Existing law, the Political Reform Act of 1974, provides for the comprehensive regulation of campaign financing, including requiring the reporting of campaign contributions and expenditures and imposing other reporting and recordkeeping requirements on campaign committees. "Contribution" is defined for purposes of the act as a payment, a forgiveness of a loan, a payment of a loan by a third party, or an enforceable promise to make a payment, except to the extent that full and adequate consideration is received, unless it is clear from the surrounding circumstances that it is not made for political purposes. The definition does not include a payment made by an occupant of a home or office for costs related to any meeting or fundraising event held in the occupant's home or office if the costs for the meeting or fundraising event are $500 or less. The act prohibits a lobbyist from making, and an elected state officer or candidate for elective state office from accepting, a contribution if the lobbyist is registered to lobby the governmental agency for which the candidate is seeking election or the governmental agency of the elected state officer. This bill would revise the definition of "contribution" to include a payment made by a lobbyist or a cohabitant of a lobbyist for costs related to a fundraising event held at the home of the lobbyist, as specified. The bill would make these payments attributable to the lobbyist for purposes of the prohibition against a lobbyist making a contribution to specified candidates and elected officers. The bill would also revise the definition of "contribution" to include a payment made by a lobbying firm for costs related to a fundraising event held at the office of the lobbying firm. A violation of the act's provisions is punishable as a misdemeanor. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, 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. 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law requires the board of governors to appoint a chief executive officer, to be known as the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges. Existing law establishes community college districts, administered by governing boards, throughout the state, and authorizes these districts to provide instruction to students at the community college campuses maintained by the districts. Existing law requires community colleges to offer instruction through, but not beyond, the 2nd year of college and authorizes community colleges to grant associate degrees in arts and science. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2015, authorize the board of governors, in consultation with the California State University and the University of California, to establish a statewide baccalaureate degree pilot program at not more than 15 community college districts, with one baccalaureate degree program each, to be determined by the chancellor and approved by the board of governors. The bill would prohibit each participating district from offering more than one baccalaureate degree program within the district, as specified. The bill would require a district baccalaureate degree pilot program to commence by the beginning of the 2017–18 academic year, and would require a student participating in a baccalaureate degree pilot program to complete his or her degree by the end of the 2022–23 academic year. The bill would require participating community college districts to meet specified requirements, including, but not limited to, offering baccalaureate degree programs and program curricula not offered by the California State University or the University of California, and in subject areas with unmet workforce needs, as specified. This bill would also require the governing board of a participating community college district to submit certain items for review by the chancellor and approval by the board of governors, including, among other things, the administrative plan for the baccalaureate degree pilot program and documentation of consultation with the California State University and the University of California. The bill would provide that the Legislative Analyst's Office shall conduct both a statewide interim evaluation and a statewide final evaluation of the statewide baccalaureate degree pilot program implemented under this article, as specified, and report to the Legislature and Governor, in writing, the results of the interim evaluation on or before July 1, 2018, and the results of the final evaluation on or before July 1, 2022. The bill would provide that on or before March 31, 2015, the board of governors shall develop, and adopt by regulation, a funding model for the support of the statewide baccalaureate degree pilot program, as specified. This bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 1, 2023, and would repeal the provisions on January 1, 2024.
(1) Under existing law, the segments of the public postsecondary education system in the state include the University of California, which is administered by the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, which is administered by the Trustees of the California State University, and the California Community Colleges, which are administered by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Existing law exempts a student of the California Community Colleges or the California State University who was a member of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed in this state on active duty for more than one year immediately prior to being discharged from paying nonresident tuition for the length of time he or she lives in the state after being discharged up to the minimum time necessary to become a resident. Existing law also exempts one of those students if he or she is enrolled, or intending to enroll, at a campus of the California Community Colleges or as an undergraduate at a campus of the California State University from paying nonresident tuition for up to one year if he or she files an affidavit with the institution stating that he or she intends to establish residency in California as soon as possible. Existing law requires a student to use this exemption within 2 years of being discharged. Existing law prohibits a former member of the Armed Forces who received a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge from receiving an exemption from paying nonresident tuition under either of the provisions described above. Existing law provides that the statutory provisions relating to student residency requirements for public postsecondary education apply to the University of California only to the extent that the regents act, by resolution, to make these provisions applicable. The bill, notwithstanding the requirements of existing law as referenced above, would require the California Community Colleges and the California State University, and request the University of California, to update and adopt policies no later than July 1, 2015, regarding tuition rates for eligible veterans and their eligible dependents to ensure conformity to, and compliance with, a specified federal statute and the requirements of existing law as described above. To the extent that this provision would impose new duties on community college districts, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. (2) 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. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law prohibits a person from driving any motor vehicle, trailer, or semitrailer unless it is registered and the appropriate fees have been paid to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) , or it is registered under the permanent trailer identification program, except as specified. Existing law requires the DMV to issue a one-trip permit to a vehicle manufacturer or dealer, upon payment of a $35 fee, which authorizes an unregistered trailer, semitrailer, or auxiliary dolly to be moved or operated laden within the state for not more than 5 days as part of one continuous trip from the place of manufacture, dispatch, or entry into this state to a place where the vehicle will be offered for sale. This bill would extend the period in which these vehicles may operate under a permit to 10 days.
