Existing law authorizes the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to oversee programs for the purposes of reducing parolee recidivism. This bill would authorize each county to establish a Community Corrections Performance Incentives Fund (CCPIF) and would authorize the state to annually allocate money into a State Corrections Performance Incentives Fund to be used for specified purposes relating to improving local probation supervision practices and capacities, as specified. This bill would require the Director of Finance, in consultation with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, the Chief Probation Officers of California, and the Administrative Office of the Courts, to calculate the amount of money to be appropriated from the state fund into a CCPIF. This bill would specify that the calculation would be based on costs avoided by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation because of a reduction in the percentage of adult probationers sent to prison for a probation failure, as specified. This bill would also require each county using CCPIF funds to identify and track specific outcome-based measures, as specified, and report to the Administrative Office of the Courts on the effectiveness of the programs paid for by the CCPIF. This bill would require the community corrections programs to be developed and implemented by the chief probation officer, as advised by a Community Corrections Partnership. This bill would require specified local officials to serve as part of that Community Corrections Partnership. Because this bill would increase the duties for certain local officials, it 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law prescribes provisions for the renewal or termination of a hiring of residential real property for an unspecified term. Existing law, in effect until January 1, 2010, requires that an owner of a residential dwelling give at least 60 days' notice prior to termination, as specified, and at least 30 days' notice prior to termination if any tenant or resident has resided in the dwelling for less than one year. This bill would delete the January 1, 2010, repeal of the provisions described above, thereby making them operative indefinitely.
Existing law requires the collection of fees for issuing marriage licenses and for providing certified copies of vital records, including marriage certificates, birth certificates, fetal death records, and death records. Existing law provides for the establishment of county domestic violence program special funds for the purpose of funding local domestic violence programs. Certain fees payable at the time a marriage license or a certified copy of any of the above vital records is issued may be collected by the county clerks for deposit into these funds. Existing law authorizes the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and the Solano County Board of Supervisors, until January 1, 2010, upon making certain findings and declarations, to authorize an increase in the fees for marriage licenses and confidential marriage licenses, up to a maximum increase of $2. Existing law authorizes those boards of supervisors, and the City Council of the City of Berkeley, upon making certain findings and declarations, to authorize an increase in the fees for certified copies of certain vital records, up to a maximum increase of $2. Existing law authorizes those governmental entities to make further increases in those fees each year, as specified. Existing law requires these fees to be allocated for purposes relating to domestic violence prevention, intervention, and prosecution. This bill would extend the operation of the provisions applicable to Solano County until January 1, 2011. This bill, until January 1, 2015, would provide the same authorization to increase fees for certain vital records to the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. The bill would require the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors to submit to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary preliminary reports by July 1, 2013, and final reports by July 1, 2014, regarding the above fee increase, as specified.
(1) Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Existing law establishes community college districts throughout the state, and authorizes them to provide instruction to students at community college campuses. This bill would request community college campuses to give priority for housing to current and former foster youth. The bill would also request community college campuses that maintain student housing facilities open for occupation during school breaks, or on a year-round basis, to give first priority to current and former foster youth for residence in the housing facilities that are open for uninterrupted year-round occupation, and next give priority to current and former foster youth for housing that is open for occupation during the most days in the calendar year. (2) Existing law establishes the California State University and the University of California as 2 of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law imposes certain requirements on the California State University with respect to student housing. This bill would require a campus of the state university that maintains student housing facilities to give priority to current and former foster youth. The bill also would require a campus of the state university that maintains student housing facilities open for occupation during school breaks, or on a year-round basis, to give priority to current and former foster youth, as specified. The bill would apply similar provisions to the University of California except that the housing priority for foster youth would only apply for residence in housing facilities for which the foster youth are eligible. These provisions would apply to the University of California only to the extent that the Regents of the University of California act, by resolution, to make them applicable.
