GR
D California Senate · District 24

Sen. Gloria Romero

Compare
Total votes
27,432
all sessions
Attendance
97%
623 missed
Near the chamber average
With party
99%
of cast votes
Near the chamber average
Bipartisan score
1%
crosses aisle rarely
Lower than 76% of chamber peers
Sponsored
1,341
bills & resolutions
Lower than 85% of chamber peers
Committees
0
assignments
1,341 bills and resolutions

Sponsored bills

Total
1,341
Primary
283
Co-sponsor
1,058
This page
1,341
matching current filters
Co-sponsor AB 7
died · California Assembly · Co-sponsor
Interscholastic athletics: High School Baseball Safety Act of 2010.

Existing law gives the governing board of a school district general control of, and responsibility for, all aspects of interscholastic athletic policies, programs, and activities in its district, and requires the governing board to ensure that all interscholastic policies, programs, and activities in its district are in compliance with state and federal law. Existing law prohibits participants in high school interscholastic football from wearing football helmets that are not certified for use by the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment or another recognized certifying agency in the field. This bill would enact the High School Baseball Safety Act of 2010. The bill would express findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding the safety implications of the use of nonwooden bats in high school baseball. The bill, until January 1, 2012, would prohibit the use of a nonwooden baseball bat at a private or public high school competitive baseball game or practice or during a physical education class or activity conducted at a private or public high school.

died Nov 30, 2010 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SB 1460
Vetoed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Student financial aid: eligibility: California Dream Act of 2010.

(1) Existing law requires that a person, 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 enact the California Dream Act of 2010. The bill, as of July 1, 2011, would exempt a person who has attended, for 3 or more years, at least one of which shall have been in a high school, and graduated from, secondary school in California from paying nonresident tuition at the California Community Colleges and the California State University. Under the bill, persons attending and graduating from California technical schools and adult schools, as well as high schools, would be included within the scope of this provision. (2) 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. In any action in which a state court finds that a specified law, or any similar provision adopted by the regents, is unlawful, existing law authorizes the court to order the administering entity that is the subject of the lawsuit to terminate any waiver awarded under that statute or action, as equitable relief, prohibits the award of money damages, tuition refund or waiver, or other retroactive relief, and provides that the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California are immune from the imposition of any award of money damages, tuition refund or waiver, or other retroactive relief in a lawsuit. This bill would amend the Donahoe Higher Education Act, as of July 1, 2011, 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 persons who are exempt from paying nonresident tuition under the provision described in (1) above, 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. If a state court finds that this provision, or a similar provision adopted by the regents, is unlawful, this bill would provide that the same limitations described above would apply. This bill would further provide that, on and after January 1, 2011, a student attending the California State University, the California Community Colleges, or the University of California who is exempt from paying nonresident tuition under the provision described above would be eligible to receive a scholarship derived from nonstate funds received, for the purpose of scholarships, by the segment at which he or she is a student. 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 July 1, 2011, would require community college districts to waive the fees of persons 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.

Vetoed Nov 30, 2010 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SCR 123
Failed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Relative to the Mexican bicentennial celebration.

This measure would recognize the importance of celebrating the birth and independence of Mexico and honoring and invigorating the spirit of friendship, understanding, and cooperation that characterizes the California-Mexico relationship.

Failed Nov 30, 2010 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SB 234
Failed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Curriculum: history-social science curriculum framework: oral histories: genocide.

Existing law provides that there is in the state government the Curriculum Development and Supplemental Materials Commission to study problems of courses of study in the schools of the state and, upon request of the State Board of Education, recommend the adoption of minimum standards for courses of study in preschool, kindergarten, elementary, and secondary schools. Existing law also requires the commission to recommend curriculum frameworks to the state board. This bill would require the commission to consider and vote on whether to include an oral history component, as defined, specifically related to genocides in the proposed changes to the 2015 history-social science curriculum framework as part of its regular process of developing and revising curriculum frameworks as requested by the state board. The bill would specify that the oral history component, if included by the commission, would not require the inclusion of oral history materials in the frameworks, but instead require in an appendix to the updated framework the inclusion of a listing of where those materials can be found and how to use them in a history course.

Failed Nov 30, 2010 1 co-sponsor
Primary SB 1421
Failed · California Senate · Lead sponsor
Education funds: Race to the Top.

The federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provides approximately $4.35 billion dollars in one-time funding to the states as Race to the Top grants, provided that applying states meet specified criteria. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to make needed changes in the law to assist California in competing for Race to the Top grant funds.

Failed Nov 30, 2010 0 co-sponsors
Co-sponsor SB 1396
Failed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Education funding: maximum categorical education flexibility pilot program.

Existing law establishes various categorical education programs and appropriates the funding for those programs in the annual Budget Act. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction, for the 2008–09 to 2012–13 fiscal years, inclusive, to apportion from the amount provided in the annual Budget Act for specified categorical education programs an amount based on the same relative proportion that the local educational agency received in the 2008–09 fiscal year for those programs and authorizes school districts, for those fiscal years, to use these funds, with specified exceptions, for any educational purpose, to the extent permitted by federal law. Existing law, for those fiscal years, deems local educational agencies that use these categorical education program funds for any educational purpose to be in compliance with the program and funding requirements of those categorical education programs. Existing law, as a condition of receiving the categorical education program funds that may be used for any educational purpose, requires school districts and county offices of education, at a regularly scheduled, open, public hearing, to take testimony from the public, discuss, and approve or disapprove the proposed use of funding. Existing law requires a local educational agency to report expenditures, as specified, to indicate the activities for which these funds were expended and requires the department annually to collect and provide this information to the appropriate legislative policy and budget committees and the Department of Finance. This bill would establish the 3-year Maximum Categorical Education Flexibility Pilot Program in which up to 3 school districts would be selected to participate. To be eligible for selection, a school district would be required to meet certain preconditions, including developing a plan or initiative to accelerate pupils' progress to proficiency that includes specified goals. A school district selected to participate would be required to agree to demonstrate significant progress toward accelerating pupils' progress toward proficiency on California's academic standards over the 3-year pilot program period, a narrowing of the achievement gap in its federally recognized subgroups, fiscal solvency, positive growth on the district API, improvement in its college entrance rate, and an increase in its graduation rate. The bill would require the Superintendent to apportion to the participating school districts special apportionments equal to the amounts of funding those school districts received in the 2009–10 fiscal year for specified programs, including the Economic Impact Aid Program, the Class Size Reduction Program, and Transportation Programs, except special education pupil transportation. A participating school district would be allowed to use the special apportionments for any purpose related to improving pupil achievement and academic instruction and would be required to implement an open and transparent process that allows public input so as to notify parents, staff, and the community of discussions and pending decisions related to the flexible use of categorical education program funds. A participating school district would be deemed to be in compliance with the program and funding requirements associated with the categorical education programs included in the pilot program, except that a participating school district that receives funding for economic impact aid would be required to continue to designate staff to coordinate services and programs for English learners, including the home language survey, and to continue in existence parent advisory committees and schoolsite councils. A participating school district would be required to submit an evaluative annual report to the department, the state board, the Governor, and the Legislature and to submit to the department an annual expenditure report. The Superintendent would be required to contract for an independent evaluation of the pilot program that would consist of an interim evaluation report and a final independent evaluation report that identifies the success and failures of the pilot program and makes recommendations regarding improving the pilot program and whether the program should be continued. The bill would prohibit the waiver of any provisions of the pilot program.

Failed Nov 30, 2010 1 co-sponsor
Co-sponsor SB 810
Failed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Singleâ€'payer health care coverage.

