The California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report, or 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 also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. Existing law establishes regulations related to numerous environmental issues. This bill would enact the Sustainable Environmental Protection Act and would specify the environmental review required pursuant to CEQA for projects related to specified environmental topical areas. For a judicial action or proceeding filed challenging an action taken by a lead agency on the ground of noncompliance with CEQA, the bill would prohibit a cause of action that (1) relates any topical area or criteria for which compliance obligations are identified or (2) challenges the environmental document if: (A) the environmental document discloses compliance with applicable environmental law, (B) the project conforms with the use designation, density, or building intensity in an applicable plan, as defined, and (C) the project approval incorporates applicable mitigation requirements into the environmental document. The bill would provide that the Sustainable Environmental Protection Act only applies if the lead agency or project applicant has agreed to provide to the public in a readily accessible electronic format an annual compliance report prepared pursuant to the mitigation monitoring and reporting program. Because this bill would impose additional duties on local agencies, it 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.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law expresses the intent of the Legislature that governing boards of school districts establish a uniform system of evaluation and assessment of the performance of all certificated personnel of a school district, including schools conducted or maintained by county superintendents of education. This bill would instead require the governing board of a school district to establish an evaluation and assessment system for certificated employees that uses a multiple-measures evaluation system with multiple research-validated approaches to measuring effectiveness, as specified. The governing board would be required to establish the system by the 2015–16 school year and to fully implement the system by the 2016–17 school year. The bill would require a compliance audit to include the verification of the development and implementation of the evaluation system. Because the bill would increase the duties of school districts, it would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law provides that, when employees are terminated pursuant to a reduction in workforce, a school district is required to terminate the employees in order of seniority. Existing law further provides those employees with preferred right to reappointment and opportunity for substitute service in order of seniority. Existing law authorizes a school district to deviate from the order of seniority for those purposes for specified reasons, including compliance with constitutional requirements related to equal protection of the laws. This bill would provide additional reasons for which a school district may deviate from terminating employees in order of seniority, including authorizing school districts to terminate employees on the basis of performance evaluations and on the basis that the employee is assigned to a schoolsite that has been selected by the governing board for exemption from certificated reductions in force, based upon the needs of the educational program. The bill would provide an exception to this authorization for an employee who has 18 months or less from his or her date of retirement, or is on medical leave. The bill would specify that the equal protection exception to the general requirement that terminations and reappointments occur in order of seniority applies to equal protection as it relates to pupils. (3) Existing law generally requires school districts to adhere to certain requirements with respect to teacher and administrator employment, and requires charter school petitions to contain certain information relating to employment. This bill would authorize school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to assign, reassign, and transfer teachers and administrators based on effectiveness and subject matter needs, without regard to years of service. (4) This bill would make various nonsubstantive and clarifying changes. (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, 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 prescribes procedures governing disputes between exclusive bargaining representatives of public transportation employees and local agencies, and authorizes the Governor, when it appears a strike will significantly disrupt transportation services and endanger public health, safety, and welfare, to appoint a board to investigate issues in connection with these labor negotiations and make a report. Existing law prohibits a strike during the period of investigation and permits the Governor, upon receiving a report from a board of investigation, to request the Attorney General to petition a court to enjoin the strike, as specified. This bill would repeal those provisions that authorize the Governor to appoint a board to investigate when it appears a strike will significantly disrupt transportation services, prohibit a strike during the period of investigation, and that authorize the Governor to request the Attorney General to petition a court to enjoin the strike. The bill would instead prohibit a state or local public transportation employee or public transportation employee organization from engaging in, causing, instigating, encouraging, or condoning a strike. The bill would also provide that a person who, on behalf of a public transportation employer, exercises authority, supervision, or direction over a public transportation employee shall not have the power to, and shall not purport to, authorize, approve, condone, or consent to a strike by a public transportation employee. The bill would establish a process for a public transportation employee to object to a determination by the chief executive officer of the public transportation employer that he or she violated these provisions by filing a sworn affidavit under penalty of perjury, thus expanding the definition of a crime. The bill would require the chief executive officer, if he or she determines that the objection raises a question of fact that if resolved in favor of the employee would establish that the employee did not commit the violation, to appoint an officer to conduct a hearing on the matter at which the employee would bear the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she did not commit the violation, as specified. The bill would require the Public Employment Relations Board to hold a hearing to determine whether an employee organization violated these provisions, and would require the employer and the employee organization to be permitted to be represented by counsel. The bill would provide that a public transportation employee who violates these provisions is subject to removal or other disciplinary action, and would authorize the chief financial officer of the employer to deduct from the compensation of a public transportation employee found to have violated these provisions an amount equal to twice his or her daily rate of pay for each day or part thereof that it was determined that he or she violated these provisions. The bill would also require the board, if it determines that an employee organization violated these provisions, to order forfeiture of specified rights granted by state law to recognized employee organizations. The bill would also require the chief executive officer of the employer, within 60 days of the end of a strike, to prepare a written report, to be made public, that contains specified information regarding the circumstances surrounding the strike, the names of those public transit employees who the chief executive officer has reason to believe were responsible for causing, instigating, or encouraging the strike, and the sanctions imposed or proceedings pending against those employees. Because the bill would expand the definition of a crime and require local officers to perform additional duties, the 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 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 law makes it a crime for the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to a person other than himself or herself, or in the death of a person, to leave the scene of the accident. Existing law makes it a crime to drive a vehicle, with or without gross negligence, in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony, or in the commission of a lawful act that might produce death in an unlawful manner. Existing law also sets forth various time limits to prosecute crimes. Except as otherwise specified, prosecution for an offense that is not punishable by death or imprisonment in the state prison is required to be commenced within one year after commission of the offense. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding any other limitation of time specified, if a person flees the scene of an accident that has caused death or permanent, serious injury, charges may be brought either one or 3 years after the completion of the offense, as specified, or one year after the person is initially identified as a suspect in the commission of the offense, whichever is later, but in no case later than 6 years after the commission of the offense.
