Existing law requires a school district or county superintendent of schools maintaining a kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, to provide a needy pupil, as defined, one nutritionally adequate free or reduced-price meal during each schoolday, and authorizes the school district or county superintendent of schools to use funds available from any federal or state program to comply with that requirement, as provided. Existing law requires the governing board of a school district and the county superintendent of schools to make paper applications and electronic applications for free or reduced-price meals available to pupils, as provided, and requires the applications to meet certain specifications and include certain information. This bill would, on or before September 1, 2018, require a school district or county superintendent of schools that has a very high poverty school, as defined, in its jurisdiction to apply to operate a federal universal meal service provision pursuant to specified federal law, and to begin providing breakfast and lunch free of charge through the universal meal service to all pupils at the very high poverty school upon state approval to operate that service. The bill would authorize a school district or county superintendent of schools to stop providing the universal free meal service at a school if the school ceases to be a very high poverty school. The bill would provide that certain charter schools are considered very high poverty schools for purposes of these provisions and would provide that those charter schools are required to comply with the requirements imposed on and are authorized to exercise the authority granted to school districts and county superintendents of schools pursuant to these provisions. Because the bill would impose additional duties on school districts, county superintendents of schools, and charter schools, it would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would exempt a school district, county superintendent of schools, or charter school from these provisions if the governing board of the school district or county office of education, or the governing body of the charter school, adopts a resolution stating that it is unable to comply with, and demonstrating the reasons why it is unable to comply with, the requirements of these provisions due to fiscal hardship. Existing law requires the State Department of Education, in consultation with the State Department of Health Care Services, to develop and implement a process to use participation data from the Medi-Cal program to verify income to directly certify children whose families meet the applicable income criteria into the school meal program. This bill would require the State Department of Education to share that participation data with local educational agencies. The bill would impose specified requirements on the State Department of Education and local educational agencies relating to the privacy and confidentiality of that participation data. The bill would require a local educational agency participating in a federal school meal program to use that participation data, commencing with the participation data of pupils in the 2017–18 school year, to directly certify pupils eligible for free and reduced-price school meals, to the extent permitted under federal law. Because the bill would impose additional duties on these local educational agencies, it would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a school district or county superintendent of schools to determine a pupil's eligibility for free and reduced-price school meals based on data including the direct certification match and alternative measures of poverty pursuant to specified state and federal law. 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.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law provides that the board of supervisors of any county may authorize the correctional administrator to offer a program under which inmates committed to a county jail or other county correctional facility or granted probation, or inmates participating in a work furlough program, may voluntarily participate or involuntarily be placed in a home detention program during their sentence in lieu of confinement in a county jail or other county correctional facility or program. Existing law authorizes the board of supervisors to prescribe a program administrative fee and an application fee for this program. This bill would make those fees payable only by adult participants of that home detention program who are over 21 years of age and under the jurisdiction of the criminal court. (2) Existing law provides that upon conviction of certain offenses involving controlled substances, or upon a finding that a minor is subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court by reason of committing one of those certain offenses, the court, when recommended by the probation officer, shall require, as a condition of probation, that the defendant or the minor not use or be under the influence of any controlled substance and submit to drug and substance abuse testing as directed by the probation officer, unless the court makes a finding that this condition would not serve the interests of justice. Existing law requires the court to order the defendant or the minor to pay a reasonable fee, not to exceed the actual cost of the testing, if the defendant or the minor is required to submit to testing and has the financial ability to pay all or part of those costs. This bill would instead require the court to order a defendant to pay that reasonable fee only if the defendant is an adult who is over 21 years of age and under the jurisdiction of the criminal court. The bill would also delete the provision requiring the court to charge the minor that reasonable fee. (3) Existing law requires specified orders providing for the care and custody of a ward, dependent child, or other minor person, as specified, to direct that the whole expense of support and maintenance of the minor, up to the amount of $20 per month, be paid from the county treasury. Existing law authorizes the board of supervisors of each county to establish a maximum amount that the court may order the county to pay for that support and maintenance and authorizes the court to direct that an amount up to that maximum amount be paid. This bill, for purposes of a ward, a minor person concerning whom a petition has been filed to declare the person a ward of the juvenile court, or a minor who is the subject of a certain program of supervision undertaken by the probation department and who is temporarily placed out of his or her home, as specified, would delete the $20 maximum on support and maintenance payments and delete the authorization of the county board of supervisors to establish a maximum amount that the court may order the county to pay. (4) Existing law generally imposes