Existing law regulates investments made by public pension and retirement systems and defines the term "external manager" to mean a person who is seeking to be, or is, retained by the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system to manage a portfolio of securities or other assets for compensation, or a person who is engaged, or proposes to be engaged, in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding, or trading securities or other assets and who offers or sells, or has offered or sold, securities to a board. Existing law also defines the term "placement agent" to mean a person hired, engaged, or retained by, or serving for the benefit of or on behalf of, an external manager, or on behalf of another placement agent, who acts or has acted for compensation as a finder, solicitor, marketer, consultant, broker, or other intermediary in connection with the offer or sale of the securities, assets, or services of an external manager to a board or an investment vehicle, as defined. The Political Reform Act of 1974 defines those terms in a similar way for purposes of an individual acting as a placement agent in connection with a state public retirement system. This bill would instead define an external manager to mean a person who is seeking to be, or is, retained by a board or an investment vehicle to manage a portfolio of securities or other assets for compensation, or a person who manages an investment fund, as defined, and who offers or sells, or has offered or sold, an ownership interest in the investment fund to a board or an investment vehicle. In addition, the bill would define a placement agent to mean a person directly or indirectly hired, engaged, or retained by, or serving for the benefit of or on behalf of, an external manager or an investment fund managed by an external manager and who acts or has acted for compensation as a finder, solicitor, marketer, consultant, broker, or other intermediary in connection with the offer or sale to a board or investment vehicle either the investment management services of the external manager or an ownership interest in an investment fund managed by the external manager. The bill would make conforming changes in the definitions of external manager and placement agent for purposes of the Political Reform Act of 1974. Existing law requires a person acting as a placement agent in connection with any potential system investment made by a local public retirement system to file any applicable reports with a local government agency that requires lobbyists to register and file reports and to comply with any other applicable requirements imposed by a local government agency, unless the person is an employee, officer, director, equityholder, partner, member, or trustee of an external manager who spends 13 or more of his or her time during a calendar year managing the securities or assets owned, controlled, invested, or held by the external manager. This bill would also exempt a placement agent from any requirements imposed by a local government agency if the placement agent is an employee, officer, or director of an external manager, or of an affiliate of an external manager, and the external manager is registered as an investment adviser or a broker-dealer with the Securities and Exchange Commission or any appropriate state securities regulator; the external manager is participating in a competitive bidding process, such as a request for proposals, or has been selected through that process and is providing services pursuant to a contract executed as a result of that competitive bidding process; and the external manager, if selected through a competitive bidding process, has agreed to a fiduciary standard of care, as defined by the standards of conduct applicable to the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system and set forth in the California Constitution, when managing a portfolio of assets of a public retirement system. Existing law makes a knowing or willful violation of the Political Reform Act of 1974 a misdemeanor and subjects offenders to criminal penalties. This bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating additional crimes. 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 Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Commonly referred to as utilization review, existing law governs the procedures that apply to every health care service plan and health insurer that prospectively, retrospectively, or concurrently reviews and approves, modifies, delays, or denies, based on medical necessity, requests by providers prior to, retrospectively, or concurrent with, the provision of health care services to enrollees or insureds, as specified. Existing law also imposes various requirements and restrictions on health care service plans and health insurers, including, among other things, a prohibition on health care service plans and health insurers that provide prescription drug benefits from excluding or limiting coverage for a drug on the basis that the drug is prescribed for a use that is different from the use for which the drug has been approved for marketing by the federal Food and Drug Administration. Existing law also requires a health care service plan that provides prescription drug benefits to maintain an expeditious process by which prescribing providers, as described, may obtain authorization for a medically necessary nonformulary prescription drug, according to certain procedures. This bill would require the Department of Managed Health Care and the Department of Insurance to, on or before July 1, 2012, develop a prior authorization form for use by every health care service plan and health insurer that provides prescription drug benefits, except as specified. On and after January 1, 2013, or 6 months after the form is developed, whichever is later, the bill would require every prescribing provider, as defined, when requesting prior authorization for prescription drug benefits, to submit the prior authorization form to the health care service plan or health insurer, and would require those plans and insurers to utilize and accept those prior authorization forms for prescription drug benefits. Except as specified, upon a failure by the plan or insurer to accept the prior authorization form or to respond to a prescribing provider within 2 business days, the bill would deem the prior authorization request as granted. Because a willful violation of the bill's provisions relative to health care service plans would be 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.
