General commercial unions

TopicBill numbersort iconAuthorInterest positionBecame law
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 Amend Section 2810.5 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 1522 (2013-2014) GonzalezSupportNo
Existing law authorizes employers to provide their employees paid sick leave. This bill would enact the Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014 to provide that an employee who, on or after… More
Existing law authorizes employers to provide their employees paid sick leave. This bill would enact the Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014 to provide that an employee who, on or after July 1, 2015, works in California for 30 or more days within a year from the commencement of employment is entitled to paid sick days for prescribed purposes, to 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 day of employment. The bill would authorize an employer to limit an employee’s use of paid sick days to 24 hours or 3 days in each year of employment. The bill would prohibit an employer 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 define terms for those purposes. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to enforce these requirements, including the investigation, mitigation, and relief of violations of these requirements. The bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to impose specified administrative fines for violations and would authorize the commissioner or the Attorney General to recover specified civil penalties against an offender who violated these provisions on behalf of the aggrieved, as well as attorney’s fees, costs, and interest. The bill would not apply to certain categories of employees that meet specified requirements. Hide
An Act to Add and Repeal Section 13084 to the Government Code, to Amend Section 1095 of the Unemployment Insurance Code, and to Add and Repeal 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. This bill would, until January 1, 2020, 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 Medi-Cal program. The bill would require the State Department of Health Care Services to determine the average per individual cost of state and federally funded benefits provided by the Medi-Cal program 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 and the State Department of Social Services to determine the total average 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 100 or more beneficiaries of the Medi-Cal program. 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 until January 1, 2020, that, among other things, identifies employers that employ 100 or more beneficiaries in the state, as specified. Under existing law, federal nutrition assistance benefits are administered through CalFresh, as specified. The bill would, until January 1, 2020, additionally require the State Department of Social Services to annually determine and provide to the Employment Development Department, the percentage of individuals who are recipients of the Medi-Cal program who are also recipients of the CalFresh program, and the average individual CalFresh benefit for individuals who are members of households in which at least one member is employed. 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, until January 1, 2020, 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 the Medi-Cal program and from refusing to hire a beneficiary for reason of being enrolled in the Medi-Cal program. This bill would prohibit an employer from disclosing to any person or entity that an employee receives or is applying for public benefits, unless authorized by state or federal law. 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 and the failure to obtain valid workers’ compensation coverage. The bill would prohibit a client employer from shifting to the labor contractor legal duties or liabilities under workplace safety provisions with respect to workers provided by the labor contractor. 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. The bill would except from the definition of labor contractor specified nonprofit, labor, and motion picture payroll services organizations and 3rd parties engaged in an employee leasing arrangement, as specified. 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 Section 12950.1 of the Government Code, Relating to Employment. AB 2053 (2013-2014) GonzalezSupportYes
Existing law makes specified employment practices unlawful, including the harassment of an employee directly by the employer or indirectly by agents of the employer with the employer’s knowledge.… More
Existing law makes specified employment practices unlawful, including the harassment of an employee directly by the employer or indirectly by agents of the employer with the employer’s knowledge. Existing law further requires every employer to act to ensure a workplace free of sexual harassment by implementing certain minimum requirements, including posting sexual harassment information posters at the workplace and obtaining and making available an information sheet on sexual harassment. Existing law also requires employers, as defined, with 50 or more employees to provide at least 2 hours of training and education regarding sexual harassment to all supervisory employees, as specified. Existing law requires each employer to provide that training and education to each supervisory employee once every 2 years. This bill would additionally require that the above-described training and education include, as a component of the training and education, prevention of abusive conduct, as defined. 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 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 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 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 Add Part 1.86 (Commencing with Section 34191.10) to Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code, and to Amend Section 21094.5 of the Public Resources Code, Relating to Economic Development, and Making an Appropriation Therefor. SB 1 (2013-2014) SteinbergSupportNo
The Community Redevelopment Law authorizes the establishment of redevelopment agencies in communities to address the effects of blight, as defined. Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and… More
