CDCAN: SENATE BUDGET COMMITTEE APPROVES 10 NEW BUDGET TRAILER BILLS – WILL GO TO SENATE FLOOR & ASSEMBLY FLOOR NEXT WEEK FOR FINAL VOTE

  •  BILLS MOSTLY CLARIFY BUDGET PROVISIONS PASSED LAST JUNE – BUT SOME IMPACT MAJOR POLICY CHANGES
  • MAJOR POLICY CHANGE REGARDING “MODIFICATION” OF SPECIAL EDUCATION BEHAVIORIAL INTERVENTION MANDATE
  • CLARIFIES THAT NEW DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER ADMISSIONS POLICY APPLIES TO NEW ADMISSIONS – NOT TO EXISTING RESIDENTS
  • CLARIFICATION ON CHANGES MADE TO IHSS PROGRAM LAST JUNE INCLUDING ESTABLISHMENT OF STATEWIDE AUTHORITY AND EVENTUAL SHIFT TO BECOME A MEDI-CAL MANAGED CARE BENEFIT
  • CLARIFICATION ON “DUAL ELGIBLE” DEMONSTRATION PROJECT AND HEALTHY FAMILIES ELIMINATION & SHIFT TO MEDI-CAL MANAGED CARE 

SACRAMENTO, CA (CDCAN)  [Last updated 08/23/2012  10:30 PM] –  The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, chaired by Sen. Mark Leno (Democrat – San Francisco), met just after 5:00 PM Thursday (August 23rd) to briefly review and return to the Senate floor 10 new budget trailer bills including changes impacting the State’s special education behavioral intervention plan mandate; the new admissions policy for the four remaining developmental centers; In-Home Supportive Services; CalWORKS, mental health, public safety, special funds and the Department of Parks and Recreation. 

Changes In Trailer Bills Largely Technical – But Some May Have Major Impact On Policy Including Special Education Behavioral Intervention Mandate Elimination

  • Nearly all of the changes contained in the new budget trailer bills were technical corrections – or clarification – of provisions passed and signed into law last June as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget.
  • However at least two of the trailer bills touched on major policy changes, including the elimination of the State’s special education behavioral intervention mandate for students with special needs. 
  • The other change – largely clarification – impacted In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS), and the establishment authorized as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget in June, of a new statewide authority to bargain with IHSS worker unions, and the eventual shift of IHSS to become a Medi-Cal managed care benefit. 
  • Largely technical changes – and some clarification – deal with the demonstration project that would shift most persons with disabilities and seniors who are eligible for both Medicare and Medi-Cal in 8 counties from “fee for service” to Medi-Cal managed care type plans beginning – if the federal government approves the California proposal- not sooner than March 1, 2013.  The State expects to expand the project to eventually cover all counties by 2015.  The federal government is expected to respond to the California proposal – and other proposals from other states – soon. 
  • The trailer bills did not specifically touch on most of the other programs and services in health and human services including Community-Based Adult Services (the new program that replaced the now eliminated Adult Day Health Care Medi-Cal benefit), regional centers that coordinate funding for eligible persons with developmental disabilities under the Department of Developmental Services; Early Start (California’s early intervention program). 

Hearing Was Not Noticed In Senate Daily File

  • The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee hearing – which was not noticed in the Senate Daily File for either August 22nd or August 23rd – was announced by Sen. Leno just minutes before the State Senate adjourned around 4:30 PM Thursday after a long floor session where action was taken on 92 bills. 
  • Leno said that the Senate budget panel hearing would begin “promptly” at 5:00 PM at the State Capitol in Room 4203, though he did not announce the purpose of the hearing or what bills would be heard.  (However actions taken earlier in the week by the Senate with amendments to the 10 bills were publicly reported). 
  • The chairs of two other committees – Senate Health Committee and Senate Appropriations Committee – also announced hearings that immediately followed the floor session on Thursday, though those two hearings were announced in the Senate Daily File for August 23rd, to be held “upon call of the chair”.  Those two committees heard only one bill not related to the budget trailer bills.  [CDCAN Note: watch for separate CDCAN Report following this report covering actions taken on policy bills on both the Senate and Assembly floors Thursday].
  • Hearings without the normal public notice, which can be waived – and amendments and actions on bills – is a normal occurrence during the final days of the legislative session for decades. 
  • The practice has been – and continues to be – widely criticized by advocates, the media, and even many members of the Legislature, who say it is done to avoid scrutiny and to pass controversial bills that otherwise might face greater opposition earlier in the legislative session. 
  • Legislative Democratic leaders however defend the practice saying that more often than not, the issues and provisions raised in these types of bills were previously heard and vetted earlier in the legislative session and that sometimes a compromise or agreement is often not possible until the last days of session. 

