DL
R California Assembly · District 73

Asm. Diane L Harkey

Compare
Total votes
16,578
all sessions
Attendance
89%
1,226 missed
Near the chamber average
With party
97%
of cast votes
Near the chamber average
Bipartisan score
1%
crosses aisle rarely
Near the chamber average
Sponsored
626
bills & resolutions
Higher than 89% of chamber peers
Committees
0
assignments
626 bills and resolutions

Sponsored bills

Total
626
Primary
67
Co-sponsor
559
This page
626
matching current filters
Co-sponsor SB 14
Vetoed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
State Budget.

(1) The California Constitution requires the Governor to submit annually to the Legislature a budget itemizing state expenditures and estimating state revenues and requires the Legislature to pass the Budget Bill by midnight on June 15. This bill would require that the budget submitted by the Governor to the Legislature for the 2013–14 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, as specified in a plan developed by the Department of Finance and distributed to the appropriate committees of the Legislature by August 1, 2012, be developed pursuant to performance-based budgeting, as defined, for each state agency. (2) Under existing law, a state agency for which an appropriation is made is generally required to submit to the Department of Finance for approval a complete and detailed budget setting forth all proposed expenditures and estimated revenues for the ensuing fiscal year. The bill would require the budget of a state agency, as defined, submitted to the department as specified in the plan developed by the department, to utilize performance-based budgeting for all programs, as defined to include those performed not only by state agencies, but by local agencies, contractors, or others that have a material relationship with the state, or its authorities and activities. For those programs not administered by the state, but which confer a benefit that would not otherwise be conferred but for the action of state government, state departments would be required to develop a process for consulting with responsible local agencies, contractors or other responsible entities, and stakeholders to develop information related to performance standards and program performance. The bill would require the department to include specified performance-based budgeting information in the Governor's Budget proposal and to post that information on the department's Internet Web site. Implementation of the requirement to use performance-based budgeting for departments and programs would be contingent on an appropriation of funding for that requirement in the annual Budget Act.

Vetoed Mar 1, 2012 1 co-sponsor
Primary AB 2524
In committee · California Assembly · Lead sponsor
Tort Claims Act: public entities.

The Tort Claims Act provides for the liability and immunity of a governmental entity for its acts or omissions that cause harm to persons, and defines a public entity for these purposes. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change to these provisions.

In committee Feb 27, 2012 0 co-sponsors
Primary AB 2448
In committee · California Assembly · Lead sponsor
Tort Claims Act: definitions.

The Tort Claims Act provides for the liability and immunity of a governmental entity for its acts or omissions that cause harm to persons and defines a public employee as an employee of a public entity for these purposes. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change to these provisions.

In committee Feb 27, 2012 0 co-sponsors
Primary AB 2079
In committee · California Assembly · Lead sponsor
Government liability.

Existing law governs the tort liability and immunity of, and claims and actions against, public entities and their officers and employees. Existing law defines the term "regulation" for purposes of those provisions as a rule, regulation, order, or standard, having the force of law, adopted by an employee or agency pursuant to certain federal and state laws, as specified. This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.

In committee Feb 24, 2012 0 co-sponsors
Co-sponsor ACA 22
In committee · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
A resolution to propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the Constitution of the State, by adding Section 12 to Article VII thereof, and by amending subdivision (f) of Section 17 of Article XVI thereof, relating to public employees' retirement.