The Community Redevelopment Law authorizes the establishment of redevelopment agencies in communities to address the effects of blight, as defined. Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies, as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies. Existing law provides for various economic development programs that foster community sustainability and community and economic development initiatives throughout the state. This bill would authorize certain public entities of a Sustainable Communities Investment Area, as described, to form a Sustainable Communities Investment Authority (authority) to carry out the Community Redevelopment Law in a specified manner. The bill would require the authority to adopt a Sustainable Communities Investment Plan for a Sustainable Communities Investment Area and authorize the authority to include in that plan a provision for the receipt of tax increment funds provided that certain economic development and planning requirements are met. The bill would authorize the legislative body of a city or county forming an authority to dedicate any portion of its net available revenue, as defined, to the authority through its Sustainable Communities Investment Plan. The bill would require the authority to contract for an independent financial and performance audit every 5 years. The bill would establish prequalification requirements for entities that will receive more than $1,000,000 from the Sustainable Communities Investment Authority and would require the Department of Industrial Relations to monitor and enforce compliance with prevailing wage requirements for specified projects within a Sustainable Communities Investment Area. The bill would deposit moneys received by the department from developer charges related to the costs of monitoring and enforcement in the State Public Works Enforcement Fund. By depositing a new source of revenue in the State Public Works Enforcement Fund, a continuously appropriated special fund, the bill would make an appropriation. Hide
An Act to Amend Sections 1374.8 and 1385.07 Of, and to Add Section 1385.10 To, the Health and Safety Code, and to Amend Sections 791.27 and 10181.7 Of, and to Add Section 10181.10 To, 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. For large group plan contracts and policies, existing law requires a plan or insurer to file rate information with the appropriate 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 require a health care service plan or health insurer to annually provide deidentified claims data at no charge to a large group purchaser that requests the information and meets specified conditions. The bill would specify that all disclosures of data to the large group purchaser made pursuant to these provisions is required to comply with the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), the federal Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act or the Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act, as specified. The bill would prohibit a health care service plan or a health insurer from disclosing the contracted rates between the health care service plan or health insurer and a provider to a large group purchaser. This bill would specify that additional aggregate claims data disclosed to a large group purchaser by a health care service plan or health insurer is confidential and is prohibited from being made public by the department and exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act. 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 these provisions regarding a plan’s or insurer’s annual disclosure of deidentified claims data to a large group purchaser. Because a willful violation of the bill’s requirements by a health care services plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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 650.02 of the Business and Professions Code, Relating to Healing Arts. SB 1215 (2013-2014) HernandezSupportNo
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of healing arts professionals by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs. Existing law makes it a crime for licensed healing arts… More
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of healing arts professionals by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs. Existing law makes it a crime for licensed healing arts professionals to receive money or other consideration for, or to engage in various related activities with respect to, the referral of patients, clients, or customers to any person, with specified exceptions. Existing law also makes it a crime for a licensed healing arts professional to refer patients for specified services if the licensee or his or her immediate family has a financial interest, as defined, with the person or entity. Existing law provides that, among other exceptions, this prohibition does not apply to services for a specific patient that are performed within, or goods that are supplied by, a licensee’s office or the office of a group practice. This bill would provide that this exception does not apply to advanced imaging, anatomic pathology, radiation therapy, or physical therapy for a specific patient that is performed within a licensee’s office or the office of a group practice and that is compensated on a fee-for-service basis. The bill would also define advanced imaging for this purpose. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 6276.12 of the Government Code, and to Amend Section 147.2 of the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. SB 193 (2013-2014) MonningSupportNo
Existing law requires the Department of Industrial Relations, with the State Department of Public Health (DPH), to establish a repository of current data on toxic materials and harmful physical… More
