The Administrative Procedure Act governs the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations by state agencies and for the review of those regulatory actions by the Office of Administrative Law. This bill would enact the Government Accountability Act of 2012 and require that a major regulation, as defined, proposed on or after January 1, 2013, include a provision to repeal the regulation 2 years after the date that the regulation is approved by the office. The bill would require the office to return to an agency any proposed regulation that does not include the repeal provision. The bill would provide that the repeal date shall be void if the Legislature enacts a statute that expressly validates and approves the content of the regulation, as specified.
Sponsored bills
Existing law suspends various activities of redevelopment agencies and prohibits the agencies from incurring indebtedness for a specified period. Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies on February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies, as defined. Existing law requires that successor entities perform certain duties, including, among others, to continue to oversee development of properties until the contracted work has been completed or the contractual obligation of the former redevelopment agency can be transferred to other parties. This bill would additionally require a successor agency to continue to oversee the development and construction of any regional transportation project of the former redevelopment agency. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
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 bill would require that an employee of a school district, county office of education, or charter school, who is convicted of any state or federal felony for conduct arising out of, or in the performance of, his or her official duties in pursuit of the office or appointment, or in connection with obtaining salary, disability retirement, or service retirement, or other benefits, forfeit retirement benefits earned or accrued from the earliest date of the commission of the felony to the forfeiture date, as specified. The bill would also require any contributions to the public retirement system made by the employee on or after the earliest date of commission of the felony to be returned, without interest, to the employee upon the occurrence of a distribution event, as defined, unless otherwise ordered by a court or determined by the pension administrator.
(1) The California Constitution requires the Governor to submit annually to the Legislature a budget itemizing state expenditures and estimating state revenues and requires the Legislature to pass the Budget Bill by midnight on June 15. This bill would require that the budget submitted by the Governor to the Legislature for the 2013–14 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, as specified in a plan developed by the Department of Finance and distributed to the appropriate committees of the Legislature by August 1, 2012, be developed pursuant to performance-based budgeting, as defined, for each state agency. (2) Under existing law, a state agency for which an appropriation is made is generally required to submit to the Department of Finance for approval a complete and detailed budget setting forth all proposed expenditures and estimated revenues for the ensuing fiscal year. The bill would require the budget of a state agency, as defined, submitted to the department as specified in the plan developed by the department, to utilize performance-based budgeting for all programs, as defined to include those performed not only by state agencies, but by local agencies, contractors, or others that have a material relationship with the state, or its authorities and activities. For those programs not administered by the state, but which confer a benefit that would not otherwise be conferred but for the action of state government, state departments would be required to develop a process for consulting with responsible local agencies, contractors or other responsible entities, and stakeholders to develop information related to performance standards and program performance. The bill would require the department to include specified performance-based budgeting information in the Governor's Budget proposal and to post that information on the department's Internet Web site. Implementation of the requirement to use performance-based budgeting for departments and programs would be contingent on an appropriation of funding for that requirement in the annual Budget Act.
