This measure would proclaim September 20, 2024, and September 20 of each year thereafter, as California Youth Climate Action Day to honor and support the efforts of young people in their pursuit of environmental sustainability, climate justice, and the preservation of biodiversity.
Existing law requires all law enforcement agencies to maintain a use of force policy, as specified, and requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to implement courses of instruction for the training of law enforcement officers in the use of force. This bill would require the commission, on or before July 1, 2026, to study and issue recommendations to the Legislature on the use of canines by law enforcement, as specified. Existing law requires each law enforcement agency to monthly provide a report of, among other things, all instances of a peace officer involved in a use of force against a civilian that results in serious bodily injury or death to the Department of Justice, and requires the department to yearly post a summary of those reports on the department's OpenJustice Web portal. This bill would require each law enforcement agency with a canine unit to annually publish a report of the use of canines, as specified, on its internet website. Because the bill would impose additional duties on local law enforcement agencies, 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, 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 the statutory provisions noted above. This bill would make the operation of its provisions contingent upon the enactment of AB 2042 of the 2023–24 Regular Session.
The Unruh Civil Rights Act provides that all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal and, regardless of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status, are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever. The California Fair Employment and Housing Act establishes the Civil Rights Department within the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency and requires the department to, among other things, bring civil actions to enforce the act. This bill would, among other things, require, as prescribed, a deployer, as defined, and a developer of an automated decision system, as defined, to perform an impact assessment on any automated decision system before the system is first deployed and annually thereafter that includes, among other things, a statement of the purpose of the automated decision system and its intended benefits, uses, and deployment contexts. The bill would require a deployer or a developer to provide any impact assessment that it performed to the Civil Rights Department and would exempt an impact assessment provided to the department from the California Public Records Act, as prescribed. This bill would require a deployer to, prior to an automated decision system making a consequential decision, as defined, or being a substantial factor, as defined, in making a consequential decision, notify any natural person that is subject to the consequential decision that an automated decision system is being used and to provide that person with specified information. The bill would require a deployer that has deployed an automated decision system to make, or be a substantial factor in making, a consequential decision concerning a natural person, to provide to the natural person, among other things, an opportunity to correct any incorrect personal data. The bill would, if a consequential decision is made solely based on the output of an automated decision system, require a deployer to, if technically feasible, accommodate a natural person's request to not be subject to the automated decision system and to instead be subject to an alternative selection process or accommodation, as prescribed. This bill would prohibit a deployer from using an automated decision system if an impact assessment identifies a reasonable risk of algorithmic discrimination, which the bill would define to mean the condition in which an automated decision system contributes to unlawful discrimination, including differential treatment or impacts disfavoring people based on their actual or perceived race, color, ethnicity, sex, religion, age, national origin, limited English proficiency, disability, veteran status, genetic information, reproductive health, or any other classification protected by state or federal law, until that risk has been mitigated. The bill would also prohibit a developer from making available to potential deployers an automated decision system until the risk of algorithmic discrimination has been mitigated. This bill would authorize the Civil Rights Department to bring a civil action against a deployer or developer for a violation of the bill and would authorize a court to award, only in an action for a violation involving algorithmic discrimination, a civil penalty of $25,000 per violation. The bill would require the Civil Rights Department to, before commencing an action for injunctive relief, provide 45 days' written notice to a deployer or developer of the alleged violations of the bill and would provide a deployer or developer a specified opportunity to cure those violations, if the deployer or developer provides the person who gave the notice an express written statement, under penalty of perjury, that the violation has been cured and that no further violations shall occur. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this 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.
Existing law establishes the Wildfire Safety Division and requires the division to perform certain regulatory functions related to wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations. Existing law transferred all functions of the Wildfire Safety Division to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety effective July 1, 2021. This bill would repeal the Wildfire Safety Division. Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment. This bill would require those actions to take into account the time required to implement proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining. Existing law requires each electrical corporation to annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan that covers at least a 3-year period and authorizes the office to allow for annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan, but requires the electrical corporation to submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every 3 years for review. Existing law requires wildfire mitigation plans to include, among other things, a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporation's service territory, and a description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, as specified. This bill instead would require each electrical corporation to submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review at least once every 4 years. The bill would require each electrical corporation, beginning January 1, 2026, to submit a preliminary wildfire mitigation plan to the office at the earliest date of one year before the filing of its general rate case application or concurrent with the filing of its Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase application with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) . The bill would revise those wildfire mitigation plan requirements to, among other things, require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation, and require the presentation of certain cost-efficiency measures adopted by the PUC, as specified. Existing law requires the office to approve or deny each wildfire mitigation plan and update submitted by an electrical corporation within 3 months of its submission. Existing law establishes procedures for the office to oversee compliance with an approved wildfire mitigation plan. Existing law requires the PUC to consider whether the cost of implementing an electrical corporation's wildfire mitigation plan is just and reasonable in the electrical corporation's general rate case application. This bill instead would require the office to approve or deny a wildfire mitigation plan submitted by