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and to inform consumers regarding information available at the department's Internet Web site. A violation of these provisions would be a class B violation, as defined, with the proceeds from fines collected to be deposited into the State Health Facilities Citation Penalties Account.
(1) Existing law establishes the California Education Information System, which consists of the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) and the California Longitudinal Teacher Integrated Data Education System (CALTIDES) . Existing law requires that data elements and codes included in the California Education Information System be maintained in compliance with specified provisions of law. This bill would additionally require that data elements and codes included in the California Education Information System be maintained in compliance with any other applicable federal or state law that can be interpreted as protecting the privacy and confidentiality of individual pupils or certificated personnel. (2) Existing law prohibits data in CALTIDES from being used either solely or in conjunction with data from CALPADS for purposes of pay, promotion, sanction, or personnel evaluation of an individual teacher or groups of teachers, or any other employment decisions related to individual teachers. This bill would delete this prohibition. The bill would prohibit data in CALTIDES from being used in violation of any federal or state law that is intended to protect an individual's right to privacy or the confidentiality of an individual's personal information. (3) Existing law requires the State Chief Information Officer to convene a working group representing specified entities to create a strategic plan to link education data systems and to accomplish specified objectives relating to the accessibility of education data. The State Chief Information Officer is required to deliver this strategic plan to the Legislature and the Governor no later than September 1, 2009. This bill would require the plan to identify specific procedures and policies that would facilitate the sharing and transfer of data, and would change the date the plan is required to be delivered to the Legislature and the Governor to January 1, 2010. The bill additionally would authorize these provisions to be implemented using federal grant funds received pursuant to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 through that act's provision of funds for statewide data systems under the federal Education Technical Assistance Act. (4) Existing law requires the State Department of Education under CALPADS to contract for the development of proposals that will provide for the retention and analysis of longitudinal pupil achievement data. Existing law requires local educational agencies to retain individual pupil records for each test taker, including other data elements deemed necessary by the Superintendent, with approval of the State Board of Education, to comply with federal reporting requirements delineated in the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. This bill would, prior to the implementation of these provisions with respect to adding data elements to CALPADS for the purpose of complying with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, require the department to submit an expenditure plan to the Department of Finance, as specified. The bill would require the Department of Finance to provide to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee a copy of the plan within 10 days of receipt. The bill also would make technical and clarifying changes.