vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Home Page - Cal MyHazards
the best way to recover from disasters is by reducing the risks before a disaster strikes.
 

 Please note: This web site is for general purpose use only. Real estate disclosure information can be
 obtained from your local city or county government. See our disclaimer below for more information regarding
 the limitations of this web service..
 
The Purpose of MyHazards web site

 We all understand that disasters will continue to occur throughout California. Hazard mitigation saves lives, preserves property, and protects the environment during times of disaster. MyHazards facilitates the identification of hazards by individuals, businesses, and local government.
 

Earthquake Risk

 Earthquakes can occur everywhere in California which means all Californians live with an earthquake risk.
 In addition to the shaking caused by earthquakes, other things can occur such as landslides, surface fault ruptures
 and liquefaction--all of which may cause injury or property damage. Take note of where you live, read the
 information provided here, and contact your local city our county government for further details on how
 to be prepared where you live.
 
Earthquake Preparedness

 More information and ideas on how to secure the contents of your home can be found at
 

 Earthquake Country Alliance
 

Recommended actions for Earthquake Fault zones

 If the property is not developed, a fault study may be required before the parcel can be subdivided or structures permitted.
 If a property is developed, you will not need a geologic study unless you plan to extensively add onto or remodel an existing structure.
 

Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
 

Recommended actions for Liquefaction Seismic Hazard zones

 What can I do about high liquefaction probability
 

 Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards - see Chapter 5
 

Recommended actions for Earthquake-Induced Landslide zones

 Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards - see Chapter 6
 

*About the Seismic Hazard Zonation Maps:

 These maps prepared by the California Geological Survey are State-mandated regulatory maps that
 show "Zones of Required Investigation" for surface fault rupture, liquefaction and landslide
 hazard. They do not depict different degrees of hazard, rather they identify zones within
 which site specific studies will be required for new construction. These maps also are used
UNT Web Archive
gov,fema)/library/file?file=spa_quake_safety_text_05_2008.pdf&fileid=22341b30-2357-11dd-9aa9-001185636a87&type=originalaccessibleformatfile
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 29, 2008 and Jan 19, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/library/file?file=spanishfort_29.pdf&fileid=5ea27fd0-4d4d-11db-bb87-000bdba87d5b&type=publishedfile
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 28, 2008 and Jan 19, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/library/file?file=spanishfort_dea.pdf&fileid=e84b9f30-95de-11db-b057-000bdba87d5b&type=publishedfile
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 28, 2008 and Jan 19, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/library/file?file=spanishfort_dea.txt&fileid=e84d9b00-95de-11db-b057-000bdba87d5b&type=originalaccessibleformatfile
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 28, 2008 and Jan 19, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/library/file?file=spanishfort_fonsi.pdf&fileid=178c3880-95e0-11db-b057-000bdba87d5b&type=publishedfile
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 28, 2008 and Jan 19, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/library/file?file=spanishfort_fonsi.txt&fileid=178c86a0-95e0-11db-b057-000bdba87d5b&type=originalaccessibleformatfile
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 28, 2008 and Jan 19, 2009
Bill Text - SB-375 Transportation planning: travel demand models: sustainable communities strategy: environmental review.
Except as specifically provided in subdivision (b) of Section 65361, the Director of Planning and Research shall not grant an extension of time from these requirements.(b) Any action brought by any interested party to review the conformity with the provisions of this article of any housing element or portion thereof or revision thereto shall be brought pursuant to Section 1085 of the Code of Civil Procedure; the court’s review of compliance with the provisions of this article shall
	 extend to whether the housing element or portion thereof or revision thereto substantially complies with the requirements of this article.(c) If a court finds that an action of a city, county, or city and county, which is required to be consistent with its general plan, does not comply with its housing element, the city, county, or city and county shall bring its action into compliance within 60 days. However, the court shall retain jurisdiction throughout the period for compliance to enforce its decision. Upon the court’s determination that the 60-day period for compliance would place an undue hardship on the city, county, or city and county, the court may extend the time period for compliance by an additional 60 days.(d) (1) If a court finds that a city, county, or city and county failed to complete the rezoning required by subparagraph (A) of paragraph
	 (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583, as that deadline may be modified by the extension provided for in subdivision (f) of that section, the court shall issue an order or judgment, after considering the equities of the circumstances presented by all parties, compelling the local government to complete the rezoning within 60 days or the earliest time consistent with public hearing notice requirements in existence at the time the action was filed. The court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order or judgment is carried out.
The 2024-25 Budget: Flood Management Proposals 
For example, the Legislature could build some General Fund for these activities into its multiyear plans and baseline budgets. Alternatively—or additionally—the Legislature could consider asking voters to approve a general obligation bond that might support several years of flood projects. While the former approach would have lower costs over time (as there would be no added interest charges), the availability of General Fund resources likely will be subject to revenue fluctuations and such expenditure plans could create budget pressures in certain years. In contrast, the latter approach would cost more overall, would not provide ongoing funding on a long‑term basis, would be subject to voter approval, and would not make funding available immediately—however it would provide a source of funding over a shorter‑term period that is less affected by downturns in state revenues and has less impact on the near‑term General Fund condition. 