Existing law requires the Department of Industrial Relations, with the State Department of Public Health (DPH), to establish a repository of current data on toxic materials and harmful physical agents in use or potentially in use in places of employment in the state. That repository is known as the Hazard Evaluation System and Information Service (HESIS). Existing law requires HESIS, among other things, to provide information and collect and evaluate data relating to possible hazards to employees resulting from exposure to toxic materials or harmful physical agents. Existing law expressly does not require employers to report any information not otherwise required by law. This bill, except as specified, when there is new scientific or medical information and the Chief of HESIS, in consultation with the Director of Industrial Relations and the Chief of the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control in DPH, makes a specified determination, would require chemical manufacturers, formulators, suppliers, distributors, importers, and their agents to provide to HESIS the names and addresses of their customers who have purchased specified chemicals or commercial products containing those chemicals, and certain other information related to those shipments, upon written request of HESIS, for every product the final destination of which may be a place of employment in California. The bill would deem the names and addresses of customers, the quantities and dates of shipments, and the proportion of a specified chemical within a mixture to be confidential. The bill would also provide that DPH would be entitled to reimbursement of attorney’s fees and costs incurred in seeking an injunction to enforce this requirement. The California Public Records Act requires certain public records to be made available for public inspection, and lists records that are exempt from disclosure under the act. The bill would exempt from public disclosure under the act the names and addresses of customers, the quantities and dates of shipments, and the proportion of a specified chemical within a mixture provided to HESIS by chemical manufacturers, formulators, suppliers, distributors, importers, and their agents, that would be required pursuant to the bill, as provided, but would specifically authorize HESIS to disclose that information to officers or employees of the DPH, to officers or employees of the state who are responsible for carrying out the provisions of the Labor Code relating to safety in employment, or to specified state agencies. The bill would also state findings and declarations of the Legislature for limiting the public’s right of access to the information. Hide
An Act to Add Part 21 (Commencing with Section 42001) to Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Taxation, and Making an Appropriation Therefor. SB 241 (2013-2014) EvansSupportNo
Existing law imposes various taxes, including taxes on the privilege of engaging in certain activities. The Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, provides procedures for… More
Existing law imposes various taxes, including taxes on the privilege of engaging in certain activities. The Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, provides procedures for the collection of certain fees and surcharges. This bill would impose an oil and gas severance tax upon any operator, as defined, for the privilege of severing oil or gas from the earth or water in this state for sale, transport, consumption, storage, profit, or use, as provided, at the specified rates, calculated as provided. The tax would be administered by the State Board of Equalization and would be collected pursuant to the procedures set forth in the Fee Collection Procedures Law. The bill would require the board to deposit all tax revenues, penalties, and interest collected pursuant to these provisions into the California Higher Education Fund, a continuously appropriated fund created by this bill, for allocation to the Regents of the University of California, the Trustees of the California State University, the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the Department of Parks and Recreation, and to a reserve account, as provided. Because this bill would expand the scope of the Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, it would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. 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 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 Amend Sections 9998.1, 9998.6, and 9998.8 Of, to Add Sections 9998.1.5, 9998.2.5, 9998.10, and 9998.11 To, and to Repeal and Add Section 9998.2 Of, the Business and Professions Code, Relating to Foreign Labor Contractors. SB 516 (2013-2014) SteinbergSupportNo
Existing federal law permits certain aliens to engage in employment in the United States under specified conditions. Existing state law regulates the services of foreign labor contractors, as… More
Existing federal law permits certain aliens to engage in employment in the United States under specified conditions. Existing state law regulates the services of foreign labor contractors, as defined, with regard to contracts, recruitment procedures and representations, and information as to terms and conditions of employment. Existing law provides that any person who violates or induces a violation of the latter provisions is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law also permits any person aggrieved by a violation of these provisions to bring an action for injunctive relief or damages, or both, and authorizes recovery of damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees, in an amount not less than $500, if the aggrieved person prevails on the action. Under existing state law, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement in the Department of Industrial Relations, under the direction of the Labor Commissioner, enforces and administers the licensing and supervision of farm labor contractors, as defined. This bill would change the definition of a foreign labor contractor to mean a person who performs foreign labor contracting activity, as defined, and would require a foreign labor contractor to register with the Labor Commissioner and pay a specified fee, upon satisfying specified conditions. The bill would require the commissioner to enforce and administer the registration and supervision of foreign labor contractors, and would authorize the commissioner to adopt regulations or policies and procedures to implement these provisions. The bill would prohibit a person from knowingly entering into an agreement for the services of a foreign labor contractor that is not registered with the commissioner. The bill would also require foreign labor contractors to disclose specified information and deposit with the commissioner a surety bond in a specified amount, for payment of any amount adjudicated against the foreign labor contractor, as a condition of registration, as specified. The bill would further require persons knowingly using the services of foreign labor contractors to obtain foreign workers to disclose specified information to the commissioner. The bill would require a foreign labor contractor to disclose in writing to each foreign worker who is recruited for employment certain information, as