(1) Existing law grants to the City and County of San Francisco the right, title, and interest of the State of California in and to certain tidelands and submerged lands in trust for certain purposes. The State Lands Commission has jurisdiction over tidelands and submerged lands of the state. The Hunters Point Shipyard Conversion Act of 2002 granted to, and vested in, the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency, all of the state's right, title, and interest in the Hunters Point trust lands, and, upon conveyance by the federal government to the agency, in appurtenances located on Hunters Point submerged lands, subject to the public trust and the terms and conditions of the act. The Hunters Point Shipyard Public Trust Exchange Act approved an exchange of public trust lands within the Hunters Point Shipyard, whereby certain trust lands that meet specified criteria and are not useful for public trust purposes are freed from the public trust and may be conveyed into private ownership, and certain other lands that are not public trust lands and that are useful for public trust purposes are made subject to the public trust. Existing law authorizes the Director of Parks and Recreation to enter into agreements concerning the development of a project in the City and County of San Francisco and partly within the Candlestick Point State Recreation Area. This bill would repeal the Hunters Point Conversion Act of 2002 and the Hunters Point Shipyard Public Trust Exchange Act. The bill would also repeal the provision authorizing the Director of Parks and Recreation to enter into agreements concerning that project in the City and County of San Francisco. This bill instead would grant to, and vest in, the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency, all of the state's right, title, and interest in Candlestick Point and the former Hunters Point Naval Shipyard trust lands, as revised, and, upon conveyance by the federal government to the agency, in appurtenances located on Hunters Point submerged lands, subject to the public trust, and the terms and conditions of this bill. This bill would also approve an exchange of public trust lands within the lands conveyed, whereby certain trust lands or interests in lands that meet specified criteria and are not now useful for public trust purposes will be freed from the public trust and may be conveyed into private ownership, and certain other lands or interests in lands that are not now public trust lands and that are useful for public trust purposes will be made subject to the public trust. The bill would require the agency to deposit all moneys collected by the agency arising out of the use or operation of any of the trust lands into a special fund maintained by the agency. The bill would require the agency to prepare an annual statement of financial conditions and operations and to submit the statement to the State Lands Commission each year on or before October 1. The bill would authorize the Director of Parks and Recreation to enter in an agreement to transfer to the agency or the City and County of San Francisco an interest in state property held by the department within the Candlestick Point State Recreation Area upon the director making certain findings. This bill would provide that upon the termination of the redevelopment plan for the project area, consisting of the former shipyard, the Hunters Point submerged lands, and Candlestick Point, or by January 1, 2050, whichever is earlier, the agency shall transfer any trust lands in which it holds fee title to the city, unless the commission approves a later date. (2) The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the need for special legislation.
Existing law establishes the Witness Relocation and Assistance Program. This bill would provide that no person, state or local public agency, or private entity shall post the home address, the telephone number, or personal identifying information that discloses the location of any witness or witness family member participating in the Witness Relocation and Assistance Program (WRAP) with the intent that another person imminently use that information to commit a crime involving violence or a threat of violence against that witness or witness' family member, and that a violation of these provisions would be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $2,500, or up to 6 months in a county jail, or by both that fine and imprisonment. The bill would also provide that a violation that leads to the bodily injury of the witness, or the witness' family members who are participating in the program, is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $5,000, or up to one year in a county jail, or by both that fine and imprisonment. The bill would authorize participants in the program to submit opt-out forms to Internet search engine providers to notify those providers of the participants, and to prevent inclusion of the participants' addresses and telephone numbers in public Internet search databases, as specified. The bill would require a business, state or local agency, private entity, or person to remove the home address or telephone number of a WRAP participant from its public Internet search databases within two business days of delivery of the opt-out form, and to ensure the information is not reposted on the same Internet Web site, a subsidiary site, or any other Internet Web site maintained by the recipient of the opt-out form, and would subject a violator of this provision to a $5,000 civil fine, as specified. The bill would authorize a witness whose home address or telephone number is made public as a result of a violation, as specified, to bring an action seeking injunctive or declaratory relief. The bill would further provide that no business, state or local agency, private entity, or person that has received an opt-out form from a WRAP participant shall solicit, sell, or trade on the Internet the home address or telephone number of that participant, and would authorize an action for damages, as specified, for a violation of this prohibition. By creating new crimes, 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) The State Bar Act provides for the licensure and regulation of attorneys by the State Bar of California, a public corporation. Existing law provides that it is the duty of an attorney to, among other things, never reject, for any consideration personal to himself or herself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed. Existing law provides that a lawyer may fulfill his or her ethical commitment to provide pro bono services, in part, by providing financial support to organizations providing free legal services to persons of limited means. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to encourage the legal profession to make further efforts to meet its professional responsibilities and other obligations by providing pro bono legal services and financial support of nonprofit legal organizations that provide free legal services to underserved communities. This bill would prohibit a person or organization that is not a specified type of legal aid organization, as defined, from using the term "legal aid," or any confusingly similar name in any firm name, trade name, fictitious business name, or other designation, or on any advertisement, letterhead, business card, or sign. The bill would subject a person or organization that violates this prohibition to specified civil liability. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2011, and subject to funding specifically provided for this purpose, require the Judicial Council to develop one or more model pilot projects in selected courts for 3-year periods pursuant to a competitive grant process and a request for proposals. The bill would provide that legal counsel shall be appointed to represent low-income parties in civil matters involving critical issues affecting basic human needs in those courts selected by the Judicial Council, as specified. The bill would provide that each project shall be a partnership between the court, a qualified legal services project that shall serve as the lead agency for case assessment and direction, and other legal services providers in the community who are able to provide the services for the project. The bill would require the lead legal services agency, to the extent practical, to identify and make use of pro bono services in order to maximize available services efficiently and economically. The bill would provide that the court partner is responsible for providing procedures, personnel, training, and case management and administration practices that reflect best practices, as specified. The bill would require a local advisory committee to be formed to facilitate the administration of the local project and to ensure that the project is fulfilling its objectives. The bill would require the Judicial Council to conduct a study to demonstrate the effectiveness and continued need for the pilot program, and to report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature on or before January 31, 2016. (2) Existing law sets the fees at $25 or $30 for various court services, including, but not limited to, issuing a writ for the enforcement of an order or judgment, issuing an abstract of judgment, recording or registering any license or certificate, issuing an order of sale, and filing and entering an award under the Workers' Compensation Law. This bill would provide, from July 1, 2011, to June 30, 2017, inclusive, that $10 of each fee collected pursuant to these provisions shall be used by the Judicial Council for the expenses of the Judicial Council in implementing and administering the civil representation pilot program described in (1) above. Commencing July 1, 2017, the bill would reduce each of those fees by $10.
Existing law provides that whenever any person is released upon probation, the case may be transferred to any court of the same rank in any other county in which the person resides permanently, provided that the court of the receiving county shall first be given an opportunity to determine whether the person does reside in and has stated the intention to remain in that county for the duration of probation. Existing law provides that if the court finds that the person does not reside in or has not stated an intention to remain in that county for the duration of probation, it may refuse to accept the transfer. This bill would provide that the transfers would be mandatory, unless there is a determination on the record that the transfer would be inappropriate, as specified. The bill would require a noticed motion for the transfer for certain cases, as specified, and would require the Judicial Council to promulgate rules of court pertaining to the motion procedures, as specified.
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of that act a crime. Existing law prohibits health care service plans from charging premium, price, or charge differentials because of sex, but makes an exception for differentials based on specified statistical and actuarial data. This bill would eliminate that exception with respect to contracts issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2011. Because a willful violation of this provision by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law provides for the regulation of life and disability insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law prohibits life and disability insurers from engaging in certain discriminatory practices, but specifies that premium, price, or charge differentials because of sex are not prohibited when based on specified statistical or actuarial data or sound underwriting practices. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2011, prohibit health insurers from charging a premium, price, or charge differential because of the sex of specified individuals. 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 requires the Governor to proclaim certain days each year for specified reasons. Existing law also designates particular days each year as having special significance in public schools and educational institutions and encourages those entities to conduct suitable commemorative exercises on those dates. This bill would provide that the Governor proclaim May 22 of each year as Harvey Milk Day, and would designate that date as having special significance in public schools and educational institutions and would encourage those entities to conduct suitable commemorative exercises on that date. This bill would incorporate amendments to Section 37222 of the Education Code proposed by both this bill and AB 264, which would become operative only if both bills are enacted and become effective and this bill is chaptered last.