Find Bills

California Bills: Search Results

Results 1-10 of 1,044 bills

SB 1002 (2013-2014) - An Act to Amend Section 14005.66 Of, and to Add Section 18901.05 To, the Welfare and Institutions Code, Relating to Low-Income Individuals.

Low-income individuals: eligibility determinations

Kevin De Leon / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

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. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid Program provisions. Existing federal law provides for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), known in… More
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. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid Program provisions. Existing federal law provides for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), known in California as CalFresh, formerly the Food Stamp Program, under which supplemental nutrition assistance benefits allocated to the state by the federal government are distributed to eligible individuals by each county. Existing law requires the State Department of Health Care Services to seek any federal waivers necessary to use eligibility information of certain individuals who have been determined eligible for the CalFresh program to determine their eligibility for Medi-Cal. This bill would also require the State Department of Health Care Services to seek any federal waivers necessary to use eligibility information of certain individuals who have been determined eligible for the CalFresh program to redetermine their eligibility for Medi-Cal. The bill would similarly require the State Department of Social Services to seek any federal waivers necessary to use eligibility information of individuals who have been determined eligible for the Medi-Cal program to determine or redetermine their CalFresh eligibility. The bill would require the State Department of Social Services to consult with stakeholders in the implementation of this provision and would authorize the State Department of Social Services to implement this provision by means of all-county letters or similar instructions. Hide

SB 1046 (2013-2014) - An Act to Add Section 10144.53 to the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance.

Insurance: mental illness: developmental disabilities: coverage: penalties

Jim Beall / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

Existing law requires that health insurance policies provide coverage for the diagnosis and medically necessary treatment of severe mental illnesses of a person of any age and of serious emotional disturbances of a child, under the same terms and conditions applied to other medical conditions, as specified. Existing law requires health insurance policies to provide benefits for specified… More
Existing law requires that health insurance policies provide coverage for the diagnosis and medically necessary treatment of severe mental illnesses of a person of any age and of serious emotional disturbances of a child, under the same terms and conditions applied to other medical conditions, as specified. Existing law requires health insurance policies to provide benefits for specified conditions, including coverage for behavioral health treatment, as defined, for pervasive developmental disorder or autism, as specified. This bill would give the Insurance Commissioner the authority to assess administrative penalties for any violations of the above provisions, including any rules or orders adopted or issued based on violations of those provisions. The bill would also give the commissioner authority to assess a penalty for each patient harmed by a violation of the above provisions, including any rules or orders adopted or issued based on violations of those provisions, as a separate and distinct violation. The penalties would not exceed $2,500 for each violation, or for an ongoing and continuous violation, the penalty would not exceed $2,500 per day for as long as the violation continues. Hide

SB 1057 (2013-2014) - An Act to Add Section 60605.84 to the Education Code, Relating to Pupil Curriculum.

Pupil curriculum: history-social science content standards

Ellen Corbett / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

Existing law required the State Board of Education, not later than November 1, 1998, to adopt statewide academically rigorous content standards in the core curriculum area of history-social science. This bill would require the state board, on or before July 30, 2018, to adopt, reject, or modify history-social science content standards in accordance with specified procedures. The bill would… More
Existing law required the State Board of Education, not later than November 1, 1998, to adopt statewide academically rigorous content standards in the core curriculum area of history-social science. This bill would require the state board, on or before July 30, 2018, to adopt, reject, or modify history-social science content standards in accordance with specified procedures. The bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to convene a group of history-social science experts, as specified, and, with input from the group, would require the Superintendent, on or before March 30, 2018, to recommend history-social science content standards to the state board. The bill would require the Superintendent and the state board, by October 1, 2018, to report certain information on the implementation of those standards to the Governor and appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature. The bill would express legislative findings and declarations relating to history-social science content standards. Hide

SB 1071 (2013-2014) - An Act to Add Section 3534.5 to the Government Code, Relating to Public Employees.