Existing law, the Open Enrollment Act, allows the parent of a pupil enrolled in a low-achieving school to submit an application for the pupil to attend school in a school district other than the school district in which the parent of the pupil resides, but in which the parent nevertheless intends to enroll the pupil. Existing law defines a low-achieving school, for purposes of these provisions, as a school identified by the Superintendent of Public Instruction by inclusion on a list of 1,000 schools ranked by increasing Academic Performance Index score. Existing law provides that no local educational agency may have more than 10% of its schools on the list and that specified types of schools, including charter schools, may not be included on the list. This bill would instead provide that the list created by the Superintendent to define low-achieving schools may include up to 1,000 schools, that a local educational agency shall not have more than 10% of its schools on the list, calculated as specified, and that county offices of education operating a special education program and state special schools not be included on the list. The bill would also provide that a school shall only be identified as a low-achieving school if it is identified on the list for 2 consecutive years and would delete the provision excluding charter schools from inclusion on the list. Existing law requires a school district of enrollment to conduct a lottery to select pupils at random if the number of pupils who request a particular school exceeds the number of spaces available at that school. This bill would provide that a school district of enrollment shall not reject the transfer of an individual with exceptional needs or an English learner if he or she is randomly selected through the lottery.
(1) The Donahoe Higher Education Act sets forth, among other things, the missions and functions of California's public and independent segments of higher education, and their respective institutions of higher education. Provisions of the act apply to the University of California only to the extent that the Regents of the University of California, by appropriate resolution, act to make a provision applicable. Existing law requires that a student, other than a nonimmigrant alien, as defined, who has attended high school in California for 3 or more years, who has graduated from a California high school or attained the equivalent thereof, who has registered at or attends an accredited institution of higher education in California not earlier than the fall semester or quarter of the 2001–02 academic year, and who, if he or she is an alien without lawful immigration status, has filed a prescribed affidavit is exempt from paying nonresident tuition at the California Community Colleges and the California State University. This bill would amend the Donahoe Higher Education Act, as of January 1, 2013, to require the Trustees of the California State University and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and to request the regents, to establish procedures and forms that enable students who are exempt from paying nonresident tuition under the above-described provision, or who meet equivalent requirements adopted by the regents, to apply for, and participate in, all student aid programs administered by these segments to the full extent permitted by federal law, except as provided. This provision would apply to the University of California only if the regents, by appropriate resolution, act to make it applicable. This bill would provide that students who are exempt from paying nonresident tuition under the above provision, or who meet equivalent requirements adopted by the regents, are eligible to apply for, and participate in, any student financial aid program administered by the State of California to the full extent permitted by federal law. This bill would require the Student Aid Commission to establish procedures and forms that enable those students who are exempt from paying nonresident tuition under the above provision to apply for, and participate in, all student financial aid programs administered by the State of California to the full extent permitted by federal law. This bill would prohibit students who are exempt from paying nonresident tuition under the provision described above from being eligible for Competitive Cal Grant A and B Awards unless specified conditions are met. The bill would make these provisions operative as of January 1, 2013. (2) Existing federal law requires that a state may provide that an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States is eligible for any state or local public benefit for which that alien would otherwise be ineligible under a specified federal law only through enactment of a state law that affirmatively provides for that eligibility. This bill would find and declare that the amendments to the Donahoe Higher Education Act described above are state laws within the meaning of this federal provision. (3) Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Existing law authorizes the establishment of community college districts under the administration of community college governing boards, and authorizes these districts to provide instruction, for prescribed fees, at community college campuses throughout the state. Existing law authorizes the waiver of these fees for, among others, students who are eligible under income standards established by the board of governors. This bill, as of January 1, 2013, would require community college districts to waive the fees of students who are exempt from nonresident tuition under the provision described in (1) above, and who otherwise qualify for a waiver under this provision, under regulations and procedures adopted by the board of governors. Because the bill would impose new duties on community college districts with respect to determining eligibility for fee waivers, the bill would constitute 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, 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.
