Existing law provides that no insurer shall, in issuing or renewing a private automobile insurance policy to a peace officer, member of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, or firefighter, with respect to his or her operation of a private motor vehicle, increase the premium on that policy for the reason that the insured or applicant for insurance has been involved in an accident while operating an authorized emergency vehicle, as defined, in the performance of his or her duty during the hours of his or her employment. This bill would also provide that no insurer shall, in issuing or renewing a private automobile insurance policy to a peace officer, member of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, or firefighter, with respect to his or her operation of a private passenger motor vehicle, increase the premium on that policy for the reason that the insured or applicant for insurance has been involved in an accident while operating his or her private passenger motor vehicle in the performance of his or her duty at the request or direction of the employer. Existing law provides that a peace officer, member of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, or firefighter shall not be required to report any accident in which he or she is involved while operating any employer-leased or employer-rented vehicle, in the performance of his or her duty during the hours of his or her employment, to any person who has issued that peace officer, member of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, or firefighter a private automobile insurance policy. This bill would provide that, in the event of a loss or injury that occurs as the result of an accident during any time period when a private passenger motor vehicle is operated by an employee who is a peace officer, member of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, or firefighter and used by him or her at the request or direction of the employer in the performance of the employee's duty, the vehicle's owner shall have no liability, and the employer shall be considered the owner of the vehicle for the purpose of any liability and defense of the claim. The bill would require the peace officer, member of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, or firefighter to report and provide, within 10 days of the accident, to his or her private automobile insurer all documentation and information known to him or her related to the accident. The bill would impose a similar duty on both the employer and employee if it is subsequently discovered that the employer did not direct or request the employee to use the vehicle when the loss occurred. The bill would prohibit, only under specified circumstances, a good faith delay by an employee in reporting the accident to his or her private passenger motor vehicle liability insurer, under the circumstances described, from being used by the insurer as a basis to claim delayed reporting, noncooperation, prejudice, or the like as a means of avoiding the defense or indemnity obligations that would otherwise exist under the terms of the automobile liability insurance policy or applicable law in the absence of delayed reporting. The bill would make conforming changes relating to proof of financial responsibility and adverse underwriting decisions, in the event of an accident involving a private passenger motor vehicle operated on behalf of a public agency, as specified.
Sponsored bills
Existing law provides for the payment of a scholarship to dependents of specified peace officers if the peace officer is killed in the performance of his or her duty or if the officer suffers death or permanent disability as a result of specified accidents or injuries incurred in the performance of his or her duties. Existing law also requires the employer of a peace officer who is killed in the performance of his or her duty, or who suffers death as a result of specified accidents or injuries, to continue providing health benefits to the deceased employee's spouse unless the spouse elects to receive a lump-sum survivor's benefit in lieu of monthly benefits. This bill would extend these peace officer benefits to Sheriff's Special Officers of the County of Orange.
Existing law contains provisions that define unlawful discrimination and employment practices by employers and employment agencies. This bill would make it unlawful, unless based on a bona fide occupational qualification or any other provision of law, for an employer, an employment agency, or a person who operates an Internet Web site for posting jobs in this state to publish an advertisement or announcement for any job that includes provisions pertaining to an individual's current employment or employment status, as specified. This bill would subject an employer, an employment agency, or a person who operates an Internet Web site for posting jobs in this state who violates the above provisions to civil penalties that increase as the number of violations increase. The State Contract Act governs contracting between state agencies and private contractors, and sets forth requirements for the procurement of materials, supplies, equipment, and services by state agencies. This bill would provide that failure to comply with the requirements of the bill would constitute a breach of a contract entered into on or after January 1, 2013, and may be grounds for canceling, terminating, or suspending the contract, as specified, and debarring the contractor from eligibility for an award of future state agency contracts for a period not to exceed 3 years, as specified.