specified. The bill would prohibit a foreign labor contractor and its agent from assessing a fee or cost to a foreign worker for foreign labor contracting activities. The bill would also prohibit charging a foreign worker with any costs or expenses not customarily assessed against similarly situated workers, and would limit the amount of housing costs charged to the foreign worker to the market rate for similar housing. The bill would prohibit requiring a foreign worker to pay any costs or expenses prior to commencement of work. The bill would prohibit additional requirements or changes to the terms of the contract originally provided to and signed by the foreign worker, unless the foreign worker is provided at least 48 hours to review and consider the additional requirements or changes, and would require the specific consent of the foreign worker, as provided, to each additional requirement or change. The bill would authorize a civil penalty for violations of these provisions, would authorize the commissioner or a person aggrieved by a violation of these provisions to bring an action for injunctive relief or damages, or both, and would authorize recovery of damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees, as specified, including enforcement of liability against the bond deposited with the commissioner. The bill would exempt a person from joint and several liability for an act or omission by a foreign labor contractor if the person is using a registered foreign labor contractor’s services. The bill would also exempt a person who uses the services of a registered foreign labor contractor from misdemeanor liability for an act or omission by the foreign labor contractor. Because this bill would expand the scope of the provisions regulating foreign labor contractors, a violation of which is a misdemeanor, 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 Amend Section 25631 Of, and to Add Section 25634 To, the Business and Professions Code, Relating to Alcoholic Beverages. SB 635 (2013-2014) LenoSupportNo
The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act provides that any on- or off-sale licensee, or agent or employee of the licensee, who sells, gives, or delivers to any person any alcoholic beverage between the… More
The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act provides that any on- or off-sale licensee, or agent or employee of the licensee, who sells, gives, or delivers to any person any alcoholic beverage between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. of the same day, and any person who knowingly purchases any alcoholic beverages between those hours, is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would allow an on-sale licensee to apply to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to authorize, with or without conditions on the on-sale license, the selling, giving, delivering, or purchasing of alcoholic beverages at the licensed premises between the hours of 2 a.m. and 4 a.m., upon completion of specified requirements by the local jurisdiction in which the licensee is located, as provided. This bill would require the applicant to notify specified persons of the application for additional hours and would provide a procedure for protest and hearing regarding the application. 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 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 1069 (2011-2012) FuentesSupportYes
AB 1081 (2011-2012) AmmianoSupportNo
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
An Act to Add Section 12012.56 to the Government Code, Relating to Tribal Gaming, and Declaring the Urgency Thereof, to Take Effect Immediately. AB 517 (2011-2012) HallSupportYes
Existing federal law, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on… More
Existing federal law, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on Indian lands within a state. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts, and amendments of tribal-state gaming compacts, between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. This bill would ratify the tribal-state gaming compact entered into between the State of California and the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, executed on March 27, 2012. The bill would provide that, in deference to tribal sovereignty, certain actions may not be deemed projects for purposes of CEQA. By imposing additional duties on a lead agency with regard to the implementation of CEQA requirements, this bill would increase the service provided by a local agency, thereby creating 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. 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
SB 1195 (2011-2012) PriceOpposeYes
An Act to Add and Repeal Section 21168.6.5 of the Public Resources Code, Relating to Environmental Quality. SB 292 (2011-2012) PadillaSupportYes
(1)The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report (EIR) on a… More
(1)The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA establishes administrative procedures for the review and certification of the EIR for a project and judicial review procedures for any action or proceeding brought to challenge the lead agency’s decision to certify the EIR or to grant project approvals. This bill would establish specified administrative and judicial review procedures for the administrative and judicial review of the EIR and approvals granted for a project related to the development of a specified stadium in the City of Los Angeles. Because the lead agency would be required to use these alternative procedures for administrative review of the EIR if the project applicant so chooses, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the lead agency and applicant to implement specified measures, as a condition of approval of the project, to minimize traffic congestion and air quality impacts that may result from spectators driving to the stadium. (2)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. (3)This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the development of a stadium in the City of Los Angeles. Hide
SB 432 (2011-2012) De LeonSupportNo
An Act to Amend Section 65950 Of, and to Add Section 65957.3 To, the Government Code, Relating to Land Use. SB 469 (2011-2012) VargasSupportNo
(1)The Permit Streamlining Act requires the lead agency that has the principal responsibility for approving a development project, as defined, to approve or disapprove the project within 60 days from… More
