Existing law establishes various benefit programs, including grant programs and loan programs. Existing law, the California Values Act, generally prohibits California law enforcement agencies from using their moneys or personnel for immigration enforcement purposes, except as specified. This bill would prohibit an administrator of a covered program, as those terms are defined, from awarding a grant or issuing a loan from a covered program to a private entity that contracts with United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, except as specified. The bill would require each private entity applying to a covered program to agree to identify to the administrator of that covered program any subcontractors to be used under the contract and to certify to the administrator that the subcontractors do not contract with United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The bill would require an administrator to include in their eligibility requirements for their covered programs that an eligible private entity and its subcontractors for each covered program, if any, shall not contract with United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The bill would make related findings and declarations. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. By imposing additional duties on local agencies and 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 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.
(1) Existing law requires a county social worker to investigate the circumstances of each child taken into temporary custody by a peace officer under specified circumstances. Existing law requires the social worker to conduct an investigation, within 30 days of the child's removal, to identify and locate adult relatives of the child, as specified, and to provide them with a notification that the child has been removed from the custody of the child's parents, guardians, or Indian custodian, and an explanation of the various options to participate in the care and placement of the child. Existing law requires a social worker to use due diligence in investigating the names and locations of relatives, and defines "due diligence" to include family finding, as specified. This bill would authorize a county child welfare agency or probation department to conduct family finding and engagement activities prior to the removal of a child from parental custody, as specified. (2) Existing law establishes various public social services programs to provide for protection, care, and assistance to the people of the state in need of those services. Existing law, in this regard, and with some exceptions, requires all applications and records concerning any individual made or kept by any public officer or agency in connection with the administration of public social services for which grants-in-aid are received by this state from the federal government be kept confidential. Existing law exempts from those confidentiality provisions the disclosure of information between employees of a county's adult protective services agency and a county's child welfare agency for the purpose of multidisciplinary teamwork in the prevention, intervention, management, or treatment of child abuse or neglect or abuse or neglect of an elder or dependent adult. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to knowingly secure or possess a list of persons who have applied for or who have been granted any form of public service in violation of these provisions. This bill would additionally exempt from these confidentiality provisions information regarding children receiving child welfare services to be disclosed to relatives and nonrelative extended family members without consent if the disclosure is directly connected to the administration of the child welfare program and serves the purpose of identifying placement and support resources for children. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law defines "child welfare services" to mean public social services that are directed toward the accomplishment of various purposes, including protecting and promoting the welfare of all children, and includes, among other services, emergency response services and family maintenance services. This bill would modify the definition of "child welfare services." The bill would require, upon providing child welfare services to a child or family, whether court-ordered or voluntarily accepted, the county child welfare agency or probation department to develop a case plan, as specified. The bill would authorize, as part of the case planning process, a county child welfare agency or probation department to conduct family finding and engagement activities to support the goals identified in the case plan. The bill would define "family finding and engagement" for these purposes. To the extent this bill increases the duties of county welfare agencies or probation departments, this bill imposes a state-mandated local program. (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.
This measure would make specified statements relating to the release of files involving Jeffrey Epstein and would urge federal and local law enforcement to take immediate action to hold accountable all those who harmed survivors or who were complicit in Epstein's crimes, regardless of elected title, royal title, party affiliation, or economic status.
Existing law prohibits law enforcement officers from employing threats, physical harm, deception, or psychologically manipulative interrogation tactics, as specified, during a custodial interrogation of a person 17 years of age or younger. This bill would prohibit a law enforcement officer from seeking statements or information while working undercover, or by individuals working in collaboration with, or acting as agents of, law enforcement, from a person who was 17 years of age or younger during the commission of crime and who is under 26 years of age while in custody. The bill would direct a court to consider any willful failure of a law enforcement officer in violation of these provisions in determining the credibility of that law enforcement officer. The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to the admissibility of statements or information provided to an officer or individuals working in collaboration with law enforcement that were sought to protect against an imminent threat to life.
