Life insurance

TopicBill numbersort iconAuthorInterest positionBecame law
An Act to Amend Section 396 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance. AB 1512 (2015-2016) SupportYes
Existing law requires an insurance policy to specify certain information, including, but not limited to, the parties to the contract, the property or life insured, the risks insured against, premium,… More
Existing law requires an insurance policy to specify certain information, including, but not limited to, the parties to the contract, the property or life insured, the risks insured against, premium, and the coverage period. Existing law, commencing January 1, 2016, and with regard to private passenger automobile insurance that provides coverage for 6 months or longer, specified residential property insurance, and policies of individual disability income insurance that are issued and take effect or that are renewed on or after January 1, 2016, requires an insurer to maintain a verifiable process or adopt a procedure that allows an applicant or policyholder to designate one additional person to receive notice of lapse, termination, expiration, nonrenewal, or cancellation of a policy for nonpayment of premium, as specified. Existing law provides that if an insurer opts to adopt the verifiable process, then the insurer, shall provide the policyholder, within 30 days after the inception of an individual policy, with notice of the right to designate one person. Existing law provides that if a policyholder pays the premium for an insurance policy through a payroll or pension deduction plan, then the notice of the right to designate one person need only be sent within 60 days after the policyholder is no longer on that deduction payment plan. Existing law further requires the application form for an insurance policy to clearly indicate the deduction payment plan selected by the applicant. This bill would delete the requirement that the application form clearly indicate the deduction payment plan selected by the applicant. The bill would make these provisions inapplicable to a policy of disability income insurance if the premiums for the policy are paid entirely by the employer. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 1798.81.5, 1798.82, and 1798.85 of the Civil Code, Relating to Personal Information Privacy. AB 1710 (2013-2014) DickinsonOpposeYes
Existing law requires a person or business conducting business in California that owns or licenses computerized data that includes personal information, as defined, to disclose, as specified, a… More
Existing law requires a person or business conducting business in California that owns or licenses computerized data that includes personal information, as defined, to disclose, as specified, a breach of the security of the system or data following discovery or notification of the security breach to any California resident whose unencrypted personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person. Existing law also requires a person or business that maintains computerized data that includes personal information that the person or business does not own to notify the owner or licensee of the information of any breach of the security of the data immediately following discovery, as specified. Existing law requires a person or business required to issue a security breach notification pursuant to these provisions to meet various requirements, including that the security breach notification provide specified information. This bill would require, with respect to the information required to be included in the notification, if the person or business providing the notification was the source of the breach, that the person or business offer to provide appropriate identity theft prevention and mitigation services, if any, to the affected person at no cost for not less than 12 months if the breach exposed or may have exposed specified personal information. Existing law requires a business that owns or licenses personal information about a California resident to implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices appropriate to the nature of the information, to protect the personal information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. This bill would expand these provisions to businesses that own, license, or maintain personal information about a California resident, as specified. Existing law prohibits a person or entity, with specified exceptions, from publicly posting or displaying an individual’s social security number or doing certain other acts that might compromise the security of an individual’s social security number, unless otherwise required by federal or state law. This bill would also, except as specified, prohibit the sale, advertisement for sale, or offer to sell of an individual’s social security number. Hide
An Act to Add Section 396 to the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance. AB 1804 (2013-2014) PereaOpposeYes
Existing law requires an insurance policy to specify certain information, including, but not limited to, the parties to the contract, the property or life insured, the risks insured against, premium,… More
Existing law requires an insurance policy to specify certain information, including, but not limited to, the parties to the contract, the property or life insured, the risks insured against, premium, and the coverage period. This bill, commencing January 1, 2016, and with regard to private passenger automobile insurance that provides coverage for 6 months or longer, specified residential property insurance, and policies of individual disability income insurance that are issued and take effect or that are renewed on or after January 1, 2016, would require an insurer to maintain a verifiable process or adopt a procedure that allows an applicant or policyholder to designate one additional person to receive notice of lapse, termination, expiration, nonrenewal, or cancellation of a policy for nonpayment of premium, as specified. The bill would prohibit an insurance policy from lapsing or being terminated for nonpayment of premium unless the insurer, at least 10 days prior to the effective date of the lapse, termination, expiration, nonrenewal, or cancellation, gives notice, as provided, to the individual designated, if any, at the address provided by the policyholder for these purposes. The bill would specify that an individual designated by a policyholder does not have any rights, whether as an additional insured or otherwise, to any benefits under the policy, other than the right to receive the notice of lapse, termination, expiration, nonrenewal, or cancellation for nonpayment of premium. Hide
An Act to Add Section 1367.004 to the Health and Safety Code, and to Add Section 10112.26 to the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. AB 1962 (2013-2014) SkinnerOpposeYes
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful… More
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires a health care service plan or health insurer to comply with specified minimum medical loss ratios and requires a plan or insurer to provide an annual rebate to enrollees and insureds if the ratio of the amount of premium revenue expended by the plan or insurer on specified costs to the total amount of premium revenue is less than a certain percentage. Existing law specifies that these requirements do not apply to specialized health care service plan contracts or specialized health insurance policies. This bill would require health care services plans that issue, sell, renew, or offer specialized dental health care service plan contracts and health insurers that issue, sell, renew, or offer specialized dental health insurance policies to, no later than September 30, 2015, and each year thereafter, file a report, to be known as the MLR annual report, with the departments that contains the same information required in the 2013 federal Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) Annual Reporting Form. The bill would require the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance, as applicable and, if a financial examination is determined to be necessary to verify the representations in the MLR annual report, to provide the health care service plan or health insurer with a notification before conducting the examination, and would require the plan or insurer to electronically submit to the appropriate department specified requested records, books, and papers. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that the data reported pursuant to these provisions be considered by the Legislature in adopting a medical loss ratio standard for health care service plans and specialized health insurance policies that cover dental services that would take effect no later than January 1, 2018. The bill would authorize the Department of Managed Health Care and the Department of Insurance, until January 1, 2018, to issue guidance to health care service plans and health insurers of specialized health insurance policies subject to these provisions regarding compliance with these provisions, as specified. Because a willful violation of the bill’s requirements by a health care service plan would be a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 64, 480.1, 480.2, and 482 Of, to Add Section 480.9 To, and to Add and Repeal Section 486 Of, the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Taxation, to Take Effect Immediately, Tax Levy. AB 2372 (2013-2014) AmmianoOpposeNo