 

Subscribe
 | California State Legislature
 | Online Voter Registration
 | Privacy Policy
 | Accessibility

Legislative Analyst's Office | The California Legislature's Nonpartisan Fiscal and Policy Advisor
 
 925 L Street, Suite 1000 Sacramento, CA 95814 | (916) 445-4656 | information [at] lao.ca.gov
The 2023-24 Budget: Overview of the Spending Plan (Final Version)
The final budget package, however, ultimately only included this trigger restoration language for $340 million in spending reductions. This included a $235 million reduction for multifamily seismic retrofit matching funds and $50 million reduction to the CalHome program. Under this language, these amounts will be reduced unless, in January 2024, the administration estimates there are sufficient resources available to fund these expenditures. In that case, the programs would be restored halfway through the fiscal year. 
Significant Recent One‑Time and Temporary Spending Remains After Spending‑Related Solutions. In 2021‑22 and 2022‑23, in response to historically large surpluses, the Legislature allocated tens of billions of dollars on a temporary basis—that is, to purposes that would end after a few years While the spending plan makes reductions to some of these temporary allocations, most notably in 2023‑24, significant temporary spending is still authorized under current law for 2023‑24 and beyond. Under our estimates, these remaining amounts would total $12.5 billion in 2023‑24, $9.4 billion in 2024‑25, and $4.1 billion in 2025‑26. To the extent budget problems persist—as we anticipate is likely—the Legislature would have to revisit these and other spending augmentations in the future. Appendix 4 provides a list of temporary, discretionary spending (above $50 million) allocated in recent years that is still in place after the reductions in the 2023‑24 budget package.
$10 Billion in Cost Shifts
Under LAO estimates, the budget package includes $10.3 billion in cost shifts. Cost shifts occur when the state moves costs between entities, fund sources, or across fiscal years. For example, shifting spending from the General Fund to special funds or, as has been done in prior budgets, shifting costs from the state to local governments.
2001 Budget Analysis: Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (3360)
We recommend that if the Legislature approves an
augmentation to the siting program, it should be funded from ERPA, consistent with program and department history. We note that
the proposed ERPA fund balance at the end of the budget year, if all proposals in the Governor's budget were adopted, would be
$2.7 million, or $0.4 million less than necessary to support this proposal. However, as discussed below, we recommend the
Legislature shift $3.5 million of one-time expenditures proposed for energy efficiency and alternative energy grant programs from
ERPA to the General Fund. Thus, for the Governor's energy-related proposals, our recommendations would result in one-time
expenditures receiving General Fund support, while ongoing responsibilities would be supported by ERPA. This would provide
sufficient resources in ERPA to support the siting proposal.
Long Term Energy Baseload Reduction Initiative 
We recommend that the Legislature approve the $2.8 million General Fund request proposed for electricity demand
analysis on a one-time basis as the Energy Commission has not made the case that General Fund support is needed on
an ongoing basis. We further recommend that the Legislature approve $3.5 million for one-time energy efficiency
proposals and solar and distributed generation grant programs from the General Fund instead of the Energy
Resources Programs Account. (Augment Item 3360-001-0001 by $3.5 million and reduce Item 3360-001-0465 by
$3.5 million.) 
The Governor's budget proposes $5.9 million ($3.2 million General Fund) for a Long-Term Energy Baseload Reduction Initiative as
outlined in Figure 1.

 Figure 1
 California Energy Commission
Long Term Energy Baseload Reduction Initiative 
 (In Thousands)
 
 Proposed Amount
 
 
 General
Fund

Special
Funds

One-Time/
Ongoing
 Electricity Analysis
 Customer characteristics survey. Collect and
analyze data on electricity use for demand
analysis models.