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws, including a credit against those taxes for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, in an amount equal to a specified percentage of the qualified expenditures, as defined, attributable to the production of a qualified motion picture in California, or, where the qualified motion picture has relocated to California or is an independent film, as provided. Existing law allows specified qualified taxpayers to elect to assign the credit, requires specified information from qualified taxpayers that apply for a tax credit allocation, and imposes specified duties on the California Film Commission related to the administration of the credits, including a requirement to allocate the tax credits until July 1, 2015, and limits the aggregate amount of credits that may be allocated to qualified motion pictures in any fiscal year to $100,000,000, through the 2014–15 fiscal year. Existing law additionally allows, in lieu of the credits under the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law for qualified motion pictures, a credit against qualified state sales and use taxes, as provided. This bill, under the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, would impose additional duties on the California Film Commission related to the administration of the credits and would extend the requirement to allocate the tax credits 2 additional years, until July 1, 2017. This bill would also extend the limit on the aggregate amount of credits that may be allocated through the 2016–17 fiscal year. This bill would also require assigning qualified taxpayers to provide the Franchise Tax Board with specified information, would revise the information included in an application for a tax credit allocation, and require the Legislative Analyst's Office to prepare reports related to the effectiveness and administration of the qualified motion picture credit under the Sales and Use Tax Law, the Personal Income Tax Law, and the Corporation Tax Law. This bill would require the California Film Commission to annually post on its Internet Web site and make available for public release specified information, including a list of qualified taxpayers and the tax credit amounts allocated to each qualified taxpayer by the commission. The bill would authorize various state agencies to disclose specified taxpayer information for purposes of the Legislative Analyst's Office report, and would impose specified criminal penalties on the disclosure of that information. By expanding the crime of knowingly and wrongfully accessing, using, or disclosing specified information, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law regulates the voting procedures for special absentee voters, defined as members of the Armed Forces, citizens of the United States temporarily living outside of the territorial limits of the United States or District of Columbia, persons serving on a merchant vessel, and a spouse or dependent of a member of the Armed Forces. Existing law also regulates the voting procedures in federal elections with respect to a citizen of the United States residing outside of the territorial limits of the United States who was domiciled in California immediately prior to leaving the territorial limits of the United States. This bill would revise and recast those provisions, replacing the term "special absentee voter" with the term "military or overseas voter." Under the bill, the term "military or overseas voter" would apply to electors absent from the county in which he or she is otherwise eligible to vote. The term would include a citizen of the United States living outside of the territorial limits of the United States, whether temporarily or permanently, if the citizen was a resident of this state when he or she was last living within the territorial limits of the United States. The bill would also specify that a citizen of the United States born outside of the territorial limits of the United States whose parent or legal guardian was a resident of California when last living within the territorial limits of the United States, provided that the voter has never been registered to vote in another state, is an elector and therefore a resident for purposes of the constitution and other provisions of the Elections Code. This bill would apply the voting procedures for citizens of the United States living outside of the territorial limits of the United States in federal elections to military or overseas voters in all elections, including state and local elections. This bill would also state that it is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this bill to implement the policies of the Uniform Military and Overseas Voters Act, as adopted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. This bill would provide new procedures for military or overseas voters to register to vote, to apply for voting ballots, and to vote. Specifically, this bill would, among other things, require unvoted voting materials to be electronically transmitted to a military or overseas voter, and would expand the use of the federal post card application and federal write-in absentee ballot in the state. Because this bill would impose additional duties on local elections officials, 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, 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 establishes the Public Employees' Retirement System and the State Teachers' Retirement System. These systems provide defined pension benefits to public employees based on age, service credit, and final compensation. The California Constitution confers upon the retirement boards of public retirement systems plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for the investment of moneys of those systems. This bill would authorize these public retirement system boards, consistent with their fiduciary duties and the standard for prudent investment, to prioritize investment in an in-state infrastructure project over a comparable out-of-state infrastructure project.
Existing law requires a business to obtain various licenses from regulatory agencies. Existing law requires state agencies to take specified actions, including, but not limited to, designating a small business liaison, to assist small businesses to achieve compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements. This bill would require the Director of the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development to ensure that the office's Internet Web site contains information to assist an individual with the licensing, permitting, and registration requirements necessary to start a business. The bill would require a state agency that the Governor determines has licensing authority to provide accurate updated information about its licensing requirements, and would prohibit a state agency from using this Internet Web site as the exclusive source of licensing information for the public. The bill would also authorize the Governor to impose a reasonable fee, not to exceed the actual cost to provide the service, upon users of the Internet Web site.