(1)The Permit Streamlining Act requires the lead agency that has the principal responsibility for approving a development project, as defined, to approve or disapprove the project within 60 days from the date of adoption of a negative declaration or the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, unless the project proponent requests an extension of time. This bill would, in addition, require a city, county, or city and county, including a charter city, prior to approving or disapproving a proposed development project that would permit the construction of a superstore retailer, as defined, to cause an economic impact report to be prepared, as specified, to be paid for by the project applicant, and that includes specified assessments and projections including, among other things, an assessment of the effect that the construction and operation of the proposed superstore retailer will have on retail operations and employment in the same market area. The bill would also require the governing body to provide an opportunity for public comment on the economic impact report. By increasing the duties of local public officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also require the lead agency to approve or disapprove the project within 180 days from the date of certification of an environmental impact report and approval of an economic impact report, or within 60 days from the date of adoption of a negative declaration and approval of an economic impact report or the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and approval of an economic impact report. (2)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 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
An Act to Add Section 2503 to the Public Contract Code, Relating to Public Contracts. SB 829 (2011-2012) RubioSupportYes
Existing law sets forth the requirements for the solicitation and evaluation of bids and the awarding of contracts by public entities and authorizes a public entity to use, enter into, or require… More
Existing law sets forth the requirements for the solicitation and evaluation of bids and the awarding of contracts by public entities and authorizes a public entity to use, enter into, or require contractors to enter into, a project labor agreement for a construction project if the agreement includes specified taxpayer protection provisions. Existing law also provides that if a charter provision, initiative, or ordinance of a charter city prohibits the governing board’s consideration of a project labor agreement for a project to be awarded by the city, or prohibits the governing board from considering whether to allocate funds to a city-funded project covered by such an agreement, state funding or financial assistance may not be used to support that project, as specified. This bill would additionally provide that if a charter provision, initiative, or ordinance of a charter city prohibits, limits, or constrains in any way the governing board’s authority or discretion to adopt, require, or utilize a project labor agreement that includes specified taxpayer protection provisions for some or all of the construction projects to be awarded by the city, state funding or financial assistance may not be used to support any construction projects awarded by the city, as specified. Hide
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 226, 233, and 234 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 1000 (2009-2010) 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 65701 to the Government Code, Relating to Land Use. ABX3 81 (2009-2010) HallSupportYes
(1)The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project… More
(1)The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect, unless the project is exempt from the act. CEQA provides for various exemptions from its requirements. Existing law requires cities and counties to prepare, adopt, and amend general plans containing specified elements. This bill would exempt from CEQA any activity or approval, necessary or incidental to, the development, planning, design, site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval together with any accessory roadway, utility, or other infrastructure improvement to that stadium complex and associated development, for which an application for the project or approval was submitted on or before January 31, 2009, to the City of Industry, if specified requirements are met. The bill would require the city to require the stadium complex and associated development to comply with those mitigation measures that are contained in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program that is adopted by the City of Industry in connection with the stadium complex and associated development. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of the exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill also would exempt from any legal requirement concerning the content of a general plan or consistency with a general plan, and prohibit those requirements from resulting in the invalidation of, the city’s approval of, and decisions regarding, specified actions taken with respect to the stadium complex and associated development included in the same project or approval and any accessory improvements to that stadium complex and associated development. The bill additionally would provide that a consistency determination is not required by the city for any decision with respect to those actions. (2)The bill would have retroactive application. (3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (4)The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 19605.73 Of, to Add Sections 19601.02, 19605.74, and 19642.1 To, and to Add Article 9.1 (Commencing with Section 19604.5) to Chapter 4 of Division 8 Of, the Business and Professions Code, Relating to Horse Racing. SB 1072 (2009-2010) CalderonSupportYes
(1)Existing law authorizes a thoroughbred association or fair, subject to approval by the California Horse Racing Board, to deduct from the parimutuel pool for any type of wager, a specified… More
