Energy-related unions (non-mining)

TopicBill numbersort iconAuthorInterest positionBecame law
An Act to Amend Section 1182.12 of the Labor Code, Relating to Wages. AB 10 (2013-2014) AlejoSupportYes
Existing law requires that, on and after January 1, 2008, the minimum wage for all industries be not less than $8.00 per hour. This bill would increase the minimum wage, on and after July 1, 2014, to… More
Existing law requires that, on and after January 1, 2008, the minimum wage for all industries be not less than $8.00 per hour. This bill would increase the minimum wage, on and after July 1, 2014, to not less than $9 per hour. The bill would further increase the minimum wage, on and after January 1, 2016, to not less than $10 per hour. Hide
An Act to Add Chapter 3 (Commencing with Section 3000) to Title 14 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, Relating to Liens. AB 1164 (2013-2014) LowenthalSupportNo
Existing law grants specified persons, including laborers, as defined, who contribute labor, skill, or services to a work of improvement the right to record a mechanic’s lien upon the property so… More
Existing law grants specified persons, including laborers, as defined, who contribute labor, skill, or services to a work of improvement the right to record a mechanic’s lien upon the property so improved. This bill would, with certain exceptions, authorize an employee to record and enforce a wage lien upon real and personal property of an employer, or a property owner, as specified, for wages, other compensation, and related penalties and damages owed the employee. The bill would prescribe requirements relating to the recording and enforcement of the wage lien and for its cancellation and removal. The bill would require a notice of lien on real property to be executed under penalty of perjury. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 3600.5 of the Labor Code, Relating to Workers’ Compensation. AB 1309 (2013-2014) PereaOpposeYes
Existing workers’ compensation law requires employers to secure the payment of workers’ compensation, including medical treatment, for injuries incurred by their employees that arise out of, or… More
Existing workers’ compensation law requires employers to secure the payment of workers’ compensation, including medical treatment, for injuries incurred by their employees that arise out of, or in the course of, employment. Existing law provides that an injury may be either “specific,” occurring as the result of one incident or exposure that causes disability or need for medical treatment, or “cumulative,” occurring as repetitive mentally or physically traumatic activities extending over a period of time, the combined effect of which causes any disability or need for medical treatment. Existing law provides that an employee who has been hired outside of this state and his or her employer are exempt from these provisions while the employee is temporarily within this state doing work for his or her employer if the employer has furnished workers’ compensation insurance coverage under the workers’ compensation insurance or similar laws of a state other than California, as specified. This bill would exempt an employee hired outside of this state and his or her employer from the occupational disease and cumulative injury provisions of this state’s workers’ compensation laws if (1) the employee is a professional athlete, defined, for purposes of these provisions, to include an athlete who is employed at the minor or major league level in the sport of baseball, basketball, football, ice hockey, or soccer, (2) that professional athlete is temporarily within this state doing work for his or her employer, and (3) the employer has furnished workers’ compensation insurance under the laws of the state other than California that covers the professional athlete’s employment while in this state, except as specified. This bill would deem a professional athlete to be temporarily within the state doing work for his or her employer if, during the 365 consecutive days immediately preceding the professional athlete’s last day of work for the employer within the state, the professional athlete performs less than 20% of his or her duty days, as defined, in the state. The bill would also exempt a professional athlete and his or her employer from the occupational disease or cumulative injury provisions of this state’s workers’ compensation laws when all of the professional athlete’s employers in his or her last year of work as a professional athlete are exempt from these provisions unless the professional athlete has, over the course of his or her professional athletic career, (1) worked for 2 or more seasons for a California-based team or teams, as defined, or worked 20% or more of his or her duty days in California or for a California-based team, and, (2) worked for fewer than 7 seasons for any team other than a California-based team. The bill would also state that it is the intent of the Legislature that the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board in Wesley Carroll v. Cincinnati Bengals, et al. (2013) 78 Cal.Comp.Cases ____ (ADJ2295331) (WCAB En Banc) be limited to professional athletes, and would include other specified statements of legislative intent. The bill would provide that these changes apply to all pending claims for benefits filed on or after September 15, 2013, as specified. Hide
An Act to Add Section 13084 to the Government Code, to Amend Section 1095 of the Unemployment Insurance Code, and to Add Section 11026.5 to the Welfare and Institutions Code, Relating to Public Benefits. AB 1792 (2013-2014) GomezSupportNo
Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, and under which qualified low-income persons receive health care benefits. The… More
Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, and under which qualified low-income persons receive health care benefits. The Medi-Cal program is governed, in part, by federal Medicaid provisions. Existing law provides for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), under which each county distributes nutrition assistance benefits provided by the federal government to eligible households. In California, federal nutrition assistance benefits are administered through CalFresh. Existing law requires that the eligibility of households be determined to the extent permitted by federal law, and requires the State Department of Social Services to establish a program of categorical eligibility for CalFresh in accordance with federal law. This bill would require the State Department of Health Care Services to annually inform the Employment Development Department of the names and social security numbers of all recipients of the above-described public assistance programs. The bill would require the State Department of Health Care Services to determine the average per individual cost of state and federally funded benefits across the above-described programs and inform the Employment Development Department of these costs. The bill would require the Employment Development Department to collaborate with the State Department of Health Care Services to determine the total cost of state and federally funded benefits provided to each identified employer’s employees, as specified. The bill would define an employer as an individual or organization that employs 50 or more beneficiaries of the above-described public assistance programs. The bill would also require the Department of Finance to, after obtaining specified information from the Employment Development Department, annually transmit to the Legislature and post on the department’s Internet Web site a report no later than the 3rd week of January of each year beginning in 2016 that, among other things, identifies employers that employ 50 or more beneficiaries in the state. Under existing law, the information obtained in the administration of the Unemployment Insurance Code is for the exclusive use and information of the Director of Employment Development in the discharge of his or her duties and is not open to the public. However, existing law permits the use of the information for specified purposes, and allows the director to require reimbursement for direct costs incurred. Existing law provides that a person who knowingly accesses, uses, or discloses this confidential information without authorization is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would require the Director of Employment Development to permit the use of specified information in his or her possession by the Department of Finance to prepare and submit the above-described report. By requiring this information to be provided to the Department of Finance for these purposes, this bill would expand the crime of unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of this information, and would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would prohibit an employer from discharging or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against an employee who enrolls in a public assistance program and from refusing to hire a beneficiary for reason of being enrolled in a public assistance program. This bill would prohibit an employer from disclosing to a nongovernmental entity that an employee receives or is applying for public benefits.This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1095 of the Unemployment Insurance Code proposed by SB 1028 and SB 1141, to be operative if this bill and one or both of the other bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2015, and this bill is enacted last.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 2810.3 to the Labor Code, Relating to Private Employment. AB 1897 (2013-2014) HernandezSupportNo
Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of employment and establishes specified obligations of employers to employees. Existing law prohibits a person or entity from entering into a contract… More
Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of employment and establishes specified obligations of employers to employees. Existing law prohibits a person or entity from entering into a contract for labor or services with a construction, farm labor, garment, janitorial, security guard, or warehouse contractor, if the person or entity knows or should know that the contract or agreement does not include sufficient funds for the contractor to comply with laws or regulations governing the labor or services to be provided. This bill would require a client employer to share with a labor contractor all civil legal responsibility and civil liability for all workers supplied by that labor contractor for the payment of wages, the obligation to provide a safe work environment, as specified, and the failure to obtain valid workers’ compensation coverage. The bill would define a client employer as a business entity that obtains or is provided workers to perform labor within the usual course of business from a labor contractor, except as specified. The bill would define a labor contractor as an individual or entity that supplies workers, either with or without a contract, to a client employer to perform labor within the client employer’s usual course of business and would except from this definition specified nonprofit, labor, and motion picture payroll services organizations. The bill would specify that it does not prohibit client employers and labor contractors from mutually contracting for otherwise lawful remedies for violations of its provisions by the other party. The bill would require a client employer or labor contractor to provide to a requesting enforcement agency or department, and make available for copying, information within its possession, custody, or control required to verify compliance with applicable state laws. The bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, and the Employment Development Department to adopt necessary regulations and rules to administer and enforce the bill’s provisions. The bill would provide that waiver of its provisions is contrary to public policy, void, and unenforceable. The bill would prohibit its provisions from being interpreted to impose liability in specified circumstances. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 3505.2 and 3505.4 of the Government Code, Relating to Public Employment. AB 2126 (2013-2014) BontaSupportNo
The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act requires the governing body of a local public agency to meet and confer in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with… More
The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act requires the governing body of a local public agency to meet and confer in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with representatives of a recognized employee organization. The act requires, if a tentative agreement is reached and the governing body adopts the tentative agreement, that the parties prepare jointly a nonbinding written memorandum of understanding of the agreement. Under existing law, if representatives of the public employee agency and the recognized employee organization fail to reach agreement, the parties may agree together upon the appointment of a mutually agreeable mediator. This bill instead would permit either party to request mediation and would require the parties to agree upon a mediator, if either party has provided the other with a written notice of declaration of impasse. If the parties cannot agree upon a mediator, the bill would authorize either party to request the board to appoint a mediator. The bill would require the board to appoint a mediator within 5 days after receipt of the party’s request, as prescribed. A public agency would not be required to proceed to mediation in its negotiations with respect to a bargaining unit under the above-described circumstances if the public agency has an impasse procedure that includes, at a minimum, a process for binding arbitration. The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act requires the Public Employment Relations Board to determine in disputed cases whether a particular item is within or without the scope of representation. Existing law requires the governing body of a local public agency, or those boards, commissions, administrative officers, or other representatives as may be properly designated by law or by a governing body, to meet and confer in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with representatives of recognized employee organizations. Existing law authorizes an employee organization to request that the parties’ differences be submitted to a factfinding panel not sooner than 30 days or more than 45 days following the appointment or selection of a mediator pursuant to the parties’ agreement to mediate or a mediation process required by a public agency’s local rules. Existing law authorizes an employee organization, if the dispute was not submitted to a mediation, to request that the parties’ differences be submitted to a factfinding panel not later than 30 days following the date that either party provided the other with a written notice of a declaration of impasse. Existing law prohibits an employee organization’s procedural right to request a factfinding panel from being waived expressly or voluntarily. This bill would authorize differences under these provisions to include those differences that arise from any dispute over any matter within the scope of representation as to which an obligation to meet and confer exists, and are not limited to negotiations after impasse after collective bargaining for a new or successor memorandum of understanding. The bill would limit the criteria that the factfinders would be required to consider to those criteria that the factfinders deem relevant to the dispute. The bill would authorize an employee organization to voluntarily waive the right to request a factfinding panel, in writing. The bill would include legislative findings and declarations that certain of these amendments are clarifying and declaratory of existing law. Hide
An Act to Add Article 2.5 (Commencing with Section 1569.261) to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code, Relating to Care Facilities. AB 2171 (2013-2014) WieckowskiSupportNo
Existing law, the Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of residential care facilities for the elderly by the State Department of Social Services.… More
Existing law, the Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of residential care facilities for the elderly by the State Department of Social Services. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. This bill would establish specified rights for residents of privately operated residential care facilities for the elderly, including, among other things, to be accorded dignity in their personal relationships with staff, to be granted a reasonable level of personal privacy of accommodations, medical treatment, personal care and assistance, and to confidential treatment of their records and personal information, as specified. The bill would require, at admission, a facility staff person to personally advise a resident and the resident’s representative, as described, of these and other specified rights and to provide them with a written copy of these rights. By expanding the scope of a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
An Act to Add Section 432.9 to the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. AB 218 (2013-2014) DickinsonSupportYes
Existing law prohibits both public and private employers from asking an applicant for employment to disclose, either in writing or verbally, any information concerning an arrest or detention that did… More
Existing law prohibits both public and private employers from asking an applicant for employment to disclose, either in writing or verbally, any information concerning an arrest or detention that did not result in a conviction. This bill, commencing July 1, 2014, would prohibit a state or local agency from asking an applicant to disclose information regarding a criminal conviction, except as specified, until the agency has determined the applicant meets the minimum employment qualifications for the position. The bill would include specified findings and declarations of the Legislature in support of this policy. Because this bill would impose new requirements on local agencies relative to employment application procedures, 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 714 of the Civil Code, and to Amend Section 65850.5 of the Government Code, Relating to Solar Energy. AB 2188 (2013-2014) MuratsuchiOpposeNo
(1)Existing law provides that it is the policy of the state to promote and encourage the use of solar energy systems, as defined, and to limit obstacles to their use. Existing law states that the… More