liability on a parent, spouse, or other person liable for the support of a ward, dependent child, or other minor person, as applicable, for certain costs, including the reasonable costs of transporting the minor to a juvenile facility and for the costs of the minor's food, shelter, and care at the juvenile facility when the minor has been held in temporary custody, as specified, and certain other circumstances are applicable; the reasonable costs of supporting the minor when he or she is placed, detained in, or committed to, any institution or other place pursuant to specified provisions of law or pursuant to an order of the juvenile court; the cost of an alcohol or drug education program as designated by the court; the cost, to the county or the court, of the legal services rendered to the minor by an attorney pursuant to an order of the juvenile court; the cost of probation supervision, home supervision, or electronic surveillance of the minor, pursuant to the order of the juvenile court; the cost of a service program administered by an agency upon delivery or referral of the minor by an officer; the cost of specified services rendered to the minor in lieu of a petition being filed to adjudge the minor a ward of the juvenile court; and other related costs. Existing law authorizes the probation department and the child welfare services department in a county to create a jointly written protocol, as specified, to allow the 2 departments to jointly assess and produce a recommendation that the child be designated as a dual status child, allowing the child to be simultaneously a dependent child and a ward of the court. This bill, for purposes of a minor who is adjudged a ward of the juvenile court, who is placed on probation without being adjudged a ward, who is the subject of a petition that has been filed to adjudge the minor a ward, or who is the subject of a certain program of supervision undertaken by the probation department, as applicable, would repeal the above-described provisions imposing liability for the specified costs and would make other conforming changes. The bill would specify that those provisions apply to a minor who is designated as a dual status child, for purposes of the dependency jurisdiction only and not for purposes of the delinquency jurisdiction. (5) Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for a minor who, while under the supervision of a probation officer, removes his or her electronic monitor without authority and who, for more than 48 hours, violates the terms and conditions of his or her probation relating to the proper use of the electronic monitor. Existing law provides, if an electronic monitor is damaged or discarded while in the possession of the minor, that restitution for the cost of replacing the unit may be ordered as part of the punishment. Existing law requires that this liability be limited by the financial ability of the person or persons ordered to pay the restitution and requires that the person or persons, upon request, be entitled to an evaluation and determination of ability to pay under specified provisions. This bill would remove the requirement that a request be made in order for the person or persons to be entitled to the evaluation and determination described above. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 903.45 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 976 to be operative only if this bill and AB 976 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(1) Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as a regional agency in the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) as a separate entity governed by the same governing board as MTC and makes BATA responsible for the programming, administration, and allocation of toll revenues from the state-owned toll bridges in the San Francisco Bay area. Existing law authorizes BATA to increase the toll rates for certain purposes, including to meet its bond obligations, provide funding for certain costs associated with the bay area state-owned toll bridges, including for the seismic retrofit of those bridges, and provide funding to meet the requirements of certain voter-approved regional measures. Existing law provided for submission of 2 regional measures to the voters of 7 bay area counties in 1988 and 2004 relative to specified increases in bridge auto tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges, subject to approval by a majority of the voters. This bill would require the City and County of San Francisco and the other 8 counties in the San Francisco Bay area to conduct a special election, to be known as Regional Measure 3, on a proposed increase in the amount of the toll rate charged on the state-owned toll bridges in that area to be used for specified projects and programs. The bill would require BATA to select the amount of the proposed increase, not to exceed $3, to be placed on the ballot for voter approval. If approved by the voters, the bill would authorize BATA, beginning 6 months after the election approving the toll increase, to phase in the toll increase over a period of time and to adjust the toll increase for inflation after the toll increase is phased in completely. The bill would specify that, except for the inflation adjustment, providing funding to meet the requirements of voter approved regional measures, and as otherwise specified in statute, the toll increase adopted pursuant to the results of this election may not be changed without the statutory authorization of the Legislature. By requiring this election, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require BATA to reimburse from toll revenues, as specified, the counties and the City and County of San Francisco for the cost of submitting the measure to the voters. This bill would require BATA to establish an independent oversight committee within 6 months of the effective date of the Regional Measure 3 toll increase with a specified membership, to ensure the toll revenues generated by the toll increase are expended consistent with a specified expenditure plan. The bill would require BATA to submit an annual report to the Legislature on the status of the projects and programs funded by the toll increase. (2) Existing law authorizes BATA to vary the toll structure on each of the bay area state-owned toll bridges and to provide discounts for vehicles classified by BATA as high-occupancy vehicles. This bill would additionally authorize BATA to provide discounts for vehicles that pay for tolls electronically or through other non-cash methods and to charge differential rates based on the chosen method. This bill, with respect to the Regional Measure 3 toll increase, would require BATA to provide a 50% discount on the amount of that toll increase on the 2nd bridge crossing for those commuters using a two-axle vehicle, who pay tolls electronically or through other noncash methods and