Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that the law enforcement agencies and the county welfare or probation department of each county develop and implement cooperative arrangements in order to coordinate existing duties in connection with the investigation of suspected child abuse or neglect cases. Existing law requires a local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over a reported case of child abuse to report to the county welfare or probation department that it is investigating the case, and requires the county welfare department or probation department, in certain cases, to evaluate what action or actions would be in the best interest of the child and to submit its findings to the district attorney, as specified. This bill would authorize each county to establish a child advocacy center to coordinate the investigation and prosecution of child abuse. The bill would provide that if a county establishes a child advocacy center, the center shall consist of a representative from the district attorney's office, the sheriff's department or police department, or both those departments, and child protective services and may also include representatives from medical and mental health, victim advocacy, and any other agency relevant to the identification, investigation, prosecution, and treatment of child abuse. The bill would authorize each county to develop an interagency protocol agreement for the collaborative investigation of child abuse and neglect and would require any member of the child advocacy center to sign the protocol. The bill would require the protocol to define the multidisciplinary team, and to detail how the team will work together, as provided.
Sponsored bills
Existing law designates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission as the regional transportation planning agency for the 9-county San Francisco Bay Area. Existing law creates the Bay Area Toll Authority with specified powers and duties relative to administration of certain toll revenues from state-owned toll bridges within the geographic jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Existing law establishes procedures for a public agency to bring an action in superior court for the judicial validation of specified matters. This bill would provide that, unless the State Auditor finds that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Bay Area Toll Authority, acting through the Bay Area Headquarters Authority, a joint powers agency, clearly had the authority to purchase an office building at 390 Main Street, San Francisco, and clearly had the authority to use toll revenues for that purchase, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Bay Area Toll Authority, acting through the Bay Area Headquarters Authority, are required to bring an action to determine the validity of those matters, subject to specified procedures. The bill would prohibit toll moneys from being used for the validation action and would prohibit additional contracts from being entered into with respect to the office building until the validation action is complete. The bill would thereby 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, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires a court to order a defendant to make restitution in every case in which a victim has suffered economic loss as a result of the defendant's conduct. Existing law requires the restitution order to be based on the amount of loss claimed by the victim or victims, and to be of a dollar amount that is sufficient to fully reimburse the victim or victims for every determined economic loss incurred as a result of the defendant's criminal conduct, as specified. Under existing law, a restitution order imposed pursuant to these provisions is enforceable as if the order were a civil judgment. Existing law specifies that a judgment that a defendant pay a fine may also direct that he or she be imprisoned until the fine is satisfied, and that the imprisonment begin at and continue after the expiration of any other prison sentence. Existing law makes those provisions applicable to restitution fines and restitution orders only if the defendant has defaulted on the payment of other fines. This bill would instead make those provisions regarding imprisonment until a fine is satisfied inapplicable to restitution fines and restitution orders. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
This measure would call on the United States Congress to pass the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2011, Senate Bill No. 1925, authored by Senators Leahy and Crapo, and ensure the sustainability of vital programs designed to keep women and families safe from violence and abuse.
(1) Existing law provides that a defendant who is in custody and arraigned for a misdemeanor offense, or who has been arrested upon an out-of-county warrant arising from a case involving only misdemeanors, is entitled to be released on his or her own recognizance unless the court finds that the release will compromise public safety or will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the defendant, in which case the court is required to set bail and specify conditions, if any, for release. This bill would authorize a court to determine, in any case that is before a court upon an accusatory pleading concerning the commission of a felony punishable by imprisonment in a county jail, whether the defendant may be released on his or her own recognizance. In making this decision, the bill would require the court to determine whether the release will compromise public safety. The bill would require the court to specify whatever reasonable conditions the court finds appropriate to ensure the appearance of the defendant, and would authorize the court to release the defendant on his or her own recognizance subject to those conditions. The bill would set forth certain conditions that the court may specify, including, but not limited to, prohibiting contact with alleged victims or potential witnesses, or home detention, with or without electronic monitoring. The bill, if release will compromise public safety or will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the defendant, would require the court to state the reasons for the finding and set bail. (2) Existing law requires a judge or magistrate, in setting, reducing, or denying bail, to take into consideration the protection of the public, the seriousness of the offense, the defendant's previous criminal record, and the probability of the defendant appearing at trial or hearing. This bill would revise the factors that the judge or magistrate would be required to consider to, among other things, require the judge or magistrate to consider the history and characteristics of the defendant, and to consider the nature and circumstances of the offense. The bill would require a judge or magistrate to also consider those factors when determining conditions for pretrial release. (3) Existing law authorizes a court, with the concurrence of the county board of supervisors, to employ an investigative staff for the purpose of recommending whether a defendant should be released on his or her own recognizance. In cases involving certain crimes, including violent felonies, an investigative report is required to be prepared that includes specified information, including outstanding warrants against the defendant and prior incidents where the defendant has failed to make a court appearance. This bill would also authorize a sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency, with the concurrence of the board of supervisors, to employ an investigative staff for those purposes, and would require a pretrial investigative report to be prepared before a court may order a defendant released on his or her own recognizance in any case involving specified crimes, including a violent felony. The bill would authorize the preparation of a pretrial investigation report in all other cases in which a court, sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency has employed an investigative staff to recommend whether the defendant should be released on his or her own recognizance. The bill would require any pretrial investigative report to include the results of an evidence-based pretrial risk assessment, as defined, evaluating the defendant's probability of appearing at trial and potential risk to public safety. The bill would prohibit, for purposes of preparing the report, a defendant from being interviewed about the facts and circumstances of the defendant's current offense, and would limit the use and availability of the information in the report. The bill would authorize a court, sheriff, county probation department, or other local governmental agency, with the concurrence of the board of supervisors, to employ supervision staff to monitor a defendant's compliance with release conditions ordered by the court, as specified. (4) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by that limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations relating to, among other things, the necessity of treating pretrial investigation reports as confidential in order for pretrial programs to function properly.
This measure would designate Monday, May 7, 2012, as California Peace Officers' Memorial Day, urge all Californians to use that day to honor California peace officers, and recognize specified California peace officers who were killed in defense of their communities.
This measure would designate May 2012 as Foster Care Month in California.
Existing law, the Emergency Medical Services System and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act, establishes the Emergency Medical Services Authority (EMSA) and provides for the certification of emergency medical technicians through the issuance of certificates, including EMT-I and EMT-II certificates, by local entities, known as local EMS agencies, which are designated by counties. Existing law also permits public safety agencies, for public safety personnel, and the State Board of Fire Services, for fire safety personnel, to issue EMT-I certificates. Existing law requires the EMSA to establish EMT-I and EMT-II certification and disciplinary guidelines. Existing law authorizes an EMT-I or EMT-II employer or medical director of a local EMS agency to investigate and discipline those EMT-I and EMT-II employees who commit specified acts. Existing law provides that the medical director of a local EMS agency or the EMSA may deny, suspend, or revoke certificates issued under these provisions, or may place a certificate holder on probation, upon the occurrence of any of specified events. Violation of the act is a misdemeanor. This bill would require the medical director of a local EMS agency to evaluate the good character and rehabilitation of an applicant for a certificate who has a prior criminal conviction before denying a certificate, as specified. By imposing new duties upon local officials, this bill would create 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, 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 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 each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families through a combination of state, county, and federal funds received through the federal TANF program. Under federal law, an individual convicted under federal or state law of an offense that is classified as a felony by the law of the jurisdiction involved, and that has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined, shall not be eligible for assistance under a state program funded under provisions of federal law regarding the TANF program. Existing law authorizes a state to exempt individuals domiciled in the state from this prohibition. Existing state law provides that an individual who has been convicted in state or federal court of a felony that has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined under federal law or the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act, is ineligible for aid under the CalWORKs program. This bill would delete the existing provisions, and would instead provide that a person convicted of a drug-related felony shall be eligible to receive CalWORKs benefits if he or she meets certain conditions of eligibility. The bill also would make a conforming change. 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. By revising and expanding standards of eligibility for benefits under the CalWORKs program, this bill would increase the responsibilities of counties, and 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, 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.
The Sales and Use Tax Law imposes a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state, or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state. Existing law, except under specified circumstances, prohibits the state from contracting with a vendor, contractor, or affiliate of a vendor or contractor that does not possess a seller's permit or a certificate of registration. This bill would, except under specified circumstances, prohibit a local government entity, as defined, from contracting with a vendor, contractor, or an affiliate of a vendor or contractor that does not possess a seller's permit or a certificate of registration. 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.