(1)Existing law provides that it is the policy of the state to promote and encourage the use of solar energy systems, as defined, and to limit obstacles to their use. Existing law states that the implementation of consistent statewide standards to achieve timely and cost-effective installation of solar energy systems is not a municipal affair, but is instead a matter of statewide concern. Existing law requires a city or county to administratively approve applications to install solar energy systems through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit. Existing law requires a solar energy system for heating water to be certified by the Solar Rating Certification Corporation or another nationally recognized certification agency. This bill would specify that these provisions address a statewide concern. The bill would additionally require a city, county, or city and county to adopt, on or before September 30, 2015, in consultation with specified public entities an ordinance that creates an expedited, streamlined permitting process for small residential rooftop solar energy systems, as specified. The bill would additionally require a city, county, or city and county to inspect a small residential rooftop solar energy system eligible for expedited review in a timely manner, as specified. The bill would prohibit a city, county, or city and county from conditioning the approval of any solar energy system permit on approval of that system by an association that manages a common interest development. The bill would require a solar energy system for heating water in single family residences and solar collectors for heating water in commercial or swimming pool applications to be certified by an accredited listing agency, as defined. Because the bill would impose new duties upon local governments and local agencies, it would impose a state-mandated local program. (2)Existing law prohibits any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of, or any interest in, real property, and any provision of a governing document from effectively prohibiting or restricting the installation or use of a solar energy system. Existing law exempts from that prohibition provisions that impose reasonable restrictions on a solar energy system that do not significantly increase the cost of the system or significantly decrease its efficiency or specified performance. Existing law defines the term “significantly,” for these purposes, with regard to solar domestic water heating systems or solar swimming pool heating systems that comply with state and federal law, to mean an amount exceeding 20% of the cost of the system or decreasing the efficiency of the solar energy system by an amount exceeding 20%, and with regard to photovoltaic systems that comply with state and federal law, an amount not to exceed $2,000 over the system cost or a decrease in system efficiency of an amount exceeding 20%, as specified. Existing law requires a solar energy system for heating water subject to the provisions described above to be certified by the Solar Rating Certification Corporation or another nationally recognized certification agency. This bill would instead define the term “significantly,” for these purposes, with regard to solar domestic water heating systems or solar swimming pool heating systems that comply with state and federal law, to mean an amount exceeding 10% of the cost of the system, not to exceed $1,000, or decreasing the efficiency of the solar energy system by an amount exceeding 10%, and with regard to photovoltaic systems that comply with state and federal law, an amount not to exceed $1,000 over the system cost or a decrease in system efficiency of an amount exceeding 10%, as specified. The bill would require a solar energy system for heating water in single family residences and solar collectors for heating water in commercial or swimming pool applications subject to the provisions described above to be certified by an accredited listing agency, as defined. (3)Existing law requires an application for approval for the installation or use of a solar energy system to be processed and approved by the appropriate approving entity in the same manner as an application for approval of an architectural modification to the property and prohibits the approver from willfully avoiding or delaying approval. Existing law requires the approving entity to notify the applicant in writing within 60 days of receipt of the application if the application is denied, as specified. The bill would instead require the approving entity to notify the applicant in writing within 45 days of receipt of the application if the application is denied, as specified. 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 66281.7 to the Education Code, Relating to Postsecondary Education. AB 2350 (2013-2014) BonillaSupportNo
Existing law, known as the Donahoe Higher Education Act, sets forth, among other things, the missions and functions of California’s public and independent segments of higher education and their… More
Existing law, known as the Donahoe Higher Education Act, sets forth, among other things, the missions and functions of California’s public and independent segments of higher education and their respective institutions of higher education. Provisions of the act apply to the University of California only to the extent that the Regents of the University of California, by appropriate resolution, act to make a provision applicable. A portion of the Donahoe Higher Education Act known as the Equity in Higher Education Act declares, among other things, that it is the policy of the State of California that all persons, regardless of their sex, should enjoy freedom from discrimination of any kind in the postsecondary educational institutions of the state. This bill would express various legislative findings and declarations relating to pregnancy discrimination. The bill would add to the Equity in Higher Education Act a provision specifying that this policy of freedom from discrimination includes, but is not limited to, freedom from pregnancy discrimination as described in a specified federal statute. This bill would prohibit postsecondary educational institutions, including the faculty, staff, or other employees of these institutions, from requiring a graduate student to take a leave of absence, withdraw from the graduate program, or limit his or her graduate studies solely due to pregnancy or pregnancy-related issues. The bill would require postsecondary educational institutions, including the faculty, staff, or other employees of these institutions, to reasonably accommodate pregnant graduate students, as specified, so that they may complete their graduate courses of study and research. The bill would also allow a graduate student who chooses to take a leave of absence because she is pregnant or has recently given birth a period consistent with the policies of the postsecondary educational institution, or a period of 12 additional months, whichever period is longer, to prepare for and take preliminary and qualifying examinations and an extension of at least 12 months toward normative time to degree while they are in candidacy for a graduate degree, unless a longer extension is medically necessary. The bill would allow a graduate student who is not the birth parent and who chooses to take a leave of absence because of the birth of his or her child a period consistent with the policies of the postsecondary educational institution, or a period of one month, whichever period is longer, to prepare for and take preliminary and qualifying examinations, and an extension of at least one month toward normative time to degree while he or she is in candidacy for a graduate degree, unless a longer period or extension is medically necessary to care for his or her partner or their child. The bill would provide that an enrolled graduate student in good academic standing who chooses to take a leave of absence because she is pregnant or has recently given birth would return to her program in good academic standing following a leave period that is consistent with the policies of the postsecondary educational institution, or a period of up to one academic year, whichever period is longer, subject to the reasonable administrative requirements of the institution, unless there is a medical reason for a longer absence, in which case her standing in the graduate program would be maintained during that period of absence. The bill would also provide that an enrolled graduate student in good academic standing who is not the birth parent and who chooses to take a leave of absence because of the birth of his or her child would return to his or her program in good academic standing following a leave period that is consistent with the policies of the postsecondary educational institution, or a period of up to one month, whichever period is longer, subject to the reasonable administrative requirements of the institution. The bill would require each postsecondary educational institution to have a written policy for graduate students on pregnancy discrimination and procedures for addressing pregnancy discrimination complaints under Title IX or this bill. The bill would require a copy of this policy to be made available to faculty, staff, and employees in their required training, and made available to all graduate students attending orientation sessions at a postsecondary educational institution. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 4656 of the Labor Code, Relating to Workers’ Compensation. AB 2378 (2013-2014) PereaSupportNo
Existing law establishes a workers’ compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers’ Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries arising out… More
Existing law establishes a workers’ compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers’ Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries arising out of and in the course of his or her employment. Existing law requires that aggregate disability payments for a single injury occurring on or after certain dates be limited, as provided. Existing law provides that whenever any member of the Department of Justice falling within the state peace officer/firefighter class is disabled by injury arising out of and in the course of his or her duties, he or she shall become entitled, regardless of his or her period of service with the Department of Justice to a leave of absence while so disabled without loss of salary, in lieu of disability payments under this chapter, for a period not exceeding one year. Existing law also provides that certain peace officers, firefighters, and other specified state and local public employees are entitled to a leave of absence without loss of salary while disabled by injury or illness arising out of and in the course of employment. This bill would provide that the above-specified leaves of absence without loss of salary are payable in addition to the maximum aggregate disability payments for a single injury that is applicable to all workers. The bill would make these provisions applicable to all claims, regardless of the date of injury. The bill would also make related findings and declarations. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 98.6, 98.7, 1102.5, and 1103 Of, to Add Section 1024.6 To, and to Add Chapter 3.1 (Commencing with Section 1019) to Part 3 of Division 2 Of, the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. AB 263 (2013-2014) HernandezSupportYes
Existing law prohibits an employer from discharging an employee or in any manner discriminating against any employee or applicant for employment because the employee or applicant has engaged in… More
Existing law prohibits an employer from discharging an employee or in any manner discriminating against any employee or applicant for employment because the employee or applicant has engaged in prescribed protected conduct relating to the enforcement of the employee’s or applicant’s rights. Existing law provides that an employee who made a bona fide complaint, and was consequently discharged or otherwise suffered an adverse action, is entitled to reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for an employer to willfully refuse to reinstate or otherwise restore an employee who is determined by a specified procedure to be eligible for reinstatement. This bill would also prohibit an employer from retaliating or taking adverse action against any employee or applicant for employment because the employee or applicant has engaged in protected conduct. The bill would expand the protected conduct to include a written or oral complaint by an employee that he or she is owed unpaid wages. The bill would provide that an employee who was retaliated against or otherwise was subjected to an adverse action is entitled to reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages. The bill would subject a person who violates these provisions to a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per violation. The bill would also provide that it is not necessary to exhaust administrative remedies or procedures in the enforcement of specified provisions. Because the willful refusal by an employer to reinstate or reimburse an employee who suffered a retaliatory action under these provisions would be a misdemeanor, the bill would expand the scope of a crime and impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law declares that an individual who has applied for employment, or who is or has been employed in this state, is entitled to the protections, rights, and remedies available under state law, regardless of his or her immigration status. Existing law declares that an inquiry into a person’s immigration status for purposes of enforcing state labor and employment laws shall not be permitted, unless a showing is made, by clear and convincing evidence, that the inquiry is necessary in order to comply with federal immigration law. This bill would make it unlawful for an employer or any other person to engage in, or direct another person to engage in, an unfair immigration-related practice, as defined, against a person for the purpose of, or with the intent of, retaliating against any person for exercising a right protected under state labor and employment laws or under a local ordinance applicable to employees, as specified. The bill would also create a rebuttable presumption that an adverse action taken within 90 days of the exercising of a protected right is committed for the purpose of, or with the intent of, retaliation. The bill would authorize a civil action by an employee or other person who is the subject of an unfair immigration-related practice. The bill would authorize a court to order the appropriate government agencies to suspend certain business licenses held by the violating party for prescribed periods based on the number of violations. The bill would require the court to consider prescribed circumstances in determining whether a suspension of all licenses is appropriate. Existing law prohibits an employer from making, adopting, or enforcing any rule, regulation, or policy preventing an employee from disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency, where the employee has reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of state or federal statute, or a violation or noncompliance with a state or federal rule or regulation. Existing law further prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee for that disclosure. Under existing law, a violation of these provisions by the employer is a misdemeanor. Existing law additionally subjects an employer that is a corporation or a limited liability company to a civil penalty not exceeding $10,000 for each violation of these provisions. This bill would additionally prohibit any person acting on behalf of the employer from making, adopting, or enforcing any rule, regulation, or policy preventing an employee from disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency, as provided, and from retaliating against an employee for such a disclosure. The bill would also expand the prohibited actions to include preventing an employee from, or retaliating against an employee for, providing information to, or testifying before, any public body conducting an investigation, hearing, or inquiry. The bill would provide that any person or entity that violates these provisions is guilty of a misdemeanor, and would further subject an entity that violates these provisions that is a corporation or limited liability company to a civil penalty not exceeding $10,000 for each violation of these provisions. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law prohibits an employer or prospective employer, with the exception of certain financial institutions, from obtaining a consumer credit report, as defined, for employment purposes unless it is for a specified position, including, among others, a position in the state Department of Justice, a managerial position, as defined, or a position that involves regular access to $10,000 or more of cash, as specified. This bill would prohibit an employer from discharging an employee or in any manner discriminating, retaliating, or taking any adverse action against an employee because the employee updates or attempts to update his or her personal information, unless the changes are directly related to the skill set, qualifications, or knowledge required for the job. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1102.5 of the Labor Code proposed by SB 496 that would become operative if this bill and SB 496 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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 Sections 336.8 and 9011.5 to the Elections Code, Relating to Petitions. AB 400 (2013-2014) FongSupportNo
Existing law requires that an initiative petition contain specified language advising the public of its right to determine whether the person circulating the petition is a paid signature gatherer or… More
Existing law requires that an initiative petition contain specified language advising the public of its right to determine whether the person circulating the petition is a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer. This bill would require a state or local initiative, referendum, or recall petition circulated by a paid circulator, as defined, who is paid by a committee to include a disclosure statement identifying the persons from whom the committee received the 5 largest cumulative contributions of $10,000 or more in support of the measure and the name of their employer, if 2 or more of these contributors have the same employer. The bill would require this disclosure statement to be updated within 7 days of any change in the 5 largest cumulative contributors. The bill would require a committee that employs one or more paid circulators for the purpose of circulating an initiative, referendum, or recall petition to submit the disclosure statement, and any updates to it, to the Secretary of State for posting on his or her Internet Web site. Hide
An Act to Add and Repeal Chapter 6.5 (Commencing with Section 6820) of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, and to Add and Repeal Section 91.2 of the Streets and Highways Code, Relating to Transportation, and Making an Appropriation Therefor. AB 401 (2013-2014) DalySupportYes
Existing law, until January 1, 2014, authorizes certain state and local transportation entities, if authorized by the California Transportation Commission, to use a design‑build process for… More