(1)Existing law authorizes a thoroughbred association or fair, subject to approval by the California Horse Racing Board, to deduct from the parimutuel pool for any type of wager, a specified percentage for the meeting of the thoroughbred association or fair that accepts the wager. This bill would require every thoroughbred association or fair that conducts a live race meeting to deduct an additional 2% of the total amount handled on exotic wagers requiring the selection of 2 wagering interests, and 3% on exotic wagers requiring the selection of 3 or more wagering interests. The bill would require that these funds be distributed into the purse account of the meet conducting racing in the zones in which the wager was placed, to be used to augment overnight purses. This bill would require any thoroughbred racing association or fair that authorizes betting systems located outside of this state to accept wagers on a race to retain from the total amount received from the out-of-state betting system, less certain specified deductions made pursuant to existing law, the incremental amount received as a result of the 2% or 3% takeout on exotic wagers required by this bill, for distribution as overnight purses. This bill would require that the method utilized to determine the incremental amount received as a result of the takeout increase be established by agreement between the various affected thoroughbred racing associations and fairs, and horsemen’s organizations. If these groups are unable to agree as to the method of determining the incremental amount received, this bill would require the board to determine the allocation method after holding a hearing. For a thoroughbred association hosting the Breeders’ Cup Championship series, this bill would require the amounts collected pursuant to the above provisions requiring that 2% or 3% be deducted from the amount handled on exotic wagers be set aside for the purpose of promoting and sponsoring the Breeders’ Cup. The bill would require the thoroughbred racing association hosting the Breeders’ Cup to enter into an agreement with the organization that operates the Breeders’ Cup regarding the expenditure of the funds, as provided, and would require a written report be made to the board regarding how the funds were utilized. (2)Existing law provides that the California Horse Racing Board shall have all powers necessary to carry out the purposes of the Horse Racing Law, such as adopting rules and regulations to protect the public, allocating dates for and controlling horse racing and parimutuel wagering, and enforcing all rules and regulations. This bill would authorize exchange wagering, defined by the bill as a form of parimutuel wagering in which 2 or more persons place identically opposing wagers in a given market, provided that the entity offering exchange wagering is licensed by the board and has entered into an exchange wagering agreement between the licensee, the applicable racing association or fair conducting live racing, and the horsemen’s organization responsible for negotiated purse agreements for the breed on which exchange wagers are accepted, as provided. The bill would invest the board with the full power to prescribe rules, regulations, and conditions under which exchange wagering may be conducted in California, except that the bill would require the board to develop rules that prohibit certain persons associated with an entrant in a particular race from placing an exchange wager on a race involving that entrant, that prohibit the placing of exchange wagers on previously run races, that require the exchange wagering licensee to provide information to the person placing the wager, that prohibit the use of automatic or quick picks to place an exchange wager, and that prohibit the displaying of the results of a wager using casino themes, as provided. The bill would allow the board to recover any costs associated with the licensing and regulation of exchange wagering by imposing an assessment on the licensee. The bill would require that these funds be deposited in the Horse Racing Fund, to be available upon appropriation by the Legislature for the sole purpose of regulating exchange wagering. The bill would prohibit the taking of exchange wagers by an exchange wagering licensee prior to May 1, 2012. (3)Existing law provides that unclaimed refunds from horse racing are to be distributed to an organization that is responsible for negotiating business agreements on behalf of horsemen, to be held in trust for the purpose of negotiating an agreement with a jockeys’ organization to provide health and welfare benefits to California licensed jockeys. Existing law requires that the funds held in trust shall not exceed $450,000. Pursuant to the above provision, this bill would require each exchange wagering licensee to annually distribute the greater of $100,000, or an amount equal to 0.001 multiplied by the total amount of exchange revenue collected by the licensee in that year, to be used for the purposes specified above. (4)Existing law permits racing associations, fairs, and the organization responsible for contracting with racing associations and fairs with respect to the conduct of racing meetings, to form a private, statewide marketing organization to market and promote thoroughbred and fair horse racing, and to obtain, provide, or defray the cost of workers’ compensation coverage for stable employees and jockeys of thoroughbred trainers. Existing law requires the marketing organization to annually submit to the California Horse Racing Board a statewide marketing and promotion plan and a thoroughbred trainers’ workers’ compensation defrayal plan for thoroughbred and fair horse racing. Existing law requires 0.4% of the amount handled by each satellite wagering facility to be distributed to the marketing organization for the promotion of thoroughbred and fair horse racing, and to defray the cost of workers’ compensation insurance, as specified. Existing law repeals these provisions on January 1, 2011. This bill would extend the operation of these provisions until January 1, 2014, when they would be repealed. The bill would specify that its provisions allowing for the formation of a private statewide marketing association apply to thoroughbred racing associations, fairs, and the organization responsible for contracting with thoroughbred racing associations and fairs with respect to the conduct of racing meetings. The bill would specify that the marketing and promotion activities that the marketing organization may engage in include, but are not limited to, the establishment and maintenance of an Internet Web site, players incentive programs, and the funding of promotional activities at satellite wagering facilities. This bill would change the amount to be distributed to the marketing organization