(1) Existing law requires the State Board of Education to develop guidelines that school districts may use in the development of teacher evaluation procedures, and distribute such guidelines to every school district. This bill would require the state board to revise, update, and adopt guidelines that school districts may use in the development of teacher evaluation procedures by July 1, 2016. The bill would also require that the updated guidelines include a determination of a teacher's overall performance, as specified. (2) Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district or a county board of education, as specified, after a public hearing on the matter, to request the state board to waive all or part of any section of the Education Code or any regulation adopted by the state board that implements a provision of the Education Code that may be waived, except for specified provisions. This bill would prohibit the state board from granting any waiver request by a governing board of a school district if the state board finds that the governing board of the school district is out of compliance with specified requirements relating to teacher evaluation. (3) Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that governing boards of school districts establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of the performance of all certificated personnel within each school district of the state. Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to establish standards of expected pupil achievement at each grade level in each area of study and to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance on a continuing basis as it reasonably relates to the progress of pupils toward the established standards and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments, the instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee, the employee's adherence to curricular objectives, and the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities. Existing law authorizes school district governing boards to develop and adopt additional evaluation and assessment guidelines or criteria. This bill would encourage the governing board of a school district to use peer observation and surveys of parents and pupils as part of the evaluation and assessment guidelines and criteria. (4) Existing law requires that an evaluation and assessment of the performance of a certificated employee be made on a continuing basis, as provided. This bill would instead require an annual evaluation and assessment of the performance of a certificated employee. The bill would require the evaluation and assessment to include a determination of the teacher's performance, as specified. 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. (5) This bill would update cross-references and would make other nonsubstantive changes. (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.
Sponsored bills
Existing federal and state laws regulate certain aspects of electronic fund transfers, including, but not limited to, preauthorized electronic fund transfers from or to a consumer's checking account. Existing law requires the Department of Business Oversight to regulate various financial institutions operating within the state, including, but not limited to, banks and credit unions. This bill would require a financial institution subject to oversight by the Department of Business Oversight to ensure it complies with a specific federal regulation with regard to electronic fund transfers. This bill would require a financial institution to provide a specified written notice to a consumer, who approved a preauthorized electronic fund transfer to a merchant from the consumer's account, and would further require a merchant located in the state that accepts preauthorized electronic fund transfers to post the same notice on its Internet Web site, if any. This bill would require a financial institution, upon written notification from a consumer who terminated a preauthorized electronic fund transfer with a merchant, within 7 business days, to take action to ensure that the merchant no longer has the ability to withdraw funds from the consumer's account, based upon the consumer's instructions. This bill would prohibit a merchant from requiring payment for goods or services in the form of a preauthorized electronic fund transfer from a consumer's account at a financial institution, and would require a merchant to notify a financial institution, and cease making demands on a consumer's account, when the consumer's debt, payable by a preauthorized electronic fund transfer, has been satisfied.
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 defines a motorized bicycle in one case as a device that has fully operative pedals for propulsion by human power and has an electric motor that meets specified requirements, including that it has a power output of not more than 1,000 watts, is incapable of propelling the device at a speed of more than 20 miles per hour on ground level, and is incapable of further increasing the speed of the device when human power is used to propel the motorized bicycle faster than 20 miles per hour. This bill would redefine this type of "motorized bicycle" by, among other things, renaming it a "low-speed electric bicycle," stating that it can have either 2 or 3 wheels, lowering the maximum power output to 750 watts, and requiring that it weigh no more than 80 pounds. The bill would exempt a low-speed electric bicycle from the prohibition on the operation of a motorized bicycle on a bicycle path or trail, bikeway, bicycle lane established as provided, equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational trail. The bill would also make conforming changes.
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.
Existing law requires the state, through the Department of Social Services and county welfare departments, to establish and support a public system of statewide child welfare services to be available in each county of the state. All counties are required to establish and maintain specialized organizational entities within the county welfare department that have the sole responsibility for the operation of the child welfare services program. The Legislature has declared its intent, in providing for this statewide system of child welfare services, that all children are entitled to be safe and free from abuse and neglect. This bill would expressly authorize a parent or legal guardian to make a video or audio recording of his or her interview or interactions with a county child protective services social worker who is investigating allegations of parental abuse or neglect. This bill would require such a county child protective services social worker to inform a parent or legal guardian, in writing, that the parent or legal guardian may make a video or audio recording of his or her interview or interactions with a county child protective services social worker. This bill would also require that a copy of the written notification be signed by the parent or legal guardian and returned to the county child protective services social worker to acknowledge receipt of the written notification. This bill would require a higher level of service by requiring a county child protective services social worker to provide notice to parents or legal guardians, and would thereby create 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.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws, including a credit for a percentage of specified research expenses. These laws, in modified conformity, apply the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, relating to the election of alternative incremental credit. These laws provide that the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code relating to election of alternative simplified credit shall not apply. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2016, would not apply the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code relating to the election of alternative incremental credit. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2016, and before January 1, 2021, would apply the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code relating to election of alternative simplified credit in modified conformity, and for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2016, would apply the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, relating to the inclusion of qualified research expenses and gross receipts of an acquired person and aggregation of expenditures. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law establishes a procedure for creating a limited conservatorship for a person with developmental disabilities. Under existing law, that procedure requires, among other things, that a court investigator conduct interviews of a proposed conservatee and others, review allegations in the petition to create the conservatorship, determine whether the proposed conservatee is incapable of completing an affidavit of voter registration, and report the results of the investigation to the court. This bill would provide that these requirements do not apply to a procedure to establish a limited conservatorship for a person with developmental disabilities when the proposed conservator is a parent of the proposed conservatee. Existing law requires that within 30 days after the filing of a petition for limited conservatorship of a person with developmental disabilities, the proposed limited conservatee, with his or her consent, be assessed at a regional center. Existing law requires the regional center to submit a written report of its findings and recommendations resulting from that assessment to the court. This bill would instead authorize, rather than require, the proposed limited conservatee, with his or her consent, to be assessed at a regional center for those purposes. The bill would require the regional center, with the consent of the proposed limited conservatee, to submit a written report containing findings and recommendations to the court without an assessment of the proposed conservatee if the proposed conservatee has been a client of the regional center for a period of time sufficient for the center to provide those findings and recommendations without the need for an additional assessment, and if the proposed conservator is a parent of the proposed conservatee.
Existing law requires a certificated probationary employee to become a permanent employee of a school district if his or her probationary period commenced during the 1983–84 fiscal year or any fiscal year thereafter, the school district has an average daily attendance of 250 pupils or more, the employee completes 2 consecutive school years, and the employee is reelected for the next succeeding school year to a position requiring certification. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2018, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2019. This bill would, after July 1, 2018, require a certificated probationary employee to become a permanent employee of a school district if the school district has an average daily attendance of 250 pupils or more, the employee completes 3 consecutive school years, received 3 consecutive evaluation ratings of effective or better, and is reelected for the next succeeding school year to a position requiring certification. The bill would require a certificated employee to lose permanent status if specified conditions occur. The bill would require school districts to offer a professional growth or remediation plan to certain certificated employees. By requiring school districts to perform additional duties, 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, 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 become operative only if AB 1078 of the 2015–16 Regular Session is also enacted and takes effect on or before January 1, 2016.