(1) Existing law establishes the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) and the State Teachers' Retirement System (STRS) for the purpose of providing pension benefits to their employees. Existing law also establishes the Judges' Retirement System II which provides pension benefits to elected judges and the Legislators' Retirement System which provides pension benefits to elective officers of the state other than judges and to legislative statutory officers. The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 authorizes counties to establish retirement systems pursuant to its provisions in order to provide pension benefits to county, city, and district employees. The Regents of the University of California have established the University of California Retirement System as a trust for this purpose. 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 making specified contributions to the system. Existing law authorizes retirement benefits to be increased. This bill, on and after January 1, 2013, would prohibit a public retirement system from allowing the purchase of additional retirement service credit, as described above. The bill would except from this prohibition an official application to purchase this type of service credit received by the retirement system prior to January 1, 2013. The bill would prohibit any member who does not have at least 5 years of service credit before the operative date of this bill, or any person hired on or after that date, from purchasing additional retirement service credit. This bill would provide that any enhancement to a public retirement system's retirement formula or benefit that is adopted on or after January 1, 2013, would apply only to service performed on or after the operative date of the enhancement, except under specified circumstances. The bill would also provide that, if a change to a member's classification or employment results in an increase in the retirement formula or benefit applicable to that member, the increase would apply only to service performed on or after the operative date of the change. This bill would require a public employer to offer to its employees first hired on or after July 1, 2013, a hybrid pension plan or alternative pension plan option, as specified. The bill would require that each hybrid pension plan be designed with the goal of providing at normal retirement age, based upon a full career in public service of 30 years for safety employees and 35 years for all other public employees, replacement income of 75% of a public employee's final compensation. (2) 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 bill would require that a public employee, as defined, who is convicted of any state or federal felony for conduct arising out of, or in the performance of, his or her official duties in pursuit of the office or appointment, or in connection with obtaining salary, disability retirement, or service retirement, or other benefits, forfeit retirement benefits earned or accrued from the earliest date of the commission of the felony to the forfeiture date, as specified. The bill would also require any contributions to the public retirement system made by the public employee on or after the earliest date of commission of the felony to be returned, without interest, to the public employee upon the occurrence of a distribution event, as defined, unless otherwise ordered by a court or determined by the pension administrator. The bill would also make related, conforming changes. (3) Existing law defines final compensation for various employment classifications in connection with the benefits provided by the retirement systems. The bill, for the purposes of determining a retirement benefit paid to a person who first becomes a member of a public retirement system on or after January 1, 2013, would require that final compensation be calculated by multiplying the member's years of service credit by a percentage of the member's final compensation based on age at retirement using the member's payrate during a period of at least 36 consecutive months, as specified. (4) 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 ensure 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 bill would require public employees who contribute to a defined benefit plan or component to contribute at least 12 of the annual actuarially determined normal costs, and would prohibit a public employer from contributing in any fiscal year, in combination with employer contributions, less than the plan normal cost. The bill would also prohibit an employer from paying the member's share of the employee contribution, except as specified. (5) Existing law generally prohibits any person who has been 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 bill would prohibit a person who retires from a public employer from serving without reinstatement, except during an emergency to prevent stoppage of public business or because the retired employee has skills needed to perform work of limited duration, as specified. (6) The California Constitution prohibits changing the composition of the retirement board of certain public pension systems, including the number, terms, and method of selection and removal of members, unless the change is ratified by a majority vote of the electors of the jurisdiction in which the participants of the pension system are or were prior to retirement, employed. Existing law creates the Board of Administration of PERS for the purpose of governing the system and prescribes the composition of the board. Existing law requires that one member of the board of administration be a member of the State Personnel Board, serving at the pleasure of the State Personnel Board, and that a member representing the public be chosen jointly by the Speaker of the Assembly and the Senate Committee on Rules. Existing law further requires that an official of a life insurer be appointed to the board of administration by the Governor. This bill would revise the composition of the Board of Administration of PERS. The bill would eliminate the position of the member of the State Personnel Board and would replace that position with the Director of Finance. The bill would add to the board 2 persons, appointed at the pleasure of the Governor, who represent the public, have financial expertise, and are not interested in the system, as specified. The bill would also replace the official of a life insurer, whom the Governor is currently authorized to appoint, with a gubernatorial appointee who has expertise in health insurance and is not interested in the system. (7) The Public Employee's Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA) requires the employer contribution, with respect to each employee or annuitant who is in employment or retired from state service, to be adjusted by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act, as specified. Those adjustments are required to be based on the principle that the employer contribution for each employee or annuitant shall be an amount equal to 100% of the weighted average of the health benefit plan premiums for an employee or annuitant enrolled for self-alone, during the benefit year to which the formula is applied, for the 4 health benefit plans that had the largest state enrollment, excluding family members, during the previous year. For each employee or annuitant with enrolled family members, the employer is required to contribute an