Existing law requires all new and used assistive devices sold at retail in this state to be accompanied by the retail seller's written warranty which is required to contain specified language including, among other things, that the assistive device may be returned to the seller within 30 days of the date of the actual receipt by the buyer or completion of fitting by the seller, whichever occurs later. This bill would, with respect to hearing aids, require all new and used hearing aids sold in this state to be accompanied by the retail seller's written warranty which is required to contain specified language including, among other things, that if the device is not initially fit for the buyer's particular needs, it may be returned to the seller within 45 days of the initial date of delivery to the buyer. Existing law requires the warranty period relating to an implied or express warranty accompanying a sale or consignment for sale of consumer goods selling for $50 or more to automatically be tolled from the date upon which the buyer takes certain actions. This bill would, with respect to hearing aids, require the warranty period to resume on the date upon which the repaired or serviced hearing aid is delivered to the buyer or 5 days after the buyer is notified that the hearing aid is repaired or serviced and is available for the buyer's possession, whichever is earlier. Existing law requires every manufacturer or seller of consumer goods selling for $50 or more to provide a receipt to the buyer showing the date of purchase. Existing law requires every manufacturer or seller performing warranty repairs or service on the goods to provide to the buyer a work order or receipt with the date of return and either the date the buyer was notified that the goods were repaired or serviced, as specified. This bill would, with respect to hearing aids, require the seller, after receiving the hearing aid for warranty repairs or service, to provide at the time of delivery to the buyer a work order or receipt with the date the warranty period resumes and the revised expiration date of the warranty, as adjusted to reflect the suspension of the warranty period provided pursuant to these provisions.
Existing law prohibits a person from driving a vehicle or animal, or stopping, parking, or leaving standing a vehicle or animal, whether attended or unattended, upon the driveways, paths, parking facilities, or grounds of specified public entities, including a transit district and a public transportation agency, except with the permission of, and upon and subject to any condition or regulation that may be imposed by, the governing body of the specified public entity. A violation of these provisions is an infraction. This bill would include county transportation commissions in the Counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino within the listed public entities for these purposes. By expanding the scope of a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) Existing law, until July 1, 2015, authorizes a county, city and county, or city to establish a capital investment incentive program, pursuant to which the county, city and county, or city is authorized to pay a capital investment incentive amount, as defined, that does not exceed the amount of property tax derived from that portion of the assessed value of a qualified manufacturing facility that exceeds $25,000,000, to a proponent of a qualified manufacturing facility. Existing law defines a "proponent" as a party and requires a party to meet certain requirements, including that the party will be the fee owner of the qualified manufacturing facility upon the completion of that facility, as provided. This bill would, until July 1, 2015, additionally authorize the party to be the lessee or the occupant under a government-owned contractor-operator enhanced use lease agreement of the qualified manufacturing facility upon the completion of that facility. (2) Existing law, the Corporation Tax Law, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2015, and before January 1, 2030, allows, with regard to the manufacture of a new advanced strategic aircraft for the United States Air Force, a credit against the taxes imposed under that law in an amount equal to 1712% of qualified wages, as defined, paid or incurred with respect to qualified full-time employees, as multiplied by an annual full-time equivalent ratio, by the qualified taxpayer, defined as a taxpayer that is a major first-tier subcontractor with regard to the manufacture of that aircraft. This bill would define a qualified taxpayer to also include a prime contractor awarded a prime contract to manufacture a new advanced strategic aircraft for the United States Air Force. The bill would limit this credit by providing that the aggregate number of total annual full-time equivalents, as defined, of all qualified taxpayers may not exceed 1,100. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, the Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $11,140,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a safe drinking water and water supply reliability program. Existing law provides for the submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) Under existing law, various measures have been approved by the voters to provide funds for water supply and protection facilities and programs. Existing law, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 84 at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,388,000,000 for the purposes of financing safe drinking water, water quality and supply, flood control, natural resource protection, and park improvements. Existing law, the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, approved by the voters as Proposition 1E at the November 7, 2006, general statewide election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,090,000,000 for the purposes of financing disaster preparedness and flood prevention projects. Existing law, the Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 50 at the November 5, 2002, statewide general election, authorizes, for the purposes of financing a safe drinking water, water quality, and water reliability program, the issuance of bonds in the amount of $3,440,000,000. Existing law, the Costa-Machado Water Act of 2000, approved by the voters as Proposition 13 at the March 7, 2000, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $1,970,000,000 for the purposes of financing a safe drinking water, clean water, watershed protection, and flood protection program. Existing law, the Safe, Clean, Reliable Water Supply Act, approved by the voters as Proposition 204 at the November 5, 1996, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $995,000,000 for the purposes of financing a