Existing law requires the state, through the State Department of Social Services and county welfare departments, to establish and support a public system of statewide child welfare services, which is defined to mean public social services that are directed toward the accomplishment of specified purposes, including protecting and promoting the welfare of all children and preventing the unnecessary separation of children from their families. This bill would authorize a county child welfare agency to establish a 3-year pilot program in which the county partners with a domestic violence consultant from a domestic violence victim service organization to offer support and guidance to county social workers in addressing the complex dynamics of families who are potentially experiencing both domestic violence and child maltreatment in order to enhance the social worker's knowledge of domestic violence and their ability to apply that knowledge to their work with parent survivors and their children through tailored engagement and intervention strategies. The bill would require a domestic violence consultant under the program to assist county social workers by providing education on domestic violence-related dynamics and services and discussing complicating factors and protective measures, as specified, among other things. The bill would require a county that implements the pilot program to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the pilot program and report its findings to the Legislature on or before October 31, 2031. The bill would require a participating county to seek the input of the State Department of Social Services and stakeholders, including people with lived experience with domestic violence and child welfare, in the design and implementation of the evaluation.
Existing law requires the Department of Justice to collect data from specified local law enforcement agencies and to make available on the department's OpenJustice Web portal information relating to criminal statistics. Existing law requires those law enforcement agencies to install and maintain records needed for the correct reporting of statistical data and to report the data to the Attorney General in the manner the Attorney General prescribes. This bill would require the department to include in the information made available on the OpenJustice Web portal information concerning arrests for human trafficking and the number of individuals who have been a victim of human trafficking as reported through the California Incident-Based Reporting System. Because the bill would require local law enforcement agencies to collect and report additional information to the Attorney General, 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, 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 requires a specified administrative hearing process in the enforcement and processing of parking violations and penalties, and requires the issuing agency to conduct an initial administrative review of the notice of parking violation at the request of the contestant to whom the notice was mailed. Existing law authorizes an examiner conducting the hearing or the issuing agency to allow payment of the parking penalty in installments, and authorizes the issuing agency to defer payment if the contestant provides satisfactory evidence to the examiner or the issuing agency, as the case may be, of the inability to pay the parking penalty in full. This bill would authorize the issuing agency to reduce or waive the parking penalty if the contestant provides satisfactory evidence of either an inability to pay the parking penalty in full or any other extenuating circumstances relevant to payment of the parking penalty, including, but not limited to, documented homelessness status and financial hardship. Existing law authorizes a parking citation processing agency, as defined, to collect an unpaid parking penalty by requesting the Department of Motor Vehicles to place a registration hold on the vehicle to which the citations have been issued, or by obtaining a civil judgment against the registered owner of the vehicle, as specified. Existing law requires a processing agency to offer a payment plan for unpaid parking citations to qualified indigent persons. Existing law requires the payment plan to meet specified conditions, including, among others, that a person is allowed a period of 120 calendar days from the issuance of a notice of parking violation or 10 days after the administrative hearing determination, whichever is later, to file a request to participate in a payment plan. This bill would allow the person to file a request to participate in a payment plan at any time.
Existing law, the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013, requires a public employee who is convicted of any state or federal felony for conduct arising out of, or in the performance of, the public employee's official duties in pursuit of the office or appointment, or in connection with obtaining salary, disability retirement, service retirement, or other benefits, to forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in any public retirement system from the earliest date of the commission of the felony to the date of conviction, and prohibits the public employee from accruing further benefits in that public retirement system. Existing law defines "public employee" for purposes of these provisions to mean an officer, including one who is elected or appointed, or an employee of a public employer. Existing law also requires an elected public officer, who takes public office, or is reelected to public office, on or after January 1, 2006, and who is convicted during or after holding office of any felony involving accepting or giving, or offering to give, any bribe, the embezzlement of public money, extortion or theft of public money, perjury, or conspiracy to commit any of those crimes arising directly out of their official duties as an elected public officer, to forfeit all rights and benefits under, and membership in, any public retirement system in which they are a member, effective on the date of final conviction, as provided. This bill would require a public employer that is investigating a public employee for misconduct arising out of or in the performance of, the public employee's official duties in pursuit of the office or appointment, or in connection with obtaining salary, disability retirement, service retirement, or other benefits, to continue the investigation even if the public employee retires while under investigation, if the investigation indicates that the public employee may have committed a crime. The bill would require a public employer, if the investigation indicates that the public employee may have committed a crime, to refer the matter to the appropriate law enforcement agency, and would then authorize the public employer to close the investigation. Under the bill, if the public employee is convicted of a felony for any conduct described above, the public employee would forfeit all accrued rights and benefits in any public retirement system pursuant to the provisions governing forfeiture described above. By imposing new duties on public employers who are local governmental entities, 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.
