Existing law establishes the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families using federal, state, and county funds. Existing law requires a recipient of CalWORKs to participate in welfare-to-work activities as a condition of eligibility. Existing law authorizes a student who, at the time they are required to participate in the program, is enrolled in any undergraduate degree or certificate program that leads to employment to continue in that program if they are making satisfactory progress in that program, the county determines that continuing in the program is likely to lead to self-supporting employment for that recipient, and the welfare-to-work plan reflects that determination. A person may meet their welfare-to-work requirements by taking part in a self-initiated education or training program; however, if a recipient does not complete a specified number of hours of classroom, laboratory, or internship activities, the county human services agency is required to have the recipient participate in concurrent work activities, as specified. Existing law limits the time period in which a participant may engage in certain educational activities, in satisfaction of welfare-to-work requirements, to 24 cumulative months during a participant's lifetime. Existing law provides for an extension of that 24-month period under certain circumstances. Existing law requires that necessary supportive services, including child care and transportation costs, be available to every welfare-to-work participant in order to participate in the program activity to which they are assigned. This bill would require that a CalWORKs eligible individual participating in an educational activity full time and making satisfactory progress, as specified, receive a standard allowance of $500, which may be provided, in whole or in part, in the form of a book voucher. The bill would authorize a participant to opt out of the standard allowance at any time, to make a reimbursement claim for the actual costs of books and supplies, and to submit this claim to the county. The bill would require that an applicant or recipient who is enrolled in a specified educational plan or program and making satisfactory progress be deemed to be meeting all welfare-to-work requirements, including the hourly participation requirements, and be entitled to the allowance or reimbursement and other necessary supportive services. The bill would provide that a recipient who is enrolled in a publicly funded postsecondary educational institution and making satisfactory progress that would meaningfully increase the likelihood of their employment is entitled to an extension of the 24-month cumulative participation period, as specified. The bill would define "full time" and "making satisfactory progress" for purposes of these provisions and would require that these allowances be adjusted annually for inflation. By imposing a higher level of service of county employees, 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 the statutory provisions noted above. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would instead provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of implementing the bill.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law, the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act, requires the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to annually designate convenience zones and requires that at least one certified recycling center that meets certain requirements be located within every convenience zone. Existing law authorizes the department to grant a convenience zone an exemption from certain redemption requirements, including certain dealer and recycling center redemption requirements, based on certain factors. Existing law limits the total number of exemptions that may be granted to 35% of the total number of convenience zones identified as having one or more of those factors applicable. This bill would increase the total number of exemptions that may be granted to 50% of the number identified as eligible. The bill would require the department to review exemptions every 5 years to determine if each exemption still meets the prescribed exemption criteria. (2) The act requires dealers within a convenience zone where no recycling location has been established, or within a convenience zone that is unserved for 60 days and not exempt from convenience zone requirements, to submit an affidavit to the department stating that the dealer has met specified standards for redemption, including, among others, that the dealer is redeeming all empty beverage container types at all open cash registers or at one designated location on the dealer's premises, during all hours that the dealer is open for business. If the dealer does not submit that affidavit, existing law requires the dealer to pay $100 per day to the department, for deposit in the California Beverage Container Recycling Fund, a continuously appropriated fund described in (3) , until a recycling location is established or until the dealer meets the standards for redemption specified in the affidavit provision. This bill would revise these convenience zone redemption duties and exempt from those duties dealers with gross annual sales of less than $2,000,000 and dealers that are not supermarkets and that have less than 5,000 square feet of interior retail space. The bill, until January 1, 2022, would also exempt certain other dealers from these requirements. (3) The act establishes the California Beverage Container Recycling Fund and, except for administrative costs, continuously appropriates moneys in the fund to the department for specified purposes, including the amount necessary to pay handling fees to certain types of recyclers to provide an incentive for the redemption of empty beverage containers in convenience zones. This bill would require the department to offer a handling fee payment from the fund to certain certified recyclers within unserved convenience zones. The bill would make an appropriation by changing the terms and conditions under which the department is authorized to make payments from a continuously appropriated fund. The bill, until July 1, 2022, would require the handling fee