Existing law generally regulates the business of insurance in the state, including the conduct of insurance licensees, and provides for the issuance of bail licenses under the jurisdiction of the Insurance Commissioner. Existing regulations generally prohibit the solicitation of bail except after a bona fide request for bail services has been received from the arrestee or from another specified person. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to impersonate certain personnel, including a law enforcement officer or an officer or member of a fire department, with the intent of fraudulently impersonating such a person, or of fraudulently inducing the belief that they are such a person. This bill, the Bail Consumer Protection Act, would make it a crime for any person to impersonate, or falsely hold themselves out to be, a licensed bail agent, and while doing so solicits or attempts to solicit bail from any individual. The bill would also make it a crime for any person to hire another person or company to solicit bail when the person knew or should have known that the other person or company is impersonating or falsely holding themselves out to be a licensed bail agent, and that other person or company solicits or attempts to solicit bail from any individual. By creating a new 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.
(1) Existing law makes it unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage, has 0.08 or 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in their blood, as specified, is addicted to the use of any drug, is under the influence of any drug, or is under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug to drive a vehicle. Existing law prohibits a person from driving a vehicle under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug and concurrently do an act forbidden by law, or neglect a duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to a person other than the driver. Existing law, until January 1, 2033, requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately suspend or revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon the receipt of an abstract of the record of a court showing that the person has been convicted of driving a vehicle under the circumstances above as well as for engaging in a motor vehicle speed contest for specified periods of time, depending on the statute under which the driving violation was punished, and prohibits the reinstatement of the driving privilege until the person gives proof of financial responsibility and proof satisfactory to the department of successful completion of a driving-under-the-influence (DUI) program, as specified. Existing law requires the department to advise the person that they may apply for a restricted driver's license if the person meets certain requirements, including, among others, satisfactorily providing proof of enrollment in a certain DUI program and the installment of a functioning, certified ignition interlock device (IID) . Existing law allows, for certain violations, a person who has had their driver's license suspended to apply to the department for a restricted license, subject to certain requirements. For specified violations, existing law requires the department to issue a restricted driver's license if the person has met certain requirements, including proof satisfactory to the department of enrollment in, or completion of, a DUI program, proof of financial responsibility, and the payment of all applicable reinstatement or reissue fees, among other fees, required by the department. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would reorganize and recast the penalties and sanctions for the alcohol- and drug-related driving offenses described above. The bill would recast violations for driving under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or having 0.08 or 0.04 percent or more, by weight of alcohol in blood (collectively "alcohol-related driving violations") from violations for driving under the influence of any drug or driving while a person is addicted to the use of any drug (collectively "drug-related driving violations") . For convictions of alcohol-related driving violations, the bill would require the department to suspend the privilege to operate a motor vehicle and would allow the suspension to be indefinite. The bill would prohibit the reinstatement of that privilege until the person satisfies certain requirements, including, among others, the person applying for and maintaining a restricted driver's license for certain periods of time depending on the statute under which the driving violation is punished, which includes installing a certified IID on each vehicle operated by the person, providing proof satisfactory to the department of successful completion of a DUI program, as specified, paying all applicable reinstatement and reissue fees required by the department, and providing proof of financial responsibility. For convictions of drug-related driving violations described above, this bill would require the department to suspend the privilege to operate a motor vehicle for specified periods of time, depending on the statute under which the violation was punished. The bill would also prohibit the reinstatement of the privilege until the person satisfies certain requirements described above, but the bill would not require the person to install a certified IID or apply for and maintain a restricted driver's license for a specified period of time. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would authorize a person, whose privilege to operate a motor vehicle is suspended for alcohol-related driving violations, to apply for a restricted license if certain requirements are met, including, among others, installing a certified IID on each vehicle operated by the person, as specified, providing proof of financial responsibility for 3 years, providing satisfactorily proof of enrollment in, or completion of, a DUI program, as specified, and paying a fee that is sufficient to cover the costs of administration of these requirements. The bill would require the department to terminate the restricted driver's license and suspend the privilege to drive if the person fails to comply with the DUI program requirements. The bill would also authorize a person, whose driving privilege was suspended for a conviction of a drug-related driving violation, to apply for a restricted driver's license if similar certain requirements are met, except the person would not be required to install a certified IID but would be required to complete a minimum number of months of a suspension period, as specified. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would require the department to monitor the installation and maintenance of an IID that is installed pursuant to specified provisions. The bill would require the installer of the IID to notify the department if the device is removed or indicates that a person has attempted to remove, bypass, or tamper with the device, or the person fails 3 or more times to comply with these requirements. The bill would require the department to immediately suspend or revoke the privilege to operate a motor vehicle and any restricted driver's license if the person attempts to remove, bypass, or tamper with an IID, has the IID removed prior to the termination date of the restriction, or fails 3 or more times to comply with any requirement for the maintenance or calibration of the IID. The bill would require the department, and manufacturers, installers, and repairers of IIDs, to post information regarding filing complaints against manufacturers, installers, and repairers, as specified. (2) Existing law requires an order of suspension of a person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for any of specified reasons, including the person was driving a motor vehicle when the person had 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in their blood. Existing law requires the notice to be served on the person by a peace officer under specified conditions where test results show that the person has specified percentages of alcohol in the person's blood or where a person under 21 years of age refuses to take, or fails to complete, a specified test for alcohol in the blood. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would include a person driving a motor vehicle when a passenger for hire was a passenger in the vehicle and the person had 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in their blood as a reason to immediately suspend the privilege to operate a motor vehicle. The bill would authorize a person, whose driving privilege has been suspended pursuant to the provision above but not suspended or revoked based on the person's refusal to submit to, or failure to complete, a chemical test or tests, to apply for a restricted driver's license if certain requirements are met, including completing 30 days of the suspension period, providing proof of enrollment in a DUI program, installing a functioning, certified IID on any vehicle that they operate, being 21 years of age or older at the time of the offense, giving proof of financial responsibility, and paying all reissue and restriction fees. The bill would require the department to terminate the restricted driver's license and suspend the privilege to operate if the person has failed to comply with the DUI program requirements, or if the person attempts to remove, bypass, or tamper with the IID, removes the IID prior to the termination date of the restriction, or fails 3 or more times to comply with any requirement for the maintenance or calibration of the IID. (3) Existing law requires the department to suspend or revoke a person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle based on a peace officer's sworn statement or report, as specified. Existing law requires the department to review the record to determine whether the suspension or revocation is supported by the record, as specified. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would require the department to review these determinations and consider the sworn report and any other information and evidence, as specified. If, by a preponderance of the evidence, the department determines in the review of a determination certain facts are proven, including, among other facts, that the peace officer had reasonable cause to believe that the person had been driving a motor vehicle in violation of an alcohol- or drug-related driving provision, the bill would require the department to sustain the order of suspension or revocation. If the department determines that any of these certain facts are not proven by a preponderance of the evidence, the bill would require the department to rescind the order of suspension or revocation, as specified. (4) Existing law allows, for certain violations, a person who has had their driver's license suspended to apply to the department for a restricted license, subject to certain requirements as provided above. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would authorize a court to disallow the issuance of the restricted driver's license if the court determines that the person would present a traffic safety or public safety risk if the person were authorized to operate a motor vehicle during the period of suspension. This bill, beginning on January 1, 2031, would make conforming changes to include the provisions above, as applicable, in statutes that generally pertain to the suspension, revocation, or restriction of the privilege to operate a motor vehicle. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires a person, who claims title to a firearm that is in the custody of a court or law enforcement agency and wishes to have it returned, to make an application for a determination by the Department of Justice as to whether the applicant is eligible to possess a firearm. Under existing law, a law enforcement agency or court that has taken custody of a firearm is prohibited from returning the firearm to an individual unless specified requirements are met, including, but not limited to, requiring the person to be eligible to possess a firearm and verifying that the firearm is not listed as stolen and the firearm has been recorded in the Automated Firearms System in the name of the person, as specified. Existing law requires any weapon that was carried unlawfully for specified crimes to be surrendered to specified law enforcement entities. Existing law requires weapons surrendered pursuant to these provisions to be destroyed by the law enforcement entity. This bill would authorize a law enforcement agency, as defined, to create a voluntary firearm storage program that allows a person to voluntarily transfer custody of their firearm to the local law enforcement agency for temporary safekeeping purposes to prevent firearm violence, suicide, and other injury. The bill would require a law enforcement agency adopting this program to provide clear instructions on the procedure to voluntarily transfer custody of a firearm and to provide clear instructions on the process for requesting return of the firearm, as specified. Upon receipt of a firearm, the bill would require a law enforcement agency to, among other things, check a certain database to ensure the firearm has not previously been reported lost, stolen, or involved in a crime and ensure that the requesting person is eligible to possess firearms when the firearm is returned to the person. The bill would require a law enforcement agency to destroy a firearm that a person failed to retrieve at the end of a time period specified by the law enforcement agency, except as provided. Existing law prohibits the carrying of a concealed firearm or the open carrying of a firearm, as specified. Existing law provides certain exemptions to these prohibitions, including exemptions for peace officers, retired peace officers, and persons possessing a valid license to carry a concealed firearm. Existing law generally regulates the sale and transfer of firearms, including, among other requirements and subject to exceptions, that the transfer of a firearm be conducted through a firearms dealer. This bill would exempt the voluntary transfer of a firearm to a local law enforcement agency pursuant to the provisions above from these prohibitions and regulations.
Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, provides for the involuntary commitment and treatment of persons with specified mental disorders. Under the act, when a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to others or to themselves, or is gravely disabled, the person may, upon probable cause, be taken into custody by specified individuals, including, among others, peace officers, and placed in a facility designated by the county and approved by the State Department of Health Care Services for up to 72 hours for evaluation and treatment. This bill would require the California Health and Human Services Agency (agency) to establish the Behavioral Health Crisis Response Advisory Group for the purpose of examining the role of law enforcement in behavioral health crisis response, as specified. The bill would require the membership of the advisory group to include representatives from, among others, the agency, the State Department of Health Care Services, law enforcement agencies, and county behavioral health departments, as appointed by the Governor. The bill would require the advisory group to meet on or before July 1, 2027, and at least once per quarter thereafter until December 31, 2028. The bill would require the agency, in collaboration with the advisory group, to make recommendations on specified topics, to the extent they relate to law enforcement interaction with behavioral health crisis response, including, among others, a state governance structure to support coordination between behavioral health crisis services accessed through 988 and emergency response systems. The bill would require the agency, in collaboration with the advisory group, to conduct an assessment of the risks associated with categorical nonresponse or limited-response policies adopted by local law enforcement agencies and whether statewide minimum standards or procedural safeguards are needed to prevent gaps in behavioral health crisis response. The bill would require the agency on January 1, 2028, and annually thereafter until January 1, 2030, to report recommendations and assessment results, as specified, to the Legislature. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2031. 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 law enforcement and state and local governments to interact with and report on federal action against individuals based on their perceived or actual immigration status in various specified manners. Under existing law, for example, a local governing body of any county, city, or city and county in which a local law enforcement agency has provided access to an individual during the last year by the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is required to hold at least one community forum, as specified, to provide public information about ICE's access to individuals and to receive and consider public comment. This bill would establish within the Department of Justice on July 1, 2027, the Working Group on Civil Rights Accountability, consisting of 12 appointed members, to develop and maintain a statewide reporting dashboard with specific data fields to document and categorize alleged constitutional or civil rights violations arising from federal immigration enforcement activities within the state. The bill would require a nonprofit organization, if eligible as specified, to be authorized to submit reports to the dashboard. The bill would require the department to establish specific standards, protocols, and procedures for a nonprofit organization to submit reports to the dashboard, including establishing data verification procedures. The bill would require the working group, beginning January 1, 2028, and on each January 1 thereafter, to submit a report of specific information and policy recommendations to the Legislature and make that annual report publicly available. This bill would also exempt the reports required pursuant to the above-described provisions from the disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. The bill would make legislative findings and declarations in support of its provisions. 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 establishes the Department of Justice, and makes the department responsible, in part, for overseeing statewide criminal justice programs. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to provide technical assistance to local law enforcement agencies and tribal governments relating to, among other things, providing guidance for law enforcement education and training on policing and criminal investigations on Indian lands, providing guidance on improving crime reporting, crime statistics, criminal procedures, and investigative tools, and facilitating and supporting improved communication between local law enforcement agencies and tribal governments. This bill would establish a Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons Justice Program within and under the discretion of the Department of Justice. The bill would impose specified responsibilities on the program, including facilitating collaboration and acting as a liaison between tribal victims' families, tribal governments, and federal, tribal, state, and out-of-state law enforcement agencies, where appropriate, regarding active and inactive cases involving missing and murdered indigenous persons in California, including cases involving human trafficking. The bill, beginning July 1, 2030, and until January 1, 2033, would require the program to submit an annual report to both houses of the Legislature containing, among other things, aggregated data on the number of, and facts about, cases involving missing and murdered indigenous persons in California.