an electrical corporation within 9 months of its submission. The bill would, for a general rate case application filed after January 1, 2027, require an electrical corporation to file the wildfire mitigation plan approved by the office or, if the plan has not been approved by the office, the preliminary wildfire plan filed with the office, and any applicable decision from the office, with the general rate case application. The bill would require an electrical corporation, within 45 days of the PUC's decision on whether the cost of implementing the electrical corporation's wildfire mitigation plan is just and reasonable in the electrical corporation's general rate case or any PUC order modifying that decision, to submit to the office a revised wildfire mitigation plan that conforms to the PUC's revenue authorization. The bill would require the office to approve the revised wildfire mitigation plan within 2 months of submission and would require the electrical corporation to file the approved revised wildfire mitigation plan as an information-only submittal with the PUC. The bill would revise and recast provisions related to the oversight by the office in the implementation of, and the enforcement by the PUC of, the finally approved wildfire mitigation plan. Existing law requires the PUC to establish an expedited utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program for large electrical corporations. In order to participate in the program, existing law requires a large electrical corporation to submit to the office a distribution infrastructure undergrounding plan, as provided. Upon approval of the plan by the office, existing law requires the large electrical corporation to submit to the PUC an application requesting review and conditional approval of the plan's costs and other specified information. This bill would revise the provisions related to the expedited utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program to, among other things, specify that the approval of a distribution infrastructure undergrounding plan is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, as specified. Existing law requires the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board to annually make recommendations to the office on various topics, including the appropriate scope and process for assessing the safety culture of an electrical corporation. Existing law requires the office to annually issue an analysis and recommendation to the PUC on the recommendations provided by the board. Existing law requires the PUC to annually adopt and approve, among other things, a process for the office to conduct annual safety culture assessments for each electrical corporation. This bill would repeal those provisions. Existing law requires local publicly owned electric utilities and electrical cooperatives to annually prepare and submit to the board, on or before July 1 of each year, wildfire mitigation plans. This bill instead would require, after January 1, 2026, local publicly owned electric utilities and electrical cooperatives to prepare and submit to the board wildfire mitigation plans at least once every 4 years on a schedule determined by the board. Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC is a crime. Because a violation of a PUC action implementing the requirements of this bill 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.
Existing law requires the Secretary of Government Operations to develop a coordinated plan to, among other things, investigate the feasibility of, and obstacles to, developing standards and technologies for state departments to determine digital content provenance. For the purpose of informing that coordinated plan, existing law requires the secretary to evaluate, among other things, the impact of the proliferation of deepfakes, as defined. This bill, the California Digital Content Provenance Standards, would require a generative artificial intelligence (AI) provider, as provided, to, among other things, apply provenance data to synthetic content produced or significantly modified by a generative AI system that the provider makes available, as those terms are defined, and to conduct adversarial testing exercises, as prescribed. The bill would prohibit, among other things, providers and distributors of software and online services from making available a system, application, tool, or service that is designed for the primary purpose of removing provenance data from synthetic content, as provided. This bill would require a newly manufactured recording device sold, offered for sale, or distributed in California to offer users the option to apply difficult to remove provenance data to nonsynthetic content produced by that device and would require the application of that provenance data to be compatible with state-of-the-art adopted and relevant industry standards. If technically feasible and secure, the bill would require a recording device manufacturer to offer a software or firmware update enabling a user of a recording device manufactured before July 1, 2026, and purchased in California to apply difficult to remove provenance data to the nonsynthetic content created by the device and decode any provenance data attached to nonsynthetic content created by the device. This bill would require a large online platform, as defined, capable of disseminating specified content to use labels to disclose, as specified, any machine-readable provenance data detected in synthetic content that is distributed on its platform. If content uploaded to or distributed on a large online platform by a user does not contain specified provenance data or if the content's provenance data cannot be interpreted or detected, the bill would require a large online platform to label the content as having unknown provenance. The bill would require a large online platform to use a visual disclosure that contains specified information, including the copyrightholder or licensor information, when labeling and disclosing provenance data of sound recordings and music videos. Beginning July 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, this bill would require a large online platform to produce a transparency report that identifies moderation of deceptive synthetic content on their platform and would authorize that report to include, among other things, instances where synthetic or potentially deceptive content was identified and removed by the platform, as applicable. This bill would authorize the Department of Technology (department) to assess specified administrative penalties for prescribed violations of the bill's provisions, including an administrative penalty of up to $100,000 for each violation that is intentional or is the result of grossly negligent conduct, to be deposited in the Digital Content Provenance Administrative Fund which the bill would establish in the State Treasury. The bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature for this express purpose, authorize the expenditure of moneys in the fund by the department to administer these provisions. This bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2026.
Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including property and fire insurance. Existing law creates the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, and prescribes the department's powers and duties. Existing department regulations prohibit an insurer from using a rating plan that does not take into account and reflect specified wildfire risk mitigation, including property-level building hardening measures. This bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2030, and every 5 years thereafter, to consider whether or not to update its regulations to include additional building hardening measures for property-level mitigation efforts and communitywide wildfire mitigation programs. As part of this consideration, the bill would require the department to consult with specified agencies to identify additional building hardening measures to consider, as well as to develop and implement a public participation process during the evaluation.