(1) Existing law establishes various public agency retirement systems, including the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) , the State Teachers' Retirement System (STRS) , the Judges' Retirement System II, and various county retirement systems pursuant to the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937, among others, and these systems provide defined pension benefits to public employees based on age, service credit, and amount of final compensation. The California Constitution permits a city or county to adopt a charter for purposes of its governance that supersedes general laws of the state in regard to specified subjects, including compensation of city or county employees. The California Constitution also establishes the University of California as a public trust with full powers of organization and government, subject only to specified limitations. Charter cities and the University of California may establish pension plans under their respective independent constitutional authority. These pension systems are funded by employee and employer contributions and investment returns. Existing law provides that public employee pension benefits are a form of deferred compensation, the right to which vests in the employee on contractual principles and is protected from impairment by the California Constitution and the United States Constitution. This measure would require each public retirement system, as defined in statute, to provide one or more hybrid pension plans meeting the requirements of this measure to each public employer that provides its employees a defined benefit pension plan administered by the public retirement system. The measure would require that a hybrid pension plan consist of a defined benefit component and a defined contribution or alternative plan design component, as specified. The measure would require, among other things, that a hybrid pension plan be designed with a goal of providing annually during retirement, based on a full career in public service, as defined, replacement income of 75% of a public employee's final compensation. The measure would require the Director of Finance, on or before January 1, 2013, to establish initial criteria and requirements for one or more hybrid pension plans, as specified. The measure would require, on and after July 1, 2013, each public retirement system to administer, and make available to each public employer that provides a defined benefit pension plan, one or more hybrid pension plans, except as specified, for public employees hired in each member classification in the public retirement system. The measure would require, for public employees hired on and after January 1, 2013, that retirement benefits be limited as provided, with regard to a defined benefit that is calculated with reference to final compensation, as specified, that final compensation be calculated using at least a consecutive 36-month period of service. The measure would establish various other limitations on the retirement benefits offered by public employers to public employees, regardless of the date the employees are hired, to the fullest extent permissible under the United States Constitution. In this regard, the measure would require that any change to a formula or benefit resulting in an increase in a member's pension benefits shall apply only to service performed on and after the operative date of the change and would require that employers and employees make required payments to fund the normal cost of benefits, as specified. The measure would require public employees to contribute at least 12 of the normal costs of any defined benefit plan and would prohibit an employer from paying an employee's required contributions, except as specified. The measure would also prohibit retirement systems from granting any nonqualified service credit, as specified. The measure additionally would require that a public employee, who is convicted of any felony arising from his or her official duties, forfeit retirement benefits based on certain statutes. The measure would limit the amount of service that a retired public employee may perform for public employers. The measure would provide that neither its provisions nor any related statutory provisions apply to, or otherwise restrict, death, survivor, and disability benefits, except as specified. The measure would provide that labor contracts that are in effect on November 7, 2012, and that are in conflict with the measure's provisions remain in effect until the expiration of the contract, at which time the requirements of the measure would apply. The measure would specify that terms used in those provisions are to be defined in a specified statute and would permit the Legislature to amend specified statutes referenced in the measure's provisions by a 23 vote of the membership of each house by a statute that is consistent with and furthers its purposes. The measure would provide that the activities, programs, and levels of service associated with its provisions are not state-mandated local programs requiring a subvention of funds. (2) The California Constitution prohibits the Legislature from changing the composition of the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system that included elected employee members as of a specified date, including the number, terms, and method of selection and removal of members, unless the change is ratified by a majority vote of the electors of the jurisdiction in which the participants of the system are, or were, prior to retirement, employed. This measure would require the composition of the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system to be modified, in the manner provided for in a specified statute, and would exempt that modification from ratification by the electors. (3) The measure would require the state to defend the constitutionality of its provisions.

In committee Feb 23, 2012 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor ACR 92
Passed · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Relative to human trafficking.

This resolution would recognize the month of January 2012, and each following January, as National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month, and it would recognize February 1, 2012, and each following February 1, as California's Free From Slavery Day.

Passed Feb 7, 2012 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor AB 192
Failed · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Public safety: Local Safety and Protection Account: appropriation.

The Vehicle License Fee Law, in lieu of any ad valorem property tax upon vehicles, imposes an annual license fee for any vehicle subject to registration in this state in the amount of 1% of the market value of that vehicle, as provided, for a specified amount of time. Existing law also, until July 1, 2011, imposes an additional tax equal to 0.15% of the market value of specified vehicles, as determined by the Department of Motor Vehicles, to the vehicle license fee, to be deposited in the General Fund and transferred to the Local Safety and Protection Account, a continuously appropriated fund. Existing law provides that money in the account shall be allocated for various public safety programs, as provided. This bill would, beginning July 1, 2011, and each July 1 thereafter for a transfer $500,000,000 from the General Fund to the account total of 5 years, as provided. By transferring funds to a continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Failed Feb 1, 2012 1 co-sponsor
Primary AB 1048
Failed · California Assembly · Lead sponsor
Water quality in the San Diego region: recycled water and wastewater: fluoride.

Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the State Water Resources Control Board and the 9 California regional water quality control boards are the principal state agencies with responsibility for the coordination and control of water quality in the state. The act requires the state board to formulate and adopt state policies for water quality control, and requires the regional boards to adopt regional water quality control plans in compliance with the state policies. This bill would require the California Regional Water Quality Board, San Diego Region, to address levels of fluoride in recycled water and wastewater as part of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board's review of the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin.

Failed Feb 1, 2012 0 co-sponsors
Showing 341 to 350 of 626 bills
Previous 1 … 34 35 36 … 63 Next