Existing law provides that no city, county, or city and county which levies a business license tax calculated on the basis of gross receipts shall include the amount of gross receipts or the cost of the business license tax on the business license tax receipt. This bill would make a nonsubstantive change to this provision.
(1) Existing law requires each school district to evaluate and assess certificated employee performance as it reasonably relates to pupil academic progress, the instructional techniques and strategies used by the employee, the employee's adherence to curricular objectives, and the establishment and maintenance of a suitable learning environment, within the scope of the employee's responsibilities. This bill would authorize the governing board of a school district to evaluate and assess the performance of certificated employees pursuant to a "multiple-measures evaluation system," defined in the bill as a teacher and principal evaluation system that uses multiple research-validated approaches to measuring effectiveness, as specified. Any system developed pursuant to these provisions would be required to meet specified criteria, including a quantitative pupil academic achievement growth component that constitutes at least 30% of the overall teacher and principal effectiveness measure. (2) Existing law provides that when employees are terminated pursuant to a reduction in workforce, a school district is required to terminate the employees in order of seniority. Existing law further provides those employees with preferred right to reappointment and opportunity for substitute service in order of seniority. Existing law authorizes a school district to deviate from the order of seniority for those purposes for specified reasons, including compliance with constitutional requirements related to equal protection of the laws. This bill would provide additional reasons for which a school district may deviate from terminating employees in order of seniority, including basing a decision on performance evaluations, if the governing board has implemented the provisions relating to a multiple-measures evaluation system, as described, and on the basis that the employee is assigned to a schoolsite that has been selected by the governing board for exemption from certificated reductions in force, based upon the needs of the educational program. The bill would provide an exception to this authorization for an employee who has 18 months or less from his or her date of retirement, or is on medical leave. The bill also would authorize the governing board of a school district to deviate from seniority when reappointing employees or offering employees the opportunity for substitute service on the basis of performance evaluations, as specified. The bill would specify that the equal protection exception to the general requirement that terminations and reappointments occur in order of seniority applies to equal protection as it relates to pupils. (3) Existing law generally requires school districts to adhere to certain requirements with respect to teacher and administrator employment, and requires charter school petitions to contain certain information relating to employment. This bill would authorize school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to assign, reassign, and transfer teachers and administrators based on effectiveness and subject matter needs, without regard to years of service. (4) This bill would make various nonsubstantive and clarifying changes.
Existing law generally lists the powers common to cities, counties, and other agencies. Existing law sets forth generally the authority and duties of local agencies in the issuance and repayment of revenue bonds with respect to public works within their jurisdiction. Existing law grants local agencies various powers to secure certain types of bond investments. This bill would require a professional sports team that will benefit from the issuance and sale of bonds by a public agency to post a bond or other undertaking at the time of issuance of the bonds in an amount adequate to ensure that all of the team's obligations under a financial agreement will be satisfied in the event the professional sports team subsequently relocates. This bill would provide that the sale by a public agency of a specified type of revenue bond affecting sports facilities may not proceed until the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission has assessed and reported to the public agency on the future financial risk imposed on the taxpayers by the sale.
(1) 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 (EIR) on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant impact on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that impact. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant impact 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 impact on the environment. This bill would provide that impacts, potential impacts, or cumulative impacts on the environment of a project that is subject to an environmental regulation are deemed to be insignificant for the purposes of CEQA unless a preponderance of evidence demonstrates that the specific impact, potential impact, or cumulative impact is significant after giving full effect to the environmental regulation. (2) CEQA requires a lead agency to prepare a negative declaration if there is no substantial evidence in the administrative record that a project would have a significant environmental impact or a mitigated negative declaration if the project's environmental impacts may be avoided through a revision of the project so that there is no substantial evidence in the administrative record that the revised project would have a significant environmental impact. CEQA requires the preparation of an EIR if there is substantial evidence in the administrative record that a project may have a significant environmental impact. This bill would instead require the lead agency to prepare a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration if there is a preponderance of the evidence in the record that a project or a revised project would not have a significant environmental impact. The bill would require the preparation of an EIR if the lead agency finds, in light of the whole record, that a project, based on a preponderance of the evidence, will have a significant environmental impact that could not be avoided through a revision of the project. Because the bill would require a lead agency to determine whether there is a preponderance of the evidence in the record that a project would not have a significant environmental impact, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) CEQA authorizes the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt guidelines to include a list of classes of projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and are exempted from the requirements of CEQA. This bill would provide that a project's greenhouse gas emissions are not, in and of themselves, deemed to cause the exemption to be inapplicable under specified conditions. (4) CEQA prohibits a person from bringing or maintaining an action or proceeding unless the alleged grounds for noncompliance with CEQA were presented to the public agency during the public comment period or before the close of the public hearing on the project before the issuance of the notice of determination. This bill would authorize, with specified exceptions, a lead agency to not consider written materials submitted after the close of the public comment period and would prohibit the use of those materials as a basis for challenging the lead agency's action pursuant to CEQA. (5) CEQA requires the Office of Planning and Research to prepare and develop, and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt, guidelines for the implementation of CEQA that include criteria for public agencies to follow in determining whether or not a proposed project may have a "significant effect on the environment." CEQA defines "significant effect on the environment" to include, among other things, effects on the environment that are "cumulatively considerable." CEQA defines "cumulatively considerable" to mean incremental effects of an individual project that are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. This bill would revise the definition of "cumulatively considerable" to delete reference to the effects of "probable future projects" and instead include the effects of "reasonably foreseeable future projects," which are projects that have been proposed or approved 90 days before the issuance of an EIR or 30 days prior to the circulation of a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration. (6) Existing law authorizes the court, upon the motion of a party, to award attorney's fees to a prevailing party in an action that has resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest if 3 conditions are met. The bill would require the court to additionally consider specified factors in awarding the attorney's fees. (7) Existing law authorizes the court until January 1, 2016, to impose a sanction of up to $10,000 for the filing of a frivolous claim in an action brought pursuant to CEQA. This bill would increase the maximum amount of a sanction for such a filing to $20,000. (8) 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 urge the United States Patent and Trademark Office to place a satellite office in California.