Bill of Rights for State Excluded Employees

Jim Beall / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

The Bill of Rights for State Excluded Employees prescribes various rights and terms and conditions of employment for excluded employees, defined as certain supervisory, managerial, and confidential state employees, among other specified employees. Under this bill, an excluded employee who is a supervisory employee, except as specified, and who is required to work shifts at a workplace that… More
The Bill of Rights for State Excluded Employees prescribes various rights and terms and conditions of employment for excluded employees, defined as certain supervisory, managerial, and confidential state employees, among other specified employees. Under this bill, an excluded employee who is a supervisory employee, except as specified, and who is required to work shifts at a workplace that operates with two or more work shifts per day would have the right to use seniority in the employee’s classification to obtain a preferred shift, subject to a specified restriction. Hide

SB 1124 (2013-2014) - An Act to Amend Section 14009.5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, Relating to Medi-Cal.

Medi-Cal: estate recovery

Ed Hernandez / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income persons receive health care benefits. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid provisions. Existing law, with certain exceptions, requires the department to claim against the estate of a decedent, or against… More
Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income persons receive health care benefits. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid provisions. Existing law, with certain exceptions, requires the department to claim against the estate of a decedent, or against any recipient of the property of that decedent by distribution or survival, an amount equal to the payments for Medi-Cal services received or the value of the property received by any recipient from the decedent by distribution or survival, whichever is less. Existing law provides for certain exemptions that restrict the department from filing a claim against a decedent’s property, including when there is a surviving spouse during his or her lifetime. Existing law requires the department, however, to make a claim upon the death of the surviving spouse, as prescribed. Existing law, which has been held invalid by existing case law, provides that the exemptions shall only apply to the proportionate share of the decedent’s state or property that passes to those recipients, by survival or distribution, who qualify for the exemptions. This bill would instead provide that the department shall make these claims only in specified circumstances and would define health care services for these purposes. The bill would delete the proportionate share provision and would delete the requirement that the department make a claim upon the death of the surviving spouse. The bill would also require the department to provide a current or former beneficiary, or his or her authorized representative, upon request and free of charge, with the total amount of Medi-Cal expenses that have been paid on his or her behalf that would be recoverable under these provisions, as specified. Hide

SB 1129 (2013-2014) - An Act to Amend Sections 33130, 34167.5, 34171, 34177, 34177.5, 34179, 34180, 34191.4, and 34191.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Relating to Redevelopment.

