(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.
Sponsored bills
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.
Existing law provides that it is the duty of the superior court judges in each county to prepare, adopt, and annually revise a uniform countywide bail schedule for all bailable felony offenses and for all misdemeanor and infraction offenses, except Vehicle Code infractions. Under existing law, a court may adopt a local rule prescribing the procedure by which the uniform countywide schedule is prepared, adopted, and annually revised by the judges. Existing law requires that, if the court does not adopt a local rule, the uniform countywide bail schedule be prepared, adopted, and annually revised by a majority of the judges. This bill would require the Judicial Council to prepare, adopt, and annually revise a statewide bail schedule for all bailable felony offenses and for all misdemeanor and infraction offenses except Vehicle Code infractions.
Existing law requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a California Mexican American Veterans' Memorial Beautification Committee for the purpose of beautification and enhancement of a specified existing memorial on state grounds. Under existing law funds for the beautification and enhancement of the memorial are required to be provided through private contributions and through existing funds collected under the auspices of the former California Mexican American Veterans' Memorial Beautification Commission. Under existing law these funds are required to be deposited in the California Mexican American Veterans' Memorial Beautification and Enhancement Account, a continuously appropriated account within the General Fund. Existing law requires any funds remaining in the account as of July 1, 2014, to revert to the General Fund. This bill would extend the date for the reversion of funds in this account until July 1, 2016. By extending the operation of a continuously appropriated account, this bill would make an appropriation. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, with specified exceptions, makes it unlawful to permit or allow a dog to pursue any bear, as defined, at any time. Existing law authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife to capture a dog not under the reasonable control of its owner or handler that is pursuing any bear in violation of this prohibition or to capture or dispatch a dog inflicting injury or immediately threatening to inflict injury on any bear at any time. This bill would eliminate the authority for the department to capture a dog not under the reasonable control of its owner or handler when the dog is pursuing any bear or to capture or dispatch a dog inflicting injury or immediately threatening injury on any bear. This bill would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to make a specified report to the Fish and Game Commission on the status of bear populations, management, and related issues every 3 years. The bill would require the first report to be submitted on or before December 15, 2015, and would require the department, not later than December 15 of each year the report is submitted, to notify, by certified mail, the board of supervisors of each county affected by bear interactions with the general public, of public safety impacts or concerns, bear depredation permit requests, and economic impacts due to bear damage to the extent of those incidences or impacts, and of its recommendations to the commission. This bill would generally prohibit a person from using dogs to hunt, pursue, or molest bears, except when recommended to the Department of Fish and Wildlife by a vote of the board of supervisors of any affected county following a public hearing, as specified. The bill would require the commission to authorize the use of dogs under those circumstances. This bill would permit the use of one dog per hunter for the hunting of bears during open deer season, and the use of more than one dog per hunter during the open bear season except during the period when archery deer seasons or regular deer seasons are open. By imposing new duties on local public officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law permits the Department of Fish and Wildlife to authorize qualified individuals, educational institutions, governmental agencies, or nongovernmental organizations to use dogs to pursue bears for the purpose of prescribed scientific research. Existing law allows the pursuit of bears by dogs that are guarding or protecting livestock or crops on property owned, leased, or rented by the owner of the dogs if the dogs are maintained with, and remain in reasonable proximity to, the livestock or crops being guarded or protect. This bill would eliminate these authorizations. (3) Existing law authorizes the Fish and Game Commission to establish a hound tag program, imposing certain requirements on the licensure and use of hounds, as defined, to pursue mammals. For these purposes, existing law defines a hound as a dog used to pursue mammals. This bill would repeal this authorization. This bill would define a hound as a dog used to pursue bears and require a hound stamp issued by the Department of Fish and Wildlife to lawfully pursue bears with hounds in a county where the use of hounds to pursue or take bears has been authorized by the commission. This bill would require the amount of the fee to be determined by the commission to fully recover, but not exceed, all reasonable administrative and implementation costs of the department and commission