The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) generally requires all state and local governmental lead agencies to prepare, or cause to be prepared by contract, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on any discretionary project that they propose to carry out or approve that may result in a significant effect on the environment, that is, a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the physical conditions that exist within the area that will be affected by the project. Under existing law, a housing project qualifies for an exemption from CEQA if certain requirements are met, including the requirement that the site is not located within the boundaries of a state conservancy. This bill would eliminate the requirement that the site not be located within the boundaries of a state conservancy.
Sponsored bills
This measure would proclaim January 26, 2016, as India Republic Day, and would urge all Californians to join in celebrating India Republic Day.
Existing law authorizes certain toll facilities on public highways. Existing law creates the Orange County Transportation Authority with various powers and duties. This bill would prohibit the Department of Transportation from seeking or providing funding for a toll lane on a public highway within the boundaries of the County of Orange unless the project is approved by a 23 vote of the Orange County Transportation Authority. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity for special legislation.
(1) Under existing law, when school employees are terminated pursuant to a reduction in workforce, a school district is required to terminate the employees in order of seniority. Existing law authorizes a school district to deviate from the order of seniority for those purposes for specified reasons. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2019. (2) Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to terminate the services of any permanent or probationary certificated employees of the school district during the time period between 5 days after the enactment of the Budget Act and August 15 of the fiscal year to which the Budget Act applies if the governing board of the school district determines that its total revenue limit per unit of average daily attendance for the fiscal year of that Budget Act has not increased by at least 2%, and if the governing board of the school district determines it is therefore necessary to decrease the number of permanent employees in the school district. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2019. (3) Existing law provides that, when the services of permanent or probationary employees are terminated pursuant to a reduction in workforce, those terminated employees have a preferred right to reappointment and an opportunity for substitute service in order of seniority, as specified. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2019. (4) Existing law prohibits, for purposes of complying with those procedures, a school district from including time spent employed in an administrative position by a certificated employee, who transfers to a teaching position and who was initially employed in an administrative position on or after July 1, 1983, in determining seniority, except in the case of a schoolsite administrator, as specified. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2019. (5) Existing law prohibits a school district from counting as a part of the service required as a condition precedent to the classification of the employee as a permanent employee of the school district the period of absence for certain terminated probationary employees. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2019. (6) Existing law extends the effective period of specified rights, and provides additional rights to certain permanent certificated employees, as specified. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2019. (7) Existing law provides that certain statutory layoff provisions are inapplicable to certain probationary certificated employees who are covered by a collective agreement which contains provisions for the layoff and reassignment of those employees. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2019. (8) This bill would require, by July 1, 2018, each governing board of a school district, in consultation with the exclusive representative of the certificated staff, if any, to adopt policies regarding the dismissal of permanent and probationary employees when a reduction in workforce is required due to declining enrollment or insufficient funding to be used commencing with the 2018–19 school year. The bill would require those adopted policies to include as a significant factor in determining the order of dismissal the evaluation rating of certificated employees, as specified. The bill would permit a school district to deviate from using the evaluation rating of certificated employees as a significant factor in determining the order of dismissal of certificated employees if the school district demonstrates specified conditions. By requiring school districts to perform additional duties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that, to the extent these provisions conflict with any provision of a collective bargaining agreement entered into before January 1, 2016, by a public school employer and an exclusive bargaining representative, the provisions shall not apply to the school district until the expiration or renewal of that collective bargaining agreement. (9) 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 point of contact for the United States Trade Representative, within the executive branch, to perform specified duties with regard to the effect of federal trade policy on the state. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to those provisions.
