Professions and vocations: board actions and regulations.

(1) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various professions and vocations by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs and authorizes those boards to adopt regulations to enforce the laws pertaining to the profession and vocation for which they have jurisdiction. Existing law makes decisions of any board within the department pertaining to setting standards, conducting examinations, passing candidates, and revoking licenses final, except as specified, and provides that those decisions are not subject to review by the Director of Consumer Affairs. Existing law authorizes the director to audit and review certain inquiries and complaints regarding licensees, including the dismissal of a disciplinary case. Existing law requires the director to annually report to the chairpersons of certain committees of the Legislature information regarding findings from any audit, review, or monitoring and evaluation. Existing law authorizes the director to contract for services of experts and consultants where necessary. Existing law requires regulations, except those pertaining to examinations and qualifications for licensure and fee changes proposed or promulgated by a board within the department, to comply with certain requirements before the regulation or fee change can take effect, including that the director is required to be notified of the rule or regulation and given 30 days to disapprove the regulation. Existing law prohibits a rule or regulation that is disapproved by the director from having any force or effect unless the director's disapproval is overridden by a unanimous vote of the members of the board, as specified. This bill would instead authorize the director, upon his or her own initiative, and require the director upon the request of the board making the decision or the Legislature, to review any nonministerial market-sensitive action, except as specified, of a board within the department to determine whether it furthers a clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed state policy and to approve, disapprove, or recommend modifications of the board action, as specified. The bill would require the director to issue and post on the department's Internet Web site his or her final written decision and the reasons for the decision. The bill would, commencing on March 1, 2017, require the director to annually report to the chairs of specified committees of the Legislature information regarding the director's disapprovals and recommended modifications of board actions. The bill would require the director to review rules or regulations, as described above, within 60 days. The bill would require the director to disapprove a proposed rule or regulation that is a market-sensitive action that does not further clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed state policy and authorize him or her to recommend modifications. (2) The Government Claims Act, except as provided, requires a public entity to pay any judgment or any compromise or settlement of a claim or action against an employee or former employee of the public entity if the employee or former employee requests the public entity to defend him or her against any claim or action against him or her for an injury arising out of an act or omission occurring within the scope of his or her employment as an employee of the public entity, the request is made in writing not less than 10 days before the day of trial, and the employee or former employee reasonably cooperates in good faith in the defense of the claim or action. That act prohibits the payment of punitive or exemplary damages by a public entity, except as specified. This bill would require a public entity to pay a judgment or settlement for treble damage antitrust awards against a member of a regulatory board for an act or omission occurring within the scope of his or her employment as a member of a regulatory board. The bill would specify that treble damages awarded pursuant to a specified federal law for violation of another federal law are not punitive or exemplary damages within the Government Claims Act.