Existing law does not provide a system of universal health care coverage for California residents. Existing law provides for the creation of various programs to provide health care services to persons who have limited incomes and meet various eligibility requirements. These programs include the Healthy Families Program administered by the Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board, and the Medi‑Cal program administered by the State Department of Health Care Services. Existing law provides for the regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and health insurers by the Department of Insurance. This bill would establish the California Healthcare System to be administered by the newly created California Healthcare Agency under the control of a Healthcare Commissioner appointed by the Governor and subject to confirmation by the Senate. The bill would make all California residents eligible for specified health care benefits under the California Healthcare System, which would, on a single-payer basis, negotiate for or set fees for health care services provided through the system and pay claims for those services. The bill would provide that a resident of the state with a household income, as specified, at or below 200% of the federal poverty level would be eligible for the type of benefits provided under the Medi-Cal program. The bill would require the commissioner to seek all necessary waivers, exemptions, agreements, or legislation to allow various existing federal, state, and local health care payments to be paid to the California Healthcare System, which would then assume responsibility for all benefits and services previously paid for with those funds. The bill would create the Healthcare Policy Board to establish policy on medical issues and various other matters relating to the system. The bill would create the Office of Patient Advocacy within the agency to represent the interests of health care consumers relative to the system. The bill would create within the agency the Office of Health Planning to plan for the health care needs of the population, and the Office of Health Care Quality, headed by a chief medical officer, to support the delivery of high quality care and promote provider and patient satisfaction. The bill would create the Office of Inspector General for the California Healthcare System within the Attorney General's office, which would have various oversight powers. The bill would prohibit health care service plan contracts or health insurance policies from being issued for services covered by the California Healthcare System. The bill would create the Healthcare Fund and the Payments Board to administer the finances of the California Healthcare System. The bill would create the California Healthcare Premium Commission (Premium Commission) to determine the cost of the California Healthcare System and to develop a premium structure for the system that complies with specified standards. The bill would require the Premium Commission to recommend a premium structure to the Governor and the Legislature on or before January 1, 2013, and to make a draft recommendation to the Governor, the Legislature, and the public 90 days before submitting its final premium structure recommendation. The bill would specify that only its provisions relating to the Premium Commission would become operative on January 1, 2011, with its remaining provisions becoming operative on the date the Secretary of California Health and Human Services notifies the Legislature, as specified, that sufficient funding exists to implement the California Healthcare System. The bill would require that system to be operative within 2 years of that date and would provide for various transition processes for that period. The bill would extend the application of certain insurance fraud laws to providers of services and products under the system, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program by revising the definition of a crime. The bill would enact other related provisions relative to budgeting, regional entities, federal preemption, subrogation, collective bargaining agreements, compensation of health care providers, conflict of interest, patient grievances, independent medical review, and associated matters. 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.

Failed Nov 30, 2010 1 co-sponsor
Primary SB 747
Failed · California Senate · Lead sponsor
Career technical education: pilot preapprentice aerospace machining program.

Existing law establishes the Health Science and Medical Technology Project, administered by the State Department of Education to provide competitive grant funds to California public schools to enhance existing or establish new health-related career pathway programs. This bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature regarding California's aerospace workforce and trends in California's high schools. The bill would create a pilot preapprentice aerospace machining program, administered by the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency to provide career technical education to high school pupils in the form of machining and related curriculum that can be applied to various manufacturing industries in California, including, but not limited to, aerospace manufacturing, as specified. The program would be funded by a combination of private nonprofit and public funds, as specified, that would be deposited into the Machinist Investment Fund, which would be created by this bill. The bill would provide that implementation of the program would be contingent upon receipt of sufficient federal funding. Grants would be competitively awarded to community colleges based upon specified criteria, including their ability to address the existing local and regional industry manufacturing needs, while providing meaningful career technical education opportunities for at-risk youth. The bill would require the Chancellor's Office of the California Community Colleges system to develop preapprenticeship curriculum in aerospace technology, and machining technology generally. The model curriculum would be required to result in the issuance of a certificate of completion stating that the holder has completed curriculum that meets specified criteria. The bill would specify that, consistent with federal guidelines, each community college shall complete an evaluation of its participation in the pilot program on or before the end date of the grant award, and submit the evaluation to the Chancellor's office by that date. The Chancellor's office would be required to compile the information provided by the participating community colleges, and to submit an evaluation to the Legislature by December 1, 2013. The bill would provide that its provisions would remain in effect until January 1, 2015.

Failed Nov 30, 2010 0 co-sponsors
Co-sponsor SB 550
Vetoed · California Senate · Co-sponsor
Natural resources: oil and gas: drilling.

Existing law regulates oil and gas activities. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2012, require the operator of an oil and gas well to provide to the surface owner a 10-day written notice of the intent to enter the surface owner's property for the purpose of the extraction of underlying oil, gas, or minerals. The operator would also be required to provide to the surface owner a copy of the applicable recorded short form or memorandum of oil, gas, or minerals lease within 10 days prior to entering the property.

Vetoed Nov 30, 2010 1 co-sponsor
Showing 21 to 30 of 1,341 bills
Previous 1 … 2 3 4 … 135 Next