Asm. Roger Dickinson

(1) Existing law provides for the testing of handguns and requires the Department of Justice to maintain a roster listing all handguns that are determined not to be unsafe handguns. Existing law makes it a crime, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, to manufacture, import into the state for sale, keep for sale, offer or expose for sale, give, or lend an unsafe handgun. Existing law provides that the provisions defining and governing unsafe handguns do not apply to the sale, loan, or transfer of any firearm in a transaction that requires the use of a licensed dealer or to the delivery of a firearm to a licensed dealer for purposes of a consignment sale or as collateral for a pawnbroker loan. This bill would limit these exemptions to a maximum of 2 firearms per person, per calendar year, and would make the provisions defining and governing unsafe handguns inapplicable to the surrender of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person to a local law enforcement agency. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law makes the provisions defining and governing unsafe handguns inapplicable to a single-shot pistol, as specified. This bill would instead make the provisions defining and governing unsafe handguns inapplicable to a single-shot pistol with a break top or bolt action. The bill would make this exemption inapplicable to a semiautomatic pistol that has been temporarily or permanently altered so that it will not fire in a semiautomatic mode. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law exempts the purchase of a handgun from the above prohibition on manufacturing, importing, selling, giving, or lending an unsafe handgun if the handgun is sold to, or purchased by, the Department of Justice, a police department, a sheriff's official, a marshal's office, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the California Highway Patrol, a district attorney's office, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties. This bill would prohibit a person exempted under the above provision from selling or otherwise transferring the ownership of the handgun to a person who is not exempted under the same provision unless the transaction is exempt from the requirement to complete the transaction through a licensed dealer. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) The bill would also make nonsubstantive, technical corrections. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 32000 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 363 that would become operative if this bill and SB 363 are both enacted and this bill is enacted last. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law defines the term "public works" for purposes of requirements regarding the payment of prevailing wages, the regulation of working hours, and the securing of workers' compensation for public works projects. Existing law establishes a workers' compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers' Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries sustained in the course of his or her employment. Under this system, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board has jurisdiction to adjudicate claims relating to workers' compensation. Existing law requires, in computing average annual earnings for the purposes of temporary disability indemnity and permanent total disability indemnity only, that the average weekly earnings be taken in accordance with a prescribed formula. This bill would require the average weekly earnings for an employee employed on a public works project to be taken at wages actually paid or the prevailing wage that was applicable to the work performed by the employee, whichever amount is greater. The bill would provide that an appeals board determination of whether a project was a public work or of the applicable prevailing wage, or both, has no effect in any other judicial or administrative proceeding.

(1) Existing law prohibits a person from practicing law in California, or from advertising or holding himself or herself out as practicing law, unless the person is an active member of the State Bar, or otherwise authorized, as specified, to practice law in this state. A violation of these provisions is a crime. This bill would, for violations of the above-described provisions, require the State Bar to disclose, in confidence, the information in its investigation to the agency responsible for the criminal enforcement of these provisions or exchange that information with that agency. This bill would authorize the State Bar to request the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a city attorney acting as a local prosecutor, to bring an enforcement action or bring a civil action in its own name, as specified. The bill would require the court, in a civil enforcement action by the State Bar for the unlawful practice of law, to impose a civil penalty not to exceed $2,500, to be paid to the State Bar. The bill would require the court to impose a civil penalty not to exceed $6,000 for the intentional violation of any injunction prohibiting the unlawful practice of law. The bill would specify that if the conduct constituting the intentional violation is of a continuing nature, each day of that conduct shall be deemed a separate and distinct violation. The bill would, in determining the amount of the civil penalty to be assessed for these violations, require the court to consider any relevant circumstances, as specified. The bill would require the court to consider, when applicable, additional relief provided under existing law and to award reasonable attorney's fees and costs, as specified. The bill would require any penalty collected pursuant to these provisions to be paid into the treasury of the State Bar and used for specified purposes. (2) Existing law requires the State Bar to issue an Annual Discipline Report by April 30 of each year describing the performance and condition of the State Bar discipline system during the preceding calendar year, as specified. This bill would additionally require the State Bar to annually report, by April 30 of each year, the number of complaints of the unauthorized practice of law received, requests for enforcement actions made to the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a city attorney acting as a local prosecutor pursuant to the provisions described in (1) above, and other unlawful practice of law proceedings filed by the State Bar, as specified, during the preceding calendar year. The bill would also require the report to include an accounting of any penalties collected pursuant to the provisions described in (1) above, and any expenditure of those funds, during the preceding calendar year. The bill would require the report to be made to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary and would authorize the information required by the report to be included in the Annual Discipline Report described above. (3) Existing law makes a person who engages in unfair competition, as defined, liable for a civil penalty not to exceed $2,500 dollars for each violation and requires that this penalty be assessed and recovered in a civil action brought in the name of the people of the State of California by specified persons in any court of competent jurisdiction. Existing law requires a court, for an unfair competition action brought at the request of a board within the Department of Consumer Affairs or a local consumer affairs agency, to determine the reasonable expenses incurred by the board or local agency in the investigation and prosecution of the action, and provides for the reimbursement of these expenses, as specified. This bill would similarly require the court, for an action brought at the request of the State Bar of California, to determine the reasonable expenses incurred by the State Bar in the investigation and prosecution of the action and provide for the reimbursement of these expenses. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Existing law authorizes the creation of infrastructure financing districts, as defined, for the sole purpose of financing public facilities, subject to adoption of a resolution by the legislative body and affected taxing entities proposed to be subject to the division of taxes and voter approval requirements. Existing law prohibits an infrastructure financing district from including any portion of a redevelopment project area. This bill would delete that prohibition and would authorize a district to finance a project or portion of a project that is located in, or overlaps with, a redevelopment project area or former redevelopment project area, as specified. (2) Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies to wind down the affairs of the dissolved redevelopment agencies and to, among other things, make payments due for enforceable obligations and to perform obligations required pursuant to any enforceable obligation. Existing law prohibits a successor agency from entering into contracts with, incur obligations, or make commitments to, any entity, as specified, or to amend or modify existing agreements, obligations, or commitments with any entity, for any purpose. This bill would authorize a successor agency, if the successor agency has received a finding of completion, to enter into, or amend existing, contracts and agreements, or otherwise administer projects in connection with enforceable obligations, if the contract, agreement, or project will not commit new property tax funds or otherwise adversely affect the flow of specified tax revenues or payments to the taxing agencies. (3) Existing law requires a successor agency to submit a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule to the Department of Finance, and requires the successor agency to make payments pursuant to that schedule. This bill would authorize the successor agency to schedule Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule payments beyond the existing Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle upon a showing that a lender requires cash on hand beyond the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle, or when a payment is shown to be due during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule period. The bill would authorize the successor agency to utilize reasonable estimates and projections to support payment amounts where a payment is shown to be due during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule period but an invoice or other billing document has not been received, if the successor agency submits appropriate supporting documentation for the basis of the estimate or projection to the department. The bill would provide that a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule may also include appropriation of moneys from bonds subject to passage during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle when an enforceable obligation requires the agency to issue the bonds and use the proceeds to pay for project expenditures. (4) Existing law requires that specified actions of a successor agency be first approved by its oversight board, including, among others, the establishment of a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule. This bill would require a successor agency to notify the board 10 days prior to entering into a contract or agreement for the use or disposition of specified properties. The bill would authorize the board to notify the successor agency during that 10-day period that the board intends to conduct a hearing to determine whether the contract or agreement is consistent with the successor agency's long-range property management plan and would require the board to hold the hearing and issue findings within 30 days after it so notified the successor agency. (5) Existing law requires the county auditor-controller to determine the amount of property taxes that would have been allocated to each redevelopment agency if it had not been dissolved and to deposit this amount in a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund in the county. Existing law requires the conducting of a due diligence review to determine the unobligated balances available for transfer to affected taxing entities. Existing law requires the county auditor-controller for each fiscal year to allocate moneys in the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund for passthrough payment obligations, enforceable obligations of the dissolved redevelopment agency, and administrative costs, as specified. Any remaining moneys in the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund are required to be distributed as local property tax revenues to local agencies and school entities, as specified. This bill would require that, on January 2, 2014, and twice yearly thereafter until June 1, 2018, funds be allocated to cover the housing entity administrative cost allowance of a local housing authority that has assumed the housing duties of the former redevelopment agency, as specified, before remaining moneys are distributed to local agencies and school entities. The bill would define "housing entity administrative cost allowance" for these purposes. This bill would also exclude from the calculation of the amount distributed to taxing entities during the 2012–13 base year the amounts distributed to taxing entities pursuant to the due diligence review process. By imposing additional duties upon local public officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (6) Existing law requires a successor agency to prepare a long-range property management plan that addresses the disposition and use of the real properties of a former redevelopment agency and requires a transfer of the property to the city, county, or city and county if the plan directs the use or liquidation of the property for a project identified in an approved redevelopment plan, as specified. This bill would specify that the term "identified in an approved redevelopment plan" includes properties listed in a community plan or a 5-year implementation plan. (7) 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. (8) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 34191.4 and 34191.5 of the Health and Safety Code, proposed by AB 564, that would become operative only if this bill and AB 564 are chaptered and become effective January 1, 2014, and this bill is chaptered last.

The Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act establishes a trial court employee personnel system that provides authority to hire trial court personnel, regulates the classification and compensation of trial court employees, labor relations, and personnel files, and requires each trial court to establish a system of employment selection and advancement and an employment protection system. Existing law authorizes state agencies to use personal services contracts to achieve cost savings if specified standards are satisfied, including, among other things, the contract does not cause the displacement of civil service employees and the contract is awarded through a publicized, competitive bidding process. The State Personnel Board is required to review a proposed contract upon the request of an employee organization for compliance with those standards. This bill, until January 1, 2020, would establish specified standards if a trial court intends to enter into a new contract, or renew or extend an existing contract, for any services that are currently or customarily performed by that trial court's employees. Among other things, the bill would require the trial court to clearly demonstrate that the contract will result in actual overall cost savings to the trial court for the duration of the entire contract as compared with the trial court's actual costs of providing the same services. The bill would require a contract for services in excess of $100,000 annually to include specific, measurable performance standards and provisions for audits on performance and cost savings, as specified. This bill would provide that these standards apply to any contract entered into, renewed, or extended after the effective date of this measure. The bill would provide that its provisions do not apply to a contract under specified circumstances, including when services are incidental to a contract for the purchase or lease of real or personal property. This bill would require each trial court to provide a report by February 1, 2014, to the Chairperson of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee and the chairpersons of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Assembly Judiciary Committee if the trial court entered into a contract between July 1, 2013, and the effective date of this measure for services that were provided or are customarily provided by its trial court employees if the contract has a term extending beyond March 31, 2014. This report would be required to include specified information relating to these contracts, including an analysis of whether the contract resulted in the displacement of trial court employees. The bill would provide that its provisions are severable.

(1) Existing law authorizes the creation of infrastructure financing districts, as defined, for the sole purpose of financing public facilities, subject to adoption of a resolution by the legislative body and affected taxing entities proposed to be subject to the division of taxes and voter approval requirements. Existing law prohibits an infrastructure financing district from including any portion of a redevelopment project area. This bill would delete that prohibition and would authorize a district to finance a project or portion of a project that is located in, or overlaps with, a redevelopment project area or former redevelopment project area, as specified. (2) Existing law requires a successor agency to submit a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule to the Department of Finance, and requires the successor agency to make payments pursuant to that schedule. This bill would authorize the successor agency to schedule Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule payments beyond the existing Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle upon a showing that a lender requires cash on hand beyond the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle, or when a payment is shown to be due during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule period. The bill would authorize the successor agency to utilize reasonable estimates and projections to support payment amounts where a payment is shown to be due during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule period but an invoice or other billing document has not been received, if the successor agency submits appropriate supporting documentation for the basis of the estimate or projection to the department and the auditor-controller. The bill would provide that a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule may also include appropriation of moneys from bonds subject to passage during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle when an enforceable obligation requires the agency to issue the bonds and use the proceeds to pay for project expenditures. (3) Existing law requires the county auditor-controller to determine the amount of property taxes that would have been allocated to each redevelopment agency if it had not been dissolved and to deposit this amount in a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund in the county. Existing law requires the conducting of a due diligence review to determine the unobligated balances available for transfer to affected taxing entities. Existing law requires the county auditor-controller for each fiscal year to allocate moneys in the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund for passthrough payment obligations, enforceable obligations of the dissolved redevelopment agency, and administrative costs, as specified. Any remaining moneys in the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund are required to be distributed as local property tax revenues to local agencies and school entities, as specified. This bill would require that, under specified conditions, on July 1, 2014, and twice yearly thereafter until July 1, 2018, funds be allocated to cover the housing entity administrative cost allowance of a local housing authority that has assumed the housing duties of the former redevelopment agency, as specified, before remaining moneys are distributed to local agencies and school entities. The bill would define "housing entity administrative cost allowance" for these purposes. This bill would also exclude from the calculation of the amount distributed to taxing entities during the 2012–13 base year the amounts distributed to taxing entities pursuant to the due diligence review process. By imposing additional duties upon local public officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law requires a successor agency to prepare a long-range property management plan that addresses the disposition and use of the real properties of a former redevelopment agency and requires a transfer of the property to the city, county, or city and county if the plan directs the use or liquidation of the property for a project identified in an approved redevelopment plan, as specified. This bill would specify that the term "identified in an approved redevelopment plan" includes properties listed in a community plan or a 5-year implementation plan. (5) 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. (6) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.