Existing law, until January 1, 2014, authorizes certain state and local transportation entities, if authorized by the California Transportation Commission, to use a design‑build process for contracts on transportation projects, as specified. Existing law establishes a procedure for submitting bids that includes a requirement that design-build entities provide a statement of qualifications submitted to the transportation entity that is verified under oath, subject to penalty of perjury. This bill would authorize the Department of Transportation to utilize design-build procurement for up to 10 projects on the state highway system, based on either best value or lowest responsible bid. The bill would authorize regional transportation agencies, as defined, to utilize design-build procurement for projects on or adjacent to the state highway system. The bill would also authorize those regional transportation agencies to utilize design-build procurement for projects on expressways that are not on the state highway system, as specified. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2024, or one year from the date that the Department of Transportation posts on its Internet Web site that the provisions related to the construction inspection services of these projects are invalid. The bill would provide that these design-build authorizations do not include construction inspection services for projects on or interfacing with the state highway system. The bill would require the Department of Transportation to perform construction inspection services for projects on or interfacing with the state highway system, as specified. The bill would require a transportation entity, as defined, awarding a contract for a public works project pursuant to these provisions, to reimburse the Department of Industrial Relations for costs of performing prevailing wage monitoring and enforcement of the public works project and would require moneys collected to be deposited into the State Public Works Enforcement Fund, a continuously appropriated fund. By depositing money in a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. The bill would extend the use of design-build procurement to regional transportation agencies, as defined, and extend the period of time for which the Department of Transportation may use design-build procurement, subject to existing procedures. The bill would, by extension, impose the statement of qualifications requirement upon regional transportation agencies and the department, subject to penalty of perjury, thereby creating a new crime and imposing 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 912 and 917 Of, and to Add Article 9.5 (Commencing with Section 1048) to Chapter 4 of Division 8 Of, the Evidence Code, Relating to Evidentiary Privileges. AB 729 (2013-2014) HernandezSupportNo
Existing law governs the admissibility of evidence in court proceedings and generally provides a privilege as to communications made in the course of certain relations, including the attorney-client,… More
Existing law governs the admissibility of evidence in court proceedings and generally provides a privilege as to communications made in the course of certain relations, including the attorney-client, physician-patient, and psychotherapist-patient relationship, as specified. Under existing law, the right of any person to claim those evidentiary privileges is waived with respect to a communication protected by the privilege if any holder of the privilege, without coercion, has disclosed a significant part of the communication or has consented to a disclosure made by anyone. This bill would provide that a union agent, as defined, and a represented employee or represented former employee have a privilege to refuse to disclose any confidential communication between the employee or former employee and the union agent while the union agent was acting in his or her representative capacity, except as specified. The bill would provide that a represented employee or represented former employee also has a privilege to prevent another person from disclosing a privileged communication, except as specified. The bill would further provide that this privilege may be waived in accordance with existing law and does not apply in criminal proceedings. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 912 of the Evidence Code made by this bill and AB 267, to take effect if both bills are chaptered and this bill is chaptered last. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 101, 9008, 9030, and 9031 Of, and to Add Sections 9009.5, 9009.6, 9022.5, 9036, and 9037 To, the Elections Code, Relating to Elections. AB 857 (2013-2014) FongSupportNo
(1)The California Constitution and existing statutory law provide for the electors to propose statutes or amendments to the Constitution by initiative. Existing law authorizes a person who is a voter… More
(1)The California Constitution and existing statutory law provide for the electors to propose statutes or amendments to the Constitution by initiative. Existing law authorizes a person who is a voter or who is qualified to register to vote in California to circulate an initiative or referendum petition anywhere within the state. Existing law requires that each section of a petition for an initiative or referendum measure have attached thereto the declaration of the person soliciting the signatures that includes specified information. This bill would require a person who solicits signatures for a proposed initiative measure and does not receive money or other valuable consideration for the specific purpose of soliciting signatures of electors to make additional declarations, as specified. (2)Existing law requires local elections officials to perform various duties with respect to statewide initiative petitions including, within 8 days after the filing of a petition, determining the total number of signatures affixed to the petition. Existing law also requires an elections official, within 30 days of notification from the Secretary of State that a petition has received 100% or more of the signatures needed to declare the petition sufficient, to determine the number of qualified voters who signed the petition. Upon order of the Secretary of State, existing law requires an elections official, within 30 days, to verify each signature on a petition, as specified. This bill would extend the time a local elections official is required to determine the total number of signatures affixed to a petition to 10 days, and would extend the time a local elections official is required to determine the number of qualified voters who signed the petition to 35 days after receiving notice from the Secretary of State that the petition has received the signatures needed to declare the petition sufficient. The bill also would extend the time that an elections official is required to verify the signatures on a petition to 35 days. This bill would require at least 10% of the signatures that are required to qualify an initiative measure to be solicited by a person who does not receive money or other valuable consideration for the specific purpose of soliciting signatures of electors, and would require that the declaration of such a person include additional content, as specified. The bill would require an elections official who determines the total number of signatures affixed to a petition and an elections official or registrar of voters who verifies signatures on petitions to also determine the total number of signatures submitted by persons who do not receive money or other valuable consideration for the specific purpose of soliciting signatures of electors, as specified. The bill would include specified findings and declarations of the Legislature in support of these policies. (3)Existing law requires that, if the statistical sampling shows that the number of valid signatures on a petition is within 95 to 110% of the number of signatures of qualified voters needed to declare the petition sufficient, the Secretary of State shall order the examination and verification of each signature filed, and shall so notify the elections officials. This bill, with regard to an initiative petition for which the statistical sampling shows that the number of valid signatures for all signatures submitted is more than 110% of the number of qualified voters needed to find the petition sufficient, but the number of valid signatures submitted for purposes of the 10% requirement described above is within 95 to 110% of the number of signatures needed to satisfy that requirement, would require the Secretary of State to only order an examination and verification of each signature filed that would satisfy the 10% requirement. (4)Existing law requires every proposed initiative measure, prior to circulation, to include on the petition, among other things, the circulating title and summary prepared by the Attorney General and a heading for the initiative measure, as specified. Existing law also requires a petition for a proposed initiative or referendum measure to be presented in sections, as specified. This bill would provide that its provisions do not apply to any initiative petition for which the Attorney General issued a circulating title and summary before January 1, 2014, and would require a petition for a proposed initiative measure to have printed in the one-inch space across the top of the first page of each section of the petition, in 18-point roman boldface type, the circulating title for the measure prepared by the Attorney General. The bill would additionally require a petition for a proposed initiative measure that is circulated by persons who do not receive money or other valuable consideration for the purpose of obtaining signatures of electors to be printed on white paper in a contrasting color ink. The bill also would require a petition for a proposed initiative measure that is circulated by persons who do receive money or other valuable consideration for the purpose of obtaining signatures of electors to be printed on paper of a color other than white in a contrasting color ink. (5)Under existing law, an initiative petition must contain specified language advising the public of its right to ask whether the person circulating the petition is a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer. This bill would additionally require a statewide initiative, referendum, or recall petition to include a disclosure notifying the public that the petition circulator is receiving money or other valuable consideration for the specific purpose of soliciting signatures of electors, as specified. (6)Existing law provides that a person who engages in specified conduct in connection with the collection of signatures on any statewide initiative or referendum petition is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would require a statewide initiative or referendum petition section to be deemed invalid, and would prohibit use of the petition section for the purpose of determining whether the initiative or referendum measure qualifies for the ballot, if the signatures are solicited and submitted by a person who engages in fraud, misrepresentation, or any of the specified conduct for which he or she may be found guilty of a misdemeanor. The bill would authorize specified persons to enforce this provision by a civil action upon a showing of clear and convincing evidence. (7)Because this bill would impose new requirements on local elections officials relative to calculating and verifying signatures on a petition, 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions. Hide
An Act to Add Section 128372 to the Health and Safety Code, to Add Section 230.9 to the Labor Code, to Amend Sections 1088.5 and 1095 Of, and to Add Division 11 (Commencing with Section 19000) To, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and to Amend Section 11025 Of, and to Add Article 7 (Commencing with Section 14199) to Chapter 7 of Part 3 of Division 9 Of, the Welfare and Institutions Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage, and Declaring the Urgency Thereof, To Take Effect Immediately. AB 880 (2013-2014) GomezSupportNo
Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, to afford to qualifying individuals health care and related remedial or preventive… More
Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, to afford to qualifying individuals health care and related remedial or preventive services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid provisions. Existing law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, requires applicable large employers, as defined, who offer full-time employees and their dependents the opportunity to enroll in minimum essential coverage and for whom one full-time employee has been certified as having enrolled in a qualified health plan for which a premium tax credit or cost-sharing reduction is allowed or paid, to pay a specified fee. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2015, require a large employer, as defined, to pay the Employment Development Department an employer responsibility penalty for each covered employee, as defined, enrolled in Medi-Cal based on the average cost of employee-only coverage provided by large employers to their employees, including both the employer’s and employee’s share of the premiums, as specified. The bill would assess interest of 10% per annum on employer responsibility penalties not paid on or before the date payment is due, as specified, and would require a large employer subject to an employer responsibility penalty to pay a penalty, as specified, for any employer responsibility penalty payment that is more than 60 days overdue. The bill would establish the Employer Responsibility for Medi-Cal Trust Fund, which would consist of the penalty amounts and interest collected pursuant to these provisions and would require that, upon appropriation, the moneys in the fund be used by the State Department of Health Care Services to provide payment for the nonfederal share of Medi-Cal costs for covered employees, to increase reimbursement to providers of care by providing supplemental Medi-Cal payments for specified benefits and providers, to provide reimbursement to county health systems, community clinics, and other safety net providers, as defined, that provide care without expectation of compensation to those Californians who do not have minimum essential coverage, as defined, to fund medical residency programs that meet certain criteria developed by the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and for all costs to implement the penalty provisions, as specified. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2015, prohibit a large employer from discharging or taking other action, as specified, against an employee who enrolls in a public health benefit program or advance premium tax credits through the California Health Benefit Exchange, and would provide that an employee is entitled to reinstatement and reimbursement of lost wages and work benefits if a large employer discharges or takes other action against an employee for those reasons. The bill would authorize an employee to file a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement of the Department of Industrial Relations if the employee is discharged, threatened with discharge, demoted, suspended, or in any other manner discriminated or retaliated against in the terms and conditions of employment by his or her employer in violation of these provisions. Existing law requires employers to file specified information with the Employment Development Department, upon hiring an employee, that may be used by specified state departments, exchanges, and boards, and county departments and agencies for specified purposes, including verifying or determining the eligibility of an applicant for, or a recipient of, state health subsidy programs, as specified, if the verification or determination is directly connected with, and limited to, the administration of the referenced state health subsidy programs. This bill would expand these provisions to allow the information to be used if the verification or determination is directly connected with, and limited to, the administration or funding of the referenced state health subsidy programs. Existing law authorizes the Director of the Employment Development Department to permit the use of information in his or her possession for specified purposes and to require reimbursement for all direct costs incurred in providing that information. Existing law provides that this information includes information provided to enable federal, state, or local government departments or agencies, subject to federal law, to verify or determine the eligibility or entitlement of an applicant for, or a recipient of, public social services if the verification or determination is directly connected with, and limited to, the administration of public social services. This bill would expand these provisions to allow the information to be used if the verification or determination is directly connected with, and limited to, the administration or funding of the public social services. Existing law also authorizes the director to permit the use of information in his or her possession and to require reimbursement for all direct costs incurred in providing that information to enable specified state departments, exchanges, and boards, and county departments and agencies, to obtain information regarding employee wages, California employer names and account numbers, employer reports of wages and number of employees, and disability insurance and unemployment insurance claim information, for specified purposes. This bill would authorize the director to provide information to enable these entities to obtain information regarding state employer identification numbers. The bill would also authorize the director to provide to the State Department of Health Care Services employer information and employee wage information on individuals who are enrolled in the Medi-Cal program to determine the employer responsibility penalties that would owed by large employers. Existing law requires the State Department of Social Services and the State Department of Health Care Services to make use of the records of the Franchise Tax Board to match unearned income against reported income of applicants for, and recipients of, aid or public social services. This bill would also require each department to use these records to match social security numbers of applicants for, and recipients of, aid or public services with their employer’s state employer identification number, which shall then be forwarded to the appropriate county welfare department or other appropriate state departments for use, as specified.This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 127280, 127400, and 129050 Of, to Add Chapter 2.6 (Commencing with Section 127470) to Part 2 of Division 107 Of, and to Repeal Article 2 (Commencing with Section 127340) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 107 Of, the Health and Safety Code, Relating to Health Facilities. AB 975 (2013-2014) WieckowskiSupportNo
Existing law makes certain findings and declarations regarding the social obligation of private nonprofit hospitals to provide community benefits in the public interest, and requires these hospitals,… More