relating to the hound stamp and the use of dogs to pursue bears. This bill would require the revenues from the fee for a hound stamp to be deposited in the Bear Report Account, which this bill would create, in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, and available upon appropriation by the Legislature, to permit separate accountability for the receipt and expenditure of these funds. (4) Under existing law, except as excluded, violations of the Fish and Game Code are misdemeanors. By changing the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing provisions of the California Constitution require the Governor to submit to the Legislature a budget for the ensuing fiscal year within the first 10 days of each calendar year and prohibit the Legislature from sending to the Governor for consideration a Budget Bill that would appropriate from the General Fund a total amount that exceeds General Fund revenues for that fiscal year estimated as of the date of the Budget Bill's passage. This measure would require the Director of Finance to submit estimates of General Fund revenues and expenditures for the ensuing fiscal year and the 3 fiscal years thereafter within 10 days following the submission of a budget by the Governor, following the submission of proposed adjustments to the Governor's Budget, as required by statute, and following the enactment of the Budget Bill. Existing provisions of the California Constitution require the Legislature to establish a prudent state reserve fund in an amount the Legislature deems reasonable and necessary. Existing provisions of the California Constitution, approved by the electors on March 2, 2004, additionally establish the Budget Stabilization Account in the General Fund and require the Controller, commencing no later than September 30, 2006, and for each fiscal year thereafter, to transfer from the General Fund to the account a specified percentage of estimated General Fund revenues. Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution (Proposition 98) sets forth a formula for computing the minimum amount of General Fund revenues that the state is required to appropriate for the support of school districts, as defined, and community college districts for each fiscal year. This measure would establish a replacement version of the Budget Stabilization Account, and would require the Controller, commencing with the 2015–16 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, to transfer from the General Fund to the account 1.5% of the estimated amount of General Fund revenues for that fiscal year. Commencing with the 2015–16 fiscal year, this measure would also require the Controller to annually transfer from the General Fund to the account amounts determined pursuant to specified formulae, consisting of General Fund proceeds of taxes derived from personal income taxes paid on net capital gains that exceed a designated level, based on estimates provided in the Budget Act. This measure, for the 2015–16 fiscal year through the 2029–30 fiscal year, would require the Legislature to appropriate 50% of these total amounts for one or more designated fiscal obligations of the state, including accrued school funding obligations, repayment of budgetary loans, payment of accrued claims for mandate costs, and payment of unfunded pension liabilities and prefunding of other postemployment benefits. For the 2030–31 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, this measure would instead authorize the Legislature to appropriate up to 50% of these total amounts for one or more of these designated fiscal obligations of the state. This measure would require the Department of Finance, commencing with the 2015–16 fiscal year, to annually report to the Legislature certain fiscal information necessary to calculate the amount of the transfer from the General Fund to the Budget Stabilization Account for that fiscal year, and would require certain of these estimates to be included in the annual Budget Act. Commencing with the 2017–18 fiscal year, the measure would require the department to provide updated estimates for each of the 2 preceding fiscal years, calculated separately, for the purpose of determining the maximum allowable transfer from the General Fund to the Budget Stabilization Account for each of these fiscal years. This measure would prohibit the balance in the Budget Stabilization Account from exceeding 10% of estimated General Fund proceeds of taxes. It also would limit the use of funds, that otherwise would be transferred to the account, to appropriation for the funding of infrastructure, as defined in a specified statute, including deferred maintenance. This measure would establish the Public School System Stabilization Account, to provide a reserve for public school funding. Commencing with the 2015–16 fiscal year and pursuant to specified calculations, the Controller would transfer certain moneys from the General Fund into the Public School System Stabilization Account, for subsequent allocation to school districts and community college districts in fiscal years for which the minimum state funding obligation under Proposition 98 falls below specified levels. The measure would prohibit the transfer of moneys into the Public School System Stabilization Account for a fiscal year for which a maintenance factor is created under Proposition 98 or before a previously determined maintenance factor has been fully reimbursed. The measure would also prohibit the transfer of funds into the account in a fiscal year in which provisions of Proposition 