Existing law creates the Pasadena Metro Blue Line Construction Authority for purposes relating to the development of a light rail project extending from the City of Los Angeles to the Cities of Pasadena and Claremont. Existing law provides that the authority shall be governed by a board consisting of 5 voting members and one nonvoting member and requires the authority to adopt a code of conduct for officers and board members of the authority that, among other things, specifies circumstances under which a board member shall be deemed to have a financial interest in a decision. This bill would redefine the authority as the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority for purposes of these provisions. The bill would provide that the board shall consist of 5 voting members and 3 nonvoting members, would require the additional 2 nonvoting members to be appointed by the City Councils of the Cities of Pasadena and South Pasadena, as specified, and would require each appointing authority to also appoint an alternate member, as specified. The bill would also specify circumstances under which board members and alternate members of the authority shall not be considered financially interested and may participate in decisions and agreements regarding the authority, any appointing authority, and any extension city, as defined. The bill would provide that a board member may simultaneously hold specified governmental positions without the holding of those positions constituting an incompatible office or activity, as specified. Because the bill would impose new duties on local agencies, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act, classifies controlled substances into 5 designated schedules, with the most restrictive limitations generally placed on controlled substances classified in Schedule I, and the least restrictive limitations generally placed on controlled substances classified in Schedule V. Under existing law, the sale or distribution of specified intoxicating substances is a crime, punishable by imprisonment or a fine or both. Existing law makes the possession of not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana an infraction, and the possession of more than 28.5 grams of marijuana a misdemeanor, as specified. Existing law makes possession of marijuana for sale a felony. This bill would make it a misdemeanor to sell, dispense, distribute, furnish, administer, or give, or offer to sell, dispense, distribute, furnish, administer, or give, or possess for sale any synthetic cannabinoid compound or any synthetic cannabinoid derivative. Because this bill would create a new crime 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
This measure would encourage the State Department of Health Care Services, the State Department of Public Health, and other state entities to partner with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) stakeholders to improve education regarding COPD in the course of implementing the statewide strategic plan. This measure would also designate November 2011, as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Awareness Month in California. This measure would also encourage public officials and the citizens of California to increase awareness of the symptoms of, and the methods of preventing, COPD.
This measure would congratulate the California State University system on the occasion of its 50th anniversary, commend the invaluable contributions it has made to the intellectual and social growth of its students, and extend best wishes for its continued success in the future.
Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which basic health care services are provided to qualified low-income individuals. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid Program provisions. Existing law, subject to federal approval, imposes a quality assurance fee, as specified, on certain general acute care hospitals through and including June 30, 2011. Existing law creates the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund in the State Treasury and requires that the money collected from the quality assurance fee be deposited into the fund. Existing law, subject to federal approval, requires the department to make supplemental payments for certain services, as specified, to private hospitals, increased capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed health care plans, and increased payments to mental health plans. Existing law provides that the moneys in the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund shall, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be available only for certain purposes, including paying for health care coverage for children, as specified, and making the supplemental payments to hospitals, increased capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed health care plans, and increased payments to mental health plans. Existing law also establishes the continuously appropriated Distressed Hospital Fund, which consists of moneys transferred to the fund or appropriated by the Legislature and used as the nonfederal share of payments to distressed hospitals, as defined. This bill would, subject to federal approval, impose a quality assurance fee, as specified, on certain general acute care hospitals, for the period of July 1, 2011, through December 31, 2013. This bill would require that the money collected from the quality assurance fee be deposited into the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund. The bill would, subject to federal approval, provide that the moneys in the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund shall, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be available only for certain purposes, including paying for health care coverage for children, as specified, and making supplemental payments for certain services to private hospitals, increased capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed care plans, increased payments to mental health plans, and supplemental payments for out-of-network emergency and poststabilization services provided by private hospitals and nondesignated public hospitals to Medi-Cal expansion enrollees in the Low Income Health Program. This bill would also authorize designated and nondesignated public hospitals to be paid direct grants in support of health care expenditures funded by the quality assurance fee. The bill would provide that if quality assurance fee payments are remitted to the department after the date determined by the department to be the final date for calculating the final supplemental payments, the fee payments shall be retained in the fund for purposes of funding supplemental payments supported by a hospital quality assurance fee program under subsequent legislation, but provides that if supplemental payments are not implemented under subsequent legislation, then those quality assurance fee payments shall be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund. The bill would also provide that if amounts of the quality assurance fees are collected in excess of the funds required to make the payments above and federal rules prohibit the department from refunding the fee payments to the general acute care hospitals, the excess funds shall be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund. By increasing the amount of money that may be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund, this bill would make an appropriation. This bill would also create the Low Income Health Program MCE Out-of-Network Emergency Care Services Fund, which would consist of moneys transferred from governmental entities on a voluntary basis and from the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund in specified amounts. This bill would provide that the moneys in the fund be used by the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to fund the nonfederal share of supplemental payments made to private hospitals and nondesignated public hospitals providing