Existing law requires every person convicted of certain offenses, for the rest of his or her life while residing in California, or while attending school or working in California, as specified, to register with the chief of police of the city in which he or she is residing, or the sheriff of the county if he or she is residing in an unincorporated area or city that has no police department, and, additionally, with the chief of police of a campus of the University of California, the California State University, or community college if he or she is residing upon the campus or in any of its facilities, within 5 working days of coming into, or changing his or her residence within, any city, county, or city and county, or campus in which he or she temporarily resides, and to register thereafter as specified. Existing law, the California Community Care Facilities Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of community care facilities, including group homes and foster family homes, by the State Department of Social Services. Existing law provides for the certification of foster homes by foster family agencies. This bill would, subject to exception, prohibit any person who is required to register as a sex offender, based upon the commission of an offense against a minor, from residing, working, or volunteering in specified foster homes or facilities, as provided. The bill would provide that violation of the prohibition is a misdemeanor. 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.
(1) Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. Existing law provides that a health facility is eligible to receive supplemental reimbursement under the Medi‑Cal program if the facility has specified characteristics, including that the facility is owned or operated by the state, a county, a city, a city and county, or a health care district. Existing law prohibits claimed expenditures for specified nursing facility services, when combined with the amount received from all other sources of reimbursement from the Medi-Cal program, from exceeding 100% of projected costs, as determined pursuant to the Medi-Cal State Plan, for skilled nursing services at each facility. This bill would, instead, prohibit those claimed expenditures from exceeding 100% of allowable costs. The bill would require that supplemental reimbursement be subject to a reconciliation process established in the state plan to ensure that supplemental reimbursement is not made in excess of allowable costs, and to ensure that it is made up to allowable costs. (2) The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid Program provisions. Existing law, subject to federal approval, modifies the inpatient fee-for-service reimbursement methodology for nondesignated public hospitals, as defined, under a specified demonstration project for services on or after July 1, 2012. Existing law provides that beginning with the 2012–13 fiscal year, and if specified conditions are met, nondesignated public hospitals, or governmental entities with which the hospitals are affiliated, shall be eligible to receive safety net care pool payments for uncompensated care from the Health Care Support Fund. Existing law provides that these provisions shall become operative on the date that all necessary federal approvals have been obtained to implement these and other related provisions. Existing law requires designated public hospitals to report and certify specified information for each successor demonstration year beginning with the 2012−13 fiscal year. This bill would revise and recast those provisions. This bill would instead authorize the department to seek necessary federal approvals or waivers to separately implement the safety net care pool payments for uncompensated care provisions for the 2013–14 and 2014–15 fiscal years. The bill would require the state, if the state receives federal safety net care pool funds for uncompensated care under these provisions, to retain 12 of the funds for Medi-Cal related expenditures. (3) Under existing law, nondesignated public hospitals may receive fee-for-service payments for inpatient services, as specified. Under existing law, beginning with the 2012–13 fiscal year, subject to federal approval and if specified conditions are met, nondesignated public hospitals may receive delivery system reform incentive pool funding, as specified. This bill would eliminate those provisions.
Existing law provides that an officer having custody of any firearm that may be useful to the California National Guard, the Coast Guard Auxiliary, or to any military or naval agency of the federal or state government, may, upon the authority of the legislative body of the city, city and county, or county by which the officer is employed and the approval of the Adjutant General, deliver the firearm to the commanding officer of a unit of the California National Guard, the Coast Guard Auxiliary, or any other military agency of the state or federal government, including the California State Military Museum and Resource Center, in lieu of destruction as otherwise required. Existing law also specifies how firearms donated to the California State Military Museum and Resource Center may be disposed of. This bill would correct an incorrect reference to the California State Military Museum and Resource Center in those provisions. The bill would authorize donation of firearms to specified branch museums in addition to the California State Military Museum and Resource Center, and would also authorize any state agency, county, municipality, or special purpose district to offer any excess military weapons or equipment, such as historical war equipment like artillery, tanks, or armored vehicles, to those museums.