The California Constitution generally limits ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property. For purposes of this limitation, “full cash value” is defined as the… More
The California Constitution generally limits ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property. For purposes of this limitation, “full cash value” is defined as the assessor’s valuation of real property as shown on the 1975–76 tax bill under “full cash value” or, thereafter, the appraised value of that real property when purchased, newly constructed, or a change in ownership has occurred. Existing property tax law specifies those circumstances in which the transfer of ownership interests in a corporation, partnership, limited liability company, or other legal entity results in a change in ownership of the real property owned by that entity, and generally provides that a change in ownership as so described occurs if a legal entity or other person obtains a controlling or majority ownership interest in the legal entity. Existing law also specifies other circumstances in which certain transfers of ownership interests in legal entities result in a change in ownership of the real property owned by those legal entities. Existing law requires the Franchise Tax Board to include a question on corporation and income returns for partnerships, banks, and corporations to assist in the determination of whether a change in ownership as so described has occurred. This bill would specify that if, on or after January 1, 2015, 90% or more of the direct or indirect ownership interests in a legal entity are cumulatively transferred in one or more transactions, the transfer of the ownership interest is a change in ownership of the real property owned by the legal entity, whether or not any one legal entity or person acquires control of the ownership interests. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to include an additional question on corporation and income returns for partnerships, banks, and corporations to assist in the determination of whether a change in ownership as so described has occurred. This bill would require the State Board of Equalization to report to the Legislature, no later than January 1, 2020, regarding the implementation of these changes in ownership, including, but not limited to, the economic impact and frequency of reassessments of real property owned by legal entities. Existing law requires, upon a change in control or change in ownership of a legal entity that owns an interest in real property in this state, or when requested by the State Board of Equalization, that the person or legal entity acquiring ownership or control, or the legal entity that has undergone a change in ownership, file a change in ownership statement with the board, as specified. Existing law requires a penalty of 10% of the taxes applicable to the new base year value, as specified, or 10% of the current year’s taxes on the property, as specified, to be added to the assessment made on the roll if a person or legal entity required to file a change in ownership statement fails to do so. This bill would also require, in the case of a change in ownership when 90% or more of the ownership interests in the legal entity are cumulatively transferred, as described above, the corporation, partnership, limited liability company, or other legal entity that underwent the change in ownership to file a change in ownership statement signed under penalty of perjury with the State Board of Equalization, as specified. This bill would increase the penalties for failure to file a change in ownership statement, as described above, from 10% to 15%. This bill would require the State Board of Equalization to notify assessors if a change in control or a change in ownership of a legal entity has occurred. By expanding the crime of perjury and by imposing new duties upon local county officials with respect to changes in ownership, 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 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. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 12209, 17053.57, and 23657 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Taxation, to Take Effect Immediately, Tax Levy. AB 32 (2013-2014) PerezSupportYes
Existing laws governing the taxation of insurers, the Personal Income Tax Law, and the Corporation Tax Law, authorize, until January 1, 2017, a credit in an amount equal to 20% of a qualified… More
Existing laws governing the taxation of insurers, the Personal Income Tax Law, and the Corporation Tax Law, authorize, until January 1, 2017, a credit in an amount equal to 20% of a qualified investment, as defined, made into a community development financial institution, as defined, but not to exceed, in the aggregate amount under all those laws, $10,000,000 per year. Existing law provides that a credit shall not be allowed under those laws unless the California Organized Investment Network certifies that the investment made by the taxpayer is a qualified investment, as defined. Existing law requires a community development financial institution to apply to the California Organized Investment Network on behalf of the taxpayer for certification of the amount of the investment and the credit amount allocated to the taxpayer. The bill would increase the $10,000,000 limitation on the aggregate amount of qualified investments to $50,000,000. This bill would require a community development financial institution to provide in the application a detailed description of the intended use of the investment funds, as described, and to provide specified information about the taxpayer. This bill would require the California Organized Investment Network, when accepting and evaluating applications for certification from any community development financial institution on behalf of the taxpayer and issuing certificates, to grant highest priority to those applications where the intended use of the investments has the greatest aggregate benefit for low-to-moderate income areas or households or rural areas or households. This bill would require the Insurance Commissioner to establish tax credit issuance cycles throughout the year as necessary in order to issue tax credit certificates to those applications granted the highest priority. This bill would prohibit the total amount of investments certified by the California Organized Investment Network in any calendar year to any one community development financial institution from exceeding 30% of the annual aggregate amount of qualified investments, except as specified. This bill would require that each year 10% of the annual aggregate amount of qualified investments be reserved for investment amounts of less than or equal to $200,000, as specified. This bill would also allow the California Organized Investment Network to certify investments for the credit until January 1, 2017. This bill would require, on or before June 30, 2016, the Legislative Analyst’s Office to submit a report to the Legislature on the effects of the tax credits allowed, with a focus on employment in low-to-moderate income and rural areas, and on the benefits of these tax credits to low-to-moderate income and rural persons. Existing law authorizes the Insurance Commissioner to issue regulations to implement the credit. This bill would instead authorize the Insurance Commissioner to adopt, amend, or repeal regulations to implement the credit, and would deem the initial adoption of the regulations to be emergency regulations, as specified. Existing law authorizes the California Organized Investment Network, in allocating qualified investment credits, when certain conditions are met, to prioritize applications for those credits, as specified. This bill would revise those conditions. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 48900 of the Education Code, Relating to Pupil Discipline. AB 420 (2013-2014) DickinsonSupportYes