Existing law makes certain findings and declarations regarding the social obligation of private nonprofit hospitals to provide community benefits in the public interest, and requires these hospitals, among other responsibilities, to adopt and update a community benefits plan for providing community benefits either alone, in conjunction with other health care providers, or through other organizational arrangements. Existing law requires each private nonprofit hospital, as defined, to complete a community needs assessment, as defined, and to thereafter update the community needs assessment at least once every 3 years. Existing law also requires the hospital to file a report on its community benefits plan and the activities undertaken to address community needs with the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. Existing law requires the statewide office to make the plans available to the public. Existing law requires that each hospital include in its community benefits plan measurable objectives and specific benefits. This bill would declare the necessity of establishing uniform standards for reporting the amount of charity care and community benefits a facility provides to ensure that private nonprofit hospitals and nonprofit multispecialty clinics actually meet the social obligations for which they receive favorable tax treatment, among other findings and declarations. This bill would require a private nonprofit hospital and nonprofit multispecialty clinic, as defined, by January 1, 2016, to develop, in collaboration with the community, a community benefits statement, as specified, and a description of the process for approval of the community benefits statement by the hospital’s or clinic’s governing board, as specified. This bill would require the hospital or clinic, prior to adopting a community benefits plan, to complete a community needs assessment, as provided. The bill would authorize the hospital or clinic to create a community benefits advisory committee for the purpose of soliciting community input. This bill would require the hospital or clinic to make available to the public a copy of the assessment, file the assessment with the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and update the assessment at least every 3 years. This bill would also require a private nonprofit hospital and nonprofit multispecialty clinic, by April 1, 2016, to develop a community benefits plan that includes a summary of the needs assessment and a statement of the community health care needs that will be addressed by the plan, and list the services, as provided, that the hospital or clinic intends to provide in the following year to address community health needs identified in the community health needs assessments. The bill would require the hospital or clinic to make its community health needs assessment and community benefits plan or community health plan available to the public on its Internet Web site and would require that a copy of the assessment and plan be given free of charge to any person upon request. This bill would require a private nonprofit hospital or nonprofit multispecialty clinic, after April 1, 2016, every 2 years to revise and submit its community benefits plan to the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, as specified, and would allow a hospital or clinic under the common control of a single corporation or other entity to file a consolidated plan, as provided. The bill would require that the governing board of each hospital or clinic adopt the community benefits plan and make it available to the public, as specified. This bill would require the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development to develop and adopt regulations to prescribe a standardized format for community benefits plans, as provided, to provide technical assistance to help private nonprofit hospitals and nonprofit multispecialty clinics exempt from licensure comply with the community benefits provisions, to make public each community health needs assessment and community benefits plan and any comments received regarding those assessments and plans, and to calculate and make public the total value of community benefits provided by hospitals, as specified. This bill would authorize the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development to assess a civil penalty, as provided, against any hospital or clinic that fails to comply with these provisions. This bill would make conforming changes.Under existing law, patients with high medical costs who are at or below 350% of the federal poverty level are eligible to apply for participation under a hospital’s charity care policy or discount care policy. A patient with high medical costs is defined as a patient who, among other things, does not receive a discounted rate from the hospital as a result of his or her third-party coverage. This bill would delete that limitation from the definition of a patient with a high medical costs. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 1374.8, 1385.03, and 1385.04 of the Health and Safety Code, and to Amend Sections 791.27 and 10181.4 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. SB 1182 (2013-2014) LenoSupportNo
Existing law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), requires the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a process for the annual review of… More
Existing law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), requires the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a process for the annual review of unreasonable increases in premiums for health insurance coverage in which health insurance issuers submit to the secretary and the relevant state a justification for an unreasonable premium increase prior to implementation of the increase. 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 in the individual, small group, or large group markets to file rate information with the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance. For individual and small group contracts and policies, existing law requires a plan or insurer to file rate information at least 60 days prior to implementing a rate change and requires a plan or insurer to disclose with each filing specified information by aggregate benefit category. Existing law allows a health care service plan that exclusively contracts with no more than 2 medical groups to provide or arrange for professional medical services for enrollees of the plan to meet this requirement by disclosing its actual trend experience for the prior year using benefit categories that are the same or similar to those used by other plans. This bill would specify the benefit categories to be used for that purpose and would make other related changes. For large group plan contracts and policies, existing law requires a plan or insurer to file rate information with the department at least 60 days prior to implementing an unreasonable rate increase, as defined in PPACA. Existing law requires the plan or insurer to also disclose specified aggregate data with that rate filing. This bill would revise the aggregate information required to be provided with the rate filing described above, including, among other things, total earned premiums, total incurred claims, and average rate of increase for the rate year. The bill would require a plan or insurer to disclose the methodologies used to develop base rates and other specified information, including, among other things, all of the base rates used for groups in the large group market and all of the factors used to adjust the base rates. The bill would also require a plan or insurer to provide additional aggregate information regarding rate changes for the large group market, including, among other things, the average monthly rate implemented during the prior year and the average rate change initially requested, as specified. The bill would require a plan or insurer, under certain circumstances, to annually disclose additional aggregate data for the large group market and to provide deidentified claims data at no charge to a large group purchaser that requests the information and meets specified conditions. Existing law prohibits, with exceptions, a health care service plan or health insurer from releasing any information to an employer that would directly or indirectly indicate to the employer that an employee is receiving or has received services from a health care provider covered by the plan unless authorized to do so by the employee. This bill would exempt from the prohibition the release of relevant information for the purposes set forth in the provisions regarding the review of rate changes. 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 Add Section 1762 to the Civil Code, Relating to Consumer Affairs. SB 1188 (2013-2014) JacksonSupportNo
Existing law, the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, makes unlawful certain acts identified as unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a… More
Existing law, the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, makes unlawful certain acts identified as unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease of goods to any consumer. Existing case law had held that act to encompass omissions, including the omission of a material fact a person was obliged to disclose. This bill, for the purposes of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, would provide that fraud or deceit may consist of the suppression or omission of a material fact by one who is bound to disclose it or who gives information of other facts that are likely to mislead for want of communication of that fact, and would provide that a fact is material if a reasonable person would attach importance to its existence or nonexistence in determining a choice of action in the transaction in question. This bill would also provide, for the purposes of the act, that materiality is not limited to circumstances in which a product poses a threat to health or safety. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 1164.3 of the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. SB 25 (2013-2014) SteinbergSupportNo
Existing law provides that within 60 days of a decision by the Agricultural Labor Relations Board taking effect, a party may file an action to enforce the order, using specified procedures. Existing… More
Existing law provides that within 60 days of a decision by the Agricultural Labor Relations Board taking effect, a party may file an action to enforce the order, using specified procedures. Existing law provides that during the pendency of any appeal of the board’s order, the order may not be stayed unless the appellant demonstrates that he or she is likely to prevail on the merits and that he or she will be irreparably harmed by implementation of the board’s order. This bill would provide that an action to enforce the order of the board may be filed within 60 days whether or not the other party is seeking judicial review of the order. The bill would also increase the evidentiary threshold for the court to grant a stay of the board’s order and require the court to make written findings supporting any order granting a stay of the order during the pendency of the appeal. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 1747.02 and 1747.08 of the Civil Code, Relating to Credit Cards. SB 383 (2013-2014) JacksonSupportNo
Existing state and federal law regulates the provision of credit and the use of credit cards. The Song-Beverly Credit Card Act of 1971 generally regulates credit card transactions and prohibits a… More
Existing state and federal law regulates the provision of credit and the use of credit cards. The Song-Beverly Credit Card Act of 1971 generally regulates credit card transactions and prohibits a person or entity that accepts credit cards for the transaction of business from requesting, or requiring as a condition to accepting the credit card, that the cardholder write any personal identification information, as defined, upon the credit card transaction form or otherwise. Existing law prohibits a person or entity that accepts credit cards for the transaction of business from requesting, or requiring as a condition to accepting the credit card, that the cardholder provide his or her personal identification information to the person or entity to be written or caused to be written upon the credit card transaction form or otherwise. Notwithstanding those provisions, existing law authorizes a person or entity that accepts credit cards for the transaction of business to require the cardholder, as a condition to accepting the credit card, to provide reasonable forms of positive identification, which may include a driver’s license or a California state identification card, provided that the information is not written or recorded on the credit card transaction form or otherwise. Existing law authorizes the use of ZIP Code information in a sales transaction at a retail motor fuel dispenser or retail motor fuel payment island with an automated cashier that uses the ZIP Code information solely for prevention of fraud, theft, or identity theft. This bill would authorize a person or entity that accepts credit cards in an online transaction involving an electronic downloadable product, as defined, to require a cardholder, as a condition to accepting a credit card as payment in full or in part, in an online transaction involving an electronic downloadable product, to provide personal identification information, as defined, if it requires that information for the detection, investigation, or prevention of fraud, theft, identity theft, or criminal activity, or for enforcement of terms of sale, and the personal identification information is used solely for those purposes. The bill would require that person or entity to destroy or dispose of the personal identification information it requires in a secure manner after it is no longer needed for those purposes. The bill would prohibit that person or entity from aggregating personal identification information and from sharing personal identification information it requires with any other person or entity, as specified. The bill, notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, would also authorize a person or entity accepting a credit card in an online transaction involving an electronic downloadable product to require a consumer to establish an account as a condition for purchase of the product and to provide personally identifiable information in connection with that account, as specified. The bill would also authorize a consumer, concurrent with completing a transaction for an electronically downloadable product, to elect to opt in to the collection and use of personally identifiable information provided certain disclosures are made and he or she is permitted to opt out prior to completing the transaction. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 12920, 12921, 12926, 12940, and 12955.2 of the Government Code, Relating to Fair Employment. SB 404 (2013-2014) JacksonSupportNo
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, protects and safeguards the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain, and hold employment without discrimination or… More
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, protects and safeguards the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain, and hold employment without discrimination or abridgment on account of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, or sexual orientation. This bill would include “familial status,” as defined, as an additional basis upon which the right to seek, obtain, and hold employment cannot be denied. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 905.2 and 19683 Of, and to Add Section 8547.15 To, the Government Code, and to Amend Section 1102.5 of the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. SB 496 (2013-2014) WrightSupportYes
(1)The Government Claims Act sets forth the general procedure for the presentation of a claim for money or damages against the state. This bill would create an exception to the general procedure for… More
(1)The Government Claims Act sets forth the general procedure for the presentation of a claim for money or damages against the state. This bill would create an exception to the general procedure for a claim alleging a violation of the California Whistleblower Protection Act. (2)The California Whistleblower Protection Act prohibits acts of reprisal, retaliation, coercion, or similar acts against a state employee or an applicant for state employment who made a protected disclosure relating to an improper governmental activity, as defined. The State Civil Service Act requires the State Personnel Board to initiate a hearing or investigation of a complaint of reprisal or retaliation in violation of the California Whistleblower Protection Act within 10 working days and the executive officer of the board to complete the findings of the hearing or investigation within 60 working days. The State Civil Service Act authorizes the executive officer to consolidate a case with the same or similar allegations to those contained in an appeal and exempts consolidated cases from the time limits for hearings, investigations, and findings. This bill would modify these requirements to instead require the board to render its decision on the consolidated matter within 6 months of the date of the order of consolidation, as specified. The bill would also make other technical changes.The act further authorizes the State Auditor to investigate and report whether it finds that a state agency or employee may have engaged or participated in an improper governmental activity. Under the act, any person who intentionally engages in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, coercion, or similar acts against a state employee or applicant for state employment for having made a disclosure that may evidence an improper governmental activity or dangerous condition is subject to, among other things, liability in an action for damages brought against him or her by the injured party. Existing law, the Government Claims Act, sets forth the general procedure for the presentation of claims as a prerequisite to commencement of actions for money or damages against the State of California, counties, cities, cities and counties, districts, local authorities, and other political subdivisions of the state, and against the officers, employees, and servants of those entities.This bill would establish an exception for an action for damages pursuant to the California Whistleblower Protection Act from the claims presentation requirements of the Government Claims Act.(3)Existing law prohibits an employer from making, adopting, or enforcing any rule, regulation, or policy preventing an employee from disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency, if the employee has reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of state or federal statute, or a violation of or noncompliance with a state or federal rule or regulation. Existing law prohibits any employer from retaliating against an employee for disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency pursuant to these provisions or for refusing to participate in an activity that would result in a violation of a state or federal statute or noncompliance with a state or federal rule or regulation. Under existing law, an employer who violates these provisions is guilty of a crime. This bill would expand these provisions to prohibit an employer from making, adopting, or enforcing any rule, regulation, or policy preventing an employee from disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency, if the employee has reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of or noncompliance with a local rule or regulation. The bill would prohibit an employer from retaliating against an employee because the employer believes that the employee disclosed or may disclose information to a government or law enforcement agency, or to a person with authority over the employee or another employee who has the authority to investigate, discover, or correct the violation, if the employee has reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of state or federal statute, or a violation of or noncompliance with a local, state, or federal rule or regulation. The bill would also prohibit an employer from retaliating against an employee for disclosing, or refusing to participate in an activity that would result in, a violation of or noncompliance with a local rule or regulation. (4)This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1102.5 of the Labor Code proposed by SB 666 and AB 263 that would become operative if this bill and either SB 666 or AB 263, or both, are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5)Because this bill would change the definition of a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
An Act to Add Title 18 (Commencing with Section 3273) to Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, Relating to Civil Law. SB 556 (2013-2014) PadillaSupportNo
Existing law specifies the authority of agents in dealing with 3rd persons. The Consumers Legal Remedies Act prohibits unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices… More