emergency and poststabilization services to Medi-Cal expansion enrollees in the Low Income Health Program. Existing law requires the department to seek a demonstration project or federal waiver of Medicaid law to implement specified objectives, which may include better care coordination for seniors, persons with disabilities, and children with special health care needs. Existing law provides that to the extent the provisions under the Medi-Cal Hospital/Uninsured Care Demonstration Project Act do not conflict with the provisions of, or the Special Terms and Conditions of, this demonstration project, the provisions of the Medi-Cal Hospital/Uninsured Care Demonstration Project Act shall apply. Under existing law, the department is required to reduce disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospitals by 10% for the 2009–10 fiscal year, as specified. Existing law also provides that, in addition to the 10% reduction, disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospitals shall be reduced in the 2010–11 fiscal year by an additional $30 million in General Fund moneys and by the corresponding federal financial participation, and in the 2011–12 fiscal year by an additional $75 million in General Fund moneys and by the corresponding federal financial participation. Existing law provides that the additional room under the federal upper payment limit created by these reductions shall be used for specified purposes. This bill would, in relation to the 2010–11 and 2011–12 fiscal year reductions, delete the requirement that the reductions be in addition to the 10% reduction for the 2009–10 fiscal year. This bill would also require the department to reduce disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospital payments by specified amounts in the 2012–13 and 2013–14 fiscal years. Existing law establishes the continuously appropriated Private Hospital Supplemental Fund, which consists of moneys from various sources that are used as the source of the nonfederal share of supplemental payments to private hospitals. This bill would require that the money annually transferred to this fund from the General Fund be reduced by specified amounts for the 2012–13 and 2013–14 fiscal years, and that the reductions in the payments to private hospitals that result from the reductions in the amounts transferred from the General Fund be allocated equally as specified. This bill would appropriate specified amounts from the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund, the Federal Trust Fund, and the Low Income Health Program MCE Out-of-Network Emergency Care Services Fund to the department to be available for expenditure until January 1, 2015, for specified purposes. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) The Sales and Use Tax Law imposes a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state, or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state. That law provides various exemptions from those taxes. On and after March 1, 2012, this bill would provide partial exemptions equal to specified percentages of state sales and use taxes imposed at a combined rate of 5% for the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property, as defined, purchased for use by a qualified person, as defined, primarily in any stage of manufacturing, processing, refining, fabricating, or recycling of tangible personal property; in research and development; to maintain, repair, measure, or test specified tangible personal property; and by a contractor for use in a construction contract with a qualified person, as specified. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board and the State Board of Equalization to provide specified information to the Director of Finance and would require the director to make certain determinations regarding whether this act has caused or will cause a net increase or decrease in the amount of revenues and to correspondingly increase or decrease the exemption to certain taxpayers that received only a limited exemption, as specified. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing law authorizes districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Exemptions from state sales and use taxes are incorporated in these laws. This bill would specify that this exemption does not apply to local sales and use taxes and transactions and use taxes. (2) The Personal Income Tax Law imposes taxes based upon taxable income. That law also allows specified credits, exemptions, and exclusions, and imposes an alternative minimum tax with respect to certain items of tax preferences. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, exclude from taxable income under this law an amount equal to 10% of the business income of a taxpayer, not to exceed $5,000, as specified, but would require the amount excluded to be included as an item of tax preferences for purposes of the alternative minimum tax. (3) The Personal Income Tax Law allows a standard deduction, as defined, in computing the income subject to tax. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, increase the standard deduction by 27%, as specified. (4) The Corporation Tax Law imposes taxes measured by income at a rate of 8.84%, as specified. The Corporation Tax Law imposes a minimum franchise tax of $800, except as provided, on every corporation incorporated in this state, qualified to transact intrastate business in this state, or doing business in this state, and a tax in an amount equal to the minimum franchise tax on every limited liability company registered, qualified to transact business, or doing business in this state, as specified. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2012, reduce that rate to 8.34% on the amount of net income that is less than or equal to $50,000 for the taxable year, except as specified. The bill would reduce the annual minimum franchise tax to $750 for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012. (5) The Corporation Tax Law imposes taxes measured by income and, in the case of a business with income derived from or attributable to sources both within and without this state, apportions the income between this state and other states and foreign countries in accordance with a specified 4-factor formula based on the property, payroll, and sales within and without this state, except that in the case of an apportioning trade or business that derives more than 50% of its gross business receipts from conducting one or more qualified business activities, as defined, business income is apportioned in accordance with a specified 3-factor formula. That law, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, allows a taxpayer to have that income apportioned in accordance with a single sales factor formula, except as provided, pursuant to an irrevocable annual election, as specified. That law also provides that sales of tangible and intangible personal property are in this state in accordance with specified criteria. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, revise the rules which determine whether a taxpayer is doing business within this state, revise the provisions which determine whether specific sales occur in this state, and require a taxpayer, except as provided, to apportion its income in accordance with a single sales factor. (6) This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. (7) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. Governor Schwarzenegger issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 6, 2010. Governor Brown issued a proclamation on January 20, 2011, declaring and reaffirming that a fiscal emergency exists and stating that his proclamation supersedes the earlier proclamation for purposes of that constitutional provision. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared and reaffirmed by the Governor by proclamation issued on January 20, 2011, pursuant to the California Constitution. (8) This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.