Existing law grants a defendant the right to counsel in a noncapital case, and requires a defendant to be represented by counsel in a capital case. Existing law requires specified assigned counsel to receive a reasonable sum for compensation and for necessary expenses, as determined by the court, to be paid out of the general fund of the county. This bill would, commencing with contracts or memoranda of understanding for indigent defense services entered into after January 1, 2028, revise the process and require a county or court, when contracting for the provision or administration of indigent defense services, to include certain elements in the contract or other agreement for indigent services, as specified. The bill would prohibit a county or court from entering into flat fee contracts, as defined, or per case compensation contracts in cases involving the death penalty or the potential sentence of life without the possibility of parole. The bill would require the structure of the contract for indigent defense services to ensure that attorneys have the resources and time necessary to provide competent legal representation. The bill would require counties that contract with a private entity or law firm to provide indigent defense services to provide all those contracts to the Office of the State Public Defender every 2 years. The bill would make related findings and declarations.
Existing law prohibits human trafficking, defined as, among other things, violating the personal liberty of another person with the intent to engage in specified sex offenses. Existing law prohibits pimping, defined as deriving support from the earnings of another person's prostitution, and pandering, defined as procuring another for purposes of prostitution or persuading someone to become a prostitute. This bill would, in any prosecution for a violation of those crimes in which the victim was a minor, prohibit any plea agreement, nonprosecution agreement, immunity agreement, anonymity, or other disposition from granting immunity to any person other than the defendant unless that person is specifically named in the written agreement, and the agreement is approved by the court after a hearing in which victims are given notice and an opportunity to be heard. By increasing duties on local prosecutors, 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, as amended by the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016, enacted by Proposition 57 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, authorizes the district attorney to make a motion to transfer a minor from juvenile court to a court of criminal jurisdiction in a case in which a minor is alleged to have committed a felony when the minor was 16 years of age or older, or in a case in which a specified serious offense is alleged to have been committed by a minor when the minor was 14 or 15 years of age, but the minor was not apprehended prior to the end of juvenile court jurisdiction. This bill would, consistent with the intent of Proposition 57, authorize the district attorney to make a motion to transfer a minor from juvenile court to a court of criminal jurisdiction when the minor is alleged to have committed certain specified offenses when the minor was 14 or 15 years of age and was previously convicted in a court of criminal jurisdiction and is now subject to resentencing in juvenile court pursuant to specified provisions.
Existing law establishes the Board of State and Community Corrections. Existing law establishes the California Violence Intervention and Prevention Grant Program (CalVIP) award grants to cities disproportionately impacted by community gun violence to fund gun violence reduction initiatives. Existing law authorizes the board to award these grants and to create an executive steering committee for the program. Existing law authorizes the board to reserve up to $2,000,000 of the funds appropriated for the program each year for the costs of administering and promoting the effectiveness of the program. This bill would create the Office of Community Violence Intervention within the Board of State and Community Corrections, and would require the office to be led by a director appointed by the board. The bill would require the board to select the director. The bill would require the board to consult with organizations in the field of community violence intervention on factors to consider when evaluating candidates. The bill would also require the board to consider certain factors when selecting a director. The bill would require the office to, among other things, advise the board on the implementation of community violence intervention and prevention policies, provide technical assistance for community violence intervention and prevention organizations and CalVIP grantees, and, on July 1, 2028, and every 2 years thereafter, to produce a report on community violence intervention and prevention, as specified. This bill would require the office to administer CalVIP, as specified. The bill would require the office to recommend grant awardees to the board and to convene and facilitate the executive steering committee for the program. The bill would require the board to reserve at least $1,000,000 and would authorize the board to reserve up to 5% of the funds appropriated for the program each year for the purposes of the office administering and promoting the effectiveness of the program.
Existing law allows the court to issue a protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of a crime of domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. Under existing law, the protective order may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. This bill would authorize those orders to be valid for up to 10 years, or one year after the person's release from the state prison or a county jail, whichever is later. Existing law authorizes a protective order restraining a person convicted of the crime of battery of specified persons, including a spouse or former spouse, to be valid for up to 15 years. The bill would authorize those orders to be valid for up to 15 years, or one year after the person's release from the state prison or a county jail, whichever is later. By extending the duration of protective orders, a violation of which is punishable as a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 136.2 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 1395 and AB 2261, to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills 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.