By Executive Order No. N-82-20, Governor Gavin Newsom directed the Natural Resources Agency to combat the biodiversity and climate crises by, among other things, establishing the California Biodiversity Collaborative and conserving at least 30% of the state's lands and coastal waters by 2030. Existing law provides that it is the goal of the state to conserve at least 30% of California's lands and coastal waters by 2030, known as the 30x30 goal. On April 22, 2022, the Natural Resources Agency issued the "Pathways to 30x30 California: Accelerating Conservation of California's Nature" report and existing law requires the Secretary of Natural Resources Agency to prepare and submit an annual report to the Legislature on progress made toward achieving the 30x30 goal, as provided. This bill would, to further specified findings of the Pathways to 30x30 Report, require the agency to develop strategies to reduce barriers and increase support for stewardship of conserved lands. The bill would require the agency to collaborate with stakeholders, California Native American tribes, and relevant state agencies to prepare a section on stewardship as part of the 2027 annual report on progress made toward achieving the 30x30 goal, which the bill would require to include, among other things, recommendations to increase and improve stewardship of 30x30 lands, including innovative ways to reduce barriers and increase federal, state, and local support for stewardship, as specified. The bill would require the update to be posted on the agency's internet website.
Under existing law, when a vehicle has been towed and stored, the legal owner may only be charged a storage fee during the first 15 days of possession, and beyond the first 15 days, only for any time after 3 days have lapsed after written notification has been made to the legal owner, as specified. Existing law requires that fees charged under these provisions for storage and towing be reasonable. Existing law makes an insurer that is responsible for reasonable storage and towing charges liable to the person providing those services when a vehicle is towed and stored as a result of an accident or stolen recovery, as specified. Existing law requires that these storage and towing fees be reasonable and enumerates a list of fees that are presumptively unreasonable. This bill would expand the list of presumptively unreasonable fees for purposes of the provisions described above to include, among other things, storage fees charged for state holidays that exceed the posted standard daily storage rate and towing fees charged when the owner or the operator of a tow truck is directed by a law enforcement officer to remove a vehicle at the scene of a state or local emergency, as specified.
Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2026, the Counties of Alameda, Butte, Nevada, and Santa Clara to establish a pilot program to operate a deferred entry of judgment pilot program for eligible defendants who are 18 years of age or older, but under 21 years of age, on the date the offense was committed, as specified. Existing law requires a probation department to submit data relating to the effectiveness of the pilot program to the Division of Recidivism Reduction and Re-Entry, within the Department of Justice. Existing law requires a participating county to submit an evaluation of its pilot program's impact and effectiveness to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Public Safety, no later than December 31, 2024. This bill would extend the pilot program, for the Counties of Butte, Nevada, and Santa Clara, to January 1, 2029, and would require an evaluation to be submitted to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Public Safety no later than December 31, 2027. Existing law requires the Board of State and Community Corrections to review a county's pilot program to ensure compliance with specific federal law. This bill would instead require the Office of Youth and Community Restoration to review a county's pilot program for compliance and would require the office to report findings from the review to the board.
Existing federal law, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, provides for the protection of migratory birds, as specified. The federal act also authorizes states and territories of the United States to make and enforce laws or regulations that give further protection to migratory birds, their nests, and eggs. Existing law, the California Migratory Bird Protection Act, until January 20, 2025, made unlawful the taking or possession of any migratory nongame bird designated in the federal act before January 1, 2017, any additional migratory nongame bird that may be designated in the federal act after that date, or any part of those migratory nongame birds, except as provided. Existing law, as of January 1, 2026, repeals this provision. This bill would, indefinitely, make unlawful the taking or possessing of any migratory bird, as designated in the federal act before January 1, 2025, any additional migratory birds that may be designated in the federal act after that date, or any part of those migratory birds, except as provided. Existing law, operative January 20, 2025, makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, or any part of a migratory nongame bird, except as provided. This bill would repeal this provision. Under existing law, a violation of the Fish and Game Code is a crime. By narrowing the exception to a crime defined in existing law, the bill would expand the scope of a crime, thus imposing a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Home Care Services Consumer Protection Act, requires a home care organization, as defined, to ensure that an affiliated home care aide completes specified training requirements prior to providing home care services, including annual training related to the aide's clients' rights and safety and how to provide for a client's daily living needs. A violation of the act is a misdemeanor. This bill would, beginning on January 1, 2027, additionally require a home care organization to ensure that a home care aide completes, prior to providing home care and annually thereafter, training related to the special care needs of clients with dementia. Because the bill creates new crimes by expanding the act to include additional requirements for home care organizations, 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.
