Existing law requires that an earthquake insurer offer specified minimum coverage for loss or damage caused by an earthquake that includes, but is not limited to, contents coverage either in an amount not less than 10% of the amount of the covered dwelling loss, or in an amount not less than $5,000, provided that if the underlying policy of residential property insurance does not cover structural loss, the amount of contents coverage after deductible is not less than $5,000. Existing law authorizes the Insurance Commissioner to approve rate applications that allow the insurer to offer policies providing coverage other than the coverage described above provided that at least one coverage offered meets the criteria of the coverage described above. This bill would specify that the earthquake insurance policies providing alternative coverage that may be offered may include coverage options not meeting the minimum coverage described above.
Sponsored bills
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 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. CEQA establishes judicial review procedures for challenging a lead agency action on the ground of noncompliance with CEQA. This bill would require a judicial proceeding challenging a project, except for a high-speed rail project, located in a distressed county, as defined, to be filed with the Court of Appeal with geographic jurisdiction over the project.
Existing law authorizes cities and counties to establish various districts and other entities to provide improvements and other benefits within their jurisdiction. Existing law, the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, authorizes cities and counties, and joint exercise of powers agencies comprised of cities and counties, to establish property and business improvement districts for the purpose of financing certain improvements on real property located within the district. This bill would authorize a local agency to form a community benefit district by complying with specified procedures and requirements, to be operated by a nonprofit management company, and to levy an assessment for the support of the district.
(1) Existing law, as of July 1, 2012, prohibits a dealer from displaying or offering for sale at retail a used vehicle unless the dealer first obtains a vehicle history report from the National Motor Vehicle Title Information System (NMVTIS) . If the NMVTIS report indicates that the vehicle is or has been a junk or salvage automobile, or the vehicle has been reported as such by a junk or a salvage yard, or an insurance carrier, or the certificate of title contains a brand, a dealer is required to post a specified disclosure and provide the retail purchaser with a copy of the report upon request prior to sale. A violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime. This bill would revise that prohibition to authorize a dealer to also obtain the vehicle history report from a commercial data provider, as defined, and would make conforming changes. The bill would impose a state-mandated local program by changing the definition of a crime. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes a motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (smog check) program, administered by the Department of Consumer Affairs. The smog check program requires inspection of motor vehicles upon initial registration, biennially upon renewal of registration, upon transfer of ownership, and in certain other circumstances. Existing law exempts specified vehicles from being inspected biennially upon renewal of registration, including, among others, all motor vehicles manufactured prior to the 1976 model-year. This bill instead would exempt all motor vehicles prior to the 1981 model-year from being inspected biennially upon renewal of registration.
Existing law authorizes the governing board of any school district with an average daily attendance of over 100,000 to allow, as an expenditure from the cafeteria fund or cafeteria revolving account, a share of money agreed upon pursuant to a contract generated from the joint sale of items between the cafeteria and an associated student body student store, as specified. This bill would instead authorize the governing board of a school district with an average daily attendance of over 20,000 to allow, as an expenditure from the cafeteria fund or cafeteria revolving account, a share of money agreed upon pursuant to a contract that is generated from the joint sale of items between the cafeteria and an associated student body student store, as specified, and would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
The Judges' Retirement System II Law authorizes any judge to elect, by written election filed with the board at any time prior to retirement, to make contributions, and receive service credit for, all of the time he or she served as a full-time subordinate judicial officer, prior to becoming a judge, excluding any period of time for which the judge is receiving, or is entitled to receive, a retirement allowance from any other public retirement system. This bill would limit that written election to a one-time written election. The bill would also authorize the judge to make contributions to, and receive service credit for, any number of whole years or all of the time he or she served as a full-time subordinate judicial officer.
(1) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 regulates the management of solid waste. Existing law prohibits the operation of a solid waste facility without a solid waste facilities permit and prohibits a person from disposing of solid waste, causing solid waste to be disposed of, arranging for the disposal of solid waste, transporting solid waste, or accepting solid waste for disposal, except at a permitted solid waste disposal facility. A violation of the provisions prohibiting the disposal of solid waste is a crime. This bill would prohibit a person from constructing or operating a solid waste landfill disposal facility located in the County of San Diego if that disposal facility is located within 1,000 feet of the San Luis Rey River or an aquifer that is hydrologically connected to that river and is within 1,000 feet of a site that is considered sacred or of spiritual or cultural importance to a tribe and is listed in the California Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands Inventory. The bill would require the enforcement agency to enforce a violation of this prohibition by the immediate issuance of a cease and desist order, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program by imposing a new duty upon local agencies. The bill would make a declaration of legislative findings regarding why a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution. Because a violation of this bill's requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
(1) The Permit Streamlining Act requires the lead agency that has the principal responsibility for approving a development project, as defined, to approve or disapprove the project within 60 days from the date of adoption of a negative declaration or the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, unless the project proponent requests an extension of time. This bill would, in addition, require a city, county, or city and county, including a charter city, prior to approving or disapproving a proposed development project that would permit the construction of a superstore retailer, as defined, to cause an economic impact report to be prepared, as specified, to be paid for by the project applicant, and that includes specified assessments and projections including, among other things, an assessment of the effect that the construction and operation of the proposed superstore retailer will have on retail operations and employment in the same market area. The bill would also require the governing body to provide an opportunity for public comment on the economic impact report. By increasing the duties of local public officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also require the lead agency to approve or disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of certification of an environmental impact report and approval of an economic impact report, or within 60 days from the date of adoption of a negative declaration and approval of an economic impact report or the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approval of an economic impact report. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, until July 1, 2011, requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to make prescribed computations each fiscal year to determine an adjusted entitlement to be apportioned to each special education local plan area for each incidence of disability. This bill would instead provide that these provisions would remain in effect indefinitely by deleting the repeal date. This bill would require the Superintendent, on or before January 31, 2012, to update the incidence multiplier used to determine the adjusted entitlement of each special education local plan area using data collected in or after 2008. The bill would require the Superintendent to allocate funds increasingly based upon calculations made using the updated incidence multiplier for the 2011–12 to 2015–16 fiscal years, inclusive, as specified. The bill would provide that this funding is contingent upon an appropriation made in the annual Budget Act or an appropriation contained in another measure.