Redevelopment: successor agencies to redevelopment agencies

Darrell Steinberg / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

(1)Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies to wind down the affairs of the dissolved redevelopment agencies, subject to review by oversight boards, and to, among other things, make payments due for enforceable obligations and to perform obligations required pursuant to any… More
(1)Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies to wind down the affairs of the dissolved redevelopment agencies, subject to review by oversight boards, and to, among other things, make payments due for enforceable obligations and to perform obligations required pursuant to any enforceable obligation. Existing law requires the Department of Finance to issue a finding of completion to a successor agency upon confirmation by the county auditor-controller that specified payments have been fully made by the successor agency. Existing law prohibits a successor agency from entering into contracts with, incurring obligations or making commitments to, any entity, as specified; or from amending or modifying existing agreements, obligations, or commitments with any entity, for any purpose. Existing law defines “enforceable obligation” for these purposes to generally exclude any agreements, contracts, or arrangements between the city, county, or city and county that created the redevelopment agency and the former redevelopment agency. This bill would authorize a successor agency, if the successor agency has received a finding of completion, to enter into, or amend existing, contracts and agreements, or otherwise administer projects in connection with enforceable obligations, if the contract, agreement, or project will not commit new property tax funds or otherwise adversely affect the flow of specified tax revenues or payments to the taxing agencies, as specified. The bill would specifically include within the definition of “enforceable obligation” an agreement entered into by the redevelopment agency prior to June 30, 2011, if the agreement relates to state highway infrastructure improvements to which the redevelopment agency committed funds pursuant to specified law. (2)Existing law requires that loan agreements entered into between the redevelopment agency and the city, county, or city and county that created the redevelopment agency be deemed enforceable obligations if the oversight board makes a specific finding. Existing law requires that, if the loan is an enforceable obligation, the accumulated interest on the remaining principal amount of the loan be recalculated from origination at that interest rate earned by funds deposited into the Local Agency Investment Fund and requires the loan to be repaid in accordance with a defined schedule at an interest rate not to exceed that interest rate. This bill would revise those provisions to provide that any accumulated interest on the remaining principal balance of the loan be recalculated from origination using the interest rate earned by funds deposited into the Local Agency Investment Fund in effect on the date of loan origination, and as adjusted quarterly thereafter and that the remaining balance of the loan and the accumulated interest be repaid in accordance with a defined schedule at an interest rate not to exceed that interest rate as the rate is adjusted on a quarterly basis. This bill would state the Legislature’s intent that these revisions be clarifying. (3)Existing law requires a successor agency to prepare a recognized obligation payment schedule, which sets forth the minimum payment amounts and due dates of payments required by enforceable obligations for each 6-month fiscal period, that is required to be submitted to, and approved by, the oversight board, and submitted to other entities, including the Department of Finance. Existing law requires the Department of Finance to make its determination of the enforceable obligations and the amounts and funding sources of the enforceable obligations no later than 45 days after the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule is submitted. This bill would require the rejection of an enforceable obligation from a recognized obligation payment schedule for a successor agency that has received a finding of completion from the department to be submitted to the oversight board for review and approval, and would provide that the determination of the oversight board is final and conclusive without further review by the department. (4)Existing law provides that, if an enforceable obligation provides for an irrevocable commitment of property tax revenue and the allocation of those revenues is expected to occur over time, the successor agency may petition the Department of Finance to provide written confirmation that its determination of the enforceable obligation as approved in a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule is final and conclusive, and reflects the department’s approval of subsequent payments made pursuant to the enforceable obligation. This bill would require the Department of Finance to provide that written confirmation within 45 days. (5)Existing law requires a city, county, or city and county that wishes to retain any properties or other assets for future redevelopment activities, funded from its own funds and under its own auspices, to reach a compensation agreement with the other taxing entities to provide payments to them in proportion to their shares of the base property tax for the value of the property retained, as specified. This bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to the disposition of properties pursuant to a long-range property management plan. (6)Existing law requires the disposition of assets and properties of the former redevelopment agency as directed by the oversight board, as specified, and suspends these requirements until the Department of Finance has approved a long-range property management plan, as specified. Upon approval of a long-range property management plan, the plan governs and supersedes, all other provisions relating to the disposition and use of the real property assets of the former redevelopment agency. Existing law requires the property of a former redevelopment agency to be disposed of according to law if the department has not approved a long-range property management plan by January 1, 2016. This bill would prohibit the department from requiring compensation agreements as part of the approval of a long-range property management plan and would specify the criteria the department may consider in approving a long-range property management plan. The bill would require the department to approve long-range property management plans as expeditiously as possible. This bill would also provide that actions relating to the disposition of property after approval of a long-range property management plan do not require review by the department. (7)Existing law requires the Controller to review the activities of redevelopment agencies in the state to determine whether an asset transfer has occurred after January 1, 2011, between the city or county, or city and county that created a redevelopment agency or any other public agency, and the redevelopment agency. This bill would require the review to be completed no later than January 1, 2016. (8)Existing law prohibits an agency or community officer or employee who is required to participate in the formulation of, or to approve plans or policies for, the redevelopment of a project area from acquiring any interest in any property included within a project area within the community. This bill would provide that an agency or community officer or employee is not prohibited from acquiring an interest in property within a former redevelopment project area of a dissolved redevelopment agency, as specified. (9)Existing law requires each successor agency to have an oversight board composed of 7 members and requires each member to be appointed by a specified authority. This bill would allow each appointing authority to appoint an alternate representative to serve on the oversight board as may be necessary. This bill would provide that the alternative representative has the same participatory and voting rights as all other attending members of the oversight board, and would require the successor agency to promptly notify the Department of Finance regarding the appointment of any alternate representative. (10)This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 34180 of the Health and Safety Code proposed by SB 1404 that would become operative only if this bill and SB 1404 are both chaptered and this bill is chaptered last. (11)This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 34191.4 of the Health and Safety Code proposed by AB 2493 that would become operative only if this bill and AB 2493 are both chaptered and this bill is chaptered last. Hide