98 have been suspended. The funds transferred into the Public School System Stabilization Account under the measure in a fiscal year would be counted toward the state's annual funding obligation for that fiscal year under Proposition 98, rather than in a fiscal year in which those funds are allocated. The measure would authorize the Controller to utilize funds in the account, that he or she determines to be unnecessary to meet foreseeable obligations, to help manage General Fund daily cash flow needs if that use does not interfere with the purpose of the account. Existing provisions of the California Constitution authorize the Governor to issue a proclamation declaring an emergency in specified circumstances. This measure would authorize the Legislature, upon the Governor's proclamation declaring a budget emergency, as described, to enact a statute that returns funds from the Budget Stabilization Account to the General Fund for appropriation to address the budget emergency, appropriates funds in the Public School System Stabilization Account for the support of school districts and community college districts, or suspends or reduces the transfer of funds from the General Fund to the Budget Stabilization Account or the Public School System Stabilization Account. Existing law requires the Secretary of State to submit ACA 4 of the 2009–10 Regular Session, a proposed legislative constitutional amendment relating to state finance, to the voters at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election. This bill would direct the Secretary of State to withdraw ACA 4 from the ballot.
This measure would recognize the week of March 23, 2014, to March 29, 2014, inclusive, as National Agriculture Week, and would designate March 19, 2014, as California Agriculture Day.
Existing law, the Emergency Medical Services System and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act, requires the Commission on Emergency Medical Services, which consists of 18 members, to perform various duties regarding the Emergency Medical Services Authority and emergency medical services. The bill would increase the membership of the commission from 18 to 20 members. The bill would require the additional members to be an air ambulance representative appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules from a list of 3 names submitted by the California Association of Air Medical Services, and a representative appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly from a public agency that provides air rescue and transport.
The California Constitution establishes a right of privacy. Existing statutory law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, contains provisions regulating abortions, including a requirement that the procedure be performed by a physician and surgeon. The act prohibits the state from denying or interfering with a woman's right to choose or obtain an abortion prior to viability of the fetus, or if the abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman. This measure, which would be known as the Parental Notification, Child and Teen Safety, Stop Predators Act, would prohibit a physician and surgeon from performing an abortion on an unemancipated minor, as defined, unless the physician and surgeon or his or her agent has delivered written notice to the parent of the unemancipated minor, or until a waiver of that notice has been received from the parent or issued by a court pursuant to a prescribed process. The measure would require the physician and surgeon performing an abortion on an unemancipated minor to report specified information to State Department of Public Health and would require the department to compile an annual statistical report with that information. The measure would impose civil and criminal liability for violation of this measure, as specified.
Existing law permits, and with respect to certain sex offenders requires, the use of electronic monitoring by county probation departments and the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to electronically monitor the whereabouts of persons on postrelease community supervision and parole, respectively. Under existing law, a person on postrelease community supervision parole, or mandatory supervision who fails to comply with the rules or conditions for the use of electronic monitoring as a supervision tool may be found to have violated the terms of his or her postrelease community supervision parole, or mandatory supervision, respectively, and may be required to serve a term of imprisonment in the county jail. This bill would provide that unauthorized removal, as specified, of an electronic, global positioning system (GPS) , or other monitoring device affixed as a condition of postrelease community supervision parole, or mandatory supervision is an offense punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or in the state prison for 16 months, 2 years, or 3 years. This bill would also provide that a person on postrelease community supervision parole, or mandatory supervision who is ordered pursuant to a revocation hearing to serve a term of imprisonment, incarceration, or confinement for violating the conditions of release, when the violation was based on the removal or disabling of an electronic, GPS, or other monitoring device affixed as a condition of release, and the person has not been prosecuted for that conduct, shall serve that term in the state prison. This bill would also make related, conforming changes. By creating a new 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.