Existing law requires the Director of Employment Development to maintain a separate reserve account for each employer, and generally requires the director to credit each reserve account with all the contributions paid on the employer's behalf and to charge against the employer's reserve account unemployment compensation benefits paid to an unemployed individual during any benefit year during his or her base period. Under existing law, certain benefits paid to claimants are not charged to an employer's reserve account, except as provided, if the department rules that specified circumstances exist. This bill would provide that an employer's reserve account is not relieved of charges relating to a benefit overpayment established on or after October 22, 2013, if the department determines that the payment was made because the employer, or an agent of the employer, was at fault for failing to respond timely or adequately to requests of the department for information relating to the individual claim for unemployment compensation benefits, as provided. Existing law permits certain employing units to elect to pay the cost of benefits into the Unemployment Fund in lieu of paying contributions required of employers. Existing law provides that the cost of benefits charged to that employer includes benefits or payments improperly paid. This bill would provide that the cost of benefits charged to an employer under that election include credits of benefit overpayments actually collected by the department, unless the department determines that the payment was made because the entity, or an agent of the entity, was at fault for failing to respond timely or adequately to requests of the department for information relating to the individual claim for unemployment compensation benefits, as provided. This provision would apply to benefit overpayments established on or after October 22, 2013. Existing law requires each employer to report to the department, as specified, the hiring of any employee who works in this state and to whom the employer anticipates paying wages. This bill would additionally require each employer to report the hiring of any employee who previously worked for the employer, but had been separated from such prior employment for at least 60 consecutive days. Existing law allows an employer that is entitled to receive notice of the filing of a new or additional claim for unemployment benefits to submit to the Employment Development Department facts explaining the reasons for the claimant leaving the employer's employ; however, the employer is restricted to providing reasons only from a specified list that the department will use to determine the cause of termination. Existing law also allows a base period employer that is not entitled to receive notice of the filing of a new or additional claim for unemployment benefits, but is entitled to notice of computation, to submit to the department facts explaining the reasons for the claimant leaving the employer's employ; however, the employer is restricted to providing reasons only from a specified list that the department will use to determine the cause of termination. This bill would expand these lists to include as a reason, the claimant leaving the employer's employ for a substantially better job. Existing law allows an employer that is entitled to receive notice of the filing of a primary claim or additional claim for extended unemployment compensation benefits or federal-state extended benefits to submit to the Employment Development Department any facts explaining the reason for the claimant leaving the employer's employ; however, the employer is restricted to providing reasons only from a specified list that the department will use to determine the cause of termination. This bill would expand these lists to include the claimant leaving the employer's employ for reason of a substantially better job or to protect his or her family or himself or herself from domestic violence abuse. Existing law provides that a claim for unemployment compensation benefits may be canceled if the individual has not been deemed ineligible for unemployment compensation benefits, has not been overpaid unemployment compensation benefits, and has not collected unemployment compensation benefits. This bill would, in order to cancel a claim for unemployment compensation benefits, add an additional requirement that the individual request to cancel the claim during the benefit year of that claim or the extended duration period of that claim. Existing law authorizes the Employment Development Department to administer the federal-state unemployment insurance program and provides for the payment of unemployment compensation benefits to eligible individuals who are unemployed through no fault of their own. Federal law requires, on and after October 22, 2013, at the time a state agency determines an erroneous payment from its unemployment insurance fund was made to an individual due to fraud committed by the individual, the assessment of a penalty on the individual in an amount of not less than 15% of the amount of the erroneous payment, and requires that assessment to be deposited into the unemployment insurance fund of the state. Under existing law, if the Director of Employment Development finds that an individual has been overpaid unemployment compensation benefits because he or she, for the purpose of obtaining those benefits, either made a false statement or representation, with actual knowledge of the falsity, or withheld a material fact, the director is required to assess against the individual an amount equal to 30% of the overpayment amount. Existing law requires the assessments collected to be deposited in the Benefit Audit Fund. This bill would instead, for penalty assessments established on and after October 22, 2013, require that overpayment assessment amount to be deposited 50% into the Unemployment Trust Fund and 50% into the Benefit Audit Fund. By depositing additional amounts into the Unemployment Trust Fund in the Unemployment Fund, which is a continuously appropriated special fund, this bill would make an appropriation. Under existing law, if the Director of Employment Development finds that any employer or any employee, officer, or agent of any employer, in submitting facts concerning the termination of a claimant's employment or in submitting a written statement concerning the reasonable assurance of a claimant's reemployment pursuant to specified provisions of unemployment insurance law, willfully makes a false statement of representation or willfully fails to report a material fact concerning that termination or the reasonable assurance of that reemployment, the director must assess a penalty against the employer in an amount not less than 2 nor more than 10 times the weekly benefit amount of that claimant. Existing law requires the penalties to be deposited into the Employment Development Department Contingent Fund, a continuously appropriated fund. This bill would instead provide that the penalty be assessed on an employer or agent of the employer, depending on who the director finds was at fault for willfully making a false statement or representation or for willfully failing to report a material fact concerning that termination or the reasonable assurance of that reemployment. The bill would provide that if both the employer and the agent of the employer were at fault, this penalty would be assessed against the employer and another penalty would be assessed against the agent of the employer. This bill would further provide that the additional penalties that are assessed against an agent of the employer be available for the specified purposes upon appropriation by the Legislature for those purposes. Existing law requires employers to withhold income taxes each calendar quarter, file a withholding report, a quarterly return, a report of wages, and pay over the taxes so required to be withheld. Existing law requires employers to remit the total amount of income tax withheld within a specified number of banking days, and uses banking days to determine when a payment is complete. This bill would, under those provisions, on and after January 1, 2013, use business days to measure time instead of banking days, as provided. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 1088.5 of the Unemployment Insurance Code, proposed by AB 174 and AB 1794, that would become operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are chaptered and become effective January 1, 2013, and this bill is chaptered last.