Existing law, as amended by Proposition 21, adopted March 7, 2000, and by Proposition 83, adopted November 7, 2006, provides for a list of crimes called "violent felonies" and "serious felonies." Other existing law provides specified enhancements to the punishments of certain repeat, state-prison bound offenders with prior violent or serious felony convictions. The initiative statutes provide that any amendment of these provisions by the Legislature shall require a 23 vote of the membership of each house. Existing law defines battery as any willful or unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another. Existing law provides that battery committed against a custodial officer, firefighter, emergency medical technician, lifeguard, process server, traffic officer, or animal control officer engaged in the performance of his or her duties, as specified, is punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony. Existing law provides that battery against a peace officer, as specified, is punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would add felony battery against the above-named persons to the list of "serious felonies" and to the list of "violent felonies." Existing law specifies, for purposes of the sentence enhancements specified above, that the statutes comprising the lists of violent and serious felonies be interpreted as they existed at the time the provisions were enacted, including amendments made to those statutes during the 2005–06 Regular Session of the Legislature, as specified. This bill would likewise require those statutes to be interpreted as they would be amended following the enactment of this bill for purposes of sentence enhancements. By expanding the punishments for existing crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) The California Constitution provides that the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system has plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and administration of the system. Existing law establishes various public agency retirement systems, including the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) , the State Teachers' Retirement System (STRS) , the Judges' Retirement System II, and various county retirement systems pursuant to the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937, among others, and these systems provide defined pension benefits to public employees based on age, service credit, and final compensation. The California Constitution permits a city or county to adopt a charter for purposes of its governance that supersedes general laws of the state in regard to specified subjects, including compensation of city or county employees. The California Constitution also establishes the University of California as a public trust with full powers of organization and government, subject only to specified limitations. Charter cities and the University of California may establish pension plans under their respective independent constitutional authority. This measure would provide that any change to the formula used to calculate the pension benefits of a member of a public retirement system, as defined, that results in an increase in the member's pension benefits shall apply only to service performed on and after the operative date of the change, and would prohibit the retroactive application of that change. The measure also would require any retirement plan for public employees hired on and after January 1, 2013, to expressly provide that the public employer retains the right to prospectively change retirement benefits, as specified. The measure would require, with respect to public employees first hired on and after January 1, 2013, the governing body of a public retirement system to annually set an actuarially sound contribution rate for any defined benefit plan based on the recommendations of an independent plan actuary. The measure would permit a public employer to offer those employees a defined benefit plan only as part of a uniform hybrid retirement plan, as specified, and only if the Legislature has established the hybrid retirement plan and the defined pension benefits that may be provided, as specified. The measure would require the employer and employee to share equally the defined benefit plan costs. Any benefits under a defined benefit plan would be based on a member's highest annual base pay averaged over any consecutive 36-month period. The measure would increase, beginning 30 days after its effective date, employee contribution rates for members of defined benefit plans by at least an additional 5% of current salary until the pension fund of the plan is 90% funded, as determined by an independent plan actuary. The bill would require the funded status of a defined benefit plan to be calculated annually, as specified. (2) Existing state and local public employee retirement systems are funded by investment returns and employer and employee contributions. The California Constitution provides that the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system has the exclusive power to provide for actuarial services in order to assure the competency of the assets of the system. Existing law, with respect to PERS, requires the Governor to include in the annual Budget Act the contribution rates submitted by the system actuary of the liability on account of employees of the state. This measure would permit an actuary to authorize a reduction or suspension of employer contributions to a defined benefit plan for a fiscal year only if the actuary determines that the plan has a surplus of actuarially determined plan assets sufficient to fund 120% of the employer's share of estimated plan normal costs for the next 30 years. The measure would also prohibit an employer from paying the employee contribution to a defined benefit plan for any employee, would require that an employee's rate of contributions represent a reasonable percentage of the normal costs of the plan, and would prohibit that rate from being less than the contribution rate applicable to his or her membership classification on July 1, 2012. This measure would also require STRS to set an actuarially sound contribution rate to be paid annually to the system, to be used as a basis for increasing the state's contribution to that system. (3) Existing law permits members of PERS, STRS, and county, city, and