$2,800
 
Ongoing
 New market functions. Analyze (1) market
mechanisms and (2) consumer response to choice
UNT Web Archive
gov,fema)/kids/games/wordsearch/quake_game.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 8 pages between Oct 26, 2008 and May 7, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/games/wordsearch/safety_game.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 8 pages between Oct 26, 2008 and May 7, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/games1.htm
 

 4 versions
 

 12 pages between Sep 16, 2008 and Aug 25, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason01.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason02.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason03.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason04.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason05.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason06.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason07.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason08.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/gleason111202.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 8 pages between Oct 26, 2008 and May 7, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/graham01.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kids/graham02.htm
 

 3 versions
 

 6 pages between Oct 27, 2008 and Jan 18, 2009
UNT Web Archive
gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=20&month=02
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=20&month=03
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=20&month=04
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=20&month=06
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=20&month=08
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=20&month=10
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=20&month=11
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=21&month=02
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=21&month=09
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=21&month=10
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
 

 gov,fema)/kidsapps/disasterhistory_view.do?day=22&month=01
 

 3 versions
 

 4 pages between Jan 13, 2009 and Jan 18, 2009
Supervisory Guidance | Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Disasters and emergencies
 
 

 Published
 
 MAY 21, 2020

Statement on Supervisory and Enforcement Practices Regarding Regulation Z Billing Error Resolution Timeframes in Light of the COVID-19 Pandemic

 The Bureau is issuing this statement to inform creditors of the Bureau’s flexible supervisory and enforcement approach during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding the timeframe within which creditors complete their investigations of consumers’ billing error notices.
 

•
 Disasters and emergencies
 
 

•
 Enforcement
 
 

•
 Truth in Lending Act (TILA)
 
 

•
 Supervision
 
 

 Published
 
 MAY 13, 2020

Joint Statement Encouraging Responsible Small-Dollar Lending in Response to COVID-19

 The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency are issuing this statement to specifically encourage financial institutions to offer responsible small-dollar loans to both consumers and small businesses.
 

•
 Banking
 
 

•
 Access to credit
 
 

•
 Disasters and emergencies
 
 

 Published
 
 MAY 12, 2020

Handling of Information and Documents During Mortgage Servicing Transfers (CFPB Bulletin 2020-02)

 The Bureau is issuing this Bulletin to provide mortgage servicers clarity, facilitate compliance, and prevent harm to consumers during the transfer of residential mortgages.
 

•
 Mortgage servicing
 
 

•
 Disasters and emergencies
 
 