for the promotion of thoroughbred and fair racing from an amount equal to 0.4% of the amount handled at each satellite wagering facility to an amount not to exceed 0.25%, and would delete the provision allowing for the funds to be used to defray the cost of workers’ compensation coverage for stable employees and jockeys of thoroughbred trainers. The bill would require that the initial distribution be 0.2% of the total amount handled by satellite wagering facilities for thoroughbred and fair meetings only and would allow the board to adjust this amount to an aggregate of 0.25% of the total amount handled by satellite wagering facilities for thoroughbred and fair meetings only. The bill would, with respect to the statewide marketing and promotion plan, instead require the marketing organization, by November 1 of each year, to submit a written report to the board on the statewide marketing and promotion plan for the upcoming calendar year, and would additionally require the marketing organization to annually present to the board at the board’s November meeting a verbal report on the statewide marketing and promotion plan for the upcoming calendar year. The bill would delete the requirement that the marketing organization submit to the board a thoroughbred trainers’ workers’ compensation defrayal plan. The bill would also require the marketing organization to quarterly submit to the board a written report that accounts for all receipts and expenditures of the promotion funds for the previous 3 months. (5)Existing law authorizes the board, in performing its responsibilities, to participate in the affairs of associations having as their purpose the interchange of information relating to racing law enforcement, the licensing of horse racing participants, the registration of race horses, the tabulation, analysis, and publication of statistical information based on parimutuel handles and the distribution of proceeds, and to conduct research regarding horse racing accidents, and the detection of drugs on race horses, among other things. This bill would provide that, in addition to certain specified distributions, an amount not to exceed 0.05% of the total amount handled by each satellite wagering facility shall be distributed to a nonprofit organization designated by the board for the purposes of maintaining a database of horse racing information to further the purposes of the above provision. The bill would state that the amount distributable to the nonprofit organization shall initially be 0.05% of the total amount handled by each satellite wagering facility and may be adjusted by the board, in its discretion. The bill would require the nonprofit organization to submit an annual budget and file quarterly financial statements with the board. (6)By imposing new requirements under the Horse Racing Law, the violation of which would be a crime, this bill would create new crimes and would thereby impose a state-mandated local program. (7)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 554 of the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. SB 1121 (2009-2010) FlorezSupportNo
Existing law sets wage and hour requirements for employees and requires an employer to pay overtime wages as specified to an employee who works in excess of a workday or workweek, as defined.… More
Existing law sets wage and hour requirements for employees and requires an employer to pay overtime wages as specified to an employee who works in excess of a workday or workweek, as defined. Existing law exempts agricultural employees from these requirements. This bill would remove the exemption for agricultural employees. Hide
An Act to Add Division 8.9 (Commencing with Section 22992) to the Business and Professions Code, and to Amend Sections 6592 and 6901 Of, to Add Section 6471.5 To, and to Add Article 1.7 (Commencing with Section 6480.50) to Chapter 5 of Part 1 of Division 2 Of, the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Cannabis. SB 1131 (2009-2010) CalderonSupportNo
Existing law provides for the licensure by the State Board of Equalization of manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, importers, and retailers of cigarettes or tobacco products that are engaged in… More
Existing law provides for the licensure by the State Board of Equalization of manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, importers, and retailers of cigarettes or tobacco products that are engaged in business in California, and prohibits retailers, manufacturers, distributors, and wholesalers from distributing or selling those cigarette and tobacco products unless they are licensed. Existing law also imposes a tax on the gross receipts from the sale in this state of, or the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state. This bill would create the Sales Tax Enforcement Act of 2010 and provide for the certification by the State Board of Equalization of growers, wholesalers, retailers, and transporters of cannabis or cannabis products that are engaged in business in California. The bill would require these certificated growers, wholesalers, retailers, and transporters to keep records of every sale, transfer, or delivery of cannabis or cannabis products, as specified. The bill would authorize any peace officer and specified employees of the board to conduct inspections, as provided. It would prohibit growers, wholesalers, retailers, and transporters from selling or purchasing cannabis or cannabis products without a certificate. The bill would provide for the seizure of cannabis or cannabis products that are sold or purchased in violation of specified provisions and impose specified penalties therefor, including certificate revocation or suspension, civil penalties, and criminal penalties. By imposing criminal penalties, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would require each wholesaler to prepay the retail sales tax on its gross receipts derived from the sale of cannabis and cannabis products, as specified. This bill would create the Cannabis and Cannabis Products Compliance Fund, 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 Amend Section 2923.5 Of, and to Add and Repeal Sections 2923.4, 2923.7, 2923.73, 2923.75, and 2923.77 Of, the Civil Code, Relating to Mortgages. SB 1275 (2009-2010) LenoSupportNo
Existing law, until January 1, 2013, and as applied to mortgages and deeds of trust recorded between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2007, that are secured by owner-occupied residential real… More