Existing law specifies the authority of agents in dealing with 3rd persons. The Consumers Legal Remedies Act prohibits unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by a person in a transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease of goods to any consumer, as defined, and authorizes specified remedies for a consumer who suffers damages as a result of the use of these methods, acts, or practices. This bill would prohibit a person, firm, corporation, or association that is a nongovernmental entity and contracts to perform, on or after January 1, 2015, public health and safety labor or services for a public agency from displaying on a vehicle or uniform a logo, as defined, that reasonably could be interpreted as implying that the labor or services are being provided by employees of the public agency, unless the vehicle or uniform conspicuously displays specific disclosures. The bill would prohibit a public agency from requiring a person or employee of a nongovernmental entity providing public health and safety labor or services under contract with the public agency to wear a badge containing the logo of the public agency. The bill would also prohibit a nongovernmental entity providing public health and safety labor or services under contract with a public agency from requiring a person or its employee to wear a badge containing the logo of the public agency. This bill would define the term “public health and safety labor or services” to mean fire protection services, rescue services, emergency medical services, hazardous material emergency response services, and ambulance services. This bill would authorize that these provisions may be enforced by the Consumers Legal Remedies Act. Hide
An Act to Add Section 4073.5 to the Business and Professions Code, Relating to Pharmacy. SB 598 (2013-2014) HillOpposeNo
The Pharmacy Law governs the practice of pharmacy in this state, including the permissible duties of licensed pharmacists. Among other permitted acts, a pharmacist filling a prescription order for a… More
The Pharmacy Law governs the practice of pharmacy in this state, including the permissible duties of licensed pharmacists. Among other permitted acts, a pharmacist filling a prescription order for a drug product prescribed by its trade or brand name may select another drug product with the same active chemical ingredients of the same strength, quantity, and dosage form, and of the same generic drug name as determined, as specified, of those drug products having the same active chemical ingredients. A person who knowingly violates the Pharmacy Law is guilty of a misdemeanor, as specified. This bill would authorize a pharmacist, in his or her discretion, except as specified, to select a biosimilar, as defined, when filling a prescription order for a prescribed biological product only if the product has been approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration, as specified, and the prescriber does not personally indicate “Do not substitute,” as specified. The bill would also require, for prescriptions filled prior to January 1, 2017, the pharmacy to, within 5 business days of the selection of a biological product or an interchangeable biosimilar, notify the prescriber or enter in a patient record whether the prescription dispensed was a biological product or an interchangeable biosimilar, except as specified. The bill would prohibit a pharmacist from selecting a biosimilar that meets the requirements of these provisions unless the cost to the patient of the biosimilar selected is the same or less than the cost of the prescribed biological product. The bill would also require that the substitution of a biosimilar be communicated to the patient. Because a knowing violation of these requirements would be a misdemeanor, the bill would create new crimes, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would also require the California State Board of Pharmacy to maintain on its public Internet Web site a link to the current list, if available, of biosimilar products determined by the federal Food and Drug Administration to be interchangeable, as specified. 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 1782 to the Labor Code, Relating to Public Works. SB 7 (2013-2014) SteinbergSupportYes
Existing law requires that, except as specified, not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages, determined by the Director of Industrial Relations, be paid to workers employed on public… More
Existing law requires that, except as specified, not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages, determined by the Director of Industrial Relations, be paid to workers employed on public works projects. Existing law defines “public works” to include, among other things, construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work done under contract and paid for, in whole or in part, out of public funds, and street, sewer, or other improvement work done under the direction and supervision or by the authority of any officer or public body of the state, or of any political subdivision or district thereof, whether the political subdivision or district operates under a freeholder’s charter or not. This bill would prohibit a charter city from receiving or using state funding or financial assistance for a construction project if the city has a charter provision or ordinance that authorizes a contractor to not comply with prevailing wage provisions on any public works contract. The bill would, except as specified, prohibit a charter city from receiving or using state funding or financial assistance for a construction project if the city has awarded, within the prior 2 years, a public works contract without requiring the contractor to comply with prevailing wage provisions. This bill would authorize charter cities to receive or use state funding or financial assistance if the city has a local prevailing wage ordinance, applicable to all of its public works contracts, that includes requirements that are equal to or greater than the state’s prevailing wage requirements, as specified. This bill would exclude contracts for projects of $25,000 or less for construction work, or projects of $15,000 or less for alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance work. This bill would require the Director of Industrial Relations to maintain a list of charter cities that may receive and use state funding or financial assistance for their construction projects. This bill would provide that it does not restrict a charter city from receiving or using state funding or financial assistance that was awarded to the city prior to January 1, 2015, or from receiving or using state funding or financial assistance to complete a contract that was awarded prior to January 1, 2015, and that a charter city would not be disqualified from receiving or using state funding or financial assistance for its construction projects based on the city’s failure to require a contractor to comply with prevailing wage provisions in performing a contract the city advertised for bid or awarded prior to January 1, 2015. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 1182.12 of the Labor Code, Relating to Wages. SB 935 (2013-2014) LenoSupportNo
Existing law requires that, on and after July 1, 2014, the minimum wage for all industries be not less than $9 per hour. Existing law further increases the minimum wage, on and after January 1, 2016,… More
Existing law requires that, on and after July 1, 2014, the minimum wage for all industries be not less than $9 per hour. Existing law further increases the minimum wage, on and after January 1, 2016, to not less than $10 per hour. This bill would increase the minimum wage, on and after January 1, 2015, to not less than $11 per hour, on and after January 1, 2016, to not less than $12 per hour, and on and after January 1, 2017, to not less than $13 per hour. The bill would require the automatic adjustment of the minimum wage annually thereafter, to maintain employee purchasing power diminished by the rate of inflation during the previous year. The adjustment would be calculated using the California Consumer Price Index, as specified. The bill would prohibit the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) from reducing the minimum wage and from adjusting the minimum wage if the average percentage of inflation for the previous year was negative. The bill would require the IWC to publicize the automatically adjusted minimum wage. The bill would provide that its provisions not be construed to preclude the IWC from increasing the minimum wage to an amount greater than the calculation would provide or to preclude or supersede an increase of the minimum wage that is greater than the state minimum wage by any local government or tribal government. The bill would apply to all industries, including public and private employment. Hide
An Act to Add Section 11349.11 To, and to Add and Repeal Section 11349.10 Of, the Government Code, Relating to Regulations. SB 981 (2013-2014) HuffOpposeNo
Existing law, the Administrative Procedure Act, governs the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations by state agencies. This bill would require each agency to review each… More
Existing law, the Administrative Procedure Act, governs the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations by state agencies. This bill would require each agency to review each regulation adopted prior to January 1, 2014, and to develop a report with prescribed information to be submitted to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2016. The bill would also require each agency, on or before January 1, 2021, and at least every 5 years thereafter, to conduct additional reviews of regulations that have been in effect for at least 20 years, as specified, and to submit an annual report to the Legislature that identifies the regulations reviewed during that year and the associated findings. Hide
AB 10 (2011-2012) AlejoSupportNo
AB 1239 (2011-2012) FurutaniSupportNo
AB 1450 (2011-2012) AllenSupportNo
An Act to Add Section 2025.290 to the Code of Civil Procedure, Relating to Depositions. AB 1875 (2011-2012) GattoSupportYes
Existing law authorizes the use of depositions in discovery in civil actions. Any party to a civil action may take an oral deposition of any person, including other parties to the action, following… More
Existing law authorizes the use of depositions in discovery in civil actions. Any party to a civil action may take an oral deposition of any person, including other parties to the action, following service of a deposition notice notifying the deponent of the date, location, and time of the deposition, as well as any materials to be produced by the deponent. This bill would limit a deposition of any person to 7 hours of total testimony, except under specified circumstances. Under the bill, the court would be required to allow additional time if necessary to fairly examine the deponent. The court would also be required to allow additional time if the deponent, another person, or any other circumstance impedes or delays the examination. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature with regard to these matters. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 20516 and 31461 of the Government Code, Relating to Public Employees’ Retirement. AB 197 (2011-2012) BuchananSupportYes
The Public Employees’ Retirement Law establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) for the purpose of providing pension benefits to specified public employees. PERS is funded by… More
The Public Employees’ Retirement Law establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) for the purpose of providing pension benefits to specified public employees. PERS is funded by investment returns and employer and employee contributions. Existing law authorizes a contracting agency and its employees to agree in writing to share the costs of any optional benefit that is inapplicable to a contracting agency until the agency elects to be subject to the benefit. This bill would instead authorize a contracting agency and its employees to agree in writing to share the costs of the employer contribution with or without a change in benefits, as specified. The bill would prohibit an employer from using impasse procedures to impose member cost sharing on any contribution amount above that which is authorized by law. The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (CERL) authorizes counties and districts, as defined, to provide a system of retirement benefits to their employees. CERL defines compensation earnable for the purpose of calculating benefits as the average compensation for the period under consideration with respect to the average number of days ordinarily worked by persons in the same grade or class of positions during the period, and at the same rate of pay, as determined by the retirement board. This bill would exclude from the definition of compensation earnable any compensation determined by the board to have been paid to enhance a member’s retirement benefit. The bill would also exclude various payments from the definition of compensation earnable, including payments for unused vacation, annual leave, personal leave, sick leave, and compensatory time off, as well as payments made at the termination of employment, except what may be earned and payable in each 12-month period during the final average salary period. Hide
AB 2039 (2011-2012) SwansonSupportNo
An Act to Add Section 53069.63 to the Government Code, to Add Part 5.5 (Commencing with Section 1550) to Division 2 of the Labor Code, and to Add Sections 653.65, 653.67, 653.69, 653.71, 653.73, and 653.74 to the Penal Code, Relating to Illegal Immigrants. AB 26 (2011-2012) DonnellyOpposeNo
Existing law, held unenforceable as preempted by federal law in the case of League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wilson (1997) 997 F.Supp. 1244, prohibits any city, county, or other legally… More
Existing law, held unenforceable as preempted by federal law in the case of League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wilson (1997) 997 F.Supp. 1244, prohibits any city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity from preventing or limiting the cooperation of any law enforcement agency with federal authorities regarding persons arrested and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, as specified. This bill would prohibit public officials and agencies from adopting a policy that limits or restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws or that restricts the sharing of a person’s immigration status, as specified. The bill would allow any person to bring an action against an entity to enforce these provisions. Existing law generally regulates employment, including, but not limited to, the wages, hours, and working conditions of employees. This bill would prohibit an employer from knowingly or intentionally employing an unauthorized alien, as specified. The bill would establish a process for persons to file complaints of violations of these provisions with the Attorney General or a district attorney. The bill would make it a misdemeanor to make a false and frivolous complaint alleging a violation of these provisions by an employer. The bill would provide for the investigation of these complaints and specify consequences, including the suspension of certain licenses, for employers that violate these provisions. The bill would require every employer to verify the employment eligibility of employees through the federal E-Verify program and require employers to participate in the federal E-Verify program in order to be eligible for economic development incentives, as specified. Because this bill would impose new duties on local governments and district attorneys, it would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law, held unenforceable as preempted by federal law in the case of League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wilson (1997) 977 F.Supp. 1244, requires every law enforcement agency, with respect to any person who is arrested and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, to, among other things, attempt to verify the legal status of such person and notify the Attorney General and federal authorities of any apparent illegal status. Existing law makes it a felony, punishable in the state prison for 5 years and a fine of $25,000, for any person to use false documents to conceal his or her true citizenship or resident alien status. This bill would make it a misdemeanor for a person to be present on any public or private land while at the same time the person is in violation of specified federal immigration laws. The bill would make it a felony to be in violation of this provision if the person is in possession of specified drugs, weapons, or property, as specified. The bill would make it a felony for a person to intentionally engage in the smuggling of a human being for profit or commercial purposes, as specified, and would provide differing penalties depending on the circumstances of the offense. The bill would make it a misdemeanor for an occupant of a motor vehicle to attempt to hire persons for work if the motor vehicle blocks or impedes the normal movement of traffic. The bill would also make it a misdemeanor to enter a motor vehicle in order to be hired by an occupant if the motor vehicle blocks or impedes the normal movement of traffic. The bill would make it a misdemeanor for a person who is unlawfully present in the United States and who is an unauthorized alien, as defined, to knowingly apply for or solicit work or perform work as an employee or independent contractor. The bill would make it a misdemeanor to transport or move or attempt to transport or move an alien when the person knows, or recklessly disregards the fact, that the alien is in the United States unlawfully, as specified. The bill would make it a misdemeanor to conceal, harbor, or shield or attempt to conceal, harbor, or shield an alien from detection if the person knows, or recklessly disregards the fact, that the alien is in the United States unlawfully, as specified. The bill would make it a misdemeanor to encourage or induce an alien to come to, or reside in, this state if the person knows, or recklessly disregards the fact, that the alien would be entering or residing in this state unlawfully. The bill would make a violation of these provisions a felony if the violation involves 10 or more illegal aliens. Because this bill would create various new crimes, it would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require a peace officer to cause the removal and either immobilization or impoundment of a vehicle if the peace officer determines that a person is driving the vehicle while the person is engaged in certain acts involving an alien unlawfully in the United States, as specified. The bill would establish the Gang and Immigration Intelligence Team Enforcement Mission Fund to be funded as specified, and administered by the Department of Justice to be used, upon appropriation, for gang and immigration enforcement and for county jail reimbursements relating to illegal immigration. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 2924.8 of the Civil Code, and to Amend Sections 415.46 and 1161b of the Code of Civil Procedure, Relating to Tenants. AB 2610 (2011-2012) SkinnerSupportYes
(1)Existing law requires a notice of sale to be posted before any power of sale can be exercised under the power of sale contained in any deed of trust or mortgage. Existing law, until January 1,… More