Existing law prohibits a pupil from being suspended from school or recommended for expulsion, unless the superintendent of the school district or the principal of the school in which the pupil is… More
Existing law prohibits a pupil from being suspended from school or recommended for expulsion, unless the superintendent of the school district or the principal of the school in which the pupil is enrolled determines that the pupil has committed a specified act, including, among other acts, disrupting school activities or otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of supervisors, teachers, administrators, school officials, or other school personnel engaged in the performance of their duties. This bill would eliminate the authority to suspend a pupil enrolled in kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 3, inclusive, and the authority to recommend for expulsion a pupil enrolled in kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, for disrupting school activities or otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of those school personnel engaged in the performance of their duties. The bill would make the restrictions inoperative on July 1, 2018. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 50079 of the Government Code, Relating to Taxation. SB 1021 (2013-2014) WolkOpposeNo
Existing law authorizes any school district to impose qualified special taxes within the district pursuant to specified procedures. Existing law defines “qualified special taxes” as special taxes… More
Existing law authorizes any school district to impose qualified special taxes within the district pursuant to specified procedures. Existing law defines “qualified special taxes” as special taxes that apply uniformly to all taxpayers or all real property within the school district and may exempt certain persons. This bill would provide that special taxes that apply uniformly include any special tax imposed on a per parcel basis, according to the square footage of a parcel or the square footage of improvements on a parcel, according to the classification of a parcel, and at a lower rate on unimproved property. This bill would authorize a school district to treat multiple parcels of real property as one parcel of real property for purposes of a qualified special tax, where the parcels are contiguous, under common ownership, and constitute one economic unit. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 10110.5, 10232.8, 10271.1, and 10292 Of, to Add Article 2.1 (Commencing with Section 10295) to Chapter 4 of Part 2 of Division 2 Of, and to Repeal and Add Section 10271 Of, the Insurance Code, Relating to Life Insurance. SB 281 (2013-2014) CalderonSupportYes
Existing law governs the business of insurance, and defines various types of insurance for these purposes, including life insurance and disability insurance. Existing law, except as provided, makes… More
Existing law governs the business of insurance, and defines various types of insurance for these purposes, including life insurance and disability insurance. Existing law, except as provided, makes the requirements imposed on disability insurance contracts inapplicable to life insurance, endowment, and annuity contracts, or supplemental contracts thereto, that provide additional benefits in case of death or dismemberment or loss of sight by accident, or that operate to safeguard contracts against lapse, or give a special surrender benefit, or a special benefit, as specified. Existing law also provides the language required as part of a provision or supplemental contract governed by these provisions. This bill would delete the term “special benefit” and replace it with the defined term “accelerated death benefit.” The bill would generally revise the phrase “provision or supplemental contract” and replace it with the term “supplemental benefit,” as defined. The bill would also revise and recast the required language of the provision or supplemental contract, as prescribed. Existing law requires a licensed health care practitioner, independent of the insurer, to certify that an insured meets the definition of a “chronically ill individual,” as specified by federal law, for purposes of establishing eligibility for benefits under a long-term care policy or certificate that provides home care benefits. This bill would prohibit an insurer, for purposes of long-term care insurance, from imposing a certification requirement of longer than 90 days. Existing law authorizes the Insurance Commissioner to adopt reasonable rules and regulations necessary to administer and carry out the purposes of certain provisions relating to the required language in a provision or supplemental contract. This bill would extend that authorization for the commissioner to adopt reasonable rules and regulations to those provisions relating to supplemental benefits that operate to safeguard life insurance contracts against lapse when the insured becomes totally disabled and those life insurance contracts with an accelerated death benefit. Existing law authorizes provisions or supplemental contracts that operate to safeguard life insurance contracts against lapse, in which the insurer waives the premium or monthly deduction for a life insurance contract when the insured becomes totally disabled, and where the waiver continues until the end of the insured’s disability, or until the attainment of an age established by the insurer. This bill would delete the provision regarding attainment of age and would instead authorize the waiver of premiums to continue for a period of time specified in the supplemental benefit. The bill would define “accelerated death benefit” as a policy provision, endorsement, or rider added to a life insurance policy that provides for the advance payment of any part of the death proceeds, payable upon the occurrence of a qualifying event, as defined. The bill would require a life insurance policy with an accelerated death benefit provision to comply with and, if applicable, explain specified requirements, including payment of benefits, commissioner approval of forms and disclosures, and a free look period, and would place limits on advertising and marketing. The bill would prohibit an insurer, broker, agent, or other person from causing a policyholder to unnecessarily replace a long-term care insurance policy with an accelerated death benefit policy, and provide certain notices when a life insurance policy or long-term care insurance policy would be replaced. The bill would prohibit accelerated death benefits from limiting or excluding coverage by type of illness, treatment, medical condition, or accident, except as specified. This bill would also provide that an insurer that fails to conform to the requirements of the above provisions would be subject to the provisions of existing law that provide for the imposition of a penalty against any person who engages in any unfair method of competition or any unfair or deceptive act or practice in the business of insurance, as provided, including civil penalties as well as a misdemeanor for an insurer intentionally advertising insurance that it will not sell. Because the bill would create a new crime, it would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would authorize the commissioner to disapprove any advertising that does not meet the requirements of these provisions, as specified. The bill would also require a policy, certificate, rider, or endorsement to include a provision giving the policyholder or certificate holder the right to appeal to the insurer a decision regarding benefit eligibility. This bill would delete obsolete provisions and make conforming changes. 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. Hide
AB 1083 (2011-2012) MonningOpposeYes
An Act to Add Section 1241.2 to the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance. AB 2160 (2011-2012) BlumenfieldOpposeYes