SB 1138 (2013-2014) - An Act to Add Sections 110796 and 114092 to the Health and Safety Code, Relating to Fish and Shellfish.

Fish and shellfish: labeling and identification

Alex Padilla / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

(1)Existing federal law, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, regulates, among other things, the labeling of foods introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce and generally prohibits the misbranding of food. Existing state law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, generally regulates misbranded food, which includes food that is not properly labeled. A violation of… More
(1)Existing federal law, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, regulates, among other things, the labeling of foods introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce and generally prohibits the misbranding of food. Existing state law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, generally regulates misbranded food, which includes food that is not properly labeled. A violation of these provisions is a crime. This bill, commencing July 1, 2016, would provide that it is unlawful to sell or offer for sale any fresh, frozen, or processed fish or shellfish intended for human consumption, wild caught or farm raised, without clearly identifying specified information, including the species of fish or shellfish by its common name, as specified. The bill would prohibit any person who sells or offers for sale any fish or shellfish and acts in reasonable reliance on the fish or shellfish package labeling and product invoice to satisfy the above-described requirements from being found in violation of those requirements. The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to a restaurant. Because any violation of these provisions would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2)Existing law, the California Retail Food Code, provides for the regulation of health and sanitation standards for retail food facilities, as defined, by the State Department of Public Health. Under existing law, local health agencies are primarily responsible for enforcing the California Retail Food Code. A violation of any of these provisions is punishable as a crime. Existing law requires fish that are received for sale or service to be commercially and legally caught or harvested. This bill, commencing July 1, 2016, would require a retail food facility, other than a restaurant, that sells or offers for sale any fresh, frozen, or processed fish or shellfish intended for human consumption, wild caught or farm raised, to identify in writing the species of fish or shellfish by its common name, as specified, and would prohibit a retail food facility from knowingly misidentifying the species of fish or shellfish. The bill, commencing July 1, 2016, would require a restaurant that sells or offers for sale any fresh, frozen, or processed fish or shellfish intended for human consumption, wild caught or farm raised, to identify the species of fish or shellfish by its common name in writing, or orally if not identified in writing, as specified, and would prohibit a restaurant from knowingly misidentifying the species of fish or shellfish. The bill, commencing July 1, 2016, would prohibit a retail food facility from knowingly misidentifying the country of origin of the fish or shellfish or whether the fish or shellfish was farm raised or wild caught. The bill would prohibit a retail food facility or restaurant that sells or offers for sale any fish or shellfish and acts in reasonable reliance on the fish or shellfish package labeling and product invoice to satisfy the above-described requirements from being found in violation of those requirements. Because any violation of these provisions would be a crime, and by imposing additional duties on local health officers, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (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 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. Hide

SB 1151 (2013-2014) - An Act to Add Section 42011 to the Vehicle Code, Relating to Vehicles.

Vehicles: school zone fines

Anthony Cannella / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

Existing law, in the case of specified violations relating to rules of the road and driving under the influence, doubles the fine in the case of misdemeanors, and increases the fine, as specified, in the case of infractions, if the violation is committed by the driver of a vehicle within a highway construction or maintenance area during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted by the… More
Existing law, in the case of specified violations relating to rules of the road and driving under the influence, doubles the fine in the case of misdemeanors, and increases the fine, as specified, in the case of infractions, if the violation is committed by the driver of a vehicle within a highway construction or maintenance area during any time when traffic is regulated or restricted by the Department of Transportation or local authorities pursuant to existing law or is committed within a designated Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zone. This bill would also require that an additional fine of $35 be imposed if the violation occurred when passing a school building or school grounds, as specified, and the highway is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign and an accompanying sign notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations that are committed within that school zone. The bill would require that these additional fines be deposited in the State Transportation Fund for purposes of funding school zone safety projects within the Active Transportation Program. Hide

SB 1263 (2013-2014) - An Act to Amend Sections 47605 and 47605.1 of the Education Code, Relating to Charter Schools.