(1) Existing law authorizes a school district or county office of education to provide emergency epinephrine auto-injectors to trained personnel, and authorizes that trained personnel to utilize those epinephrine auto-injectors to provide emergency medical aid to persons suffering from an anaphylactic reaction. The Pharmacy Law authorizes a pharmacy to furnish epinephrine auto-injectors to a school district or county office of education if certain conditions are met. A violation of the Pharmacy Law is a crime. Existing law requires the Emergency Medical Services Authority to establish training and standards for all prehospital emergency medical care personnel regarding the characteristics and method of assessment and treatment of anaphylactic reactions and the use of epinephrine, and to promulgate regulations therefor. This bill would authorize a prehospital emergency medical care person or lay rescuer to use an epinephrine auto-injector to render emergency care to another person, as specified. The bill would require the California Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Authority to approve authorized training providers and to establish and approve minimum standards for training and the use and administration of epinephrine auto-injectors. The bill would specify components to be included in the minimum training and requirements. The bill would authorize the director of the authority to deny, suspend, or revoke any approval or place any approved training provider on probation upon a finding by the director of an imminent threat to public health and safety, as prescribed. The bill would create the Specialized First Aid Training Program Approval Fund, and require the authority to assess a fee, to be deposited into the fund, to cover the reasonable costs incurred by the authority for the ongoing review and approval of training and certification. These provisions would not apply to a school district or county office of education, or its personnel, that provides and utilizes epinephrine auto-injectors to provide emergency medical care, as specified. The bill would provide that nothing in these provisions shall be construed to limit or restrict the ability of prehospital emergency medical care personnel to administer epinephrine, including the use of epinephrine auto-injectors, or to require additional training or certification, if the administration of epinephrine is part of their scope of practice. The bill would authorize a pharmacy to dispense epinephrine auto-injectors to a prehospital emergency medical care person or lay rescuer for the purpose of rendering emergency care in accordance with these provisions. Because a violation of this requirement would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require epinephrine auto-injectors obtained by prehospital emergency medical care personnel to be used only when functioning outside the course of the person's occupational duties, or as a volunteer, as specified. (2) Under existing law, everyone is generally responsible, not only for the result of his or her willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned to another by his or her want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his or her property or person, except so far as the latter has, willfully or by want of ordinary care, brought the injury upon himself or herself. This bill would provide that a prehospital emergency medical care person or lay rescuer who administers an epinephrine auto-injector, in good faith and not for compensation, to another person who appears to be experiencing anaphylaxis at the scene of an emergency situation is not liable for any civil damages resulting from his or her acts or omissions in administering the epinephrine auto-injector, if that person has complied with specified certification and training requirements and standards, except as specified. (3) 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 requires certain veterans of a war in which the United States is or has been engaged, upon application and presentation to the Department of Parks and Recreation of certain proof, including proof of a disability or proof of being held captive as a prisoner of war, to be issued a pass entitling the bearer use of all facilities, including boat launching facilities, in units of the state park system. This bill would authorize the department to offer a veteran, as defined, or current active duty or reserve military personnel for the United States Armed Forces or the National Guard of any state, a reduced fee or free day use of the California state parks, as provided, on Memorial Day and Veterans Day if certain conditions are met, including that proper proof is supplied.
Existing law, the Veterans' Bond Act of 2008, as approved by the voters, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $900,000,000, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law, for purposes of financing the Cal-Vet program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans. This bill would amend the Veterans' Bond Act of 2008 to reduce the amount of bonds that are authorized to be issued under the act from $900,000,000 to $300,000,000. The bill would enact the Veterans Housing and Homeless Prevention Bond Act of 2014 (the bond act) to authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $600,000,000, as specified, for expenditure by the California Housing Finance Agency, the Department of Housing and Community Development, and the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide multifamily housing to veterans pursuant to the Veterans Housing and Homeless Prevention Act of 2014 (VHHPA) , also enacted by the bill. The bill would authorize the Legislature to amend the provisions of the bond act, by majority vote, for specified purposes. The bill would impose a specified reporting requirement on the Department of Housing and Community Development to evaluate, in collaboration with the Department of Veterans Affairs, any program established by the former pursuant to the VHHPA. The bill would authorize the Department of Housing and Community Development to provide specified assistance to veterans. The bill would provide for submission of a specified section to the voters at the June 3, 2014, statewide primary election, as specified. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.