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 effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA establishes a procedure by which a person may seek judicial review of the decision of the lead agency made pursuant to CEQA. This bill would exempt from these CEQA provisions a project that consists of the inspection, maintenance, repair, restoration, reconditioning, relocation, replacement, or removal of existing transportation infrastructure if certain conditions are met, and would require the person undertaking these projects to take certain actions, including providing notice to an affected public agency of the project's exemption. Because a lead agency would be required to determine if a project qualifies for this exemption, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would also, in an action or proceeding seeking judicial review under CEQA, prohibit a court from staying or enjoining a transportation infrastructure project that is included in a sustainable communities strategy or an alternate planning strategy and for which a programmatic EIR has been certified unless it makes specified findings. For purpose of these provisions, the bill would specify that a transportation infrastructure project includes a project that consists of new construction of transportation infrastructure or a project that consists of the inspection, maintenance, repair, restoration, reconditioning, relocation, replacement, or removal of existing transportation infrastructure. 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law creates various state transportation agencies, including the Department of Transportation and the High-Speed Rail Authority, with specified powers and duties. Existing law provides for the allocation of state transportation funds to various transportation purposes. This bill would create the Office of the Transportation Inspector General in state government, as an independent office that would not be a subdivision of any other government entity, to build capacity for self-correction into the government itself and to ensure that all state agencies expending state transportation funds are operating efficiently, effectively, and in compliance with federal and state laws. The bill would provide for the Governor to appoint the Transportation Inspector General for a 6-year term, subject to confirmation by the Senate, and would provide that the Transportation Inspector General may not be removed from office during the term except for good cause. The bill would specify the duties and responsibilities of the Transportation Inspector General, would require an annual report to the Legislature and Governor, and would provide that funding for the office shall, to the extent possible, be from federal transportation funds, with other necessary funding to be made available from the State Highway Account and an account from which high-speed rail activities may be funded.
Existing law requires all moneys, except for fines and penalties, collected by the State Air Resources Board from the auction or sale of allowances as part of a market-based compliance mechanism relative to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to be deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Existing law continuously appropriates 60% of the annual proceeds of the fund to various purposes, including high-speed rail, transit and intercity rail capital, low-carbon transit operations, and affordable housing and sustainable communities. This bill would exclude from allocation under these provisions the annual proceeds of the fund generated from the transportation fuels sector. The bill would instead provide that those annual proceeds shall be appropriated by the Legislature for transportation infrastructure, including public streets and highways, but excluding high-speed rail.
Existing federal law provides for the allocation of federal funds through the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant program to eligible states. Existing law provides for the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program under which, through a combination of state and county funds and federal funds received through the TANF program, each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families. Existing law, with certain exceptions, provides eligible families with homeless assistance, including temporary shelter assistance for one period of up to 16 consecutive calendar days. This bill would eliminate the requirement that the temporary assistance be provided during one period of consecutive days, and instead would limit the temporary assistance to a maximum of 16 calendar days. This bill would require the State Department of Social Services to issue an all-county letter or similar instructions by April 1, 2016, and to adopt regulations to implement the provisions of the bill by July 1, 2017. The bill also would make conforming and technical, nonsubstantive changes. Because this bill would create new administrative duties for counties, it would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would, instead, provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of implementing the bill. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Existing law allows every person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of his or her imprisonment or restraint. Existing law allows a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted for, but not limited to, false evidence that is substantially material or probative to the issue of guilt or punishment that was introduced at trial and false physical evidence which was a material factor directly related to the plea of guilty of the person. This bill would additionally allow a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted on the basis of new evidence that is credible, material, presented without substantial delay, and of such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial. Existing law requires the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board to recommend an appropriation be made by the Legislature for the purpose of indemnifying a person if the evidence shows that a crime with which the person was charged was either not committed at all, or, if committed, was not committed by that person. Existing law requires that the appropriation recommended shall be a sum equivalent to $100 per day of incarceration served subsequent to the person's conviction. If a court grants a writ of habeas corpus or vacates a judgment on the basis of new evidence and finds that the new evidence points unerringly to innocence, existing law requires the board to recommend an appropriation to the Legislature pursuant to these provisions without a hearing. This bill would require the board to recommend an appropriation to the Legislature if the court finds that the person is factually innocent. The bill would make additional clarifying and technical changes.
Existing law, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, prohibits a person from introducing into interstate commerce any new drug unless the drug has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) . Existing law requires the sponsor of a new drug to submit to the FDA an investigational new drug application and to then conduct a series of clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the drug in human populations and submit the results to the FDA in a new drug application. Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, regulates the packaging, labeling, and advertising of drugs and devices and is administered by the State Department of Public Health. A violation of that law is a crime. The Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law prohibits, among other things, the sale, delivery, or giving away of a new drug or new device unless either the department has approved a new drug or device application for that new drug or new device and that approval has not been withdrawn, terminated, or suspended or the drug or device has been approved pursuant to specified provisions of federal law, including the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The Medical Practice Act provides for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California and requires the board to take action against a licensee who is charged with unprofessional conduct. The Osteopathic Act provides for the licensure and regulation of osteopathic physicians and surgeons by the Osteopathic Medical Board of California and requires the board to enforce the Medical Practice Act with respect to its licensees. This bill, among other things, would permit a manufacturer of an investigational drug, biological product, or device to make the product available to eligible patients with an immediately life-threatening disease or condition, as specified. The bill would provide that the act does not require a health benefit plan, as defined, or governmental agency to provide coverage for the cost of any investigational drug, biological product, or device made available pursuant to these provisions, but would authorize a health benefit plan to provide coverage for an investigational drug, biological product, or device. The bill would also prohibit the Medical Board of California and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California from taking any disciplinary action against the license of a physician based solely on the physician's recommendation to an eligible patient regarding, or prescription for, or treatment with, an investigational drug, biological product, or device if the recommendation or prescription is consistent with protocol approved by the physician's institutional review board or an accredited institutional review board, and would require the institutional review board to biannually report specified information to the State Department of Public Health, among others.