Charter schools: location

Fran Pavley / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

Existing law authorizes a charter school that is unable to locate within the jurisdiction or geographic boundaries of the chartering school district to establish one site outside the boundaries of the school district, but within the county in which that school district is located, if the school district where the charter school proposes to operate is notified in advance of the charter petition… More
Existing law authorizes a charter school that is unable to locate within the jurisdiction or geographic boundaries of the chartering school district to establish one site outside the boundaries of the school district, but within the county in which that school district is located, if the school district where the charter school proposes to operate is notified in advance of the charter petition approval, the county superintendent of schools is notified of the location of the charter school before it commences operations and either the charter school has attempted to locate a single site or facility to house the entire program, but such a site or facility is unavailable in the area in which the school chooses to locate or the site is needed for temporary use during a construction or expansion project. This bill would delete the authority of a charter school to locate outside the jurisdiction or geographic boundaries of the chartering school district because the charter school has attempted to locate a single site or facility to house the entire program, but a site or facility is unavailable in the area in which the charter school chooses to locate. The bill would authorize a charter school to establish one facility outside the boundaries of the school district, as described above, if either (1) the school district within the jurisdiction of which the charter school proposes to operate provides written approval to the chartering school district before the charter petition is approved for that facility and before each charter petition renewal, or (2) the facility is needed for temporary use during the period of construction for a construction or expansion project, for up to 18 months, unless the school district in which the charter school intends to operate approves of a longer period of time. The bill would require a charter school locating outside the boundaries of the chartering school district for temporary use to provide the parents of pupils enrolled at the charter school with specified information at least 60 days before the beginning of the school year. The bill would also authorize a charter school to operate a facility outside the boundaries of the chartering school district if (1) the charter school was authorized before April 1, 2013, to locate at that facility and the charter school operated that facility with pupils enrolled and attending before September 15, 2014, (2) the school district within the jurisdiction of which the charter school operates provides written approval to the chartering school district, (3) the charter school is an American Indian charter school, as defined, or (4) the charter school meets the eligibility criteria for the Alternative Schools Accountability Model adopted by the State Board of Education. The bill would prohibit a school district that is assigned a negative certification, as specified, from authorizing new charter schools to locate outside the boundaries of the school district. The bill would also make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions. Hide

SB 1292 (2013-2014) - An Act to Amend Section 116761.23 of the Health and Safety Code, Relating to Drinking Water, and Making an Appropriation Therefor.

Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

Ben Hueso / This bill was passed by both houses and vetoed by the Governor. It did not become law.

Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, requires the State Water Resources Control Board to administer provisions relating to the regulation of drinking water to protect public health. The board’s duties include, but are not limited to, conducting research, studies, and demonstration programs relating to the provision of a dependable, safe supply of drinking water, enforcing the… More
Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, requires the State Water Resources Control Board to administer provisions relating to the regulation of drinking water to protect public health. The board’s duties include, but are not limited to, conducting research, studies, and demonstration programs relating to the provision of a dependable, safe supply of drinking water, enforcing the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, and adopting and enforcing regulations. Existing law, the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Law of 1997, establishes the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, which is continuously appropriated to the board for grants and revolving fund loans for the design and construction of projects for public water systems that will enable suppliers to meet safe drinking water standards. Existing law sets the maximum grant to each participating public water system for its share of the costs of the construction at $3,000,000, except as provided. This bill would increase the maximum amount of a construction grant award to $5,000,000 for a water system serving severely disadvantaged communities, except as provided. By authorizing the increased expenditure of moneys in a continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation. Hide