Existing law authorizes a court, upon motion, to award attorney's fees to a successful party against public entities in any action that has resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest, if certain conditions are met, but does not authorize an award of attorney's fees in favor of a public entity, except in limited circumstances. This bill would instead authorize the award of attorney's fees in those actions both against, and in favor of, public entities unless both parties mutually agree to forego the recovery of attorney's fees, as specified. This bill would also, notwithstanding any other law, entitle a city, county, or city and county that prevails in a civil action that provides for attorney's fees and costs to those reasonable attorney's fees, in addition to other costs, unless the parties stipulate to forego the recovery of attorney's fees.
Sponsored bills
Existing law declares that the uniform administration of justice throughout the state is a matter of statewide interest. Existing law authorizes the district attorney to sponsor, supervise, or participate in any project or program to improve the administration of justice. Existing law also sets forth various personal rights and provides that all persons within California have the right to be free from violence, or intimidation by the threat of violence, because of, among other characteristics, their race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, political affiliation, or sex. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would develop a state policy relating to the application of foreign law to the adjudication of California criminal justice proceedings.
Existing law requires the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to appoint a Committee of Credentials that is authorized to review an allegation of misconduct of an applicant for, or holder of, a credential, as specified. Existing law requires the committee to report its recommendations of adverse actions to the commission, which may be adopted by the commission under specified conditions. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would direct the commission to undertake all procedural and statutory changes necessary to increase the number of cases of teacher misconduct that the commission reviews each month.
Existing law, operative until July 1, 2013, provides that prisoners released from state prison after serving a prison term for specified felonies shall be subject to the jurisdiction of, and parole supervision by, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Existing law, operative July 1, 2013, provides that persons released from state prison prior to or on or after July 1, 2013 after serving a prison term for specified felonies shall be subject to parole supervision by the department and to the jurisdiction of the court in the county where the parolee is released or resides for the purpose of hearing petitions to revoke parole and impose a term of custody. This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
Existing law establishes the California Gambling Control Commission and grants the commission jurisdiction over the supervision, operation, and concentration of gambling establishments in the state. Existing law authorizes the commission to employ not more than 8 attorneys. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change to this provision.
Existing law authorizes specified individuals to assist an individual with exceptional needs who requires specialized physical health care services during the regular schoolday. Existing law requires the State Department of Education and the State Department of Health Care Services to jointly develop, and the State Board of Education to adopt, regulations to implement this provision. Existing law requires the State Department of Education, on or before June 15, 2001, to review and make recommendations to the state board regarding any needed updates to these regulations. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to the latter provision.
(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.
Existing law requires agents and insurers to fulfill certain requirements with regard to the replacement of existing life insurance policies and annuities. This bill would require insurers and insurance producers, as defined, to comply with specified requirements regarding the purchase, exchange, or replacement of an annuity recommended to a consumer, including, but not limited to, having reasonable grounds for the insurance producer believing the annuity transaction would be suitable for the consumer, as provided. The bill would also prohibit an insurance producer from selling annuities unless he or she has received Insurance Commissioner-approved training, and would authorize the commissioner to require certain actions by, and impose sanctions and penalties on, insurers and their agents for a violation of the bill's provisions. The bill would further provide that sales by a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker-dealer that comply with the suitability and supervision system requirements of FINRA shall be deemed to satisfy the suitability and supervision system requirements of this bill, as specified.
(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.
(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.