district retirement systems that have adopted specified provisions, to purchase up to 5 years of additional retirement service credit by contributing an amount that, at the time of purchase, provides for the resulting increase in employer liability. This measure would prohibit a public employer or public retirement system from offering, or entering into, a contract by which a member may make contributions to receive additional retirement service credit, as described above. (4) Existing law generally prohibits any person who has retired from being employed in any capacity with the same public employer unless he or she is first reinstated from retirement, except as authorized. This measure would, on or after January 1, 2013, prohibit a person from being employed by, or providing personal services as a contractor for, a public employer while he or she is receiving pension payments from a public retirement system. (5) Existing law provides that any elected public officer who takes public office, or is reelected to public office, on or after January 1, 2006, who is convicted of any specified felony arising directly out of his or her official duties, forfeits all rights and benefits under, and membership in, any public retirement system in which he or she is a member, effective on the date of final conviction, as specified. This measure would require that a public employee, as defined, who is convicted of any felony for conduct related to his or her office or employment on or after the effective date of this measure forfeit that portion of the rights and benefits to which he or she is entitled in any public retirement system in which he or she is a member that accrued on or after the date of commission of the crime, and not accrue further benefits, as specified. (6) The Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act, which is administered by the Board of Administration of PERS, establishes various percentages for employer contributions for health care benefits provided under the approved health benefit plan in which the employee or annuitant is enrolled. This measure would require public employees to pay an increased amount, that is proportional to employee base pay, as specified, for employee health care benefits. The measure would also require a public employee hired on and after January 1, 2013, to contribute to the cost of postretirement health care benefits, in proportion to the employee's base pay and years of service, as specified, if the public employer provides those benefits. The bill would prohibit employees hired on and after January 1, 2013, from being eligible for full postretirement health care benefits until the employee has 25 years of service. The measure would provide that these provisions shall not impair existing collective bargaining agreements, but would apply upon expiration of those agreements. (7) The measure would declare that the above-described provisions are self-executing and would require any bill, ordinance, resolution, or other measure enacted to implement any of those provisions to be approved by a 23 vote of the membership of each house of the Legislature, the Regents of the University of California, or the governing body of the public employer. The measure would also require any bill enacted to change public employee retirement benefits or health care benefits to be approved by a 23 vote of the membership of each house of the Legislature. The measure would declare that the above-described provisions would not limit any disability, death, or survivor benefits. (8) The California Constitution requires that the moneys to be applied by the state for the support of school districts and community college districts be not less than the greatest of 3 amounts computed pursuant to specified tests. The Constitution provides that the first of those tests is the amount which, as a percentage of General Fund revenues which may be appropriated pursuant to Article XIIIB, equals the percentage of General Fund revenues appropriated for school districts and community college districts, respectively, in fiscal year 1986–87. The Constitution provides that the 2nd and 3rd tests are the amount required to ensure that the total allocations to school districts and community college districts from General Fund proceeds of taxes appropriated pursuant to Article XIIIB and allocated local proceeds of taxes shall not be less than the total amount from these sources in the prior fiscal year, excluding specified revenues, and adjusted for specified factors. Existing law requires the state to appropriate a sum equal to 8% of creditable compensation, as specified, to be deposited in the Teachers' Retirement Fund, for the initial purpose of financing the Defined Benefit Program of the State Teacher's Retirement System. Existing law does not count these appropriations toward meeting the state's constitutional obligation to annually provide funding for the support of school districts and community college districts, as described above. This measure would specify, for purposes of the first test, that the "General Fund revenues appropriated for school districts and community college districts, respectively, in the 1986–87 fiscal year" excludes General Fund revenues appropriated to the Controller for transfer to the Teachers' Retirement Fund. The measure would specify, for the 2013–14 fiscal year, for purposes of the 2nd and 3rd tests, that "total allocations from General Fund proceeds of taxes appropriated pursuant to Article XIIIB and allocated local proceeds of taxes" for the prior fiscal year excludes General Fund revenues appropriated for purposes of the State Teachers' Retirement System. (9) The California Constitution provides that the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system has the exclusive power to provide for actuarial services in order to assure the competency of the assets of the system. This measure would delete those provisions and would instead require that the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system select an independent plan actuary, to serve for a term of not less than 12 years, from a specified list to be established by the California Actuarial Advisory Panel. The measure would permit, following the initial term of service, the independent actuary to be appointed by the retirement board to subsequent