 Previous
 
Next
 

 Page
 

 1 out of 4 total pages
 

 of 4

 Go
 

 Back to top 

 About Us
 

 Contact Us
 

 Careers
 

 Events
 

 Industry Whistleblowers
 

 CFPB Ombudsman
 

 FOIA
 

 Privacy
 

 Website Privacy Policy & Legal Notices
 

 Data
 

 Open Government
 

 Information Quality Guidelines
 

 Diversity & Inclusion
 

 Administrative Adjudication
 

 Plain Writing
 

 Accessibility
 

 Office of Civil Rights
 

 No FEAR Act & Cummings Act
 

 Tribal
 

USA.gov 

Office of Inspector General 

 An official website of the
 United States government
Bill Text - SB-375 Transportation planning: travel demand models: sustainable communities strategy: environmental review.
council of governments files an objection pursuant to this subdivision and includes with the objection a proposed alternative determination of its regional housing need, it shall also include documentation of its basis for the alternative determination. Within 45 days of receiving an objection filed pursuant to this section, the department shall consider the objection and make a final written determination of the region’s existing and projected housing need that includes an explanation of the information upon which the determination was made.SEC. 9. Section 65584.02 of the Government Code is amended to read:65584.02. (a) For the fourth and subsequent revisions of the housing element pursuant to Section 65588, the existing and projected need for housing may be determined for each region by the department as follows, as an alternative to the process pursuant to Section 65584.01:(1) In a region in which at least one subregion has accepted delegated authority pursuant to Section 65584.03, the region’s housing need shall be determined at least 26 months prior to the housing element update deadline pursuant to Section 65588. In a region in which no subregion has accepted delegation pursuant to Section 65584.03, the region’s housing need shall be determined at least 24 months prior to the housing element deadline.(2) At least six months prior to the department’s determination of regional housing need pursuant to paragraph (1), a council of governments may request the use of population and household forecast assumptions used in the regional transportation plan. This request shall include all of the following:(A) Proposed data and assumptions for factors contributing to housing need beyond household growth identified in the forecast. These factors shall include allowance for vacant or replacement units, and may include other adjustment factors.(B) A proposed planning period that is not longer than the period of time covered by the regional transportation improvement plan or plans of the region pursuant to Section 14527, but a period not less than five years, and not longer than six years.(C) A comparison between the population and household assumptions used for the Regional Transportation Plan with population and household estimates and projections of the Department of Finance.(b) The department shall consult with the council of governments regarding requests submitted pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a).
The 2024-25 Budget: CalFire—Implementation of a 66-Hour Workweek
Specifically, instead of its current model of three staffing periods—base, transitional, and peak, as discussed earlier—CalFire would move to two staffing periods—base and peak—as shown in Figure 7. Also, the peak staffing period would be extended to nine months rather than five months. Furthermore, the number of fire engines that would be staffed during the base period would more than double—153 versus 65.
Would Adopt a Platoon Staffing Model. In addition to moving the department towards greater year‑round staffing of engines, the additional permanent personnel would allow CalFire to adjust its staffing rotation to a platoon model (subject to further bargaining with Unit 8). Under this approach, firefighters would rotate on and off duty together as a group rather than individually. For example, an engine might be staffed by a team made up of a Fire Captain, Fire Apparatus Engineer, and Fire Fighter I on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday; a separate trio of individuals on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday; and a third group on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. Notably, under this model, some days would have overlapping groups of two teams working on the same day.

Proposed Changes Could Have Indirect Impacts on Other Agencies. In addition to the direct impacts on CalFire operations, the workweek change could potentially have indirect impacts on CalFire and other partner agencies, many of which may not be fully understood yet. For example, currently, many local agencies have contracts with CalFire to provide local fire protection and emergency services. If the proposal is approved, we expect these agreements ultimately may need to be modified to reflect that (1) more personnel will be needed to fill each seat on a fire engine because of the higher staffing factors and (2) each fire engine will be staffed with a mix of relatively more costly personnel than is currently the case. These changes could result in higher costs for these local agencies and potentially make it less advantageous for some of them to contract with CalFire for services. 
Legislature Could Explore Other Options 
As we discussed previously, addressing the welfare of firefighters is a worthwhile goal. However, particularly given the state’s fiscal condition, the Legislature could consider other ways to address this underlying concern as an alternative to changing the workweek.
Help with disaster relief | FTB.ca.gov
*Note: If your principal residence or place of business (including tax-exempt organizations) is in Modoc or Shasta counties, income tax filing and payment deadlines that fall between Feb. 21, 2023, and Aug. 15, 2023, are due Aug. 15, 2023.

 Q8: I am an affected taxpayer who received a bill for a late filing penalty or late payment penalty relating to an original or extended due date that fell during the disaster postponement period. Can I have the penalty abated?
 

 

A8: Yes. If you are an affected taxpayer who received a bill for a late filing penalty or late payment penalty relating to a due date that fell between December 27, 2022, and November 16, 2023, and you timely filed your return and paid your tax by November 16, 2023, you should contact FTB to have the penalty abated.
*Note: If your principal residence or place of business is in Modoc or Shasta counties, income tax filing and payment deadlines that fall between Feb. 21, 2023, and Aug. 15, 2023, are due Aug. 15, 2023.

 Q9: I am an affected taxpayer who began an Internal Revenue Code section 1031 transaction with either a 45-day identification period or a 180-day exchange period that hadnât expired by January 8, 2023. Does the disaster postponement to November 16, 2023 (or Aug. 15, 2023 for Modoc and Shasta counties), apply to these transactions?
 

A9: Yes. If the last day of the 45-day identification period or the last day of the 180-day exchange period falls on or after December 27, 2022, the deadline for an affected taxpayer is postponed by 120 days or to November 16, 2023, whichever is later. The postponement period may not extend beyond the earlier of: the due date of the taxpayerâs return (including extensions) for the year of the transfer or one year.
A taxpayer is an affected taxpayer if the taxpayerâs principal residence is in one of the California counties identified by the federal government as the covered disaster area.