Existing law regulates solid waste facilities and requires that any person owning or operating a solid waste landfill submit evidence of financial ability to provide for the cost of closure and postclosure maintenance, except as specified. Existing law provides that if the evidence of financial ability for closure, postclosure, or corrective action is demonstrated by use of insurance, either through an independent insurer or where the insurance carrier is established by a solid waste facility operator to meet the financial assurance obligations of that operator, the insurance mechanism may be approved by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery if the insurance carrier meets specified requirements. This bill would specify that, until January 1, 2018, an insurance carrier established by a solid waste facility operator to meet the financial assurance obligations of that operator that meets all of those specified requirements shall be eligible to provide that insurance and shall not be required to be a California admitted insurer nor be required to provide the insurance through a surplus line broker. The bill would add as a requirement for approval of a solid waste facility operator meeting its financial assurance obligations by establishing an insurance carrier that the insurance mechanism not provide in excess of 50% of the financial assurance obligation that the solid waste facility operator is required to meet in the state. This bill would also require the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to submit to the Legislature, on or before January 1, 2017, a report on the use of the mechanisms demonstrating financial ability to provide for the cost of closure and postclosure maintenance, including, among other things, any financial liability the state may assume if the mechanisms permitted under this bill and existing law fail. The bill would authorize the department to receive private funds for the purposes of conducting the study necessary for completion of the report, and would prohibit use of evidence of insurance with a carrier established by the owner or operator for the purpose of meeting the financial assurance obligations, unless sufficient private funds are received to conduct the study. The bill would require the department to make public by March 1, 2013, the costs estimate for conducting the study, and would authorize the department to consult with the Department of Insurance in completing the report. The bill would establish criteria applicable to contracts, if any, entered into by the department to conduct the study.
Existing federal law provides for tax-qualified retirement plans and individual retirement accounts or individual retirement annuities by which private citizens may save money for retirement. This bill would enact the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust Act, which would create the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust to be administered by the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Investment Board, which would also be established by the bill. The bill would require eligible employers, as defined, to offer a payroll deposit retirement savings arrangement so that eligible employees, as defined, could contribute a portion of their salary or wages to a retirement savings program account in the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program, as specified. The bill would require eligible employees to participate in the program, unless the employee opts out of the program, as specified. The bill would specify risk management and investment policies that the board would be subject to regarding administration of the program. The bill would require a specified percentage of the annual salary or wages of an eligible employee participating in the program to be deposited in the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust, which would be segregated into a program fund and an administrative fund, both of which would be continuously appropriated to the board for purposes of the act. The bill would limit expenditures from the administrative fund, as specified. The bill would also authorize the board to establish a Gain and Loss Reserve Account within the program fund. The bill would, contingent upon sufficient interest and funding by vendors, as specified, require the board to establish a Retirement Investments Clearinghouse on its Internet Web site and a vendor registration process through which information about employer-sponsored retirement plans, and payroll deduction individual retirement accounts and annuities offered by private sector providers is made available for consideration by eligible employers. The bill would require the opt-out form disseminated by the Employment Development Department to be used to create an option for employees to elect to opt out of the program, as specified. The bill would, commencing 6 months after the program is ready to proceed, require the Employment Development Department to assess a penalty on any eligible employer that fails to make the program available to eligible employees, as specified. The bill also would make a statement of legislative findings. The bill would provide that the state would have no liability for the payment of the benefits under the program, as specified. The bill, upon sufficient funds being made available through a nonprofit or private entity or federal funding, would require the board to conduct a market analysis to determine whether the necessary conditions for implementation can be met, as specified. The bill would require moneys made available to conduct the market analysis to be deposited in the Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program Fund which would be created in the State Treasury. The bill would provide that the operational provisions of the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust Act shall be operative only if the board determines that, based on the market analysis, the provisions will be self-sustaining, and sufficient funds are made available through a nonprofit or private entity, federal funding, or the annual Budget Act, as specified, to allow the board to implement the program until the trust has sufficient funds to be self-sustaining. The bill would require the board to ensure that an insurance, annuity, or other funding mechanism is in place at all times that protects the value of individuals' accounts and protects, indemnifies, and holds the state harmless at all times against any and all liability in connection with funding retirement benefits pursuant to these provisions. The bill would prohibit the board from implementing the program if the IRA arrangements offered fail to qualify for the favorable federal income tax treatment ordinarily accorded to IRAs under the Internal Revenue Code, or if it is determined that the program is an employee benefit plan under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Existing law establishes the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System and vests the board with various powers and duties. This bill would authorize that board to administer funds in the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust, as specified.