to be set at the rate in effect on July 1, 2015. The bill would authorize the department, until July 1, 2022, to annually expend $3,000,000 from the fund for specified supplemental handling fee payments to low-volume recycling centers. By authorizing the expenditure of a continuously appropriated fund for new purposes, this bill would make an appropriation. The bill would require the department to develop and submit to the Legislature recommended revisions to the handling fee provisions, as specified. (4) The act also continuously appropriates from the California Beverage Container Recycling Fund $10,500,000 annually for payments to cities and counties for beverage container recycling and litter cleanup activities. The act authorizes the department to withhold those payments to any city, county, or city and county that has restricted or prohibited the siting of a supermarket site, as provided. This bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2020, to convene a public hearing, as specified, for purposes of discussing and receiving public testimony on the development of guidelines for evaluating the circumstances that might prompt the department to withhold beverage container recycling and litter cleanup activities payments to any city, county, or city and county that has restricted or prohibited the siting of a supermarket site. (5) The act requires the department to pay a market development payment to a reclaimer, as defined, for empty plastic beverage containers that have been collected for recycling in the state, and that the reclaimer washes and processes into flake, pellet, sheet, or any other form that is then usable as input for the manufacture of new plastic products, as defined, by product manufacturers in the state. The act also requires the department to pay a market development payment to a product manufacturer, as defined, for plastic flake, pellet, sheet, or any other form of plastic purchased from a reclaimer and used by that product manufacturer to manufacture a plastic product in the state. The act makes these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2022. This bill would delay the inoperative date of these provisions from July 1, 2022, to July 1, 2023. The act authorizes the department, for the 2019–20 fiscal year to the 2021–22 fiscal year, inclusive, to expend up to $10,000,000 each fiscal year from the fund for market development payments to reclaimers and product manufacturers. This bill would additionally authorize the department to expend up to $10,000,000 from the fund for those purposes for the 2022–23 fiscal year, thereby making an appropriation. (6) Under the act, the department is required to calculate a processing fee for each beverage container with a specified scrap value, which is required to be paid by beverage manufacturers for each beverage container sold or transferred to a distributor or dealer. The department is required to calculate the processing fee in a specified manner, so that the processing fee generally equals 65% of the processing payment that the department is required to pay to processors if the scrap value of the container having a refund value pursuant to the act is less than the cost of recycling. The department is required to determine the statewide weighted average cost to recycle each beverage container type by conducting a survey, as specified. The department is required to establish a processing fee account in the continuously appropriated California Beverage Container Recycling Fund for each material type and to deposit processing fees and other amounts in the applicable account. This bill would, for purposes of calculating processing payments, require the department, until January 1, 2022, to use the actual cost of recycling that was in effect on December 30, 2015, adjusted as specified. The bill would make an appropriation by changing the terms and conditions under which the department is authorized to make payments from a continuously appropriated fund. The bill would provide that the processing fees established by the department between the effective date of the bill and December 31, 2019, inclusive, shall not be higher than they would be absent these new provisions. The bill would require the department to suspend usage of surveys and calculations of recycling costs until at least January 1, 2021, and would authorize the department to redirect any contract funds for cost surveys and calculations to provide for a specified assessment and to utilize any contract funds available for the development of amendments to be recommended to the Legislature regarding specified provisions of the act. (7) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law provides for various programs that prevent disease and promote health, including the Safe Drinking Water Supplemental Benefit Pilot Program that provides, until July 1, 2020, additional benefits to residents of prioritized disadvantaged communities to purchase safe drinking water. Existing law imposes various taxes, including taxes of the privilege of engaging in certain activities. The Fee Collection Procedures Law provides procedures for the collection of certain fees and surcharges and establishes criminal penalties for specified acts, including making it a misdemeanor to knowingly or willfully file a false return and making it a felony to willfully evade or attempt to evade or defeat the payment of a fee. This bill, subject to specified exemptions, would impose a fee on every distributor, as defined, for the privilege of distributing bottled sugary drinks and concentrate in the state, at a rate of $0.02 per fluid ounce and for the privilege of distributing syrups and powders concentrate in this state, either as concentrate or as sweetened beverages derived from that concentrate, at the rate of $0.02 per fluid ounce of sweetened beverage to be produced from concentrate. The bill would require the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to administer and collect the fee pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law, to register the distributors upon whom the fee is imposed, and would authorize the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to promulgate and enforce regulations