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 emissions reductions. The act authorizes the state board to include the use of market-based compliance mechanisms. Existing state board regulations require specified entities to comply with a market-based compliance mechanism beginning January 1, 2013, and require additional specified entities to comply with that market-based compliance mechanism beginning January 1, 2015. This bill would instead exempt those categories of persons or entities that did not have a compliance obligation, as defined, under a market-based compliance mechanism beginning January 1, 2013, from being subject to that market-based compliance mechanism through December 31, 2020. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires a local educational agency to implement one of several specified interventions for a school not identified as a persistently lowest-achieving school that, after one full school year, is subject to corrective action, as specified, and fails to meet specified criteria and has a specified percentage of parents and legal guardians of pupils sign a petition requesting the local educational agency to implement at least one of 5 specified interventions. Existing law requires a local educational agency to implement the intervention option requested by the petition unless the agency makes a specified finding in a regularly scheduled public hearing. If a local educational agency receives a petition and does not implement the option requested in the petition in its final disposition of the petition, this bill would authorize the petitioners to appeal the final disposition to the county board of education. The bill would authorize the county board of education to approve the appeal if it finds that the local educational agency acted in violation of specified requirements or did not act in good faith. If the county board of education approves the appeal, the bill would require the local educational agency to implement the option requested in the petition. To the extent that these provisions impose additional duties on a county board of education or a local educational agency, 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, 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 property tax law provides, pursuant to the authority of a specified provision of the California Constitution, for a homeowners' exemption in the amount of $7,000 of the full value of a "dwelling," as defined, and authorizes the Legislature to increase this exemption. This bill, beginning with the lien date for the 2016–17 fiscal year, would increase the homeowners' exemption from $7,000 to $25,000 of the full value of a dwelling. This bill would also require, for the 2017–18 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, the county assessor to adjust the amount of the homeowners' exemption by the percentage change in the House Price Index for California for the first 3 quarters of the prior calendar year, as specified. The California Constitution requires the Legislature, whenever it increases the homeowners' property tax exemption, to provide a comparable increase in benefits to qualified renters. The Personal Income Tax Law authorizes various credits against the taxes imposed by that law, including a credit for qualified renters in the amount of $120 for married couples filing joint returns, heads of household, and surviving spouses if adjusted gross income is $50,000 or less, and in the amount of $60 for other individuals if adjusted gross income is $25,000 or less. Existing law requires the Franchise Tax Board to annually adjust for inflation these adjusted gross income amounts. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2016, increase this credit for a qualified renter to $428 for married couples filing joint returns, heads of household, and surviving spouses if adjusted gross income is $50,000 or less, as adjusted for inflation, and to an amount equal to $214 for other individuals if adjusted gross income is $25,000 or less, as adjusted for inflation. The bill would also require, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2017, the Franchise Tax Board to annually adjust for inflation, based upon the California Consumer Price Index, the amount of these credits. The bill would also make technical, nonsubstantive changes to the renters' credit. The California Constitution requires the Legislature, in each fiscal year, to reimburse local governments for the revenue losses incurred by those governments in that fiscal year as a result of the homeowners' property tax exemption. 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 take effect immediately as a tax levy.
(1) Existing law establishes the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, and the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law appropriates funding, in the annual Budget Act and in other statutes, from the state General Fund for the support of these segments. Existing law also authorizes these segments to require their students to pay mandatory systemwide fees and tuition, among other costs, for matriculation at these institutions. Proposition 30, known as the Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act of 2012, was approved by the voters at the November 6, 2012, statewide general election and, among other things, increases personal income tax and sales and use tax rates and provides revenue for public elementary and secondary schools and community colleges. This bill would express a finding and declaration of the Legislature, and express the intent of the Legislature, relating to the enactment of Proposition 30 by the voters and to the provision of funding to the California State University, the University of California, and the California Community Colleges. The bill, from the 2015–16 fiscal year to the 2018–19 fiscal year, inclusive, would prohibit mandatory systemwide fees or tuition charged to students of the California State University from exceeding the level of the mandatory systemwide fees or tuition charged to students of the California State University for the 2014–15 fiscal year. The bill, from the 2015–16 fiscal year to the 2018–19 fiscal year, inclusive, would prohibit the mandatory systemwide fees charged to students of the California Community Colleges from increasing beyond the level of the mandatory systemwide fees charged to students of the California Community Colleges for the 2014–15 fiscal year. The bill, from the 2015–16 fiscal year to the 2018–19 fiscal year, inclusive, would prohibit the mandatory systemwide fees or tuition charged to students of the University of California from exceeding the level of the mandatory systemwide fees or tuition charged to students of the University of California for the 2014–15 fiscal year. (2) Existing law prohibits a campus of the California State University, or the Chancellor of the California State University, or both, from approving a student success fee before January 1, 2016. Existing law requires, during the 2014–15 fiscal year, the chancellor to conduct a review of the California State University Student Fee Policy relating to student success fees and to recommend to the Trustees of the California State University changes to the fee policy. This bill, commencing with the 2015–16 fiscal year, would prohibit the imposition of a student success fee at a campus of a segment of public postsecondary education unless the student success fee is approved by a favorable vote of 2 3 "?> a majority of those students voting at an election of the student body held at that campus within the preceding 48 months. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The Economic Revitalization Act establishes the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, also known as "GO-Biz," to 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. The Bergeson-Peace Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank Act establishes the Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank within GO-Biz to, among other things, assist in the promotion of economic development throughout the state. This bill would enact the Small Business Technical Assistance Act of 2015, within the bank under the direction of GO-Biz to, among other things, serve as the lead state entity for overseeing the state's participation with the federal California Small Business Development Center Program, the Women's Business Center program, the Veteran Business Outreach Center program, the Service Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE) , and the Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement program. The bill would also recognize those federal programs, and would authorize GO-Biz or any other state entity to contract with a federal small business technical assistance center. The bill would require the State Chair of the California Small Business Development Center Leadership Council, or the contract lead for any of the other federal small business technical assistance centers, to report specific information to GO-Biz relating to any year that state funds are appropriated to support the California Small Business Development Center Program or any of the other federal small business technical assistance center programs, and would, in turn, require the director of GO-Biz or the contract lead for any of the other small business technical assistance centers to provide that report to the Legislature and post the report on the GO-Biz's Internet Web site. The bill would also require the state chair, as a condition of accepting state funds, to allow access to other information about those federal programs under certain conditions. The bill would make legislative findings and declarations in this regard.