terms. The measure would prohibit the reduction of the independent plan actuary's salary and benefits during his or her term of office, and would require his or her salary agreement to provide for annual increases in pay, except as specified. The measure would limit the circumstances under which the independent plan actuary may be removed from office. The measure would grant an independent plan actuary exclusive authority to provide actuarial services and would require a retirement board to adopt the actuary's recommendations without amendment. The measure would require the actuary to be guided by prevailing actuarial standards, any applicable governmental accounting standards that are consistent with prevailing actuarial standards, and any contracts related to the required funding of the system, and to seek to maximize retirement security and minimize the employer's long-term cost. The measure would provide for the removal of plan actuaries who were not chosen pursuant to its requirements, and would require the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system to ensure that the independent plan actuary has sufficient staff and budgetary resources to perform all of his or her required duties. (10) The California Constitution prohibits the number, terms, and method of selection or removal of members of the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system, which includes in its composition elected employee members, from being changed, amended, or modified by the Legislature from those that were required by law or otherwise in effect on July 1, 1991, unless the change, amendment, or modification enacted by the Legislature is ratified by a majority vote of the electors of the jurisdiction in which the participants of the system are or were, prior to retirement, employed. This measure would additionally require 23 of the elected or appointed members of the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system to have demonstrated expertise in the financial, legal, accounting, or health care fields and would prohibit them from being members of that system or from having immediate family members who are members of that system. The measure would authorize the Legislature to prescribe the criteria and process for selecting those elected or appointed members by a statute enacted by a 23 vote of the membership of each house. (11) The measure would provide that if the Attorney General fails to defend the constitutionality of its provisions, following its approval by the voters, a taxpayer may intervene and participate for that purpose in any court action challenging its constitutionality, and the fees and costs of defending the action would be a charge on funds appropriated to the Attorney General.
Existing personal income tax allow individual taxpayers to contribute amounts in excess of their tax liability for the support of specified funds, including the ALS/Lou Gehrig's Disease Research Fund. Those laws repeal the ALS/Lou Gehrig's Disease Research Fund on January 1, 2013, or on the taxable year beginning on or after January 1 of the calendar year in which the Franchise Tax Board estimates, by September 1, that the contributions made on returns filed in that calendar year will be less than a minimum contribution amount, as defined, whichever occurs first. This bill would repeal those provisions and reenact similar provisions, except that the January 1, 2013, repeal date would be extended to January 1, 2016.
Existing law creates in the State Treasury the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund for the receipt and deposit of moneys received by the state from certain Indian tribes pursuant to the terms of gaming compacts entered into with the state. Existing law authorizes moneys in that fund to be used for specified purposes, including for grants for the support of state and local government agencies impacted by tribal government gaming. This bill would appropriate $9,100,000 from the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund to the California Gambling Control Commission to provide grants to local agencies.
Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, creates the California State Board of Pharmacy and makes it responsible for administering and enforcing the provisions of that law, including the licensure of pharmacies, as defined, and nonresident pharmacies that ship, mail, or deliver controlled substances or dangerous drugs or devices, as defined, into this state. A knowing violation of the Pharmacy Law is a crime. Existing law requires that each pharmacy establish procedures for addressing the theft, diversion, or self-use of dangerous drugs by a licensed individual employed by or with the pharmacy, and that every pharmacy report to the board within 30 days of the receipt or development of certain information affecting the ability of those individuals to practice the profession or occupation authorized by their license, as specified. Existing law requires an entity licensed by the board to retain records of the acquisition and disposition of dangerous drugs and devices in a specified manner. Existing federal law requires registrants distributing specified controlled substances to conduct an inventory of controlled substances every 2 years. This bill would instead require a pharmacy to report and provide to the board, within 14 days of the receipt or development thereof, the information described above regarding the ability of licensed individuals employed by or with the pharmacy to practice the profession or occupation authorized by their license. The bill would require the report to include specified detailed information, including the date of the last controlled substances inventory, and would require the pharmacy to prepare and submit an audit relating to the report upon the request of the board. The bill would also require an entity licensed by the board to provide records to designated persons within 3 business days of the time of the request, unless that timeframe is extended by the board, as specified. The bill would prohibit a pharmacist whose license was revoked by the board to perform pharmacy duties, as specified, for a nonresident pharmacy. Because this bill would specify additional requirements under the Pharmacy Law, a violation of which is a crime, it 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.