(1) Existing law establishes procedures by which a person may petition the court for certain protective or restraining orders, including civil harassment restraining orders, domestic violence restraining orders, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining orders, gun violence restraining orders, postsecondary school restraining orders, and workplace violence restraining orders, to enjoin a restrained person from taking specified actions. Before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order, existing law requires the court to ensure that a search has been conducted to determine, among other things, if the subject of the proposed order owns or possesses a firearm as reflected in the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System. If after the search, the court finds that the subject of the proposed order owns or possesses a firearm, existing law requires the court to make a written record as to whether the subject has relinquished the firearm and provided proof of the required storage, sale, or relinquishment of the firearm. Upon a court's issuance of such a protective order, existing law requires the restrained person to relinquish any firearm and ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control, according to specified procedures. Existing law prescribes procedures by which the restrained person must certify compliance with the court, and for the court to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the person has a firearm in violation of the order. This bill would make clarifying and conforming changes to the procedures relating to the protective or restraining orders described above by explicitly requiring the restrained person to relinquish, in addition to any firearm, any ammunition in that person's immediate possession or control. The bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would require courts to permit a party or witness to appear remotely at a hearing for a postsecondary educational institution or workplace violence restraining order at no cost. This bill would also require courts to develop rules and instructions for such remote appearances and to post them on their internet websites. The bill would also, commencing on January 1, 2028, require courts to allow filings related to those protective orders to be submitted electronically, as specified. (2) Existing law prohibits court from granting a temporary restraining order without notice to the respondent, except as specified. Existing law requires a peace officer, upon the request of a petitioner, to serve any civil harassment restraining order, domestic violence restraining order, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining order, gun violence restraining order, postsecondary school restraining order, or workplace violence restraining order on the respondent, whether or not the respondent has been taken into custody. Existing law prescribes procedures that a sheriff or marshal must follow when serving a writ, warrant, summons, order, or other process issued by a superior court in a civil action or proceeding. Existing law requires the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2024, to create a statewide form or forms to be used by litigants in civil actions or proceedings to request service of process or notice by a marshal or sheriff. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would prohibit a court from requiring notice to be provided to the party to be restrained in advance of accepting a filing for, or deciding, an application for an ex parte restraining order, as specified, if the applicant or the applicant's attorney certifies to the court under oath that providing notice to the party to be restrained in advance of filing the petition would likely endanger the safety of the petitioner or other persons. The bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would require a peace officer, as defined, to follow the procedures that apply to a sheriff or marshal when serving a writ, warrant, summons, order, or other process issued by a superior court, as described above. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2028, to create a statewide form or forms to be used by litigants in civil actions or proceedings to request service of process or notice by a marshal or sheriff, or by a peace officer serving any of the restraining or protective orders described above. By expanding the duties of peace officers, which include officers of local law enforcement agencies, and expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law requires, on any charge involving acts of domestic violence, that the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney conduct a search of certain databases for protective or restraining orders, as specified. This bill would additionally require the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney to conduct a search of the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System. By expanding the duties of the district attorney or prosecuting city attorney, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Under existing law, before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a domestic violence restraining order, the court must ensure that a search is or has been conducted to determine if the subject of the proposed order has, among other things, a prior criminal conviction for a violent or serious felony, owns or possesses a firearm, as reflected in the Department of Justice Automated Firearms System, or has a prior restraining order or violation thereof. Existing law requires this search to be conducted of specified records and databases readily available and reasonably accessible to the court. Existing law requires the court, after issuing its ruling, to advise the parties that they may request the information upon which the court relied to conduct the search and information obtained as a result of the search to be maintained in a confidential case file, except as specified. This bill would authorize a court to order any of the searches described above to be conducted before a hearing on the issuance or denial of a civil harassment restraining order, elder or dependent adult abuse restraining order, gun violence restraining order, postsecondary school restraining order, or workplace violence restraining order. The bill would require the court, after issuing its ruling, to provide the advisement to the parties described above, and to keep the information obtained as a result of any search to be maintained in a confidential case file, except as specified. (4) Existing law requires a court, when issuing a gun violence restraining order, to notify the Department of Justice regarding the order. Existing law requires the court, when issuing protective orders and firearm or ammunition relinquishment orders, to notify the prosecuting agency and law enforcement officials, as