Existing law requires law enforcement agencies, departments, or entities to consider specified best practices regarding the downloading and storage of body-worn camera data, such as specifically stating the length of time that recorded data is to be stored, when establishing policies and procedures for the implementation and operation of a body-worn camera system, as specified. This bill would require, on or before July 1, 2027, each law enforcement agency that has a body-worn camera policy to update that policy to include a procedure for emergency service personnel to request the redaction of evidentiary and nonevidentiary recordings of a patient undergoing medical or psychological evaluation, procedure, or treatment by emergency service personnel, and to maintain an unredacted copy of the recording consistent with the policies and procedures of the agency. By requiring local law enforcement agencies to adopt new policies, 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 health facility, clinic, physician's office, or office of a group practice that uses generative artificial intelligence to generate written or verbal patient communications pertaining to patient clinical information, as defined, to ensure that those communications include both (1) a disclaimer that indicates to the patient that a communication was generated by generative artificial intelligence, as specified, and (2) clear instructions describing how a patient may contact a human health care provider, employee, or other appropriate person. Existing law exempts from this requirement a communication read and reviewed by a human licensed or certified health care provider. This bill would require developers and deployers, as defined, of an artificial intelligence system that produces a prediction, classification, recommendation, evaluation, or analysis that aids decisionmaking related to diagnosis or treatment, known as a clinical decision support system, to make reasonable efforts to identify clinical decision support systems developed for use by deployers that are known or have a reasonably foreseeable risk for biased impacts resulting from deployment of the system in health programs or activities. The bill would require developers to make a statement describing the intended uses and known or reasonably foreseeable risks associated with the use of the clinical decision support system and certain documentation available to deployers, as specified. The bill would require developers to make reasonable efforts to mitigate known or reasonably foreseeable risk for biased impacts resulting from use of the clinical decision support system in health programs or activities. The bill would require deployers to regularly monitor clinical decision support systems and take reasonable and proportionate steps to mitigate known or reasonably foreseeable risk of biased impacts. The bill would specify that a person, partnership, state or local governmental agency, or corporation may be both a developer and a deployer.
Existing law makes the violation of a county ordinance or a city ordinance a misdemeanor unless by ordinance it is made an infraction. Existing law specifies monetary fines for any violation of local ordinances that is an infraction, not to exceed specified amounts that vary based on the circumstances of the violation, as prescribed. This bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, authorize the county board of supervisors to impose fines, penalties, and forfeitures for violations of ordinances and to fix the penalty by a fine or imprisonment, or both. The bill would also establish the amount of the fine that may be imposed for the violation of a city or county ordinance, where the violation pertains to a nonresidential structure with a floor area of 20,000 or more square feet and the violation poses a threat to health and safety, to not exceed $1,000 for the first violation, $2,000 for the 2nd violation within 5 years of the first violation, and $5,000 for subsequent violations within 5 years of the first violation, as specified. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Los Angeles.