Existing law, until January 1, 2013, and as applied to mortgages and deeds of trust recorded between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2007, that are secured by owner-occupied residential real property containing no more than 4 dwelling units, requires a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent to contact the borrower, as defined, prior to filing a notice of default, in order to assess the borrower’s financial situation and explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure. Existing law requires the notice of default to include a specified declaration from the mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent regarding its contact with the borrower. This bill would, until January 1, 2013, extend those requirements for those types of dwellings to apply to mortgages or deeds of trust recorded prior to January 1, 2009, if the loans are required to be reviewed under federal Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) guidelines, or between January 1, 2003, and January 1, 2009, if the loans are not required to be reviewed under HAMP guidelines. The bill would require a mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent, within a specified time period prior to the filing of a notice of default, to provide the borrower with written information regarding loan modifications and a specified notice regarding the borrower’s rights during the foreclosure process, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would require an unspecified state entity to make that notice available in English and specified languages. The bill would further revise the borrower contact requirements described above by requiring a mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent to make reasonable borrower solicitation efforts, as specified, to explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure. The bill would prohibit a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent from filing a notice of default until the borrower has been evaluated and determined to be ineligible for a loan modification or the borrower has failed to submit an application prior to the passing of the deadline. The bill would specify minimum time periods in which the borrower may submit an application or supplemental information for a loan modification, and would require the mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent, if it denies the application, to send a denial explanation letter within a specified time period. These requirements would not apply to a mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent that has no loan modification option available to the borrower or to a grandfathered party, as defined. This bill would further require, until January 1, 2013, with respect to those properties described above, that a mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent, concurrently with the filing of a notice of default, record a declaration of compliance that attests to specified facts relating to its borrower solicitation and foreclosure avoidance efforts, except as provided. The bill would authorize the borrower to bring an action within one year of the trustee sale to void the foreclosure or request an injunction if, among other things, the mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent records a notice of default without completing reasonable borrower solicitation efforts, or to recover specified damages if the mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent fails to record a declaration of compliance or materially comply with specified provisions, if specified conditions exist. The bill would provide that a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall have no civil liability if it satisfies specified requirements prior to the initiation of legal action by the borrower. Hide
An Act to Amend Section 512 of the Labor Code, Relating to Employment. SB 287 (2009-2010) CalderonOpposeNo
Existing law requires an employer to provide an employee who works more than 5 hours in a workday with a meal period of not less than 30 minutes, unless the employee works no more than 6 hours in a… More
Existing law requires an employer to provide an employee who works more than 5 hours in a workday with a meal period of not less than 30 minutes, unless the employee works no more than 6 hours in a workday and the meal period is waived by mutual consent. An employer also is required to provide an employee who works more than 10 hours in a workday with a 2nd meal period of not less than 30 minutes, unless the employee works no more than 12 hours, the first meal period was not waived, and the 2nd meal period is waived by mutual consent. The Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) of the Department of Industrial Relations adopts and amends wage orders that, among other things, specify how meal periods are required to be provided to covered employees within various industries, including the procedures for providing employees with on-duty meal periods. This bill would revise the statutory requirements for the provision of meal periods to specify that the requirements apply only to employees subject to the meal period provisions of an order of the IWC. The statutory requirements for providing the meal periods would be revised to specify that a meal period based on working more than 5 hours in a workday is required to be provided before the employee completes 6 hours of work, unless the existing waiver provision is invoked. The waiver provision for the 2nd meal period would be changed to provide an exception for different provisions within IWC wage orders in effect as of January 1, 2009, and to permit the employer and employee to agree to waive either the first or the 2nd meal period if the employee otherwise is entitled to 2 meal periods. The bill also would specify conditions under which on-duty meal periods are permitted rather than meal periods in which the employee is relieved of all duty. The meal period provisions of a valid collective bargaining agreement would be required to be implemented for covered employees rather than the statutory requirements. The bill would require that orders of the IWC be interpreted in a manner consistent with this section, and would require the Department of Industrial Relations to amend and republish specified IWC wage orders to be consistent with the revised meal period requirements. Hide