Existing law requires the governing board of each school district, each academic year, to notify pupils in grades 7 to 12, inclusive, and the parents or guardians of all pupils enrolled in the district, that the school authorities may excuse a pupil from the school for confidential medical services without the consent of the pupil's parent or guardian. This bill would instead require the governing board to notify pupils in grades 9 to 12, inclusive, and the parents or guardians of all pupils enrolled in the district, that school authorities may excuse, for these purposes, a pupil 16 years of age or older from school without parental or guardian consent. The bill would prohibit a school district from excusing a pupil 15 years of age or younger from the school for the purpose of obtaining confidential medical services without parental or guardian consent. To the extent this bill would require a school district to change its notification policy and procedure, 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, 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, the Financial Integrity and State Manager's Accountability Act of 1983 (FISMA) , provides that state agency heads are responsible for the establishment and maintenance of a system or systems of internal accounting and administrative control within their agencies, as specified. Existing law requires that state agency heads covered by FISMA shall, biennially, conduct an internal review and prepare a report on the adequacy of the agency's systems of internal accounting, administrative control, and monitoring practices. Copies of the reports are required to be submitted to the Legislature, the California State Auditor, the Controller, the Treasurer, the Attorney General, the Governor, the director, and to the State Library where the copies are required to be available for public inspection. This bill would also require the report to be posted on the agency's Internet Web site within 5 days of finalization and would require the report to be signed by the head of the agency under penalty of perjury. By requiring the head of an agency to sign the report under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand circumstances under which a person may be convicted of a crime and, thereby, would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would provide that the head of an agency that fails to submit the report within 30 days of its deadline shall be suspended without pay until the agency comes into compliance with the reporting requirements. This bill would require the framework for conducting an internal review of an agency's systems of internal accounting and administrative control to include Protocols for auditing and monitoring of the agency's assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenditures, as well as reconciliation of accounting and budget documents reported to the Department of Finance and the Office of the Controller. Existing law requires the head of an internal audit staff of a state agency to investigate any allegation that an employee of the agency provided false or misleading information in connection with the review of the agency's systems of internal accounting and administrative control or in connection with the preparation of the biennial report on the systems of internal accounting, administrative control, and monitoring practices. Existing law requires the head of an internal audit staff or designated internal control person to report in writing to the head of the agency or the division if there is reasonable cause to believe that false or misleading information was provided. This bill would require the report to also be submitted to the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee. 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.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires each city, county, and city and county to prepare and adopt a general plan that contains certain mandatory elements, including a housing element that analyzes existing and projected housing needs. That law includes legislative findings and declarations relating to housing. This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to those findings and declarations.
Existing law authorizes the Adjutant General to take specified actions with respect to state armories, including leasing or otherwise authorizing the use of all armories for any lawful purpose, and requires all revenues or income from any armory to be paid into the Armory Discretionary Improvement Account in the General Fund. This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to this provision.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws. This bill would, under both laws, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2013, allow a credit to a qualified employer, as defined, in an amount equal to 50% of the tuition reimbursed to, and either 5% or 10% of the qualified wages paid to, a qualified employee working in qualified industry, as defined to include the manufacture of aerospace or defense hardware or software, aerospace maintenance, aerospace repair and overhaul, parts supply to the aerospace industry, provision of services and support relating to the aerospace industry, research and development of aerospace technology and systems, and the education and training of aerospace personnel, as provided. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
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.
This measure would designate a specified portion of State Highway Route 14 in the City of Palmdale as the Lance Corporal Javier Olvera Memorial Highway. The measure would also request the Director of Transportation to determine the cost of appropriate signs showing this special designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources covering that cost, to erect those signs.
(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 sales and use tax laws impose 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, and provides various exemptions from those taxes. This bill would exempt from those taxes, on and after January 1, 2014, and before January 1, 2019, the gross receipts from the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption of, qualified tangible personal property purchased for use by a qualified person in the aerospace products and parts manufacturing industry for use primarily in any stage of manufacturing, processing, refining, fabricating, or recycling of tangible personal property, as specified, or for use primarily in research and development, as specified, or to maintain, repair, measure, or test that property. The bill would also exempt from those taxes the gross receipts from the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption of, tangible personal property purchased for use by a contractor, as specified, for a qualified person. The bill would require the purchaser to furnish the retailer with an exemption certificate, as specified. This bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office, by January 1, 2018, to report on the effect of the exemption on employment in the aerospace and related industries, as specified. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing law authorizes districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Exemptions from state sales and use taxes are incorporated into these laws. This bill would specify that this exemption does not apply to local sales and use taxes, transactions and use taxes, and specified state taxes from which revenues are deposited into the Local Public Safety Fund, the Education Protection Account, the Local Revenue Fund, the Fiscal Recovery Fund, or the Local Revenue Fund 2011. The bill would remain in effect until January 1, 2019. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.