who cross 2 bridges during commute hours, as specified. Existing law, if BATA establishes high-occupancy vehicle lane fee discounts or access for vehicles classified by BATA as high-occupancy vehicles for any bridge, requires BATA to collaborate with the Department of Transportation to reach agreement on how the occupancy requirements shall apply on each segment of highway that connects with that bridge. This bill would instead require BATA to establish those occupancy requirements in consultation with the department. (3) Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) , governed by a board of directors, with specified powers and duties relative to the construction and operation of a rapid transit system. This bill would create the Independent Office of the BART Inspector General within BART. The bill would provide for the board of directors to nominate 3 persons to the Governor and for the Governor to appoint one of those nominees to serve as the Inspector General for a 4-year term. The bill would require the Inspector General to be removed from office by the board of directors, subject to the approval of the Governor, under certain circumstances. The bill would specify the duties and responsibilities of the Inspector General and would require the Inspector General to submit an annual report to the board of directors and the Legislature. The bill would provide for the office to receive $1,000,000 from an allocation of bridge toll revenue from BATA and, in the second and subsequent years of operation of the office, would authorize BATA to increase that amount, as specified. The bill would make these provisions operative upon an affirmative vote to increase tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges pursuant to Regional Measure 3 or related provisions. (4) Existing law authorizes the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) to conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane program on 2 corridors included in the high-occupancy vehicle lane system in Santa Clara County. Existing law authorizes a HOT lane established as part of this program on State Highway Route 101 to extend into the County of San Mateo as far as the high-occupancy lane in the County of San Mateo existed as of January 1, 2011, subject to agreement of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. This bill would delete the authorization for a HOT lane to extend into the specified portion of San Mateo County as part of a value pricing program established on 2 corridors in Santa Clara County. The bill would instead authorize VTA to specifically conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll lane program on State Highway Route 101 in San Mateo County in coordination with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, as prescribed. (5) 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 vests the authority over public lands owned by the state with the State Lands Commission. Existing federal law authorizes federal agencies to convey federal public lands under certain circumstances. This bill would establish, except as provided, a policy of the state to discourage conveyances of federal public lands in California from the federal government. The bill would, except as provided, specify that these conveyances are void ab initio unless the commission was provided with the right of first refusal or the right to arrange for the transfer of the federal public land to another entity. The bill would require the commission to issue a certificate of compliance if the commission was provided with the right of first refusal or the right to arrange for the transfer of the federal public land to another entity. The bill would require the commission to waive the right of first refusal or the right to arrange for the transfer of the federal public land to another entity for conveyances the commission deems to be routine, as specified. The bill would require the commission, the Wildlife Conservation Board, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife to enter into a memorandum of understanding establishing a state policy that they will undertake all feasible efforts to protect against future unauthorized conveyances of federal public lands or any change in federal public land designation. The bill would authorize the commission to seek declaratory and injunctive relief in a court of competent jurisdiction to contest these conveyances. The bill would, except as provided, prohibit a person from knowingly presenting for recording or filing with the county recorder a deed, instrument, or other document related to the conveyance of federal public lands unless it is accompanied by a certificate of compliance and would subject a person who violates this prohibition to a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000. By increasing the duties of the county recorder's office, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that the state shall not be responsible for any costs associated with conveyed federal public land that the commission did not accept, purchase, or arrange for the transfer of, as provided. The bill would require the commission to ensure, for any conveyed federal public land the commission accepts, purchases, or arranges for the transfer of, that future management of the conveyed federal public land is determined in a public process that gives consideration of past recognized and legal uses of those lands. 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 federal law, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on Indian lands within a state. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude tribal-state gaming compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts, and amendments of tribal-state gaming compacts, between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. This bill would ratify the tribal-state gaming compact entered into between the State of California and the Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians, executed on August 18, 2017. The bill would provide that, in deference to tribal sovereignty, certain actions related to that compact are not projects for purposes of CEQA. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires the Fish and Game Commission to form a marine resources committee and a wildlife resources committee from its membership. Existing law requires each committee to consist of at least one commissioner and requires each committee to report to the commission from time to time on its activities and to make recommendations on the applicable resource matters considered by the commission. This bill would also require the commission to form a tribal committee from its membership consisting of at least one commissioner and would require the committee to report to the commission from time to time on its activities and to make recommendations on all tribal matters considered by the commission.