Existing law prohibits domestic insurers from acquiring foreign investments from or located in foreign jurisdictions designated as state sponsors of terrorism by the United States Secretary of… More
Existing law prohibits domestic insurers from acquiring foreign investments from or located in foreign jurisdictions designated as state sponsors of terrorism by the United States Secretary of State. Existing law, the Iran Contracting Act of 2010, provides that a person whose name appears on a list developed or contracted for development by the Department of General Services as a person determined by the department to be engaged in investment activities in Iran is ineligible to bid on, submit a proposal for, enter into, or renew a contract with a public entity. This bill would require that above-referenced investments by a domestic insurer in companies that are included on the list maintained by the Department of General Services be treated as nonadmitted assets on the financial statements of the domestic insurer. The bill would deem use of the list developed for purposes of the Iran Contracting Act of 2010 as automatic compliance with these requirements. The bill would require the insurer to provide the Department of Insurance, on an annual basis, with a list of the investments the insurer has in companies included on the Department of General Services list. Hide
An Act to Add Section 1367.243 to the Health and Safety Code, and to Add Section 10123.192 to the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. AB 369 (2011-2012) HuffmanOpposeNo
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of… More
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Commonly referred to as utilization review, existing law governs the procedures that apply to every health care service plan and health insurer that prospectively, retrospectively, or concurrently reviews and approves, modifies, delays, or denies, based on medical necessity, requests by providers prior to, retrospectively, or concurrent with, the provision of health care services to enrollees or insureds, as specified. Existing law also imposes various requirements and restrictions on health care service plans and health insurers, including, among other things, requiring a health care service plan that provides prescription drug benefits to maintain an expeditious process by which prescribing providers, as described, may obtain authorization for a medically necessary nonformulary prescription drug, according to certain procedures. Existing law also requires every health care service plan that provides prescription drug benefits that maintains one or more drug formularies to provide to members of the public, upon request, a copy of the most current list of prescription drugs on the formulary. This bill would impose specified requirements on health care service plans or health insurers that restrict medications for the treatment of pain pursuant to step therapy or fail first protocol. The bill would authorize the duration of any step therapy or fail first protocol to be determined by the prescribing participating plan provider or prescribing provider, as respectively defined, and would, except under certain conditions, prohibit a health care service plan or health insurer from requiring that a patient try and fail on more than 2 pain medications before allowing the patient access to other pain medication prescribed by the prescribing participating plan provider or prescribing provider, as specified. Because a willful violation of the bill’s provisions relative to health care service plans would be a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
AB 999 (2011-2012) YamadaOpposeYes
An Act to Amend Sections 38.5, 663, 678, 678.1, and 10086 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance. SB 1212 (2011-2012) CalderonSupportNo
Existing law authorizes the electronic transmission of any written notice required to be given or mailed to any person by an insurer relating to any insurance on risks or on operations in this state,… More
Existing law authorizes the electronic transmission of any written notice required to be given or mailed to any person by an insurer relating to any insurance on risks or on operations in this state, as specified. This bill would authorize offers of renewal of automobile, property, or commercial insurance, as well as certain liability insurance, and any offer of coverage or renewal and any disclosure of earthquake coverage, to be provided electronically with the insured’s consent, as specified. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 922.2, 922.4, 922.5, 922.8, and 12121 Of, to Add Sections 717.5, 922.31, 922.42, 922.43, and 922.85 To, to Add and Repeal Section 922.41 Of, and to Repeal and Add Section 922.6 Of, the Insurance Code, Relating to Reinsurance. SB 1216 (2011-2012) LowenthalSupportYes
(1)Existing law prohibits the transaction of any class of insurance in this state without first being admitted for that class of insurance, and admission is secured by procuring a certificate of… More
(1)Existing law prohibits the transaction of any class of insurance in this state without first being admitted for that class of insurance, and admission is secured by procuring a certificate of authority from the Insurance Commissioner. Before granting a certificate of authority to any applicant, the commissioner is required to consider the qualifications of the applicant, including, but not limited to, capital and surplus and lawfulness and quality of investments. This bill would authorize the commissioner to designate an insurer as a professional reinsurer when an insurer admitted and domiciled in this state, or an insurer applying to become admitted and domiciled in this state, is determined by the commissioner to be qualified, as specified, which includes, but is not limited to, the commissioner determining that the insurer is principally engaged in the business of reinsurance, that the insurer does not conduct significant amounts of direct insurance as a percentage of its net premiums, and is not engaged, on an ongoing basis, in the business of soliciting direct insurance. (2)Existing law requires insurers doing business in this state to annually make and file with the commissioner financial statements. Existing law requires that credit for reinsurance as an asset or deduction from liability be allowed a domestic ceding insurer only if the reinsurance contract includes certain provisions, including, in the event of insolvency and the appointment of a conservator, liquidator, or statutory successor of the ceding company, that the reinsurance will be payable, as specified, without diminution because of the insolvency. This bill would revise that requirement to additionally apply in the event of a change in status of the ceding company, as specified, including when the commissioner finds that the conditions for the appointment of a conservator, liquidator, or statutory successor has occurred with respect to the ceding company. The bill would also require a ceding insurer to take steps to manage its reinsurance recoverables proportionate to its own book of business and to diversify its reinsurance program. The bill would also require a domestic ceding insurer to notify the commissioner within 30 days after reinsurance recoverables from any single assuming insurer, or group of affiliated assuming insurers, exceed 50% of the domestic ceding insurer’s last reported surplus to policyholders, or after it is determined that the reinsurance recoverables are likely to exceed that limit, as specified. The bill would also require a domestic ceding insurer to notify the commissioner within 30 days after ceding to any single assuming insurer, or group of affiliated assuming insurers, more than 20% of the ceding insurer’s gross written premium in the prior calendar year, or after it has determined that the reinsurance ceded is likely to exceed this limit, as specified. (3)Existing law also allows credit for reinsurance when the reinsurance is ceded to an assuming insurer that is accredited as a reinsurer in this state, except as specified. Existing law describes an accredited reinsurer for purposes of this provision as one that, among other criteria, maintains a surplus as regards to policyholders in an amount that is either not less than $20,000,000, and whose accreditation has not been denied by the commissioner within the last 90 days, or maintains a