This measure would recognize May 2024 as Black Lives Matter Month, recognizing the profound impact of the movement, recommitting to the principles of justice and equality, and calling upon all states to follow in proclaiming their support for a society where truly, Black Lives Matter.
(1) Existing law, the Farmer Equity Act of 2017, requires the Department of Food and Agriculture to ensure the inclusion of socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, defined as a member of a socially disadvantaged group, as defined, in the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of food and agriculture laws, regulations, and policies and programs, as specified. This bill would expand the definition of socially disadvantaged group to include descendants of enslaved persons in the United States. (2) Existing law establishes the Wildlife Conservation Board, the Department of Conservation, the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection, the Department of Parks and Recreation, the State Coastal Conservancy, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy, the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, and the Department of Water Resources. Existing law authorizes these persons and entities to award grants, as provided. This bill would require those persons and entities, until January 1, 2031, when awarding certain grants, to prioritize the awarding of grant funding to socially disadvantaged organizations by awarding additional points equal to 15% of the total points available for scoring, as specified. The bill would define "socially disadvantaged organization" for that purpose to mean a nonprofit organization that has (1) , as a majority of its board of directors, members who are descendants of enslaved persons in the United States, and (2) articles of incorporation stating certain information. The bill would also require grant applications submitted by a socially disadvantaged organization to include an affidavit executed by each member of its board of directors that the organization meets specified requirements. (3) This bill would make its provisions severable.
Existing law, the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, provides the exclusive authority and procedure for the initiation, conduct, and completion of changes of organization and reorganization for cities and districts, except as specified. The act continues in existence in each county a local agency formation commission (LAFCO) that consists of members appointed, as specified, and that oversees those changes of organization and reorganization. The act authorizes a LAFCO to, among other things, review and approve with or without amendment, wholly, partially, or conditionally, or disapprove proposals for changes of organization or reorganization, including incorporation of a city or formation of a district, as specified. Existing law requires each county to have a board of supervisors and provides for the organization and powers of the board of supervisors. This bill would require the County of Los Angeles, no later than March 1, 2025, to submit to the Legislature a report that includes specified information, including, among other things, for East Los Angeles, the feasibility of forming a municipal advisory council, a local town council, or a coordinating council that could represent the comprehensive interests of the entire East Los Angeles community. If the county has produced a report that contains substantially similar information to the information required by the above-described provisions, this bill would authorize the county to submit that report in lieu of completing a separate report. The bill would make these provisions inoperative upon the completion and submission of the report to the Legislature and would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2029. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles. 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 the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law permits a candidate for nonpartisan elective office, and an officer whose recall is being sought, to file with the elections official a candidate's statement that includes a brief description of the candidate's education and qualifications. Existing law requires an elections official to include in the county voter information guide a candidate's statement from a candidate for nonpartisan elective office and from an officer whose recall is being sought. Existing law prohibits a candidate for nonpartisan elective office, or an incumbent in a recall election, to knowingly make a false statement of material fact in the candidate's statement with the intent to mislead the voters in connection with the candidate's campaign for nomination or election to an office. Violation of this prohibition is punishable by a fine not to exceed $1,000. This bill would increase the maximum fine amount to $5,000.
Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) , governed by a board of directors, with specified powers and duties relative to the construction and operation of a rapid transit system. Existing law also establishes the independent Office of the BART Inspector General within BART and specifies the duties and responsibilities of the BART Inspector General including, among others, conducting, supervising, and coordinating audits and investigations relating to the district's programs and operations. Existing law provides that any investigatory file compiled by the BART Inspector General is an investigatory file compiled by a local law enforcement agency subject to disclosure pursuant to provisions of the California Public Records Act applicable to law enforcement records. This bill would provide that the BART Inspector General is vested with the full authority to exercise all responsibility for maintaining a full scope, independent, and objective audit and investigation program. The bill would provide the office with access and authority to examine all records, files, documents, accounts, reports, correspondence, or other property of the district and external entities that perform work for the district. The bill would provide that all books, papers, records, and correspondence of the office are public records subject to the California Public Records Act, but would prohibit the office from releasing certain types of records to the public, except under certain circumstances. Before conducting any investigatory interview with an employee represented by an employee organization, the bill would require the office to notify the employee of certain rights including the right to be represented at the interview by a representative of the employee organization and would require the office to obtain a written waiver of that right of representation from the employee if the interview is conducted without a representative of the employee organization. The bill would authorize the office to issue subpoenas for the attendance of subjects and witnesses and the production of records, files, documents, accounts, reports, correspondence, or other property, or for the making of oral or written sworn statements, in any interview conducted as part of an audit, investigation, or review relating to improper activities by a person or entity other than an employee of the district, as specified. 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.
Existing law generally regulates the governance of local agencies and defines a local agency to mean a county, city, or city and county. This bill would authorize a local agency to adopt an ordinance requiring the owner of, or person otherwise responsible for, an animal to collect and dispose of any animal excrement deposited by that animal on public or private property. The bill would declare that these provisions are declaratory of existing law.