additional 90% of the weighted average of the additional premiums required for enrollment of those family members, during the benefit year to which the formula is applied, in the 4 health benefit plans that had the largest state enrollment, excluding family members, during the previous year. This bill, for employees first hired on or after January 1, 2013, would limit the employer contribution amount to no greater than the lowest premium formula paid for a current employee enrolled for self-alone health benefit coverage year during the benefit year to which the formula is applied multiplied by the weighted average of the health benefit plan premiums, as specified. The bill would further require an employer, for each enrolled family member of a retired employee, to contribute an additional percentage that is no higher than the lowest premium formula paid for enrolled family members multiplied by the weighted average of the additional health benefit plan premiums required for enrollment of those family members. (8) Under PEMHCA, a state employee is required to have a certain number of years of state service, depending on hiring date and other factors, before he or she may receive any portion of the employer contribution payable for annuitants for postretirement health benefits. This bill would prohibit a state employee who becomes a state member of the system on or after January 1, 2013, from receiving any portion of the employer contribution payable for annuitants unless the person is credited with 15 years of state service at the time of retirement. The bill would further specify that the percentage of the employer contribution payable for postretirement health benefits for an employee shall be based on the number of completed years of credited state service at retirement, with 50% after 15 credited years of service, and 100% after 25 or more years of service. (9) The bill would also declare that ensuring the statewide integrity of local government pension systems and ensuring the sufficiency of local public safety services are matters of statewide concern and not a municipal affair, and that, therefore, all cities, including charter cities, would be subject to the provisions of the bill. The bill would also declare that these provisions apply to the University of California. (10) The bill would delay the operation of its provisions until January 1, 2013, contingent on voter approval of an unspecified Senate Constitutional Amendment by voters at the November 6, 2012, statewide election. (11) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) 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 amount of 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. These pension systems are funded by employee and employer contributions and investment returns. Existing law provides that public employee pension benefits are a form of deferred compensation, the right to which vests in the employee on contractual principles and is protected from impairment by the California Constitution and the United States Constitution. This measure would require each public retirement system, as defined in statute, to provide one or more hybrid pension plans meeting the requirements of this measure to each public employer that provides its employees a defined benefit pension plan administered by the public retirement system. The measure would require that a hybrid pension plan consist of a defined benefit component and a defined contribution or alternative plan design component, as specified. The measure would require, among other things, that a hybrid pension plan be designed with a goal of providing annually during retirement, based on a full career in public service, as defined, replacement income of 75% of a public employee's final compensation. The measure would require the Director of Finance, on or before January 1, 2013, to establish initial criteria and requirements for one or more hybrid pension plans, as specified. The measure would require, on and after July 1, 2013, each public retirement system to administer, and make available to each public employer that provides a defined benefit pension plan, one or more hybrid pension plans, except as specified, for public employees hired in each member classification in the public retirement system. The measure would require, for public employees hired on and after January 1, 2013, that retirement benefits be limited as provided, with regard to a defined benefit that is calculated with reference to final compensation, as specified, that final compensation be calculated using at least a consecutive 36-month period of service. The measure would establish various other limitations on the retirement benefits offered by public employers to public employees, regardless of the date the employees are hired, to the fullest extent permissible under the United States Constitution. In this regard, the measure would require that any change to a formula or benefit resulting in an increase in a member's pension benefits shall apply only to service performed on and after the operative date of the change and would require that employers and employees make required payments to fund the normal cost of benefits, as specified. The measure would require public employees to contribute at least 12 of the normal costs of any defined benefit plan and would prohibit an employer from paying an employee's required contributions, except as specified. The measure would also prohibit retirement systems from granting any nonqualified service credit, as specified. The measure additionally would require that a public employee, who is convicted of any felony arising from his or her official duties, forfeit retirement benefits based on certain statutes. The measure would limit the amount of service that a retired public employee may perform for public employers. The measure would provide that neither its provisions nor any related statutory provisions apply to, or otherwise restrict, death, survivor, and disability benefits, except as specified. The measure would provide that labor contracts that are in effect on November 7, 2012, and that are in conflict with the measure's provisions remain in effect until the expiration of the contract, at which time the requirements of the measure would apply. The measure would specify that terms used in those provisions are to be defined in a specified statute and would permit the Legislature to amend specified statutes referenced in the measure's provisions by a 23 vote of the membership of each house by a statute that is consistent with and furthers its purposes. The measure would provide that the activities, programs, and levels of service associated with its provisions are not state-mandated local programs requiring a subvention of funds. (2) The California Constitution prohibits the Legislature from changing the composition of the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system that included elected employee members as of a specified date, including the number, terms, and method of selection and removal of members, unless the change 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 require the composition of the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system to be modified, in the manner provided for in a specified statute, and would exempt that modification from ratification by the electors. (3) The measure would require the state to defend the constitutionality of its provisions.