Under existing law, a county elections official is required to prepare a certified statement of the results of an election and submit it to the county board of supervisors within 30 days of the election. This bill would make it a felony, punishable by imprisonment for 16 months or 2 or 3 years, to seize or cause or assist in the seizure of ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified by the elections official. The bill would also make it a felony punishable by imprisonment for 2, 3, or 4 years for any person with authority to direct another person subject to their supervision or authority to seize ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified. By creating new crimes, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes the Department of Technology within the Government Operations Agency. Existing law requires the department to conduct, in coordination with other interagency bodies as it deems appropriate, a comprehensive inventory of all high-risk automated decision systems that have been proposed for use, development, or procurement by, or are being used, developed, or procured by, any state agency. Existing law generally regulates artificial intelligence, including the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act, which, among other things related to the safety of certain artificial intelligence models, requires a large frontier developer to write, implement, comply with, and clearly and conspicuously publish on its internet website a frontier AI framework that applies to the large frontier developer's frontier models and describes how the large frontier developer approaches certain safety-related items. Existing law defines "artificial intelligence" as an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments. This bill would require the Government Operations Agency to, no later than January 1, 2029, establish an AI Auditor Registry on the agency's internet website allowing AI auditors to register with the agency and allowing natural persons to report misconduct by a registered AI auditor, and require the agency to fix annual registration fees, as specified. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2029, prohibit an unregistered person from offering, selling, or conducting a covered AI audit, as defined, and would require the agency to, among other things, issue a unique registration number to each registered AI auditor and publish information provided by a registered AI auditor on the agency's internet website. The bill would require the registration number of a registered AI auditor to be clearly and conspicuously displayed on all advertising materials offering or soliciting covered AI audit services. The bill would authorize the agency to adopt regulations that are reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of the bill. This bill would require an AI auditor that registers with the agency to provide specified information to the agency and would impose various requirements on a registered AI auditor that conducts a covered AI audit, including, among other things, providing the auditee with a report that includes a signed and dated statement indicating that the audit was conducted according to the provisions of this bill. This bill would require a registered AI auditor to adhere to various standards of independence, objectivity, and integrity, including not seeking, soliciting, negotiating for, or accepting employment with an auditee while participating in the audit and not conducting a covered AI audit if the auditor has a financial, business, employment, or other interest or relationship that would reasonably be expected to impair the auditor's independence or objectivity. The bill would prohibit a registered AI auditor from preventing an employee from engaging in, or from retaliating against an employee who has engaged in, specified whistleblower activity. The bill would authorize the agency to investigate alleged violations of the bill, as specified, and provide that a violation constitutes grounds for removal from the registry and referral to the Attorney General or other appropriate enforcement authority. This bill would create the AI Auditors' Registration Fund within the State Treasury, to be administered by the agency, and would require that all moneys collected or received by the agency pursuant to the above-described provisions be deposited into the fund to be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to administer the above-described provisions. Existing law establishes the California Board of Accountancy, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs, and requires the board to license and regulate accountants in this state. This bill would exempt a registered AI auditor licensed or authorized to practice public accountancy and a firm holding a permit to practice public accountancy issued by the California Board of Accountancy, as specified, from complying with certain requirements related to reporting information to the agency and standards of independence, objectivity, and integrity under the bill if certain requirements are met. The bill would require the Government Operations Agency to, if the agency determines that a certified public accountant, public accountant, or accounting firm in good standing has violated this bill, notify the accountant or firm and the California Board of Accountancy in writing, and would require the board to investigate the complaint and provide the agency with a report of its findings and any resulting action.
Existing law establishes the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement within the Department of Industrial Relations. Existing law authorizes the division, which is headed by the Labor Commissioner, to enforce the Labor Code and all labor laws of the state the enforcement of which is not specifically vested in any other officer, board, or commission. This bill would limit the use of workplace surveillance tools, as defined, by employers, including by prohibiting an employer from monitoring or surveilling employees in a bathroom located in the workplace, except as specified. The bill would provide an employee with the right to leave behind workplace surveillance tools that are on their person or in their possession when entering a bathroom, except as specified. This bill would authorize the commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions, as prescribed, and would authorize a public prosecutor to bring specified enforcement actions. The bill would subject an employer who violates the bill to a civil penalty of up to $500 for each violation. 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.
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. Existing law requires, on or before September 1, 2024, the Department of Technology to conduct, in coordination with other interagency bodies as it deems appropriate, a comprehensive inventory of all high-risk automated decision systems that have been proposed for use, development, or procurement by, or are being used, developed, or procured by, any state agency. This bill would generally regulate the development and deployment of an automated decision system (ADS) used to make consequential decisions, as defined. The bill would define "automated decision system" to mean a computational process derived from machine learning, statistical modeling, data analytics, or artificial intelligence that issues simplified output, including a score, classification, or recommendation, that is designed or used to assist or replace human discretionary decisionmaking and materially impacts natural persons. This bill would require a developer of a covered ADS, as defined, to take certain actions, including providing a potential deployer instructions explaining how the covered ADS should be used by the deployer to make or facilitate a consequential decision. This bill would require a deployer of a covered ADS to take certain actions, including provide certain disclosures to a subject of a consequential decision made or facilitated by the covered ADS that results in an adverse outcome, as defined, and provide the subject with an opportunity to appeal the outcome of the consequential decision, as prescribed. This bill would authorize the Attorney General to bring a specified civil action for noncompliance.
Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for any person having charge of a completed vote by mail ballot to interfere with a ballot's return to the local elections official. This bill would additionally make it a misdemeanor for any person having charge of a vote by mail ballot to interfere, as defined, with a ballot's delivery to a voter. The bill would make it a felony for a person with authority to direct one or more persons subject to their supervision or authority to interfere with a ballot's return to the local elections official or delivery to a voter. By expanding the scope of an existing 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the California AI Transparency Act, requires, among other things, a person that creates, codes, or otherwise produces a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system that has over 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users and is publicly accessible within the geographic boundaries of the state to make available an AI detection tool at no cost to the user. Existing law requires the AI detection tool to, among other things, allow a user to assess whether the image, video, or audio content was created or altered by that person's generative AI system. Existing law defines terms for these purposes and makes these provisions generally operative on August 2, 2026. Existing law also requires a large online platform to comply with specific duties relating to artificial intelligence, including, among other duties, allowing a user to inspect all available system provenance data that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body by specified means. Existing law prohibits a large online platform from knowingly stripping any system provenance data or digital signature that is compliant with widely adopted specifications adopted by an established standards-setting body from content uploaded or distributed on the large online platform. Existing law makes these provisions, relating to a large online platform, operative on January 1, 2027. This bill would revise the duties and prohibitions applicable to a large online platform relating to artificial intelligence, including the requirement for allowing a user to inspect system provenance data. The bill would specify that these provisions do not require a large online platform to take any action with respect to provenance data, system provenance data, or digital signatures that are not compliant with widely adopted specifications issued by an established standards-setting body.
Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including life and disability insurance. Existing law prohibits an insurer from requiring a test for the presence of a genetic characteristic for the purpose of determining insurability, except as specified. If an insurer requests an applicant to take a genetic characteristic test, existing law requires the insurer to obtain the applicant's written informed consent and to notify the applicant of the test result. Existing law prohibits a life or disability income insurer from requiring a genetic characteristic test if the results of the test would be used to determine eligibility for specified health care coverage. Existing law prescribes civil penalties for an insurer who discloses the results of a test for a genetic characteristic requested by the insurer. This bill would repeal those provisions and would instead prohibit a life or disability insurer from canceling, limiting, or denying coverage, among other actions, based on a test for the presence or absence of a genetic characteristic. The bill would authorize a life or disability insurer to base an underwriting decision on a test for the presence or absence of a genetic characteristic if specified criteria are met. The bill would, except as provided, prohibit a life or disability insurer from requiring, requesting, or soliciting genetic information, using genetic test results, or considering a person's decisions or actions relating to genetic testing in any manner for an insurance purpose. The bill would additionally impose civil penalties for the use of genetic information or genetic characteristics in a manner inconsistent with these provisions, as specified, and other civil penalties for any violation of these provisions. The bill would also prohibit the use or disclosure of an individual's full genome. Existing law, the Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act, prohibits an insurance institution, agent, or insurance-support organization from seeking specified information in connection with an insurance transaction or preparing or requesting an investigative consumer report about an individual for an insurance application, except as specified. Existing law prohibits an insurance institution or agent from basing an adverse underwriting decision on specified information. Existing law prohibits an insurance institution, agent, or insurance-support organization from utilizing a form or statement that authorizes disclosure of personal or privileged information as its disclosure form, unless the form or statement meets specified criteria. This bill would prohibit an insurance institution, agent, or insurance-support organization from seeking information in connection with an insurance transaction concerning, or prohibit an insurance institution or agent from basing an adverse underwriting decision on, an individual's genetic information or full genome, unless specified criteria are met. The bill would prohibit an insurance institution, agent, or insurance-support organization from preparing or requesting an investigative consumer report that seeks an individual's genetic information or full genome. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature that, notwithstanding any other law, these provisions shall not be interpreted to authorize the use or disclosure of an individual's full genome. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 791.07, 791.11, and 791.12 of the Insurance Code proposed by SB 354 to be operative only if this bill and SB 354 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