surplus that is less than $20,000,000 and whose accreditation has been approved by the commissioner. This bill would instead require that the reinsurer demonstrate to the satisfaction of the commissioner that it has adequate financial capacity to meet its reinsurance obligations and is otherwise qualified to assume reinsurance from domestic insurers, and would delete the provision authorizing a reinsurer whose accreditation has been approved to maintain a surplus of less than $20,000,000. The bill would instead provide that an assuming insurer who maintains a surplus of not less than $20,000,000 and whose accreditation has not been denied by the commissioner within the last 90 days shall be deemed to meet that requirement and would require that an assuming insurer who is not deemed to meet this requirement obtain the affirmative approval of the commissioner. The bill would require that the approval of the commissioner be based upon a finding that the assuming insurer has adequate financial capacity to meet its reinsurance obligations and is otherwise qualified to assume reinsurance from domestic insurers. (4)Existing law also provides that credit is allowed when reinsurance is ceded to an assuming insurer that maintains a trust fund, as specified. This bill would authorize the commissioner to authorize a reduction in the required trustee surplus after an assuming insurer has permanently discontinued underwriting new business secured by the trust for at least 3 full years, as specified. The bill would also enact, only until January 1, 2016, provisions governing the certification and rating of assuming insurers by the commissioner and specify additional circumstances under which credit shall be allowed to a domestic insurer when the reinsurance is ceded to an assuming insurer that has been certified. The bill would require, among other things, that the assuming insurer be domiciled and licensed to transact insurance or reinsurance in a qualified jurisdiction and would require the commissioner to create and publish a list of qualified jurisdictions, as specified. The bill would also require the assuming insurer to maintain minimum capital and surplus, or its equivalent, in an amount determined by the commissioner, and to maintain financial strength ratings from 2 or more rating agencies, as specified. The bill would impose various filing requirements on certified reinsurers, including notification within 10 days of any regulatory actions taken against the certified reinsurer and annual audited financial statements. The bill would also require the commissioner to assign a rating to each certified reinsurer based on specified criteria, such as the certified insurer’s financial strength rating from an acceptable rating agency and the certified insurer’s reputation for prompt payment of claims. The bill would also authorize the commissioner to suspend or revoke an accredited or certified reinsurer’s accreditation or certification after notice and opportunity for hearing, as specified. The bill would make other related changes. (5)Existing law provides that credit for reinsurance as an asset or a deduction from liability is allowed a foreign ceding insurer, with exceptions, to the extent the credit has been allowed by the ceding insurer’s state of domicile if the state of domicile is accredited by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), or the credit or deduction from liability would be allowed if the foreign ceding insurer were domiciled in this state. Credit for reinsurance as an asset or a deduction from liability may be disallowed if the commissioner finds that the financial condition of the reinsurer, or the collateral or other security provided by the reinsurer, does not satisfy the credit for reinsurance requirements applicable to a ceding insurer domiciled in this state. This bill would instead require that credit for reinsurance not be denied a foreign ceding insurer to the extent that credit is recognized by the ceding insurer’s domestic state regulator, provided that the domestic state is accredited by the NAIC, or the domestic state regulator has financial solvency requirements similar to the requirements necessary for NAIC accreditation. Hide
SB 1234 (2011-2012) De LeonOpposeYes
An Act to Add Chapter 8.1 (Commencing with Section 10750) to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance. SB 1431 (2011-2012) De LeonOpposeNo
Existing law prohibits a person from transacting any class of insurance business, including health insurance, in this state without first being an admitted insurer. Under existing law, admission is… More
Existing law prohibits a person from transacting any class of insurance business, including health insurance, in this state without first being an admitted insurer. Under existing law, admission is secured by procuring a certificate of authority from the Insurance Commissioner. Existing law prohibits a health insurance policy from being issued or delivered to any person in this state unless specified requirements have been met, including that a copy of the form and premium rates are filed with the commissioner. Under existing law, if the commissioner notifies the health insurer that the filed form does not comply with specified requirements, it is unlawful for that health insurer to issue any health insurance policy in that form. Existing law, with respect to small employer health insurance, requires a carrier providing aggregate or specific stop-loss coverage or any other assumption of risk with reference to a health benefit plan, as defined, to provide that the plan meets specified requirements concerning preexisting condition provisions, waiting or affiliation periods, and late enrollees. Existing law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commencing January 1, 2014, prohibits a group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage from imposing any preexisting condition exclusion with respect to the plan or coverage. Existing law provides for self-funded or partially self-funded multiple employer welfare arrangements (MEWAs) and allows for MEWAs to apply for a certificate of compliance to do business in the state. This bill would require a stop-loss insurer, as defined, to offer coverage for all employees and dependents of a small employer to which it issues a stop-loss insurance policy and would prohibit the insurer from excluding any employee or dependent on the basis of actual or expected health status-related factors, as specified. Except as specified, the bill would require a stop-loss insurer to renew, at the option of the small employer, all stop-loss insurance policies. The bill would prohibit a stop-loss insurance policy issued on or after January 1, 2012, to a small employer from containing specified individual or aggregate attachment points, as defined, for a policy year or providing direct coverage, as defined, of an employee’s health claims. The bill would make a stop-loss insurer in violation of these provisions subject to administrative penalties and would direct those fine and penalty moneys received to the General Fund to be available upon appropriation by the Legislature. The bill would, in addition, exempt the ongoing operation of MEWAs, as specified, and a stop-loss insurance policy issued to a small employer prior to January 1, 2012, or a policy that is subsequently renewed without decrease in the attachment point or other substantial amendments from the operation of these provisions. Hide
SB 1449 (2011-2012) CalderonSupportYes
An Act to Amend Section 742.40 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance. SB 615 (2011-2012) CalderonSupportYes
Commencing January 1, 2014, existing law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), requires a health insurance issuer that offers coverage in the small group or individual… More