NEXT STEPS

  • The 10 budget trailer bills go to the Senate floor for a final vote as early as Monday, August 27th, when the Senate convenes next.  Following approval there – the bills would then go to the Assembly for a final vote on or before August 31st (the last day of the 2012 legislative session), and then to the Governor for approval.  With Democrats controlling both the Senate and Assembly, and passage of all 10 trailer bills only requiring a majority vote, approval in both houses – and approval by the Governor is all but certain to happen, barring a surprise. 
  • The Assembly is scheduled to convene floor session on Friday, August 24th at 10:00 AM to continue action on bills.
  • The State Senate’s next floor session is Monday, August 27th at noon, with a “check-in” session on Friday (August 24th) [that is simply a requirement for senators to “check-in” with the Senate desk.  No floor action occurs – though the Senate desk is open for certain Senate business]

CDCAN SUMMARY OF THE 10 NEW BUDGET TRAILER BILLS

  • Behavioral Intervention Mandate/Special Ed – see AB 1476
  • CalWORKS – see AB 1471 and AB 1477
  • Coordinated Care Initiative – see AB 1468
  • Developmental Center Admissions – see AB 1471
  • Dual Eligible Demonstration Project – see AB 1468 (and also AB 1471 for IHSS piece)
  • Education (including Special Education Behavioral Intervention) – see AB 1468
  • Healthy Families – see AB 1468
  • IHSS (In-Home Supportive Services) – see AB 1471
  • Medi-Cal – see AB 1468 and also AB 1471 (for IHSS piece)
  • Mental Health – see AB 1468 and AB 1488 (for State Hospitals)
  • Special Funds – see AB 1487

 AB 1468 – HEALTH: MEDI-CAL, DUAL ELIGIBLE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT, HEALTHY FAMILIES AND DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH

CDCAN SUMMARY (As Amended 08/21/2012):

  • Existing State law, passed and signed into law last June as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget included changes to authorize a demonstration project for persons with disabilities and seniors eligible for both Medicare and Medi-Cal (“dual eligible”)  in eight counties, not sooner than March 2013 (and for all counties by the end of 2015) that integrates the delivery of medical services, long-term services and supports (including In-Home Supportive Services), and behavioral health services through Medi-Cal managed care plans for persons who are eligible for both Medicare and Medi-Cal.
  • This bill makes technical corrections and clarifications to the dual eligibles demonstration project.
  • This bill includes provisions that would require persons enrolled in a Medi-Cal home and community-based waiver program to be mandatorily enrolled in Medi-Cal managed care (for medical services and long-term supports and services), consistent with how seniors and people with disabilities eligible for only Medi-Cal (“straight Medi-Cal”) who are enrolled in a Medi-Cal home and community-based waiver program, are mandatorily enrolled in Medi-Cal managed care.
  • Would eliminate the requirement that the Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC) monitor health plans participating in the dual eligible demonstration project on a quarterly basis to determine whether the those persons in the project are able to receive timely access to primary and specialty care services as federal law (42 Code of Federal Regulations Section 422.402) preempts that department from performing this activity on Medicare plans.
  • Medi-Cal Primary Care Provider Payments:  bill would make technical corrections to ensure that Medi-Cal primary care provider payment increases (as required by federal health care reform and implemented by AB 1467) do not apply to state-only programs.
  •  Existing federal law under the health reform act requires that specified Medicaid primary care services be reimbursed at no less than the Medicare rate from January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2014, and that marginal rate increase is fully funded by the federal government for services provided in the Medi-Cal program.
  • Healthy Families Program Transfer to Medi-Cal:  makes various technical corrections to existing State law (passed and signed into law last June as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget) that transfers the Healthy Families Program to Medi-Cal.
  • Bill would extend provisions inadvertently chaptered out or replaced by another budget trailer bill), in AB 1467, the health trailer bill that was passed and signed into law as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget, regarding the rural expansion of Medi-Cal managed care and the consideration of safety net providers when factoring managed care plan costs in the default managed care assignment methodology. 
  • Makes changes to various references to the Department of Mental Health (DMH) and responsibilities shifted to other departments. 