safe, clean, reliable water supply program. Existing law, the Water Conservation and Water Quality Bond Law of 1986, approved by the voters as Proposition 44 at the June 3, 1986, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $150,000,000 for the purposes of financing a water conservation and water quality program. This bill would enact the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $7,120,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill, upon voter approval, would reallocate $425,000,000 of the unissued bonds authorized for the purposes of Propositions 1E, 13, 44, 50, 84, and 204 to finance the purposes of a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. This bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) The Municipal Water District Law of 1911 provides for the formation of municipal water districts and grants to those districts specified powers. Existing law permits a district to acquire, control, distribute, store, spread, sink, treat, purify, recycle, recapture, and salvage any water for the beneficial use of the district, its inhabitants, or the owners of rights to water in the district. Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, provides for the operation of public water systems, and imposes on the State Department of Public Health various responsibilities and duties. Existing law requires the department to conduct research, studies, and demonstration projects relating to the provision of a dependable, safe supply of drinking water, to adopt regulations to implement the California Safe Drinking Water Act, and to enforce provisions of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. This bill would exempt the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, the Eastern Municipal Water District, the Western Municipal Water District, and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California from liability, as prescribed, for claims by past or existing County Water Company of Riverside customers or those who consumed water provided through the County Water Company of Riverside water system prior to and during the interim operation period, as specified. The bill would prohibit the immunity from liability from being construed to relieve any water district, water wholesaler, or any other entity from compliance with drinking water standards, impair any cause of action or proceeding brought by specified public entities, or impair claims alleging the taking of property without compensation. The bill would require the interim operation period to last until permanent replacement facilities are accepted by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and the Eastern Municipal Water District with the concurrence of the department or December 31, 2015, whichever occurs first. The bill would require the department to extend the interim operation period for up to 3 successive one-year periods at the request of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and the Eastern Municipal Water District, as prescribed. (2) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute with regard to the customers of the County Water Company of Riverside. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law authorizes a county, city and county, or city to establish a capital investment incentive program, pursuant to which the county, city and county, or city is authorized to pay a capital investment incentive amount, as defined, that does not exceed the amount of property tax derived from that portion of the assessed value of a qualified manufacturing facility that exceeds $150,000,000, to a proponent of a qualified manufacturing facility. A "qualified manufacturing facility" is defined to include a facility operated by a business described in specified provisions of the Standard Industrial Classification Manual. Existing law requires the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, or its successor, to certify qualified manufacturing facilities for purposes of these provisions and to carry out various oversight duties. Existing law repeals these provisions on January 1, 2017. This bill would, until July 1, 2015, reduce the assessed value threshold for calculating the capital investment incentive amount from $150,000,000 to $25,000,000 and would define "qualified manufacturing facility" to include, among others, facilities operated by certain businesses described in specified provisions of the North American Industry Classification System Manual. The bill would transfer the duties of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency to the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) . The bill would, on July 1, 2015, restore the existing provisions relating to the capital investment threshold amount and the definition of "qualified manufacturing facility," but would maintain the transfer of duties to Go-Biz. The bill would instead repeal these provisions on January 1, 2018. The bill would also replace obsolete references in those restored provisions to the Standard Industrial Classification Manual with corresponding references to the North American Industry Classification System Manual. The Corporation Tax Law allows various credits against the taxes imposed by that law. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2015, and before January 1, 2030, allow, with regard to the manufacture of a new advanced strategic aircraft for the United States Air Force, a credit against the taxes imposed under that law for 1712% of qualified wages, as defined, paid or incurred by the qualified taxpayer, as defined, to qualified full-time employees, award the credit on a first-come-first-served basis, and provide that the credit have a phased aggregate cap ranging from $25,000,000 to $31,000,000 per calendar year, as specified. Existing law also allows a credit against the taxes imposed under both laws for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2014, and before January 1, 2025, in an amount as provided in a written agreement between the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development and the taxpayer, agreed upon by the California Competes Tax Credit Committee, and based on specified factors, including the number of jobs the taxpayer will create or retain in the state and the amount of investment in the state by the taxpayer. Existing law limits the aggregate amount of credits allocated to taxpayers to a specified sum per fiscal year. This bill would reduce this aggregate amount of credits that may be allocated to taxpayers per fiscal year by the phased aggregate amount allowed to taxpayers pursuant to the credit proposed by this bill with regard to the manufacture of a new advanced strategic aircraft, as described above. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.