related to administration of the fee. The bill would require the fees to be deposited into the California Community Health Fund, created by the bill. The bill would require moneys in the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to be allocated to specified entities, including the State Department of Public Health, the State Department of Health Care Services, the State Department of Social Services, and the State Department of Education, to promote health equity, to reduce health disparities, to improve oral health, and to prevent the leading causes of illness, injury, and premature death. The bill would authorize state departments to award competitive grants to local organizations in support of the bill's objectives, and would authorize the State Department of Social Services to prioritize the revenues that it receives from the California Community Health Fund to fund the Safe Drinking Water Supplemental Benefit Pilot Program. The bill would require the State Department of Social Services to coordinate with the State Water Resources Control Board for purposes of conducting any activities related to the Safe Drinking Water Supplemental Benefit Pilot Program and that are funded by the California Community Health Fund. The bill would extend the Safe Drinking Water Supplemental Benefit Pilot Program to July 1, 2025, and would repeal those provisions on January 1, 2026. Because the bill would expand the application of the Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, it would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations relating to the consumption of sweetened beverages, diabetes, childhood obesity, and dental disease. 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. 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 XIII   A of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature.
Existing law establishes the State Department of Public Health, which, among other things, administers various programs to prevent disease and promote health. Existing law also regulates certain advertising and promotion practices related to specific products, including by prohibiting the nonsale distribution of smokeless tobacco or cigarettes in designated places and the giving away of premiums, gifts, or free goods in connection with the sale or distribution of alcoholic beverages, except as specified. This bill would regulate promotion and marketing activities related to sugar-sweetened beverages, as defined, by prohibiting a beverage company, as defined, manufacturer, or distributor, as defined, from giving or offering incentives or other financial support to compensate distributors or retailers for the cost of promotional offers, coupons, or other incentives offered to consumers for branded products of the beverage company. The bill would exempt from that prohibition contracts between a beverage company, manufacturer, or distributor and a theme or amusement park, zoo, other attraction, or professional sports stadium that include nonfood promotions. The bill would authorize local governments and the Attorney General to impose civil penalties for a violation of the prohibition, as specified. The bill would state that these provisions do not preempt or prohibit the adoption and implementation of local ordinances related to promotional and marketing activities for sugar-sweetened beverages that are not inconsistent with these requirements, including ordinances that impose additional or more restrictive requirements on those activities.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development within its boundaries that includes, among other things, a housing element. Existing law, the Housing Element Law, prescribes requirements for the preparation of the housing element, including a requirement that a planning agency submit a draft of the element or draft amendment to the element to the Department of Housing and Community Development prior to the adoption of the element or amendment to the element. Existing law requires the department to review the draft and report its written findings, as specified. Existing law also requires the department, in its written findings, to determine whether the draft substantially complies with the Housing Element Law. Existing law also requires the department to review any action or failure to act by the city or county that it determines is inconsistent with an adopted housing element or a specified provision of the Housing Element Law and to issue written findings, as specified, whether the action or failure to act substantially complies with the Housing Element Law. If the department finds that the action or failure to act by the city or county does not substantially comply with the Housing Element Law, and if it has issued findings as described above that an amendment to the housing element substantially complies with the Housing Element Law, existing law authorizes the department, after allowing no more than 30 days for a local agency response, to revoke its findings until it determines that the city or county has come into compliance with the Housing Element Law. Existing law also requires the department to notify the city or county that the city or county is in violation of state law if the department makes certain findings of noncompliance or a violation of specified provisions related to housing. This bill would authorize the city or county to submit evidence that the city or county is no longer in violation of state law to the department and to request the department to issue a finding that the city or county is no longer in violation of state law. If the department finds that the city or county is no longer in violation of state law, the bill would require the department to notify the city or county. The bill would, on or before January 1, 2025, prohibit a city or county found to be in violation of state law, as described above, from applying for a state grant, unless the fund source of the state grant is protected by a specified provision of the California Constitution relating to state taxes and fees on motor vehicles and motor vehicle fuels or the state grant funds, if awarded to the city or county, would assist the city or county in complying with the Housing Element Law.
Existing law establishes various programs, including, among others, the Emergency Housing and Assistance Program, to provide assistance to homeless persons. Existing law also establishes the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council to, among other things, create a statewide data system or warehouse that collects local data through homeless management information systems, with the ultimate goal of matching data on homelessness programs to programs impacting homeless recipients of state programs, as specified. This bill would establish the California Flexible Housing Subsidy Pool Program within the Department of Housing and Community Development for the purpose of making grants available to applicants, defined to include a city, county, city and county, or continuum of care, for eligible activities including, among other things, rental assistance, operating subsidies in new and existing affordable or supportive housing units, and specified outreach services. The bill would continuously appropriate $450,000,000 from the General Fund every fiscal year to the department for purposes of the program, and set forth how these funds must be allocated. The bill would require the department to, on or before January 1, 2023, and every year thereafter, evaluate the outcomes of the program and report the outcomes to the Senate Committee on Housing and the Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development. The bill would also require the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council to work with the department to create a California Funder's Collaborative that would, among other things, establish a process for incorporating private contributions into state programs to create local innovations, establish pilot programs, or evaluate programs.
Existing law, the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018, which was approved by the voters as Proposition 1 at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires the proceeds from the sale of these bonds to be used to finance various housing programs and a specified program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, as provided. Existing law authorizes a city, county, or city and county to provide for the creation of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned to allow single-family or multifamily use by an ordinance that complies with specified requirements. Existing law requires the city, county, or city and county to ministerially approve or disapprove an application for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit received pursuant to such an ordinance within 120 days. This bill would enact the Accessory Dwelling Unit Construction Bond Act of 2020 (bond act) , which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $500,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance the Accessory Dwelling Unit Construction Program, established as part of the bond act. The bill would authorize the Department of Housing and Community Development to enter into a contract under that program with a homeowner to provide financing to pay for the eligible costs incurred by the homeowner in constructing an accessory dwelling unit on the homeowner's property, subject to specified terms and conditions. The bill would require that moneys received from a homeowner for the repayment of financing provided under the program to be used to pay debt service when due on bonds issued pursuant to the bond act. This bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the next statewide general election following its effective date, in accordance with specified law.
Existing law provides for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , administered in California as CalFresh, under which each county distributes nutrition assistance benefits provided by the federal government to eligible households. Existing state law authorizes a county to deliver CalFresh benefits through the use of an electronic benefits transfer (EBT) acceptance system. Existing law, until January 1, 2022, encourages the Regents of the University of California, requires the Trustees of the California State University, and authorizes the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, to designate as a "hunger-free campus" each of the institutions' respective campuses that meet specified criteria, including having a campus employee designated to help ensure that students have the information they need to enroll in CalFresh. This bill would require the State Department of Social Services, the State Department of Public Health, the State Department of Education, and the Department of Food and Agriculture, to develop a plan to end hunger. The bill would require the State Department of Social Services to serve as the lead agency for the development of the plan. The bill would require the plan to be distributed to the Legislature no later than January 1, 2021, and would establish criteria for the plan, including that the plan establish a budget of $11,500,000, contingent upon an appropriation in the annual Budget Act or other measure, for the Department of Food and Agriculture to support local food hub efforts. The bill would also require the plan to request the Regents of the University of California, and direct the Trustees of the California State University and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, to develop systems that allow EBT cards to be used on their respective campuses, and present a report to the Assembly Select Committee on Campus Climate on the progress that has been made, by July 1, 2020.
(1) Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that satisfies specified planning objective standards to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. This bill would authorize a development proponent of a neighborhood multifamily project located on an eligible parcel to submit an application for a streamlined, ministerial approval process that is not subject to a conditional use permit. The bill would define a "neighborhood multifamily project" to mean a project to construct a multifamily structure on vacant land, or to convert an existing structure that does not require substantial exterior alteration into a multifamily structure, consisting of up to 4 residential dwelling units and that meets local height, setback, and lot coverage zoning requirements as they existed on July 1, 2019. The bill would also define "eligible parcel" to mean a parcel that meets specified requirements, including requirements relating to the location of the parcel and restricting the demolition of certain housing development that may already exist on the site. This bill would require a local agency to notify the development proponent in writing if the local agency determines that the development conflicts with any of the requirements provided for streamlined ministerial approval within 60 days of the submission of the development to the local agency. If the local agency does not notify the development proponent within this time period, the development would be deemed to comply with those requirements. The bill would limit the authority of a local agency to impose parking standards or requirements on a streamlined development approved pursuant to these provisions, as provided. The bill would provide that the approval of a project under these provisions expires automatically after 3 years, unless that project qualifies for a one-time, one-year extension of that approval. The bill would provide that approval pursuant to its provisions would remain valid for 3 years and remain valid thereafter, so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress, and would authorize a discretionary one-year extension, as provided. The bill would prohibit a local agency from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project receives ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. This bill would allow a local agency to exempt a project from the streamlined ministerial approval process described above by finding that the project will cause a specific adverse impact to public health and safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill would establish a streamlined ministerial approval process for neighborhood multifamily projects, thereby exempting these projects from the CEQA approval process. (2) Existing law, known as the density bonus law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. This bill, on or after January 1, 2023, would require a specified city, county, or city and county to grant upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things, that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with specified law within specified time periods; and the residential development complies with specified additional requirements under existing law. The bill would impose additional requirements on a residential development located within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000. The bill would require that a residential development within a county with a population greater than 600,000 that is eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive, upon request, waivers from maximum controls on density; minimum automobile parking requirements greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit; and specified additional waivers if the residential development is located within a 12-mile or 14-mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined. For a residential development within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000, the bill would instead require that the incentive provide waivers from maximum controls on density, subject to certain limitations; maximum height limitations less than or equal to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height for mixed use or residential use; certain requirements governing the size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy; and minimum automobile parking requirements, as provided. The bill would require a local government to grant an equitable communities incentive unless it makes a specified finding regarding the effects of the incentive on any real property or historic district that is listed on a federal or state register of historical resources. The bill would authorize a local government to modify or expand the terms of an equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable communities incentive is consistent with these provisions. The bill would delay implementation of these provisions in potentially sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2023. The bill would further delay implementation of these provisions in sensitive communities, determined as provided, until January 1, 2026, unless the city or county in which the area is located votes to make these provisions applicable after a specified petition and public hearing process. On and after January 1, 2026, the bill would apply these provisions to a sensitive community unless the city or county adopts a community plan for the area that meets certain requirements. The bill would also exempt from these provisions a local government that has a local flexibility plan that has been reviewed and certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified. The bill, on or before July 1, 2021, would require the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, to develop and publish on its internet website rules, regulations, or guidelines for the submission and approval of a local flexibility plan, as specified. The bill, on or after July 1, 2021, would authorize a local government to submit a local flexibility plan for review and approval by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to those rules, regulations, or guidelines. The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by these provisions address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project that complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That law provides that the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. This bill would additionally provide that the receipt of an equitable communities incentive is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. (3) By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) 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.
The California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018, approved by the voters as Proposition 68 at the June 5, 2018, statewide primary direct election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,100,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program. This bill would enact the Wildfire Prevention, Safe Drinking Water, Drought Preparation, and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2020, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,510,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance projects for a wildfire prevention, safe drinking water, drought preparation, and flood protection program. This bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.