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (PDF VERSION): Not available – pdf version “crashed” on the legislative information site. 

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (HTML VERSION):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1468_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v97.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to State Senate floor by vote of 10 to 4.

NEXT STEPS: The bill could be approved by the full Senate as early as August 27th, Monday – the next Senate floor session.  After approval there – which is almost certain – the bill would head back to the Assembly for final vote (called “concurrence”) that has to happen on or before the end of the day of August 31st (Friday) – the last day of the 2012 legislative session.  The bill requires only a majority vote and would take effect immediately upon approval by the Governor.

CDCAN COMMENT:

  • The Governor’s Department of Finance told the Senate committee on August 23rd that the trailer bill was a “technical cleanup” dealing with health programs, including the “Coordinated Care Initiative”  so that expansion of Medi-Cal managed care can work “effectively” and that the elimination and transition of the Healthy Families program into Medi-Cal managed care “…stays on the same schedule as agreed to as part of the [2012-2013] budget package…” that was passed and signed into law last June.

 

AB 1471- HUMAN SERVICES: IHSS, DEVELOPMENTAL CENTERS, COMMUNITY CARE & CALFRESH

CDCAN SUMMARY (As Amended 08/22/2012):

DEVELOPMENTAL CENTERS ADMISSION POLICY CLARIFICATION PROVISIONS:

  • The bill would provide clarification regarding the new admissions policy of developmental centers that the policy impacts persons on or after July 1, 2012 and not to those persons who reside in those facilities prior to that date. 
  • The bill would provide that a  person with a developmental disability shall not be committed to the Department of Developmental Services under existing State law unless he or she is a person described in paragraph(2) or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 7505 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and is dangerous to self or others or the person currently is a resident of a developmental center or state-operated community facility pursuant to an order of commitment prior to July, 2012, and is being recommitted pursuant to paragraph (3) of this subdivision.
  • If the person with a developmental disability is in the care or treatment of a state hospital, developmental center, or other facility at the time a petition for commitment is filed under existing State law, proof of a recent overt act while in the care and treatment of a state hospital, developmental center, or other facility is not required in order to find that the person is a danger to self or others.
  • The bill clarifies that in the event subsequent petitions are filed with respect to a resident of a developmental center or a state-operated community facility committed prior to July 1, 2012, the procedures followed and criteria for recommitment shall be the same as with the initial petition for commitment.
  • The bill provides clarification on the effective date that any order of commitment made pursuant to this article  on or after July, 2012,  with respect to  the admission to a developmental center of  a person described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 7505 shall expire automatically six months after the earlier of the order of commitment pursuant to this section or the order of a placement in a developmental center pursuant to Section 6506, unless the regional center, prior to the expiration of the order of commitment, notifies the court in writing of the need for an extension.

IN-HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES STATE AUTHORITY CLARIFICATION PROVISIONS:

  • Existing State law (as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget passed and signed into law last June) establishes the In-Home Supportive Services Employer-Employee Relations Act, which serves to resolve disputes regarding wages, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment between a new Statewide Authority and recognized employee organizations.
  • Existing State law authorizes individual IHSS providers to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations (unions) for the purpose of representation on all matters within the scope of representation.
  • Under existing State law passed and signed into law last June as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget, the new Statewide Authority is the employer of record, for collective bargaining purposes, of individual providers of in-home supportive services in each county upon implementation by a county. 
  • This bill, would, among other things, clarify that predecessor agencies (public authorities or other similar agencies that previously had those responsibilities) to the Statewide Authority cannot meet and confer in good faith with a recognized employee organization after the Statewide Authority assumes those agencies’ rights and responsibilities.
  • The bill would also require – if the new Statewide Authority and the recognized employee organization negotiate changes to locally administered health benefits – that the Statewide Authority give a county and a specified entity 90 days’ notice before the changes are implemented.
  • ·      This bill would provide that the scope of representation shall exclude providing assistance to IHSS recipients through the establishment of emergency backup services.
  • ·      This bill would change references from the employer and public agency to the new Statewide Authority in these provisions, and would make other technical and clarifying changes to these provisions. 
  • ·      Existing State law, passed and signed into law last June as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget, authorizes managed care health plans, as defined, to assume the authority, previously granted to counties, to contract for the provision of in-home supportive services with a qualified agency, as defined, subject to specified restrictions and requirements.
  • ·      Existing State law requires qualified agencies to establish procedures to ensure specified contract limitations on caseload are being met and there is coordination of information between managed care health plans, qualified agencies, counties, and the Department of Social Services.
  • This bill would, among other things, create an alternative means to meet a documentation requirement for entities seeking authorization as a qualified agency, as specified, and would specify that counties and managed care health plans are also required to establish those procedures.
  • This bill would provide that the State shall be immune from liability resulting from the state’s implementation of those provisions, and from the negligence or intentional torts of a contract provider providing services pursuant to those provisions. 
  • Existing State law requires all counties, commencing July 1, 2012, to have a County IHSS Maintenance of Effort (MOE), and requires counties to pay the County IHSS MOE instead of paying the nonfederal share of IHSS costs, as specified. 
  • This bill would specify that the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) shall be adjusted for the annualized (yearly) cost of increases in IHSS provider wages or health benefits that are locally negotiated, mediated, or imposed before the new Statewide Authority assumes specified responsibilities for certain counties.
  • This bill would require the Governor’s Department of Finance to consult with a specified organization, as prescribed, to implement the Maintenance of Effort.
  • Existing State law passed and signed into law last June as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget, provides that, not sooner than March 1, 2013, IHSS shall be a Medi-Cal benefit available through managed care health plans in specified counties, and requires managed care health plans to, among other things, enter into a contract with the Department of Social Services to pay wages to IHSS providers, as specified.
  • Existing State law requires the Department of Social Services to assume responsibility for providing workers’ compensation coverage for specified employees who provide in-home supportive services pursuant to contracts with counties. 
  • This bill would, among other things, require Medi-Cal managed care health plans to enter into a contract with the Department of Social Services to pay benefits to IHSS providers, as specified. This bill would provide that a Medi-Cal managed care health plan shall not be deemed to be the employer of an in-home supportive services provider for purposes of liability, as specified in the bill.
  • This bill would also require the Department of Social Services to provide workers’ compensation coverage for specified employees pursuant to contracts with Medi-Cal managed care health plans. 
  • Existing State law provides that specified provisions relating to the California In-Home Supportive Services Authority and managed care health plans that contract for the provision of in-home supportive services shall become inoperative under certain circumstances.
  • This bill would include among those provisions the In-Home Supportive Services Employer-Employee Relations Act. 
  • This bill makes changes to existing California Community Care Facilities Act, which (among other provisions) authorizes a licensee of certain adult residential facilities or group homes to utilize secured perimeters by revising the list of laws, pursuant to which the juvenile court has jurisdiction over a foster child, for purposes of eligibility to reside in a facility with secured perimeters.
  • Under existing State law, prior to the initial licensure or first renewal of a license of any person to operate or manage specified psychiatric and mental health care facilities, the Department of Social Services is required to submit fingerprint images and other information pertaining to the applicant or licensee to the Department of Justice. Existing law imposes similar requirements on the Department of Social Services upon the employment of, or contract with or for, any direct care staff. 
  • This bill would transfer the responsibilities of the Department of Social Services with respect to submitting the fingerprint images and information described above to the applicant, licensee, or direct care staff person, as appropriate.

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/22/2012 (HTML VERSION):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1471_bill_20120822_amended_sen_v95.html

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/22/2012 (PDF VERSION)http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1471_bill_20120822_amended_sen_v95.pdf

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to the State Senate floor by vote of 10 to 4.

NEXT STEPS:  The bill could be approved by the full Senate as early as August 27th, Monday – the next Senate floor session.  After approval there – which is almost certain – the bill would head back to the Assembly for final vote (called “concurrence”) that has to happen on or before the end of the day of August 31st (Friday) – the last day of the 2012 legislative session.  The bill requires only a majority vote and would take effect immediately upon approval by the Governor.

CDCAN COMMENT: 

The Governor’s Department of Finance told the Senate Budget panel that the clarifications in the bill are “technical in nature” and clarifies previously approved changes to the IHSS program, including establishment of the new Statewide Authority. 