(1)Existing law requires a notice of sale to be posted before any power of sale can be exercised under the power of sale contained in any deed of trust or mortgage. Existing law, until January 1, 2013, requires a resident of property upon which a notice of sale has been posted to be provided a specified notice advising the resident that, among other things, if the person is renting the property, the new property owner may either give the tenant a new lease or rental agreement, or provide the tenant with a 60-day eviction notice, and that other laws may prohibit the eviction or provide the tenant with a longer notice before eviction. Existing law makes it an infraction to tear down the notice within 72 hours of posting. Existing law requires a state government entity to make translations of the notice available in 5 specified languages, for use by a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent, in order to satisfy the notice requirements. This bill would revise certain portions of the notice to instead require a resident of property upon which a notice of sale has been posted to be advised that if the person is renting the property, the new property owner may either give the tenant a new lease or rental agreement, or provide the tenant with a 90-day eviction notice. The bill would require the notice to advise a tenant who has a lease that the new property owner is required to honor the lease unless the new owner will occupy the property as a primary residence or under other limited circumstances. The bill would require the Department of Consumer Affairs to make translations of the notice available, as described above. The bill would provide that these changes to the notice would become operative on March 1, 2013, or 60 days following posting of a dated notice incorporating those amendments on the Department of Consumer Affairs Internet Web site, whichever date is later. The bill would extend the operation of these provisions until December 31, 2019. By extending the operation of provisions establishing a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2)Existing law provides, that in an unlawful detainer action, if an owner or owner’s agent has obtained service of a prejudgment claim of right to possession, as specified, no occupant of the premises, whether or not that occupant is named in the judgment for possession, may object to the enforcement of the judgment, as specified. This bill would provide that in any action for unlawful detainer resulting from a foreclosure sale of a rental housing unit pursuant to specified provisions, the above provisions regarding objection to the enforcement of a judgment do not limit the right of a tenant or subtenant to file a prejudgment claim of right of possession or to object to enforcement of a judgment for possession, regardless of whether the tenant or subtenant was served with a prejudgment claim of right to possession, as specified. (3)Existing law, until January 1, 2013, requires a tenant or subtenant in possession of a rental housing unit at the time that property is sold in foreclosure to be provided 60 days’ written notice to quit before the tenant or subtenant may be removed from the property, as specified. This bill would instead require a tenant or subtenant in possession of a rental housing unit under a month-to-month lease at the time that property is sold in foreclosure to be provided 90 days’ written notice to quit before the tenant or subtenant may be removed from the property. The bill would provide tenants or subtenants holding possession of a rental housing unit under a fixed-term residential lease entered into before transfer of title at the foreclosure sale the right to possession until the end of the lease term, except in specified circumstances. The bill would also extend the operation of these provisions until December 31, 2019. (4)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 Section 904.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Relating to Appeals. AB 271 (2011-2012) NestandeOpposeNo
Existing law specifies the judgments and orders from which an appeal may be taken to the court of appeal. Existing law also provides that, if the consent of any person who should have been joined as… More
Existing law specifies the judgments and orders from which an appeal may be taken to the court of appeal. Existing law also provides that, if the consent of any person who should have been joined as a plaintiff cannot be obtained, the person may be made a defendant. This bill would require an appellate court to permit an appeal from an order granting or denying class action certification to join a defendant pursuant to those provisions if the petition to appeal is filed within 14 days of entry of the order. Hide
An Act to Add Section 18410 To, and to Repeal and Add Section 19135 Of, the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Taxation. AB 318 (2011-2012) SkinnerSupportYes
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law establish specified dates for the filing of tax returns, and provide that if the last day for filing a return falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or… More
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law establish specified dates for the filing of tax returns, and provide that if the last day for filing a return falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or other legal holiday, returns may be filed and payments made on the following day without penalty. This bill would conform to federal income tax law regarding the definition of a legal holiday for the purposes of the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law. The Corporation Tax Law imposes taxes measured by income at a specified rate. Existing law provides that whenever any foreign corporation that fails to qualify to do business in this state or whose powers, rights, and privileges have been forfeited, or any domestic corporation that has been suspended, and that is doing business in this state, fails to make and file a return, as provided, the Franchise Tax Board shall impose a penalty of $2,000 per taxable year, as specified. This bill would also make this penalty applicable to a foreign limited liability company that fails to qualify to do business in this state or whose powers, rights, and privileges have been forfeited and to a domestic limited liability company that has been suspended and that is doing business in this state, as specified. Hide
AB 325 (2011-2012) LowenthalSupportNo
An Act to Amend Sections 24214 and 24214.5 Of, and to Add Sections 22119.3, 22164.5, 24202.6, 24202.7, and 24202.8 To, the Education Code, to Amend Sections 9355.4, 9355.41, 9355.45, 20281.5, 20516, 21076, and 31461 Of, to Amend and Renumber Section 1243 Of, to Add Sections 20516.5, 20677.96, 20683.2, 20791, 21076.5, 31542, 31542.5, 31543, 31631, and 31631.5 To, to Add Article 4 (Commencing with Section 7522) to Chapter 21 of Division 7 of Title 1 Of, to Add a Heading to Article 1 (Commencing with Section 7500), to Add a Heading to Article 2 (Commencing with Section 7515), and to Add a Heading to Article 3 (Commencing with Section 7520) of Chapter 21 of Division 7 of Title 1 Of, to Add and Repeal Sections 7522.66 and 21400 Of, and to Repeal the Headings of Chapter 21.4 (Commencing with Section 7515) and Chapter 21.5 (Commencing with Section 7520) of Division 7 of Title 1 Of, the Government Code, Relating to Public Employees’ Retirement, and Making an Appropriation Therefor. AB 340 (2011-2012) FurutaniSupportYes
(1)The Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL) establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) and the Teachers’ Retirement Law establishes the State Teachers’ Retirement System… More
(1)The Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL) establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) and the Teachers’ Retirement Law establishes the State Teachers’ Retirement System (STRS) for the purpose of providing pension benefits to specified public employees. Existing law also establishes the Judges’ Retirement System II which provides pension benefits to elected judges and the Legislators’ Retirement System which provides pension benefits to elective officers of the state other than judges and to legislative statutory officers. The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 authorizes counties to establish retirement systems pursuant to its provisions in order to provide pension benefits to county, city, and district employees. This bill would require a public retirement system, as defined, to modify its plan or plans to comply with this act. The bill would establish new retirement formulas that could not be exceeded by a public employer offering a defined benefit pension plan, setting the maximum benefit allowable for employees first hired on or after January 1, 2013, as a formula commonly known as 2.5% at age 67 for nonsafety members, one of 3 formulas for safety members, 2% at age 57, 2.5% at age 57, or 2.7% at age 57, and 1.25% at age 67 for new state miscellaneous or industrial members who elect to be in Tier 2. The amount of pensionable compensation upon which a defined benefit for new members, as defined, could be based would be limited to an amount determined under a specified provision of federal law for an employee whose service is included in the federal system, which is $110,100 for 2012, and 120% of that amount for an employee whose service is not included in the federal system. Those amounts would be adjusted annually, as specified. The bill would authorize an employer to contribute to a defined contribution plan, as specified. The bill would prohibit a public employer from making contributions on behalf of a person who first becomes a member on or after January 1, 2013, to any qualified retirement plan based on any portion of compensation that exceeds an amount specified in federal law, which is $250,000 for 2012. The bill would also prohibit, for the purposes of determining a retirement benefit paid to a new member of a public retirement system, the maximum salary, compensation, or payrate taken into account under the retirement plan for any year from exceeding the amount specified in that federal provision, and would prohibit a public employer from seeking an exception to that prohibition. The bill would prohibit a public employer from offering a plan of replacement benefits for a person who is first hired on or after January 1, 2013, and any survivors or beneficiaries whose retirement benefits are limited by a specified provision of federal law. The bill would prohibit a public employer from providing a retirement health benefit vesting schedule or other specified retirement benefits to a manager or an employee or officer who is excluded from collective bargaining that is more advantageous than that provided generally to other public employees of the same employer who are in related membership classifications. Under existing law, state miscellaneous and industrial employees first hired on or after August 11, 2004, who qualify for membership in PERS do not make contributions to the system or receive service credit for their service and the state employer does not make contributions on their behalf during their first 24 months of employment. These members are instead required to contribute into a tax-deferred savings account, commonly known as the alternate retirement program. This bill would end that program and instead provide that new members immediately make their contributions to the system. (2)Existing law defines final compensation for various employment classifications in connection with the benefits provided by the retirement systems. This bill, for the purposes of determining a retirement benefit paid to a person who first becomes a member of a public retirement system on or after January 1, 2013, would require that final compensation mean the member’s highest average annual pensionable compensation earned, as defined, during a period of at least 36 consecutive months, or at least 3 school years, as specified. (3)Existing state and local public employee retirement systems are funded by investment returns and employer and employee contributions. The California Constitution provides that the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system has the exclusive power to provide for actuarial services in order to ensure the competency of the assets of the system. Existing law, with respect to PERS, requires the Governor to include in the annual Budget Act the contribution rates submitted by the system actuary of the liability on account of employees of the state. This bill would require public employees who are first employed on and after January 1, 2013, and who contribute to a defined benefit plan to contribute at least 12 of the annual actuarially determined normal costs, and would prohibit a public employer from contributing in any fiscal year, in combination with employee contributions, less than the plan normal cost, except as specified. The bill would authorize employee contributions to be more than 12 of the normal costs if agreed to through collective bargaining, but would prohibit the employer from using impasse procedures to increase an employee rate. The bill would also state that equal sharing of the normal cost between the employer and employees shall be the standard and would prescribe specified increases in employee contribution rates for existing employees. By increasing the contribution to continuously appropriated funds, this bill would make an appropriation. (4)The Teachers’ Retirement Law establishes the Defined Benefit Program of STRS, which provides a defined benefit to members of the system based on final compensation, credited service, and age at retirement, subject to certain variations. The Teachers’ Retirement Law also establishes the Defined Benefit Supplement Program, which provides supplemental retirement, disability, and other benefits, payable either in a lump-sum payment or an annuity, or both, to members of the State Teachers’ Retirement Plan. The Teachers’ Retirement Law defines creditable compensation for these purposes as remuneration that is payable in cash to all persons in the same class of employees, as specified, for performing creditable service. This bill would revise the definition of creditable compensation for these purposes and would identify certain payments, reimbursements, and compensation that are creditable compensation to be applied to the Defined Benefit Supplement Program. The bill would prohibit an employer from offering a supplemental defined benefit plan unless it offered one before January 1, 2013. The bill would establish a retirement formula of 2.4% at age 65 and set a minimum retirement age of 55 for a member of STRS who is hired on or after January 1, 2013. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature that STRS propose statutory changes to fully effectuate those changes by June 30, 2013. (5)Existing law permits members of PERS, STRS, and county, city, and district retirement systems that have adopted specified provisions, to purchase up to 5 years of nonqualified service credit by making specified contributions to the system. This bill, on and after January 1, 2013, would prohibit a public retirement system from allowing the purchase of nonqualified service credit, as described above, except as specified. Under existing law, retirement benefits may be increased retroactively or prospectively. This bill would provide that any enhancement to a public retirement system’s retirement formula or benefit that is adopted on or after January 1, 2013, would apply only to service performed on or after the operative date of the enhancement. The bill would also provide that, if a change to a member’s classification or employment results in an increase in the retirement formula or benefit applicable to that member, the increase would apply only to service performed on or after the operative date of the change. The bill would also, until January 1, 2018, specify the benefit amount for industrial disability retirement. (6)Existing law requires the final compensation of a local member for the purpose of determining any pension or benefit resulting from state service as an elective or appointed officer on a city council or a county board of supervisors accrued while in membership, to be based on the highest average annual compensation earnable by the member during the period of state service in each elective or appointed office. This bill, for the purpose of determining any pension or benefit resulting from the local service, would require final compensation to be based on the highest average annual pensionable compensation earned. (7)Existing law provides that any elected public officer who takes public office, or is reelected to public office, on or after January 1, 2006, who is convicted of any specified felony arising directly out of his or her official duties, forfeits all rights and benefits accrued on and after January 1, 2006, under, and membership in, any public retirement system in which he or she is a member, effective on the date of final conviction, as specified. This bill would instead require that a public employee, including one who is elected or appointed to a public office, who is convicted of any state or federal felony for conduct arising out of, or in the performance of, his or her official duties in pursuit of the office or appointment, or in connection with obtaining salary, disability retirement, service retirement, or other benefits, forfeit retirement benefits earned or accrued from the earliest date of the commission of the felony to the forfeiture date, as specified. The bill would also require any contributions to the public retirement system made by the public employee on or after the earliest date of commission of the felony to be returned, without interest, to the public employee upon the occurrence of a distribution event, as defined, unless otherwise ordered by a court or determined by the pension administrator. The bill would also make related, conforming changes. (8)PERL establishes the circumstances in which a retired person may serve without reinstatement from retirement or loss or interruption of benefits, including as a member of a board, commission, or advisory committee, upon appointment by certain state officials, by the director of a state department, or by the governing board of a contracting agency. Existing law generally prohibits any person who has been retired from being employed in any capacity with the same public employer unless he or she is first reinstated from retirement, except as authorized. This bill would authorize a retired person, who is first appointed on or after January 1, 2013, to a part-time or nonsalaried position on a state board or commission, to serve without reinstatement, as specified. The bill would prohibit a retired person who retires from a public employer from serving, being employed by, or being employed through a contract directly by a public employer in the same retirement system from which the retiree receives a pension benefit without reinstatement, except as specified. (9)The Teachers’ Retirement Law limits the amount of compensation for certain creditable service activities by a retired member to be $22,000 adjusted by the percentage change in the average compensation earnable by active members of the Defined Benefit Program, from the 1998–99 fiscal year to the fiscal year ending in the previous calendar year. The bill would change that limit in the Teachers’ Retirement Law to be 12 of the median final compensation of all members who retired for service during the fiscal year ending in the previous calendar year and would define those activities as retired member activities. (10)The Legislators’ Retirement Law (LRL) provides pension benefits based in part upon credited service. The LRL also authorizes the Insurance Commissioner and every legislative statutory officer and every elective officer of the state whose office is provided for by the California Constitution, except judges, to become a member of the Legislators’ Retirement System (LRS). PERL authorizes legislative statutory officers and