Commencing January 1, 2014, existing law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), requires a health insurance issuer that offers coverage in the small group or individual market to ensure that such coverage includes the essential health benefits package, as defined. Under existing federal law, a health insurance issuer, defined to include an insurance company, insurance service, or insurance organization including a health maintenance organization and excluding a group health plan, that offers health insurance coverage in the individual or small group market is required to ensure that such coverage includes the essential health benefits package. Commencing January 1, 2014, existing law requires specified individuals to ensure that they are covered under minimum essential coverage and a penalty is required to be imposed for failure to comply with that requirement. Existing law prohibits a self-funded or partially self-funded multiple employer welfare arrangement (MEWA) from providing any benefits for any resident of this state without obtaining a certificate of compliance from the Insurance Commissioner. Existing law imposes various eligibility requirements on a self-funded or partially self-funded MEWA in order to obtain a certificate of compliance, including, among other things, that it be a nonprofit corporation, that it be established and maintained by a specified association with at least 200 paid members, and that benefits be offered only to association members. Under existing law, a self-funded or partially self-funded MEWA is limited to providing certain benefits that include, among other things, medical, dental, and surgical benefits. Under existing law, a MEWA is required to offer health care coverage benefits to any newly eligible person and his or her dependents under terms and conditions no less favorable than those offered to the MEWA employers’ existing employees and their dependents under specified circumstances. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2014, prohibit a MEWA from offering, marketing, representing, or selling any product, contract, or discount arrangement as minimum essential coverage or as compliant with the essential health benefits requirement under the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, unless it meets the applicable requirements under that act. Hide
An Act to Add Article 11 (Commencing with Section 10509.930) to Chapter 5 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance. SB 713 (2011-2012) CalderonSupportYes
Existing law requires insurers to fulfill certain requirements with regard to life insurance policies. This bill, the Life Insurance Proceeds Disclosure Act of 2011, would require insurers to provide… More
Existing law requires insurers to fulfill certain requirements with regard to life insurance policies. This bill, the Life Insurance Proceeds Disclosure Act of 2011, would require insurers to provide written disclosures to life insurance beneficiaries, as specified, at the time a claim is made and before a retained asset account, as defined, is selected or established as the benefit payment. The bill would require an insurer that settles life insurance benefits through a retained asset account to provide the beneficiary with a supplemental contract that clearly discloses the rights of the beneficiary and the obligations of the insurer under the supplemental contract. The bill would also require, if the life insurance benefits are placed in a retained asset account, the insurer to send the beneficiary at least one statement per quarter, and a statement for any month in which there has been any account activity other than the crediting of interest. The bill would provide that an insurer that fails to conform to the requirements of the above provisions would be subject to provisions of existing law that provide for the imposition of a civil penalty against any person who engages in any unfair method of competition or any unfair or deceptive act or practice in the business of insurance, as provided. The bill would become operative only if SB 599 of the 2011–12 Regular Session is enacted and becomes effective. Hide
An Act to Add Article 9 (Commencing with Section 10509.910) to Chapter 5 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Annuity Transactions. SB 715 (2011-2012) CalderonSupportNo
Existing law requires agents and insurers to fulfill certain requirements with regard to the replacement of existing life insurance policies and annuities. This bill would require insurers and… More
Existing law requires agents and insurers to fulfill certain requirements with regard to the replacement of existing life insurance policies and annuities. This bill would require insurers and insurance producers, as defined, to comply with specified requirements regarding the purchase, exchange, or replacement of an annuity recommended to a consumer, including, but not limited to, having reasonable grounds for the insurance producer believing the annuity transaction would be suitable for the consumer, as provided. The bill would also prohibit an insurance producer from selling annuities unless he or she has received Insurance Commissioner-approved training, and would authorize the commissioner to require certain actions by, and impose sanctions and penalties on, insurers and their agents for a violation of the bill’s provisions. The bill would further provide that sales by a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker-dealer that comply with the suitability and supervision system requirements of FINRA shall be deemed to satisfy the suitability and supervision system requirements of this bill, as specified. Hide
SB 946 (2011-2012) SteinbergOpposeYes
An Act to Add Section 22856 to the Government Code, to Add Section 1374.74 to the Health and Safety Code, and to Add Section 10144.8 to the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. AB 1600 (2009-2010) BeallOpposeNo
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful… More
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Under existing law, a health care service plan contract and a health insurance policy are required to provide coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of severe mental illnesses of a person of any age. Existing law does not define “severe mental illnesses” for this purpose but describes it as including several conditions. This bill would expand this coverage requirement for certain health care service plan contracts and health insurance policies issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2011, to include the diagnosis and treatment of a mental illness of a person of any age and would define mental illness for this purpose as a mental disorder defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV, including substance abuse but excluding nicotine dependence and specified diagnoses defined in the manual, subject to regulatory revision, as specified. The bill would specify that this requirement does not apply to a health care benefit plan, contract, or health insurance policy with the Board of Administration of the Public Employees’ Retirement System unless the board elects to purchase a plan, contract, or policy that provides mental health coverage. Because this bill would expand coverage requirements for health care service plans, the willful violation of which would be a crime, 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. Hide
An Act to Add Section 10123.865 To, and to Add and Repeal Section 10123.866 Of, the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. AB 1825 (2009-2010) De La TorreOpposeNo
Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Under existing law, a health insurer that provides maternity coverage may not restrict inpatient hospital… More
Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Under existing law, a health insurer that provides maternity coverage may not restrict inpatient hospital benefits, as specified, and is required to provide notice of the maternity services coverage. This bill would require health insurance policies issued, amended, or renewed on or after July 1, 2011, and prior to January 1, 2014, to provide coverage for maternity services, as defined and would require health insurance policies issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2014, to provide coverage for maternity services consistent with the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as specified. The bill would also, until January 1, 2014, to the extent permitted under federal law, authorize certain individual health insurance policies to include an exclusionary period of up to 12 months on maternity services, as specified, and would require the insurer to provide a specified notice regarding that exclusionary period at the time of solicitation for the policy. Hide
An Act to Add Section 1374.255 to the Health and Safety Code, and to Add Section 10199.49 to the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. AB 2042 (2009-2010) FeuerOpposeNo
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful… More