Under existing law, knowingly buying or receiving stolen property or property that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft or extortion, as specified, is punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony if the value of the property exceeds $950. Existing law prohibits a local authority from regulating sidewalk vendors, except in accordance with certain provisions, including that a local authority may, by ordinance or resolution, adopt requirements regulating the time, place, and manner of sidewalk vending if the requirements are directly related to objective health, safety, or welfare concerns. This bill, until January 1, 2031, would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to adopt an ordinance requiring a permit for the sale of specified merchandise on public property, if the ordinance includes specified written findings supported by substantial evidence, including, among other things, that there has been a significant pattern of merchandise being the subject of retail theft and then appearing for sale on public property within the City and County of San Francisco. The bill would require an ordinance adopted by the City and County of San Francisco to, among other things, identify a local permitting agency that is responsible for administering a permit system. The bill would authorize the ordinance to provide specified punishments for selling merchandise without a permit, including that 2nd and 3rd violations within 18 months of the first violation would be punishable as infractions, and that subsequent violations after 3 prior violations, that occur within 18 months of the first violation, would be punishable as infractions or misdemeanors by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 6 months, or by both that imprisonment and a fine. This bill would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to charge a fee for the cost of issuing a permit, not to exceed the reasonable regulatory costs of implementing the bill, as provided. The bill would authorize the permitting agency to accept specified forms of identification in lieu of a social security number, if the permitting agency otherwise requires a social security number for the issuance of a permit or business license, but would require the number collected from the alternative identification to be confidential, except as provided. The bill would prohibit the permitting agency from inquiring into or collecting certain information, including, information about an individual's immigration or citizenship status or criminal history. This bill would require, if an ordinance is adopted, the permitting agency to submit a report to the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco and the Legislature by January 1 of each year that includes specified information, including, among other things, the list or lists of merchandise that the City and County of San Francisco determined was a common target of retail theft. The bill would require the City and County of San Francisco, at least 60 days prior to the enactment of an ordinance, to hold one or more workshops to inform the development of the ordinance, and would require the City and County of San Francisco to administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the enactment of the ordinance, including public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco. 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires a provider of commercial financing to disclose certain information, as specified. Existing law provides that a provider of commercial financing licensed under the California Financing Law (CFL) is subject to examination and enforcement by the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation under the CFL for any violation of those disclosure provisions, as specified. Certain violations of the CFL are a crime. This bill would prohibit a provider of commercial financing from using the term "interest" or "rate" in a deceptive way that could reasonably result in the recipient being misled and would require those providers to use the term "annual percentage rate" or the acronym "APR" in specified circumstances. The bill would repeal the provision subjecting those providers to the CFL described above and would instead provide that a violation of the disclosure provisions described above and the provisions of the bill is a violation of the CFL if the violation relates to a commercial financing transaction subject to the CFL, or a violation of the California Consumer Financial Protection Law if the violation relates to a commercial financing transaction that is not subject to the CFL. 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.
Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976, among other things, requires anyone wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, except as specified, in addition to obtaining any other permit required by law from any local government or from any state, regional, or local agency, to obtain a coastal development permit from the California Coastal Commission or a local government, as provided. The act provides that a coastal development permit is not required for specified types of development in specified areas, as provided. Existing law provides that a coastal development permit is not required for any category of development, or any category of development within a specified geographic area, if the commission, after a public hearing, and by a 23 vote of its appointed members, finds that there is no potential for any significant adverse effect, as specified, on coastal resources or on public access to, or along, the coast and, where the exclusion precedes certification of the applicable local coastal program, that the exclusion will not impair the ability of local government to prepare a local coastal program. Existing regulation, before a categorical exclusion becomes effective, requires specified things to occur, including that the public agency issuing the permit accepts and agrees to the terms and conditions to which the categorical exclusion has been made subject. This bill would require the commission, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, by July 1, 2027, to identify, based on specified considerations, infill areas within at least 3 local jurisdictions that do not have a certified local coastal program for a categorical exclusion from the coastal development permitting requirement. Specifically, until June 30, 2037, if a development in one of those identified infill areas is a residential housing project comprised only of units that are deed restricted for persons of very low, low, or moderate income, as specified, this bill would categorically exclude the development from that requirement. The bill would exempt the categorically excluded infill areas from the above-described regulation. The bill would require, before commencing development, a proponent of the development to request from the commission, and for the commission to issue, a notice of exclusion. This bill would require the commission, on or before August 1, 2027, to post on its internet website clearly defined maps of the categorical exclusion areas. The bill would also require the commission, on or before January 1, 2035, to report to the Legislature the number of projects that were constructed or are currently under construction pursuant to this categorical exclusion.