elective officers, as defined, to elect to become members of PERS. This bill would prohibit anyone who first becomes, on or after January 1, 2013, the Insurance Commissioner, a legislative statutory officer, or an elective officer of the state whose office is provided for by the California Constitution from becoming a member of the LRS but would continue to provide optional membership in PERS. (11)Existing law authorizes any public agency to participate in, and make its employees members of, PERS by contract. In the case of an employee who has been employed by one or more contracting public agencies, retirement benefits distributed to that employee are based on the highest final compensation under any system, and each system makes a separate retirement payment to the employee based upon the number of years that the employee worked for each of those agencies. The bill would require the Board of Administration of PERS to implement program changes to ensure that a contracting agency that creates a significant increase in actuarial liability bears the associated liability. The bill would require the system actuary to assess an increase in liability in this regard to the employer that created it at the time the increase is determined and to make adjustments to that employer’s rates to account for the increased liability. The bill would apply these requirements to any significant increase in actuarial liability due to increased compensation paid to a nonrepresented employee regardless of when the increase in compensation occurred. (12)The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (CERL) authorizes counties and districts, as defined, to provide a system of retirement benefits to their employees. CERL defines compensation earnable for the purpose of calculating benefits as the average compensation for the period under consideration with respect to the average number of days ordinarily worked by persons in the same grade or class of positions during the period, and at the same rate of pay, as determined by the retirement board. This bill would prohibit a variety of payments, including unscheduled overtime, payments for unused vacation, sick leave, or compensatory time off, exceeding what may be earned and payable in each 12-month period during the final average salary period, and specified payments made at the termination of employment from being included in compensation earnable. The bill would require the board to establish a procedure for assessing and determining whether an element of compensation was paid to enhance a member’s retirement benefit and would prohibit that compensation from being included in compensation earnable. The bill would require the board to provide notice to the member and employer upon a final determination that compensation was paid to enhance a member’s retirement benefit. The bill would authorize the member or employer to obtain judicial review of the board’s action by filing a petition for writ of mandate, as specified. The bill would authorize the board to assess a county or district a reasonable amount to cover the cost of audit, adjustment, or correction, if it determines that a county or district knowingly failed to comply with specified reporting requirements. Hide
An Act to Add Section 43018.3 to the Health and Safety Code, Relating to Vehicular Air Pollution, and Declaring the Urgency Thereof, to Take Effect Immediately. AB 344 (2011-2012) MendozaSupportNo
Existing law imposes various limitations on emissions of air contaminants for the control of air pollution from vehicular and nonvehicular sources. Existing law generally designates the State Air… More
Existing law imposes various limitations on emissions of air contaminants for the control of air pollution from vehicular and nonvehicular sources. Existing law generally designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency with the primary responsibility for the control of vehicular air pollution. Existing law requires the state board to adopt and implement motor vehicle emission standards, in-use performance standards, and motor vehicle fuel specifications for the control of air contaminants, including standards for off-road and nonvehicle engine categories.This bill would require the state board, for purposes of specified provisions relating to mobile source emissions reductions, as applied to the reduction of emissions of diesel particulate matter, oxides of nitrogen, and other criteria pollutants from certain in-use, diesel-fueled vehicles, to define “low-use vehicle” for purposes of tax-exempt nonprofit organizations as a vehicle that will be operated fewer than 5,000 miles in the state in any compliance year, as specified.This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 1060, 1061, and 1064 Of, and to Amend the Heading of Chapter 4.5 (Commencing with Section 1060) of Part 3 of Division 2 Of, the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. AB 350 (2011-2012) SolorioSupportNo
Existing law, the Displaced Janitor Opportunity Act, requires contractors and subcontractors, that are awarded contracts or subcontracts by an awarding authority to provide janitorial or building… More
Existing law, the Displaced Janitor Opportunity Act, requires contractors and subcontractors, that are awarded contracts or subcontracts by an awarding authority to provide janitorial or building maintenance services at a particular job site or sites, to retain, for a period of 60 days, certain employees who were employed at that site by the previous contractor or subcontractor. The act requires the successor contractors and subcontractors to offer continued employment to those employees retained for the 60-day period if their performance during that 60-day period is satisfactory. The act authorizes an employee who was not offered employment or who has been discharged in violation of these provisions by a successor contractor or successor subcontractor, or an agent of the employee, to bring an action against a successor contractor or successor subcontractor in any superior court of the state having jurisdiction over the successor contractor or successor subcontractor, as specified. This bill would rename the act the Displaced Property Service Employee Opportunity Act and make the provisions of the act applicable to property services, which would consist of licensed security, as defined, window cleaning, food cafeteria and dietary services, janitorial services, and building maintenance services. This bill would exclude from the definitions of “contractor” and “subcontractor” specified types of food service providers. The bill also would make conforming changes. Hide
An Act to Add Section 3212.13 to the Labor Code, Relating to Workers’ Compensation. AB 375 (2011-2012) SkinnerSupportNo
Existing law provides that an injury of an employee arising out of and in the course of employment is generally compensable through the workers’ compensation system. Existing law provides that, in… More
Existing law provides that an injury of an employee arising out of and in the course of employment is generally compensable through the workers’ compensation system. Existing law provides that, in the case of certain public employees, the term “injury” includes heart trouble, hernia, pneumonia, human immunodeficiency virus, lower back impairment, and other injuries and diseases. This bill would provide, with respect to hospital employees who provide direct patient care in an acute care hospital, as defined, that the term “injury” includes a bloodborne infectious disease, as defined, or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) that develops or manifests itself during the period of the person’s employment with the hospital. This bill would further create a disputable presumption that the above injury arises out of and in the course of the person’s employment if it develops or manifests as specified. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 226 Of, and to Add Article 1.5 (Commencing with Section 245) to Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 2 Of, the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. AB 400 (2011-2012) MaSupportNo
Existing law authorizes employers to provide their employees paid sick leave. This bill would provide that an employee who works in California for 7 or more days in a calendar year is entitled to… More
Existing law authorizes employers to provide their employees paid sick leave. This bill would provide that an employee who works in California for 7 or more days in a calendar year is entitled to paid sick days, as defined, which shall be accrued at a rate of no less than one hour for every 30 hours worked. An employee would be entitled to use accrued sick days beginning on the 90th calendar day of employment. The bill would require employers to provide paid sick days, upon the request of the employee, for diagnosis, care, or treatment of health conditions of the employee or an employee’s family member, or for leave related to domestic violence or sexual assault. An employer would be prohibited from discriminating or retaliating against an employee who requests paid sick days. The bill would require employers to satisfy specified posting and notice and recordkeeping requirements. The bill would also make conforming changes. This bill would require the Labor Commissioner to administer and enforce these requirements, including the promulgation of regulations, investigation, mitigation, and relief of violations of these requirements. This bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to impose specified administrative fines for violations and would authorize an aggrieved person, the commissioner, the Attorney General, or an entity a member of which is aggrieved to bring an action to recover specified civil penalties against an offender, as well as attorney’s fees, costs, and interest. The bill would specify that it does not apply to employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement that provides for paid sick days, nor does it lessen any other obligations of the employer to employees. This bill would further specify that it does not apply to employees in the construction industry covered by a collective bargaining agreement if the agreement expressly waives the requirements of this article in clear and unambiguous terms. However, the bill would specify that it applies to certain public authorities, established to deliver in-home supportive services, except where a collective bargaining agreement provides for an incremental wage increase sufficient to satisfy the bill’s requirements for accrual of sick days. Hide
An Act to Add Section 3507.7 to the Government Code, Relating to Public Employment. AB 455 (2011-2012) CamposSupportNo
The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act contains various provisions that provide methods for local public employers and their employees to resolve disputes regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions… More
The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act contains various provisions that provide methods for local public employers and their employees to resolve disputes regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. This bill would additionally provide that when a local public agency has established a personnel commission or merit commission to administer personnel rules or a merit system, the governing board of the public agency would appoint 12 of the members of the commission, and 12 of the members of the commission, nominated by the recognized employee organization, would be appointed by the governing board of the public agency. Whenever multiple bargaining units are represented by different recognized employee organizations, the employee organization representing the largest number of employees would designate commission members pursuant to that provision. Hide
AB 506 (2011-2012) WieckowskiSupportYes
An Act to Amend Sections 215, 225.5, and 226 Of, and to Add Section 213.5 To, the Labor Code, Relating to Payroll Cards. AB 51 (2011-2012) YamadaSupportNo
(1)Existing law prohibits an employer from issuing in payment of wages due certain instruments, including an order, check, draft, note, memorandum, scrip, coupon, card, or other acknowledgment of… More
(1)Existing law prohibits an employer from issuing in payment of wages due certain instruments, including an order, check, draft, note, memorandum, scrip, coupon, card, or other acknowledgment of indebtedness or redeemable instrument, unless specified requirements are satisfied. This bill would authorize an employer to pay an employee’s wages by means of a payroll card, as defined, provided that specified requirements are satisfied. In addition, the bill would make a violation of its provisions a misdemeanor and would subject a violator to specified civil penalties. By creating new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2)Existing law requires an employer to provide employees, at the time wages are paid, with an itemized statement containing specified items regarding the wages earned. This bill would extend the requirement for an itemized statement of wages to an employer who pays his or her employees via payroll cards. 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 Section 1386 Of, and to Add Article 6.1 (Commencing with Section 1385.001) to Chapter 2.2 of Division 2 Of, the Health and Safety Code, and to Add Article 4.4 (Commencing with Section 10180.1) to Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Insurance Code, Relating to Health Care Coverage. AB 52 (2011-2012) FeuerSupportNo
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 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 or a health insurance policy may become effective without prior written notification of the change to the contractholder or policyholder. Existing law prohibits a health care service plan or health 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. Existing law requires a health care service plan or health insurer that issues individual or group contracts or policies to file with the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance specified rate information at least 60 days prior to the effective date of any rate change. This bill would further require a health care service plan or health insurer that issues individual or group contracts or policies to file with the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance, on and after January 1, 2012, a complete rate application for any proposed rate, as defined, or rate change, and would prohibit the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance from approving any rate or rate change that is found to be excessive, inadequate, or unfairly discriminatory. The bill would require the rate application to include certain rate information. The bill would authorize the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance to approve, deny, or modify any proposed rate or rate change, and would authorize the Department of Managed Health Care and the Department of Insurance to review any rate or rate change that went into effect between January 1, 2011, and January 1, 2012, and to order refunds, subject to these provisions. The bill would authorize the imposition of fees on health care service plans and health insurers for purposes of implementation, for deposit into newly created funds, subject to appropriation. The bill would impose civil penalties on a health care service plan or health insurer, and subject a health care service plan to discipline, for a violation of these provisions, as specified. The bill would establish proceedings for the review of any action taken under those provisions related to rate applications and would require the Department of Managed Health Care and the Department of Insurance, and plans and insurers, to disclose specified information on the Internet pertaining to rate applications and those proceedings. The bill would require the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance, or the court, to award reasonable advocate’s fees, including expert witness fees, and other reasonable costs in those proceedings under specified circumstances, to be paid by the plan or insurer. Because a willful violation of these provisions 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
AB 559 (2011-2012) SwansonSupportNo
AB 59 (2011-2012) SwansonSupportNo
An Act to Amend Section 216 of the Public Utilities Code, Relating to Public Utilities. AB 631 (2011-2012) MaSupportYes
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, as defined. The existing Public Utilities Act requires every public utility to furnish and maintain… More
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, as defined. The existing Public Utilities Act requires every public utility to furnish and maintain adequate, efficient, just, and reasonable service, instrumentalities, equipment, and facilities as are necessary to promote the safety, health, comfort, and convenience of its patrons, employees, and the public. This bill would provide that the ownership, control, operation, or management of a facility that supplies electricity to the public only for use to charge light duty plug-in electric vehicles, as defined, does not make the corporation or person a public utility for purposes of the act. Hide
AB 723 (2011-2012) BradfordSupportNo
AB 889 (2011-2012) AmmianoSupportNo
An Act to Amend Sections 315 and 583 of the Public Utilities Code, Relating to the Public Utilities Commission. SB 1000 (2011-2012) YeeSupportNo
(1)Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities and can establish its own procedures, subject to statutory limitations or directions and… More
(1)Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities and can establish its own procedures, subject to statutory limitations or directions and constitutional requirements of due process. The Public Utilities Act requires the commission to investigate the cause of all accidents occurring upon the property of any public utility or directly or indirectly arising from or connected with its maintenance or operation, resulting in loss of life or injury to person or property and requiring, in the judgment of the commission, investigation by it, and authorizes the commission to make any order or recommendation with respect to the investigation that it determines to be just and reasonable. This bill would require that any order or recommendation made by the commission and any accident report filed with, or generated by, the commission pursuant to these requirements be made available and ready for public review in compliance with the California Public Records Act and these provisions. (2)The Public Utilities Act prohibits the commission or an officer or employee of the commission from disclosing any information furnished to the commission by a public utility, a subsidiary, an affiliate, or corporation holding a controlling interest in a public utility, unless the information is specifically required to be open to public inspection under the act, except on order of the commission or a commissioner in the course of a hearing or proceeding. The act provides that any present or former officer or employee of the commission who divulges this information is guilty of a misdemeanor.This bill would require the commission, for those records subject to public disclosure, to determine, prior to disclosing any record, whether any exemptions to the California Public Records Act or other law restricting disclosure applies to that record. This bill would require the commission to create a list of safety-related reports submitted by gas corporations or electrical corporations that the commission would, upon completion of the reports, automatically disclose to the public. The bill would require the commission, prior to disclosing any record, to determine whether any exemptions to the California Public Records Act or other law restricting disclosure apply to that record. The bill would require the commission to post certain information on its Internet Web site. Hide