 AB 1476 – EDUCATION: BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION MANDATE

CDCAN SUMMARY (as amended 08/22/2012):

  • This bill would proposes “clean-up” provisions dealing with Cal Grants, UC Merced but also significant modification to the State’s behavioral intervention plan mandate for students with special needs in special education.
  • Existing State regulations of the California Department of Education, among other things, prohibit the authorization, order, consent to, or payment for specified interventions, or interventions similar to the prohibited interventions and require nonpublic schools and agencies to develop policies consistent with regulations related to emergency interventions.
  • Existing State regulations also provide that emergency interventions, among other things, may be used only to control unpredictable, spontaneous behavior which poses a clear and present danger of serious physical harm to the individual or others, require that emergency interventions be employed for no longer than necessary to contain the behavior, and prohibit emergency interventions from including specified interventions.
  • Existing federal regulations of the US Department of Education require the individualized education program (IEP) team to consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports to address the behavior of a child whose behavior impedes his or her learning and the learning of others.
  • Existing federal regulations of the US Department of Education provide the procedures for evaluations related to behavioral needs.
  • This bill would codify a portion of those federal regulations related to emergency interventions and prohibited interventions consistent with certain requirements.
  • The bill generally would codify the portion of the federal regulations that require the individualized education program (IEP) team to consider the use of positive  behavioral interventions and supports to address the behavior of an individual whose behavior impedes his or her learning and the learning of others, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program, and require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to issue non-mandatory program guidelines regarding the systematic use of behavioral interventions, and provide related training, as specified.
  • Existing State law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to develop and the State Board of Education to adopt regulations governing the use of behavioral interventions with individuals with exceptional needs receiving special education and related services.
  • This bill would require the state board to repeal those State regulations.
  • Existing State law provides a person recognized by the national Behavior Analyst Certification Board as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst qualifies as a behavioral intervention case manager of a school district, special education local plan area, or county office of education and may conduct behavior assessments and provide behavioral intervention services for individuals with exceptional needs.
  • Existing State law provides that a school district, special education local plan area,  or county office of education is not required to use a Board Certified Behavior Analyst as a behavioral intervention case manager.
  • This bill would instead provide that a person recognized by the national Behavior Analyst Certification Board as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst may conduct behavior assessments and provide behavioral intervention services for individuals with exceptional needs.
  • ·      This bill would provide that a school district, special education local plan area, or county office of education is not required to use a Board Certified Behavior Analyst to conduct behavior assessments and provide behavioral intervention services for individuals with exceptional needs.

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/22/2012 (68 PAGES PDF VERSION):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1476_bill_20120822_amended_sen_v97.pdf

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/22/2012 (HTML VERSION):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1476_bill_20120822_amended_sen_v97.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to the State Senate floor by vote of 10 to 4.

NEXT STEPS:  The bill could be approved by the full Senate as early as August 27th, Monday – the next Senate floor session.  After approval there – which is almost certain – the bill would head back to the Assembly for final vote (called “concurrence”) that has to happen on or before the end of the day of August 31st (Friday) – the last day of the 2012 legislative session.  The bill requires only a majority vote and would take effect immediately upon approval by the Governor.

CDCAN COMMENT:

  • The Governor’s Department of Finance told the Senate panel on August 23rd that the education trailer bill proposes “…cleanup provisions for education and modification to the behavioral intervention plan mandate that will reduce state mandate costs” and also technical changes to the Cal Grant program, and provisions dealing with UC Merced. 
  •  Some advocates who were at the August 23rd hearing expressed concern about findings and intent language regarding the provisions dealing with the modification of the behavioral intervention plan mandate, and concerns about the lack of time to review and consider the provisions dealing with those changes that they said could have major impact.  They urged the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee to delete those provisions for a more careful policy review next year. The committee voted to approve the bill as amended August 22nd leaving the behavioral intervention plan changes in it.

 

AB 1477 – BUDGET BILL “JUNIOR”

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/22/2012 (38 PAGE PDF):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1477_bill_20120822_amended_sen_v98.pdf

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/22/2012 (HTML): http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1477_bill_20120822_amended_sen_v98.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned to the State Senate floor by vote of 10 to 4. (with amendments)

NEXT STEPS: See AB 1468, AB 1471 “Next Steps”

CDCAN COMMENT:  The Governor’s Department of Finance told the Senate budget panel on August 23rd that AB 1477 “…makes amendments to the budget act correcting a number of technical errors as well as to highlight the some of the more substantial changes…” and would allow “…the California State University access to some reserve funds, approving three bargaining agreements that were not completed in time when the 2012-2013 State Budget was passed last June, PUC [Public Utilities Commission] Special Funds…” and make a technical change to CalWORKS, the State’s “welfare-to-work  program.

 

AB 1478 – DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (29 PAGE PDF):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1478_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v96.pdf

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (HTML): http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1478_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v96.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to the State Senate floor by vote of 9 to 4.