specified, in order, to enable the prosecuting agency and law enforcement officials to take necessary actions to obtain any firearms or ammunition owned, possessed, or controlled by the subject of the order. This bill would require local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting agencies, as defined, to designate a person responsible for accessing or receiving notifications from the superior court indicating that a person has violated a protective or restraining orders' firearm relinquishment requirement and to regularly ensure that the clerk of the court has updated contact information for the person designated to receive those notifications on behalf of the agency. This bill would also require each prosecuting agency to ensure that a protected person or protected people named in the order are notified about the issuance, terms, and duration of the protective order, except as specified. The bill would require each prosecuting agency to develop, adopt, and implement written policies and standards regarding notification to protected parties on or before January 1, 2028, as specified. By placing new requirements on local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would authorize a law enforcement agency or officer to seek enforcement of a valid extreme risk protection order issued by another state or jurisdiction. The bill would define an extreme risk protection order as an injunction, restraining order, or other civil or criminal court order issued by another state or jurisdiction that does not name a protected individual, but prohibits the subject of the order from possessing, owning, controlling, purchasing, or receiving firearms for the duration of the order based on evidence that the subject of the order poses a danger to themselves or others. The bill would require a valid extreme risk protection order to be registered with a court in this state if requested by a law enforcement officer or other petitioner. (5) Existing law requires each county to electronically transmit data regarding protective orders through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System of the Department of Justice, as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain the California Restraining and Protective Order System that contains detailed information regarding protective and restraining orders and injunctions, as specified, and to make that information available to court clerks and law enforcement personnel. This bill would extend these reporting requirements to include any protective order or restraining orders issued pursuant to specified sections, including a gun violence restraining order or an extreme risk protection order. (6) Existing law, the Uniform Interstate Enforcement of Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act, authorizes the enforcement of a valid foreign protection order in a tribunal of this state under certain conditions. The bill would expand the definition of a protection order to include any injunction or order under the federal Violence Against Women Act and would extend these provisions to orders issued by any state or other jurisdiction. The bill would make conforming changes. (7) Existing law authorizes the Department of Justice, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature, to establish or contract with a vendor to establish an automated protected person information and notification system, as specified. This bill would authorize the department to establish or contract with a vendor to create the above-described notification system through the availability of necessary funding through grants or other sources. (8) Existing law, subject to exceptions, provides that any person who has been convicted of certain misdemeanors may not, within 10 years of the conviction, own, purchase, receive, possess or have under their custody or control, any firearm and makes a violation of that prohibition punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would prohibit a person, who is convicted on or after January 1, 2027, of specified offenses, including misdemeanor violations of a gun violence restraining order or other protective orders, or violations that constitute a hate crime, from owning, purchasing, receiving, or having in their possession or under their custody or control any firearm within 10 years of the conviction, and would make conforming changes. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (9) Existing law requires a peace officer who is at the scene of a domestic violence incident or enforcing a domestic violence restraining order or gun violence restraining order to take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or otherwise lawful search, as specified. This bill would additionally require a peace officer to take temporary custody of any ammunition in plain sight or discovered pursuant to such a search. By expanding the duties of local law enforcement agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (10) This bill would provide that its provisions are severable. (11) This bill would provide that if AB 2179 is enacted, then the changes made to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure by this bill would not be operative. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1961 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1961 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.85 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by SB 1374 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1374 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 6383 of the Family Code proposed by SB 99 and SB 1395, to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 29805 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 1220 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1220 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (12) 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.
Under existing law, a grand jury is a body of the required number of persons chosen from the citizens of the county to serve before a court of competent jurisdiction, and sworn to inquire of public offenses that are committed or triable within the county. Existing law requires each grand jury, no later than the end of each fiscal or calendar year, to submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters. Existing law requires one copy of each final report and its responses to be placed on file with the clerk of the court who shall immediately forward the report and responses to the State Archivist. This bill would instead require the clerk to compile all final reports and responses issued during the grand jury's term of service and to transfer the reports and responses to the State Archivist within 6 months of the end of the grand jury's term of service, as specified. The bill would specify that the clerk is not required to create new or consolidated documents.