SB 1195 (2011-2012) PriceOpposeYes
An Act to Add Part 5.7 (Commencing with Section 11160) to Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Local Government Finance. SB 223 (2011-2012) LenoSupportNo
Existing law authorizes certain counties to impose a local vehicle license fee not exceeding $10 per vehicle, as provided, for the privilege of operating specified vehicles on public roads in the… More
Existing law authorizes certain counties to impose a local vehicle license fee not exceeding $10 per vehicle, as provided, for the privilege of operating specified vehicles on public roads in the county. Existing law requires a county imposing this fee to contract with the Department of Motor Vehicles to collect and administer the fee, as specified. This bill would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to impose a voter-approved local assessment for specified vehicles if certain conditions, including approval by local voters, are met. The bill would require the city and county to contract with the department to collect and administer the assessment, as provided. The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law authorize various deductions against the income that is otherwise subject to tax under those laws, including a deduction for local taxes that were paid or incurred by a taxpayer. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to annually notify the department of estimated revenue losses to the state resulting from taxpayers deducting, for purposes of the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, the voter-approved local assessments authorized by this bill, as specified. This bill would require the department to transmit from the assessments collected an amount equal to these reported losses for deposit in the General Fund. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 22112.5, 22119.2, 22461, 22905, 25009, 26302, and 26505 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 24214.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Section 26806 Of, and to Add Sections 24214.6 and 26307 To, the Education Code, and to Amend Sections 20221, 20630, 20636, 20636.1, and 21220 Of, and to Add Section 21220.3 To, the Government Code, Relating to Public Retirement Systems. SB 27 (2011-2012) SimitianSupportNo
(1)The State Teachers’ Retirement Law (STRL) establishes the Defined Benefit Program of the State Teachers’ Retirement System, which provides a defined benefit to members of the system based on… More
(1)The State Teachers’ Retirement Law (STRL) establishes the Defined Benefit Program of the State Teachers’ Retirement System, which provides a defined benefit to members of the system based on final compensation, credited service, and age at retirement, subject to certain variations. STRL also establishes the Defined Benefit Supplement Program, which provides supplemental retirement, disability, and other benefits, payable either in a lump-sum payment, an annuity, or both to members of the State Teachers’ Retirement Plan. STRL defines creditable compensation for these purposes as remuneration that is payable in cash to all persons in the same class of employees, as specified, for performing creditable service. This bill would revise the definition of creditable compensation for these purposes and would identify certain payments, reimbursements, and compensation that are creditable compensation to be applied to the Defined Benefit Supplement Program. The bill would prohibit one employee from being considered a class. The bill would revise the definition of compensation with respect to the Defined Benefit Supplement Program to include remuneration earnable within a 5-year period, which includes the last year in which the member’s final compensation is determined, when it is in excess of 125% of that member’s compensation earnable in the year prior to that 5-year period, as specified. The bill would prohibit a member who retires on or after January 1, 2013, who elects to receive his or her retirement benefit under the Defined Benefit Supplement Program as a lump-sum payment from receiving that sum until 180 days have elapsed following the effective date of the member’s retirement. (2)Existing law permits a retired member of STRS to perform specified activities as an employee of an employer in the system, as an employee of a 3rd party, or as an independent contractor within the California public school system, but prohibits the member from making contributions to the retirement fund or accruing service credit based on compensation earned from that service. Existing law conditions this authorization on a variety of factors including limitations on the rate of pay of the member and the total amount of compensation. Existing law prohibits compensation, in this regard, for a member who is below normal retirement age for the first 6 months after retirement for service. This bill would apply the prohibition described above to employees retiring on or after January 1, 2013, for the first 180 days after retirement for service. The bill, beginning January 1, 2013, and until June 30, 2014, would exclude from that postretirement compensation limitation up to $2,500 of compensation earned by a member who retired for service and returned to work during the first 180 days after retirement as a substitute employee, as specified, if other conditions are met. (3)Existing law establishes the Cash Balance Benefit Program, administered by the Teachers’ Retirement Board, as a separate benefit program within the State Teachers’ Retirement Plan in order to provide a retirement plan for persons employed to perform creditable service for less than 50% of full-time service. Existing law provides that the normal form of benefit under the program is a lump-sum payment, after which further benefits are not payable. This bill would permit the board to assess penalties for late and improper adjustments on contributions in connection with the Cash Balance Benefit Program. The bill would prohibit a member who retires on or after January 1, 2013, from receiving the lump-sum payment under the program until 180 days have elapsed following the effective date of the member’s termination of employment. (4)The Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL) establishes the Public Employees’ Retirement System, which is administered by its board of administration, and which provides a defined benefit to its members based on age at retirement, service credit, and final compensation. PERL defines compensation earnable and other related terms for purposes of calculating a member’s retirement allowance. PERL requires employers and contracting agencies participating in the system to provide notice to the board of the change of status of a member. This bill would require a participating employer and contracting agencies to immediately notify the board of a change that may affect a member’s payrate for purposes of compensation earnable and would authorize the board to assess a reasonable fee upon an employer that fails to do so. The bill would authorize the board to assess a reasonable amount to cover the cost of audit, adjustment, or correction, if it determines that an employer knowingly failed to comply with requirements regarding the reporting of compensation. The bill would specify that payrate means, among other things, the member’s monthly base pay, would connect payrate to publicly available pay schedules, and would establish requirements for computation of the payrate of a member for a leave without pay. The bill would prescribe a process for determining if specific compensation items are special compensation. The bill would prohibit a person who retires on or after January 1, 2013, from being employed in any capacity by the state, the University of California, a school employer, or a contracting agency until that person has been separated from service for a period of at least 180 days, subject to existing exceptions, unless the employee is subject to a collectively bargained early retirement plan with the California State University in effect prior to January 1, 2013. The bill also would make additional related changes and would make a statement of legislative findings. This bill would provide that its provisions would become operative on July 1, 2012, except as specified. Hide
SB 396 (2011-2012) HuffOpposeNo
SB 432 (2011-2012) De LeonSupportNo
An Act to Amend Section 6404.5 of the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. SB 575 (2011-2012) DeSaulnierSupportNo
Existing law prohibits smoking of tobacco products inside an enclosed space, as defined, at a place of employment. The violation of the prohibition against smoking in enclosed spaces of places of… More
Existing law prohibits smoking of tobacco products inside an enclosed space, as defined, at a place of employment. The violation of the prohibition against smoking in enclosed spaces of places of employment is an infraction punishable by a specified fine. This bill would expand the prohibition on smoking in a place of employment to include an owner-operated business, as defined. This bill would also eliminate most of the specified exemptions that permit smoking in certain work environments, such as hotel lobbies, bars and taverns, banquet rooms, warehouse facilities, private residences used as family day care homes, and employee break rooms. By expanding the scope of an infraction, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
SB 8 (2011-2012) YeeSupportYes
An Act to Amend and Add Sections 2923.5 and 2923.6 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 2924 Of, to Add Sections 2920.5, 2923.4, 2923.7, 2924.17, and 2924.20 To, to Add and Repeal Sections 2923.55, 2924.9, 2924.10, 2924.18, and 2924.19 Of, and to Add, Repeal, and Add Sections 2924.11, 2924.12, and 2924.15 Of, the Civil Code, Relating to Mortgages. SB 900 (2011-2012) LenoSupportYes
(1)Existing law, until January 1, 2013, requires a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent to contact the borrower prior to filing a notice of default to explore options for the borrower… More
(1)Existing law, until January 1, 2013, requires a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent to contact the borrower prior to filing a notice of default to explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure, as specified. Existing law requires a notice of default or, in certain circumstances, a notice of sale, to include a declaration stating that the mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent has contacted the borrower, has tried with due diligence to contact the borrower, or that no contact was required for a specified reason. This bill would add mortgage servicers, as defined, to these provisions and would extend the operation of these provisions indefinitely, except that it would delete the requirement with respect to a notice of sale. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, additionally require the borrower, as defined, to be provided with specified information in writing prior to recordation of a notice of default and, in certain circumstances, within 5 business days after recordation. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent from recording a notice of default or, until January 1, 2018, recording a notice of sale or conducting a trustee’s sale while a complete first lien loan modification application is pending, under specified conditions. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, establish additional procedures to be followed regarding a first lien loan modification application, the denial of an application, and a borrower’s right to appeal a denial. (2)Existing law imposes various requirements that must be satisfied prior to exercising a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust, including, among other things, recording a notice of default and a notice of sale. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, require a written notice to the borrower after the postponement of a foreclosure sale in order to advise the borrower of any new sale date and time, as specified. The bill would provide that an entity shall not record a notice of default or otherwise initiate the foreclosure process unless it is the holder of the beneficial interest under the deed of trust, the original or substituted trustee, or the designated agent of the holder of the beneficial interest, as specified. The bill would prohibit recordation of a notice of default or a notice of sale or the conduct of a trustee’s sale if a foreclosure prevention alternative has been approved and certain conditions exist and would, until January 1, 2018, require recordation of a rescission of those notices upon execution of a permanent foreclosure prevention alternative. The bill would until January 1, 2018, prohibit the collection of application fees and the collection of late fees while a foreclosure prevention alternative is being considered, if certain criteria are met, and would require a subsequent mortgage servicer to honor any previously approved foreclosure prevention alternative. The bill would authorize a borrower to seek an injunction and damages for violations of certain of the provisions described above, except as specified. The bill would authorize the greater of treble actual damages or $50,000 in statutory damages if a violation of certain provisions is found to be intentional or reckless or resulted from willful misconduct, as specified. The bill would authorize the awarding of attorneys’ fees for prevailing borrowers, as specified. Violations of these provisions by licensees of the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate would also be violations of those respective licensing laws. Because a violation of certain of those licensing laws is a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that the requirements imposed on mortgage servicers, and mortgagees, trustees, beneficiaries, and authorized agents, described above are applicable only to mortgages or deeds of trust secured by residential real property not exceeding 4 dwelling units that is owner-occupied, as defined, and, until January 1, 2018, only to those entities who conduct more than 175 foreclosure sales per year or annual reporting period, except as specified. The bill would require, upon request from a borrower who requests a foreclosure prevention alternative, a mortgage servicer who conducts more than 175 foreclosure sales per year or annual reporting period to establish a single point of contact and provide the borrower with one or more direct means of communication with the single point of contact. The bill would specify various responsibilities of the single point of contact. The bill would define single point of contact for these purposes. (3)Existing law prescribes documents that may be recorded or filed in court. This bill would require that a specified declaration, notice of default, notice of sale, deed of trust, assignment of a deed of trust, substitution of trustee, or declaration or affidavit filed in any court relative to a foreclosure proceeding or recorded by or on behalf of a mortgage servicer shall be accurate and complete and supported by competent and reliable evidence. The bill would require that, before recording or filing any of those documents, a mortgage servicer shall ensure that it has reviewed competent and reliable evidence to substantiate the borrower’s default and the right to foreclose, including the borrower’s loan status and loan information. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, provide that any mortgage servicer that engages in multiple and repeated violations of these requirements shall be liable for a civil penalty of up to $7,500 per mortgage or deed of trust, in an action brought by specified state and local government entities, and would also authorize administrative enforcement against licensees of the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate. The bill would authorize the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate to adopt regulations applicable to persons and entities under their respective jurisdictions for purposes of the provisions described above. The bill would provide that a violation of those regulations would be enforceable only by the regulating agency. (4)The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature in relation to foreclosures in the state generally, and would state the purposes of the bill. (5)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 215 and 225.5 Of, and to Add Section 213.5 To, the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. SB 931 (2011-2012) EvansSupportNo
Existing law prohibits an employer from issuing in payment of wages due certain instruments, including an order, check, draft, note, memorandum, scrip, coupon, card, or other acknowledgment of… More
Existing law prohibits an employer from issuing in payment of wages due certain instruments, including an order, check, draft, note, memorandum, scrip, coupon, card, or other acknowledgment of indebtedness or redeemable instrument, unless specified requirements are satisfied. This bill would authorize an employer to pay an employee’s wages by means of a payroll card, as defined, provided that specified requirements are satisfied. In addition, the bill would make a violation of its provisions a misdemeanor and would subject a violator to specified civil penalties. By creating new crimes, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
SBX1 2 (2011-2012) SimitianSupportYes
An Act to Amend, Repeal, and Add Section 25744 of the Public Resources Code, Relating to Energy, and Making an Appropriation Therefor. AB 2132 (2009-2010) CarterSupportNo
Under the Public Utilities Act, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the PUC, until January… More
Under the Public Utilities Act, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the PUC, until January 1, 2012, to require Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison to identify a separate electrical rate component to fund programs that enhance system reliability and provide in-state benefits. This rate component is a nonbypassable element of local distribution and collected on the basis of usage. Existing PUC resolutions refer to the nonbypassable rate component as a “public goods charge.” The public goods charge moneys are collected to support cost-effective energy efficiency and conservation activities, public interest research and development not adequately provided by competitive and regulated markets, and renewable energy resources. The moneys collected by the public goods charge for renewable energy are required to be transferred to the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission), for deposit in the Renewable Resource Trust Fund, for use for the renewable energy resources program. Some of the money in the fund, and in the accounts in the fund, is continuously appropriated to the Energy Commission for specified purposes related to renewable energy resources. The moneys collected by the public goods charge for public interest research and development are required to be transferred to the Energy Commission, for deposit in the Public Interest Research, Development, and Demonstration Fund, for use for specified purposes, including the public interest energy research, demonstration, and development program. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2012, the use of those revenues generated from the public goods charge for energy improvements in existing buildings built prior to July 1, 1978, thereby making an appropriation. Hide