The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature by rollcall vote entered in the journal, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, to propose an amendment or revision of the California Constitution and, in the same manner, to amend or withdraw its proposal. This measure would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to this provision.
(1) Existing law authorizes the limit line, intersection, or other places where a driver is required to stop to be equipped with an automated enforcement system, as defined, if the system meets certain requirements. Existing law authorizes a governmental agency to contract out the operation of the system under certain circumstances, except for specified activities, that include, among other things, establishing guidelines for selection of location. A violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime. This bill would require that those requirements include identifying the system by signs posted within 200 feet of an intersection where a system is operating. The bill would require that automated traffic enforcement systems installed as of January 1, 2012, be identified no later than January 1, 2013. The bill would require the governmental agency that operates an automated traffic enforcement system to develop uniform guidelines for specified purposes and to establish procedures to ensure compliance with those guidelines. The bill would require, for systems installed as of January 1, 2012, that a governmental agency that operates an automated traffic enforcement system establish those guidelines by January 1, 2013. The bill would require the governmental agency to adopt a finding of fact establishing the need for the system at a specific location for reasons related to safety for those systems installed after January 1, 2012. The bill would prohibit a governmental agency that proposes to install or operate an automated traffic enforcement system from considering revenue generation, beyond recovering its actual costs of operating the system, as a factor when considering whether or not to install or operate a system within its local jurisdiction. The bill would require the manufacturer or supplier that operates an automated traffic enforcement system, in cooperation with the governmental agency, to submit an annual report to the Judicial Council that includes specified information. (2) Existing law provides special written, mailed notice to appear procedures in connection with certain alleged violations recorded by an automated traffic enforcement system and provides that whenever a written notice to appear has been issued by a peace officer or by a qualified employee of a law enforcement agency on a form approved by the Judicial Council for an alleged traffic violation recorded by an automated traffic enforcement system, and delivered by mail within 15 days of the alleged violation to the current address of the registered owner of the vehicle on file with the Department of Motor Vehicles, with a certificate of mailing obtained as evidence of service, an exact and legible duplicate copy of the notice when filed with the magistrate constitutes a complaint to which the defendant may enter a plea. This bill would expand the information that must be included on a notice to appear. The bill would authorize the mailing of a specified courtesy notice or any other notice other than a notice to appear by the issuing agency, manufacturer, or supplier of the automated traffic enforcement system to the registered owner or the alleged violator prior to issuing a notice to appear. The bill would require that this notice contain specified information and, beginning January 1, 2013, be on a form approved by the Judicial Council, following consultation with the traffic and transportation committee of the California Peace Officers' Association. The bill would prohibit a manufacturer or supplier of an automated traffic enforcement system or the governmental agency operating the system from altering the notice to appear or any other form approved by the Judicial Council. If a form is found to have been materially altered, the bill would authorize that the citation, based on the altered form, be dismissed. The bill would also require that the citation be dismissed if a magistrate or judge makes a finding that there are grounds for dismissal, in certain circumstances. (3) Because it is unlawful and constitutes an infraction for any person to violate, or fail to comply with any provision of the Vehicle Code, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law grants to the State Air Resources Board the primary authority for the control of air pollution from vehicular sources. The state board tests and certifies new motor vehicle models for compliance with air pollution emissions standards developed by the state board. This bill would require the state board, within 30 working days after receipt of an application for certification of a new, a carryover, or a partial carryover on-road or off-road vehicle, engine, or equipment family, as defined, to inform the applicant, in writing, either that the application is complete and accepted for filing, or that the application is deficient, identifying the specific information required to make the application complete.
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of professions and vocations by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs and these boards may require licensees to satisfy continuing education course requirements. This bill would provide, if applicable, that continuing education or competency courses, as specified, that advance or promote labor organizing on behalf of a union, or that advance or promote statutory or regulatory changes, political candidates, political advocacy, or political strategy shall not be considered content relevant to the practice regulated by the board and shall not be acceptable for meeting requirements for licensure renewal. The bill would also prohibit, to the extent applicable, an approved provider from representing that such a continuing education or competency course is acceptable for meeting requirements for licensure renewal and would require a board, subject to specified procedural requirements, to withdraw its approval of a provider that violates that requirement for no less than 5 years, as specified.