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Under existing law, no change in premium rates or coverage in a health care service plan contract or a health insurance policy may become effective without prior written notification of the change to the contractholder or policyholder. Existing law prohibits a plan or insurer during the term of a group plan contract or policy from changing the rate of the premium, copayment, coinsurance, or deductible during specified time periods. This bill would prohibit a health care service plan or health insurer from altering the rates, as defined, that apply to individual health care service plan contracts or individual health insurance policies, or altering any benefits included in individual contracts or policies, more than once each calendar year, except as specified. Among those exceptions, the bill would provide that, if a brand name drug becomes available as a generic drug, the application of a lower cost-sharing rate for the generic drug would not constitute an alteration of benefits. The bill’s provisions would apply to a new individual plan contract or policy issued to an enrollee or insured who transfers from another plan or policy, as specified, and would prohibit the issuance of new plan contracts or policies more often than annually. Because a willful violation of these requirements by a health care service plan would be a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
An Act to Add Section 1367.49 to the Health and Safety Code, and to Add Section 10133.64 to the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. AB 2389 (2009-2010) GainesSupportNo
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care. Existing law also… More
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law prohibits a contract between a plan or insurer and a health care provider from containing certain terms. This bill would prohibit a contract by or on behalf of a plan or insurer and a health care facility, as defined, to provide inpatient hospital services or ambulatory care services to subscribers and enrollees of the plan or policyholders and insureds of the insurer from containing a provision that restricts the ability of the plan or insurer to furnish information to subscribers or enrollees of the plan or policyholders or insureds of the insurer concerning the cost range of procedures at the facility or the quality of services performed by the facility, provided that, among other requirements, the cost information is limited to certain elective, uncomplicated procedures, the plan or insurer also discloses the location of its facility cost ranges and quality measurements and makes specified disclosures regarding those measurements and the cost information provided, and the plan or insurer provides affected facilities an opportunity to review the information prior to furnishing it to subscribers, enrollees, policyholders, or insureds, as specified. The bill would make a contractual provision inconsistent with the bill’s requirements void and unenforceable. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 1386 Of, and to Add Article 6.2 (Commencing with Section 1385.01) to Chapter 2.2 of Division 2 Of, the Health and Safety Code, and to Add Article 4.5 (Commencing with Section 10181) to Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. AB 2578 (2009-2010) JonesOpposeNo
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 (Knox-Keene Act), provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and… More
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 (Knox-Keene Act), provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of insurers by the Department of Insurance, including health insurers. Existing law makes the violation of a final order by the Insurance Commissioner relating to rates imposed by certain insurers, other than health insurers, subject to assessment of a civil penalty and makes the willful violation by those insurers of specified rate provisions a misdemeanor. Under existing law, no change in premium rates or coverage in a health care service plan or a health insurance policy may become effective without prior written notification of the change to the contractholder or policyholder. Existing law prohibits a plan and insurer during the term of a group plan contract or policy from changing the rate of the premium, copayment, coinsurance, or deductible during specified time periods. This bill would require approval by the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance of an increase in the amount of the premium, copayment, coinsurance obligation, deductible, and other charges under health care service plan contracts or health insurance policies, other than Medicare supplement, dental-only, or vision-only contracts or policies. The bill would require a plan or insurer to submit to the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance, respectively, an application for a rate increase that would be effective on or after January 1, 2012, and would require review of the application in accordance with regulations that each department would be required to adopt no later than January 1, 2012. The bill would subject a rate increase that became effective January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2011, inclusive, to review by the appropriate department. The bill would require each department to notify the public of a rate application and would deem the application approved within 60 days of the date of that notice unless the department holds a hearing on the application, as specified. The bill would authorize the initiation of, and intervention in, proceedings relating to rate approvals and the award of advocacy fees and costs in those proceedings in specified circumstances. The bill would require the departments to work together in implementation of these provisions and to take specified actions in order to ensure coordination and consistency in implementation. The bill would authorize each department to assess a charge in connection with its costs associated with a rate application. The bill would direct the deposit of these fees into the respective department’s Health Rate Approval Fund, which would be created by the bill, and would make those funds available to each department for those purposes, upon appropriation. The bill would specify that a violation of its provisions is punishable by criminal sanctions under the Knox-Keene Act and under provisions applicable to insurers and, therefore, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
An Act to Add Chapter 3.6 (Commencing with Section 1024.5) to Part 3 of Division 2 of the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. AB 482 (2009-2010) MendozaOpposeNo
The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and the state Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act define and regulate consumer credit reports and authorize the use of consumer credit reports for… More
The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and the state Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act define and regulate consumer credit reports and authorize the use of consumer credit reports for employment purposes, pursuant to specified requirements. The FCRA provides that it does not preempt state law, except as specifically provided or to the extent that state laws are inconsistent with its provisions. Existing federal and state law specify the procedures that an employer is required to follow before requesting a report and if adverse action is taken based on the report. Under existing law, an employer may request a credit report for employment purposes so long as he or she provides written notice of the request to the person for whom the report is sought. Existing law requires that the written notice inform the person for whom the consumer credit report was sought of the source of the report and contain space for the person to request a copy of the report. Existing law further requires an employer, whenever he or she bases an adverse employment decision on information contained in a consumer credit report, to advise the person for whom the report was sought that an adverse action was taken based upon information contained in the report and provide the person with the name and address of the consumer credit agency making the report. This bill would prohibit an employer, with the exception of certain financial institutions, from obtaining a consumer credit report for employment purposes unless the information is (1) substantially job-related, meaning that the position of the person for whom the report is sought has access to money, other assets, or trade secrets or other confidential information, and (2) the position of the person for whom the report is sought is a position in the state Department of Justice, a managerial position, that of a sworn peace officer or other law enforcement position, or a position for which the information contained in the report is required to be disclosed by law or to be obtained by the employer. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 17516 of the Government Code, and to Amend Sections 175, 182, 186, 1055, 1055.2, 1228.5, 1228.7, 1241, 1241.6, 1410, 1675, 1701.3, 1703.6, 13176, 13193, 13204, 13220, 13261, 13274, 13285, 13291, 13304.1, 13320, 13330, 13376, 13392, 13392.5, 13395.5, 13396.7, 13426, 13442, 13521, 13522, 13523, 13523.1, 13528, 13540, 13552.4, 13553, 13576, 13578, 13580.9, 13627, 13627.4, 13755, 13800, 13801, 13903, 13904, and 13952.1 Of, to Amend the Headings of Article 1 (Commencing with Section 13300) and Article 2 (Commencing with Section 13320) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 Of, to Amend and Renumber Section 13274 Of, to Add Section 13248 To, and to Repeal Sections 1062 and 1241.5 Of, the Water Code, Relating to Water. SB 1169 (2009-2010) LowenthalOpposeYes
(1)Existing law establishes the State Water Resources Control Board (state board) and the 9 California regional water quality control boards (regional boards) as the principal state agencies with… More
(1)Existing law establishes the State Water Resources Control Board (state board) and the 9 California regional water quality control boards (regional boards) as the principal state agencies with authority over matters relating to water quality. Existing law authorizes a party aggrieved by a specified decision or order issued by the state board to obtain review of the order in superior court by filing a petition for writ of mandate within 30 days after service of a copy of the state board’s decision or order. Existing law authorizes a party aggrieved by a final decision or order of a regional board for which the state board denies review to obtain review of the decision or order of the regional board in superior court by filing a petition for writ of mandate within 30 days after the date on which the state board denies review. This bill would provide that an aggrieved party must file a petition for reconsideration with the state board to exhaust that party’s administrative remedies only if the initial decision or order is issued under authority delegated to an officer or employee of the state board and the state board by regulation has authorized a petition for reconsideration. The bill, with respect to a decision or order of a regional board, would specify that the authorization to obtain review of the decision or order of the regional board applies to a final decision or order of a regional board subject to review under a certain provision of law. (2)The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) prescribes various timelines for commencing an action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul acts or decisions of a public agency on the grounds of noncompliance with CEQA. This bill would provide that the time for filing an action or proceeding subject to these timelines for a person who seeks review of the regional board’s decision or order under a specified provision of law, or who seeks reconsideration under a state board regulation authorizing a petition for reconsideration, shall commence upon the state board’s completion of that review or reconsideration. (3)Under existing law, each California regional water quality control board consists of 9 members who are appointed by the Governor and who serve 4-year terms. This bill would extend the terms of 2 board members on each regional water quality control board, as specified, to September 30, 2014. (4)Existing law requires that, prior to the indoor use of recycled water in a condominium project, the agency delivering the recycled water to the condominium project file a report with the regional board and receive written approval of the report from the State Department of Public Health. This bill instead would require the agency to file the report with the State Department of Public Health. (5)This bill would update cross-references in, and delete obsolete provisions of, the Water Code, and make various other technical or clarifying changes. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 10113.2 and 10113.3 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Insurance. SB 1242 (2009-2010) CalderonSupportNo
Existing law prohibits a person from entering into, brokering, or soliciting life settlements, as defined, unless that person is licensed by the Insurance Commissioner. The applicant for a license is… More
Existing law prohibits a person from entering into, brokering, or soliciting life settlements, as defined, unless that person is licensed by the Insurance Commissioner. The applicant for a license is required to provide any information the commissioner may require. This bill would delete the requirement that an applicant provide any information the commissioner may require, and provide that all application information be received in confidence, as provided, and not be subject to the Public Records Act. Existing law requires that a life settlement broker provide the owner of a life insurance policy and the insured with at least all of specified disclosures in writing, prior to the signing of the life settlement contract by all parties. The disclosures include, but are not limited to, all estimates of the life expectancy of the insured which are obtained by the licensee in connection with the life settlement, unless such disclosure would violate California or federal privacy laws. This bill would provide that the broker shall be required to provide the owner and the insured with only the specified disclosures, and would delete from the list of required disclosures the estimate of the life expectancy of the insured. Existing law authorizes the commissioner to adopt rules and regulations reasonably necessary to govern life settlement transactions. This bill would recast this provision to authorize the commissioner to adopt rules and regulations reasonably necessary to implement and enforce the express provisions of the act. Existing law prohibits these provisions relating to life settlements from doing certain things, including, but not limited to, limiting the powers granted elsewhere by the laws of this state to the commissioner or an insurance fraud unit to investigate and examine possible violations of law and to take appropriate action against the wrongdoer. This bill would clarify that the above-described prohibition is applicable to insurance law, and would prohibit these provisions, except as expressly provided, from establishing any authority for the commissioner to enforce any provision of any state securities law or any rule, order, or notice issued thereunder, or grant the authority for the commissioner to regulate the assignment, transfer, sale of a settled policy, or any other transaction involving a settled policy. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 1707.7 of the Insurance Code, Relating to the Insurance Commissioner. SB 396 (2009-2010) CalderonSupportNo
Existing law requires the commissioner, on or before the first day of August to make a report to the Governor, the Legislature, and the committees of the Senate and Assembly having jurisdiction over… More
Existing law requires the commissioner, on or before the first day of August to make a report to the Governor, the Legislature, and the committees of the Senate and Assembly having jurisdiction over insurance containing a tabular statement and synopsis showing the general condition of insurance, and related matters, in this state. This bill would require the commissioner to include in this report information, by license type, relating to the number of first-time insurance license examinees who passed the exam, their overall pass rate, the total number of examinations, the mean examination score for examinees, and, for license types with an overall pass rate of less than 65%, ethnicity/race, gender, and level of education data for applicants, as specified. Hide