Existing law authorizes an individual to contribute amounts in excess of his or her personal income tax liability for the support of specified funds. Existing law sets forth general administrative provisions applicable to voluntary contributions, which, among other things, provide for the disbursement of contributions following repeal of the fund provisions and require undesignated funds to be transferred to the General Fund. This bill would allow a taxpayer to designate an amount in excess of personal income tax liability to be deposited into the California Senior Citizen Advocacy Voluntary Tax Contribution Fund, which the bill would create. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to revise the tax return to include a space for this fund. The bill would require moneys transferred to the California Senior Citizen Advocacy Voluntary Tax Contribution Fund to be continuously appropriated and allocated to the Controller and the Franchise Tax Board, and to the California Senior Legislature for the purpose of funding the activities of the California Senior Legislature, as provided. The bill would require the California Senior Legislature's Internet Web site to report specified information, including all events the California Senior Citizen Advocacy Voluntary Tax Contribution Fund supports each year. This bill would require specified minimum contributions to be made in order for the fund to appear on the return for the following year. The bill would repeal these voluntary contribution provisions on January 1, 2025, or, if contributions made on returns are less than a specified minimum amount, by an earlier date as provided. By continuously appropriating these funds, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law, the Marks-Roos Local Bond Pooling Act of 1985, authorizes joint powers authorities, among other powers, to issue bonds and loan the proceeds to local agencies to finance specified types of projects and programs. This bill would enact the Water Bill Savings Act, which would authorize a joint powers authority to provide funding for a customer of a local agency in the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma or its publicly owned utility to acquire, install, or repair a water efficiency improvement on the customer's property served by the local agency or its publicly owned utility. The bill would require the customer to repay the authority through an efficiency charge on the customer's water bill to be established and collected by the local agency or its publicly owned utility on behalf of the authority pursuant to a servicing agreement. The bill would authorize the authority to issue bonds to fund the program. The bill would require an efficiency improvement to comply with certain provisions of the CalConserve Water Use Efficiency Revolving Loan Program guidelines to be eligible for financing under the bill. The bill would also make technical changes. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the San Francisco Bay Area and the County of Los Angeles.
Existing law requires the governing board of any school district to let contracts for the purchase of equipment, materials, or supplies to be furnished, leased, or sold to the district, services other than construction services, and certain repairs, involving an expenditure of more than $50,000, and to let contracts for public projects, as defined, involving an expenditure of $15,000 or more, to the lowest responsible bidder who gives security as the governing board requires. This bill would require procurement bid solicitations and awards made by a school district for purchases in support of federal nonprofit child nutrition programs to be consistent with certain federal procurement standards. The bill would require awards to be let to the most responsive and responsible party, and would require price to be the primary consideration, but not the only determining factor.
The Local Agency Public Construction Act requires a bridge and highway district to advertise for contracts in specified publications for all vessel repair, maintenance, and alteration work whenever the estimated expenditure exceeds $20,000 and for all other construction, repair, maintenance, and alteration work and for all insurance purchased by the district if the estimated expenditure exceeds $5,000. The act authorizes a bridge and highway district to contract without advertising or competitive bidding in case of emergency. The act requires a bridge and highway district to comply with specified emergency contracting procedures if the notice for bids to let a contract will not be given. This bill would instead require a bridge and highway district to advertise for contracts for all vessel repair, maintenance, and alteration work if the estimated expenditure exceeds $1,000,000, and for all other construction, repair, maintenance, and alteration work, and all similar work, if the estimated expenditure exceeds $5,000, in at least one newspaper and one trade paper of general circulation, as specified. The bill would also authorize the district, at its discretion, to use informal bidding for a contract for construction, repair, maintenance, and alteration work, and all similar work, with an estimated expenditure that does not exceed $50,000, and for a contract for vessel repair, maintenance, and alteration work that does not exceed $1,000,000, if it enacts an ordinance that governs the selection of contractors, as specified. Existing law requires the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District to award all contracts in excess of $20,000 for the hiring or purchase of equipment, supplies, or materials to the lowest responsible bidder, except that, if the required expenditure exceeds $100,000, the contract may be let, in the district's discretion, to the responsible bidder who submitted a proposal that provides the best value, as specified. The bill would also authorize the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District to contract without competitive bidding with suppliers of goods and services by participating in contracts let by one or more specified public entities and any other entity that expends public funds.