(1) Existing law, beginning January 1, 2027, in any county in which the offices of sheriff and the coroner are combined, prohibits the sheriff-coroner from determining the circumstances, manner, and cause of death, as provided, for an in-custody death, as defined. Existing law instead requires the sheriff-coroner to contract with specified entities to determine the circumstances, manner, and cause of death. Existing law requires the county board of supervisors to annually enter into a service agreement or service agreements with those entities. This bill would remove the requirement that those service agreements be entered into annually. (2) Existing law, when a defendant is returned to court after specified proceedings to restore competency and it appears the defendant is gravely disabled, requires the court to initiate specified conservatorship proceedings. Existing law defines gravely disabled for these purposes as meaning a condition in which a person, as a result of specified disorders, is unable to provide for their basic personal needs for food, clothing, shelter, personal safety, or necessary medical care, or a condition in which the person has been found mentally incompetent and specified facts exist, including that the person is unable to understand the nature and purpose of the proceedings taken against them and to assist counsel in the conduct of their defense in a rational manner. This bill would clarify that gravely disabled includes meeting either or both of these definitions of gravely disabled. (3) Existing law sets forth the grounds and procedures for the issuance of a search warrant. Existing law defines a search warrant to refer to an order in writing, in the name of the people, signed by a magistrate, directed to a peace officer, commanding that peace officer to search for a person or persons, a thing or things, or personal property, and, in the case of a thing or things, or personal property, bring the thing or things, or the personal property, before the magistrate. Existing law prohibits a foreign corporation from transacting intrastate business without a certificate of qualification from the Secretary of State, and requires a statement filed for a certificate of qualification to include, among other things, an agent for service of process within the state. Existing law defines a foreign corporation for these purposes as any corporation that is qualified to do business within the state, as specified. Existing law defines "properly served" for these purposes as, among other things, a search warrant that has been delivered by hand, or by any other means specified by the recipient of the search warrant, as specified. This bill would broaden the foreign corporation definition to include a corporation that transacts intrastate business, except a California corporation. The bill would also broaden the "properly served" definition to include, for recipients not qualified to do business in this state, any means reasonably calculated to give actual notice. (4) Existing law requires the sheriff or city municipal police department, when determining whether a non-California resident is qualified for a license to carry a firearm capable of being concealed on the person, to conduct an in-person or virtual interview of the applicant, unless the application is for a renewal of that license. This bill would require that interview for all applicants, unless the application is for a renewal of that license. By increasing duties on local governments, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) Existing law makes it a crime, with exceptions, for a person to knowingly bring or send into, or to knowingly assist in bringing into, or sending into, any county juvenile hall, ranch, camp, or forestry camp, or for a person who is confined in any of those institutions to possess, a prohibited controlled substance, a firearm, weapon, or explosive of any kind, a tear gas or tear gas weapon, or an alcoholic beverage, as specified. Existing law requires the posting of a sign at the entrance of those institutions specifying the prohibited conduct and the penalties. This bill would clarify that those provisions also apply to a secure youth treatment facility within a juvenile hall. (6) Existing law authorizes any county or court to implement a "comprehensive collection program" as a separate revenue collection activity, and requires the program to meet certain criteria, one of which is that the program engages in specified activities in collecting fines or penalties accepting payment of delinquent debt by credit card. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to make an annual report to the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee regarding, among other items, the total amount of revenue collected in the prior fiscal year by each court and county from criminal fines and fees related to infractions and misdemeanors. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to separately list information regarding fines and fees assessed in a year before the current reporting year that had outstanding balances in the current reporting year. This bill would additionally require that the program be administered by a county and superior court working in cooperation, as specified, and would authorize the program to contract with one or more specified entities. The bill would authorize the program to accept electronic payment of debt by credit or debit card, electronic funds transfer, or other online payment method accepted by the program. The bill would also make conforming changes to provisions regarding the report by the Judicial Council regarding the revenue collected from criminal fines and fees. The bill would require the Judicial Council to separately list information regarding fines and fees assessed, without limitation to the year before the current reporting year, that had outstanding balances in the current reporting year. (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, 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, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act, authorizes specified adult persons to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services, to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, and who meet other specified criteria. Existing law authorizes specified individuals to file a petition to commence the CARE process, including, but not limited to, a spouse, parent, sibling, child, grandparent, or an individual who stands in loco parentis to the respondent. Existing law requires the court to issue an order relieving the original petitioner if the petitioner is someone other than the director of a county behavioral health agency or their designee and appoint the director or their designee as the successor petitioner. Existing law requires the original petitioner to have specified rights to notice of proceedings if the petitioner is a parent or specified family member or the person with whom the respondent resides. Existing law authorizes the court to allow the original petitioner to participate in the respondent's CARE proceedings to the extent the respondent consents. This bill would authorize the original petitioner to provide specified information regarding the respondent, including the respondent's condition, treatment history, and housing status. The bill would require the CARE team to review specified parts of the provided information, including that relevant to the respondent's care and treatment, and would authorize the court to consider that information in evaluating the respondent's progress and compliance, among other things. The bill would specify that the respondent's consent is not required to receive this information from the original petitioner and that submission of this information does not confer party status on the original petitioner or create a right to direct treatment decisions, obtain discovery, access confidential records, receive protected health information, attend confidential proceedings, or otherwise participate in the proceedings without the respondent's consent, except as expressly provided by law.