(with proposed additional proposed amendments)

NEXT STEPS: See AB 1468, AB 1471 “Next Steps”

 

AB 1481- PUBLIC SAFETY

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (31 PAGE PDF):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1481_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v97.pdf

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (HTML): http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1481_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v97.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to the State Senate floor by vote of 9 to 3.

Impacts three issues – clarifying impact of fee as part of the budget

NEXT STEPS: See AB 1468, AB 1471 “Next Steps”

 

AB 1487 – SPECIAL FUNDS

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (6 PAGE PDF):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1487_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v98.pdf

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (HTML): http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1487_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v98.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to the State Senate floor by vote of 9 to 3.

NEXT STEPS: See AB 1468, AB 1471 “Next Steps”

CDCAN COMMENT: 

  • ·      The Governor’s Department of Finance told the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee on August 23rd that “…this bill addresses the broader issue that we were speaking of [earlier in the hearing dealing with Department of Parks and Recreation] that has certainly come to light due to the Department of Parks problems  This bill really sort of puts in statute the process that the director committed to this committee in terms of laying forth a process going forward to ensure that special funds are reconciled each year between the Controller’s and Department of Finance’s records.”
  • ·      Sen. Mark Leno added that “…We had a full conversation of this last week.  I think the two operative verbs here are  reconciliation and methodologies…that’s what’s in this bill.”
  • ·      Sen. Emmerson however criticized the proposed measure saying “…I think this bill is premature and not comprehensive.  It is not real clear what the problems are…this bill fails to require auditing and investigation of encumbrances. It fails to establish safeguards to prevent unauthorized leave buy-outs and overtime payments. It fails to establish standards for responsible fund balances.  It fails to address wasteful spending in the Mental Health Services Fund or Prop 63, and it fails to address discrepancies in the restitution fund…”

 

AB 1488 – MENTAL HEALTH STATE HOSPITALS

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (86 PAGE PDF):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1488_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v98.pdf

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENED 08/21/2012 (HTML): http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1488_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v98.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to the State Senate floor by vote of 9 to 3.

NEXT STEPS: See AB 1468, AB 1471 “Next Steps”

CDCAN COMMENT:

Governor’s Department of Finance said this bill was necessary, following the elimination of the Department of Mental Health (as part of the 2012-2013 State Budget passed last  June and signed into law) the was replaced by the new Department of State Hospitals and “…In doing so, there is obviously a lot of substantial work, but there is also code cleanup in terms of name changes.  This bill is largely capturing those name changes.”

 

AB 1489 – ELIMINATION OF 7 ADVISORY BOARDS

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/22/2012 (19 PAGE PDF):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1489_bill_20120822_amended_sen_v98.pdf

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/22/2012 (HTML): http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1489_bill_20120822_amended_sen_v98.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to the State Senate floor by vote of 9 to 3.

NEXT STEPS: See AB 1468, AB 1471 “Next Steps”

CDCAN COMMENT:

  • The Governor’s Department of Finance said at the August 23rd Senate Budget Committee hearing that in the “…last two budget acts the Legislature and Governor have eliminated 60 different entities….this bill eliminates several more” boards that was proposed by the Governor in May as part of his budget revisions but was not included in the final budget passed and signed into law last June.  The Department of Finance said that however “…there was consensus now” that there was no need for the seven advisory boards or task forces proposed for elimination in the bill.  
  • Sen. Leno commented that including the seven boards and task force for elimination was determined based on threshold that those entities’ “…assigned task was completed, redundant or inactive.” 

 

AB 1496 – RELIGNMENT

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (3 PAGE PDF):http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1496_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v95.pdf

LATEST COPY OF BILL AS AMENDED 08/21/2012 (HTML): http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1496_bill_20120821_amended_sen_v95.html

LATEST ACTION 08/23/2012: Returned bill to the Senate floor for final vote by vote of 9 to 3.

NEXT STEPS: See AB 1468, AB 1471 “Next Steps”

CDCAN COMMENT:

Governor’s Department of Finance said to the Senate budget committee on August 23rd that the bill would make “…technical corrections to ensure allocation for realignment is working as everyone intended…” 

Find more articles like this at: www.cdcan.us

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

  • LAAAC is managed by St. Barnabas Senior Services; Funded, in part, by Archstone Foundation.
  • St. Barnabas Senior Services

%d bloggers like this: