Existing law creates an enhanced fleet modernization program for the retirement of high polluting vehicles to be administered by the Bureau of Automotive Repair in the Department of Consumer Affairs pursuant to guidelines adopted by the State Air Resources Board. Existing law requires the department to pay a person who retires his or her vehicle $1,500 for a low-income motor vehicle owner, as defined, and $1,000 for all other motor vehicle owners, and authorizes additional payments above these amounts based on consideration of specified criteria. Under existing law, the Bureau of Automotive Repair establishes the Consumer Assistance Program to provide incentives for low-income motor vehicle owners to retire a qualified vehicle. This bill would require the guidelines adopted by the state board to additionally include specific goals for retirement and replacement of passenger vehicles and light- and medium-duty trucks that are high polluters. The bill would require the state board and the bureau to cooperate in the issuance of a specified number of replacement vouchers through the Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program for specified fiscal years and a specified number of retirement vouchers through the Consumer Assistance Program and the Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program for specified fiscal years. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature regarding the funding of these activities. The bill would require the state board to study and consider specified elements. The bill would require the state board and the bureau, on or before September 1, 2016, to make publicly available, on their respective Internet Web sites, a report regarding whether the goals for the numbers of vehicle retirements and replacements have been met and, if not, the manner in which the state board and the bureau plan to revise the program to increase the numbers of vehicle retirements and replacements.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law, the Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $11,140,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a safe drinking water and water supply reliability program. Existing law provides for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) Under existing law, various measures have been approved by the voters to provide funds for water supply and protection facilities and programs. Existing law, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 84 at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,388,000,000 for the purposes of financing safe drinking water, water quality and supply, flood control, natural resource protection, and park improvements. Existing law, the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, approved by the voters as Proposition 1E at the November 7, 2006, general statewide election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,090,000,000 for the purposes of financing disaster preparedness and flood prevention projects. Existing law, the Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 50 at the November 5, 2002, statewide general election, authorizes, for the purposes of financing a safe drinking water, water quality, and water reliability program, the issuance of bonds in the amount of $3,440,000,000. Existing law, the Costa-Machado Water Act of 2000, approved by the voters as Proposition 13 at the March 7, 2000, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $1,970,000,000 for the purposes of financing a safe drinking water, clean water, watershed protection, and flood protection program. Existing law, the Safe, Clean, Reliable Water Supply Act, approved by the voters as Proposition 204 at the November 5, 1996, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $995,000,000 for the purposes of financing a safe, clean, reliable water supply program. Existing law, the Water Conservation and Water Quality Bond Law of 1986, approved by the voters as Proposition 44 at the June 3, 1986, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $150,000,000 for the purposes of financing a water conservation and water quality program. This bill would enact the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $7,120,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill, upon voter approval, would reallocate $425,000,000 of the unissued bonds authorized for the purposes of Propositions 1E, 13, 44, 50, 84, and 204 to finance the purposes of a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law provides for a public postsecondary education system in this state. This system consists of the University of California, the California State University, and the California Community Colleges. Existing law authorizes these institutions to require that mandatory systemwide fees and tuition, among other fees, be paid by enrolled students. Existing law establishes the Student Aid Commission as the primary state agency for the administration of state-authorized student financial aid programs available to students attending all segments of postsecondary education. This bill would require the Student Aid Commission and the Legislative Analyst to conduct a study of the effects of enacting, in future legislation, a Pay it Forward, Pay it Back Pilot Program and would designate the Legislative Analyst as the lead agency in charge of preparing the study. The study would evaluate a pilot program designed to provide an additional option for students to finance the costs of their education, by paying the costs of upfront tuition, fees, and room and board, for enrollment at institutions of higher education, for admitted resident students who sign a binding contract to, upon graduation, pay 2 to 4%, inclusive, of their annual adjusted gross incomes to the state or the institution for a specified number of years, as provided. The bill would further specify that the pilot program could vary by institution. This bill would require the study to, among other things, identify at least one campus of each segment of public higher education and one campus of a nonprofit private postsecondary educational institution to participate in the pilot program and establish an immediate source of funding for the first 15 to 20 years, inclusive, of the pilot program, as provided. The bill would require that the study be presented for consideration by the Legislature, and would require the Student Aid Commission to submit a report on the study to the Assembly Committee on Higher Education and the Senate Committee on Education on or before September 30, 2015. The bill would also make legislative findings and declarations related to these provisions.
Existing law governs the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations by state agencies and for the review of those regulatory actions by the Office of Administrative Law, including procedures relating to increased public participation in the adoption, amendment, and repeal of these regulations. Existing law specifically requires a state agency proposing to adopt regulations, prior to publication of a notice of proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation, to involve parties who would be subject to the proposed regulations in public discussions regarding those proposed regulations, when the proposed regulations involve complex proposals or a large number of proposals that cannot easily be reviewed during the comment period. Existing law requires the office to provide for the publication of the California Regulatory Notice Register and to include specified information in the register, including notices of proposed action prepared by regulatory agencies, a summary of regulations filed with the Secretary of State, and a summary of regulation decisions issued, as specified. This bill would require the office to allow electronic submission to the office by a state agency of notices required to be published and information required to be submitted pursuant to specified provisions of existing law. The bill would also expand the public discussion requirement described above to require a state agency proposing to adopt regulations, prior to publication of a notice of proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation, to involve parties that would be subject to the proposed regulations in public discussions regarding those proposed regulations, without regard to the complexity or number of proposals. Existing law authorizes an agency that is considering adopting, amending, or repealing a regulation to consult with interested persons before initiating regulatory action. This bill would instead require such an agency to make a reasonable effort to consult with interested persons who would be subject to the proposed regulation, or their representatives, prior to initiating regulatory action, as provided.
Existing law makes it a crime for a person under 21 years of age who has 0.05% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle. If a person at least 18 years of age is convicted of a first violation of that offense, existing law requires the court, in addition to any penalties, to order the person to attend a licensed driving-under-the-influence program and to pay a fee to attend the program. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change to these provisions.
The California Constitution establishes the University of California as a public trust with full powers of organization and government, as provided, and administered by the Regents of the University of California, subject only to the legislative control necessary to ensure the security of its funds and compliance with the terms of the endowments of the university. The California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) , on and after January 1, 2013, requires a public retirement system, as defined, to modify its plan or plans to comply with the act and, among other provisions, establishes new retirement formulas that may not be exceeded by a public employer offering a defined benefit pension plan, setting the maximum benefit allowable for employees hired on or after January 1, 2013. This measure would, for an officer or employee of the University of California first hired on or after the effective date of this measure, make any retirement plan of the University of California subject to the provisions of PEPRA and any subsequent statutory enactment amending that act or enacting or amending a successor act.
Existing law provides that a person who solicits or agrees to engage in or engages in any act of prostitution is guilty of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for no more than 6 months, by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. Existing law requires a person convicted of seeking to procure or procuring the sexual services of a prostitute in violation of these provisions, if the prostitute is under 18 years of age, to pay an additional fine in an amount not to exceed $25,000. This bill would, instead, make it either a misdemeanor, punishable by not more than one year in a county jail, or a felony, punishable in a county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years, for a person who, in violation of the above provisions, solicits an act of prostitution from, agrees to engage in an act of prostitution with, or engages in an act of prostitution with, another person under 18 years of age whom the person knows or reasonably should know is under 18 years of age. The bill would make a 2nd or subsequent violation of that offense a felony, punishable in a county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. The bill would also impose an additional fine in an amount not to exceed $25,000 for a violation of these provisions. These provisions would apply only to the person who exchanged, or offered to exchange, anything of value with the other person in return for a lewd act. By increasing the punishment for a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The Personal Income Tax Law provides for modified conformity to specified provisions of federal income tax law relating to the exclusion of the discharge of qualified principal residence indebtedness, as defined, from an individual's income if that debt is discharged after January 1, 2007, and before January 1, 2013, as provided. The federal American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 extended the operation of those provisions to qualified principal residence indebtedness that is discharged before January 1, 2014. This bill would conform to the federal extension and make legislative findings and declarations regarding the public purpose served by the bill. The bill would also make a continuous appropriation from the General Fund to the Franchise Tax Board in those amounts necessary to make payments to taxpayers who have included in income and paid tax on qualified principal residence indebtedness that was discharged on and after January 1, 2013, and before January 1, 2014. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The California Environmental Quality Act 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. The act 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. The act authorizes the court, in an action or proceeding challenging a decision of a public agency on the ground of noncompliance with the act, to enter an order that includes, among other things, a mandate to suspend any or all specific project activities that could result in an adverse change or alteration to the physical environment until the public agency has taken actions that maybe necessary to bring the public agency into compliance with the act. This bill would, for maintenance activities along the Salinas River meeting specified requirements, prohibit the court in such an action from staying or enjoining those maintenance activities unless those activities present an imminent threat to public health and safety or would materially, permanently, and adversely affect unforeseen important Native American artifacts, or unforeseen important historical, archaeological, or ecological values. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Salinas River in the County of Monterey.
(1) Existing law, the Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $11,140,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a safe drinking water and water supply reliability program. Existing law provides for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) Under existing law, various measures have been approved by the voters to provide funds for water supply and protection facilities and programs. This bill would enact the Clean, Safe, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2014, which, if adopted by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in an unspecified amount pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a clean, safe, and reliable drinking water supply program. This bill would provide for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.