(1) Existing law requires the Board of Parole Hearings to meet with each indeterminately sentenced inmate during the 6th year before the inmate's minimum eligible parole date for the purpose of reviewing and documenting the inmate's activities and conduct pertinent to parole eligibility. One year before the inmate's minimum eligible parole date, existing law requires a panel of the board to meet with the inmate and to grant parole unless the panel or board sitting en banc determines that the gravity of the current convicted offense, or the timing and gravity of current or past convicted offenses, is such that consideration of the public safety requires a more lengthy period of incarceration for the inmate. In certain circumstances, the board will conduct an en banc review and existing law specifies how the en banc review is required to be conducted. Existing law requires a decision of the board to become final unless the board finds that the panel made an error of law, or that the panel's decision was based on an error of fact, or that new information should be presented to the board, and that, when corrected or considered by the board, has a substantial likelihood of resulting in a substantially different decision upon a rehearing. Existing law authorizes the Governor to request a review of a decision by the board to grant or deny parole and, if a request has been made, existing law requires the request to be reviewed by a majority of commissioners, as specified. This bill would instead require a decision by the board to become final unless the board finds an error of law or fact or new information should be presented to the board and that, when corrected or considered by the board, has a substantial likelihood of resulting in a different decision upon a rehearing. The bill would also make the decision and vote of each commissioner of the board in an en banc review a public record. The bill would require the board, when reviewing decisions referred en banc based on review of a panel's decision, to determine if there was a material error of law or fact, or new information that, when corrected or considered by the board, has a substantial likelihood of resulting in a different decision upon a rehearing, and would require the board to vote to either affirm the decision or vacate the decision and set a new hearing. The bill would require the board, when reviewing a parole decision referred en banc by the Governor, to address the Governor's stated reason or reasons for the requested review, and would require the board to either affirm the decision, refer for a recision hearing for lack of substantial evidence, or, in the case of a denial, vacate the decision and set a new hearing. The bill would also make nonsubstantive changes throughout these provisions. (2) Existing law defines a sexually violent predator to mean a person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense against one or more victims and who has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to the health and safety of others in that it is likely that the person will engage in sexually violent criminal behavior. For purposes of this definition, a conviction for a sexually violent offense includes convictions that resulted in either a determinate or an indeterminate prison sentence, as specified. Existing law requires the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to refer a person who is in custody under that department's jurisdiction, and who is serving a determinate sentence or whose parole has been revoked, for evaluation by the State Department of State Hospitals at least 6 months prior to that individual's scheduled date for release from prison if the secretary determines that the person may be a sexually violent predator. Existing law requires a petition for commitment as a sexually violent predator to be filed in the county in which the person was convicted of the sexual offense for which the person was committed to the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. This bill would authorize the Executive Officer of the Board of Parole Hearings to refer individuals for evaluation as a sexually violent predator pursuant to these provisions. The bill would authorize the secretary or executive officer of the board to refer the person for evaluation if the incarcerated person is determinately sentenced and is scheduled for a parole hearing in the next 6 months. The bill would additionally authorize the secretary or executive officer of the board to refer an individual who is serving an indeterminate term or whose parole was revoked who meets certain criteria for evaluation at least 6 months before the individual's scheduled release date or if the person is scheduled for a parole hearing within the next 6 months, as specified. By imposing additional duties on counties regarding commitment of persons as sexually violent predators, 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.
