Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to immediately suspend a person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a specified period of time if the person has been convicted of driving a motor vehicle when the person had a certain blood-alcohol concentration. Existing law authorizes certain individuals, whose privilege is suspended pursuant to that provision to receive a restricted driver's license if specified requirements are met, including the elapse of specified periods of license suspension or revocation. Existing law also requires the department to immediately suspend or revoke a person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle if the person has been convicted of violating specified provisions prohibiting driving a motor vehicle under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or drug or the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and drug, or with 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood or while addicted to the use of any drug, with or without bodily injury to another. Existing law authorizes certain individuals whose privilege is suspended or revoked pursuant to that provision to receive a restricted driver's license if specified requirements are met, including the elapse of specified periods of license suspension or revocation and, in some instances, the installation of an ignition interlock device on the person's vehicle. Existing law does not permit a person who has been convicted of a first offense of driving a motor vehicle under the influence, with injury, to receive a restricted driver's license. Existing law also requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to establish a pilot program from July 1, 2010, to July 1, 2017, inclusive, in the Counties of Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Tulare that requires, as a condition of being issued a restricted driver's license, being reissued a driver's license, or having the privilege to operate a motor vehicle reinstated subsequent to a conviction for any violation of the above offenses, a person to install for a specified period of time an ignition interlock device on all vehicles he or she owns or operates. Under existing law, the amount of time the ignition interlock device is required to be installed is based upon the number of prior convictions suffered by the individual, as prescribed. This bill would extend the pilot program in those counties until January 1, 2019. Effective January 1, 2019, and until January 1, 2026, the bill would make an individual whose license has been suspended for driving a motor vehicle when he or she has a certain blood-alcohol concentration and who is eligible for a restricted driver's license eligible for a restricted driver's license without serving any period of the suspension if the person meets all other eligibility requirements and the person installs an ignition interlock device. The bill would authorize that individual to install an ignition interlock device prior to the effective date of the suspension and would require the individual to receive credit towards the mandatory term to install an ignition interlock device, as specified. The bill would require the department to immediately reinstate the suspension of the privilege to operate a motor vehicle upon receipt of notification that a person has engaged in certain activities, including, among others, attempted to remove, bypass, or tamper with the ignition interlock device. The bill would also require, commencing January 1, 2019, and until January 1, 2026, a person who has been convicted of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, as specified, to install for a specified period of time an ignition interlock device on the vehicle, as ordered by the court, that is the vehicle that he or she operates. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2019, and until January 1, 2026, also authorize a person convicted of driving a motor vehicle under the influence, including a person who was convicted of a first offense of driving a motor vehicle under the influence, with injury, if all other requirements are satisfied, including the installation of an ignition interlock device, to apply for a restricted driver's license without completing a period of license suspension or revocation. The bill would require the department to, if a person maintains an ignition interlock device for the specified required time, reinstate the person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle at the time the other reinstatement requirements are satisfied. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2019, and until January 1, 2026, authorize a court to require a person convicted of a specified type of reckless driving to install a certified ignition interlock device on any vehicle that the person operates and prohibit that person from operating a motor vehicle unless that vehicle is equipped with a functioning, certified ignition interlock device for a specified period of time. The bill would require the Transportation Agency to issue a report to the Legislature by January 1, 2025, regarding the implementation and efficacy of these provisions. The bill would reinstate current law as described above as of January 1, 2026. The bill would also make conforming and clarifying changes. By specifying that certain crimes relating to ignition interlock devices apply when an ignition interlock device is installed pursuant to the provisions of this bill, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law establishes the Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings, and Thermal Insulation under the supervision and control of the Director of Consumer Affairs and requires the director to administer and enforce provisions relating to the registration of electronic and appliance repair service dealers. Existing law authorizes the director to deny, suspend, revoke, or place on probation the registration of a service dealer for any of certain acts, as specified. Existing law authorizes a service dealer licensed under these provisions to install, calibrate, service, maintain, and monitor ignition interlock devices. A violation of these provisions is punishable as a misdemeanor. Existing law, the Automotive Repair Act, establishes the Bureau of Automotive Repair under the supervision and control of the Director of Consumer Affairs and provides for the registration and regulation of automotive repair dealers. Existing law requires the bureau to adopt standards for installation, maintenance, and servicing of ignition interlock devices by automotive repair dealers, and existing regulations authorizes automotive repair dealers to install, maintain, and service an ignition interlock device. Existing law authorizes the director to deny, suspend, revoke, or place on probation the registration of an automotive repair dealer for certain acts, as specified. A violation of the act is a crime. This bill would authorize the director to issue a citation to, or suspend, revoke, or place on probation the registration of an automotive repair dealer or service dealer who installs, calibrates, services, maintains, or monitors ignition interlock devices if the automotive repair dealer or service dealer is not in compliance with specified provisions relating to payment for the costs of an ignition interlock device and would require an automotive repair dealer or service dealer to provide that information to an individual receiving ignition interlock device services. By expanding the definition of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require, commencing January 1, 2019, until January 1, 2026, an ignition interlock device manufacturer to be in compliance with specified provisions relating to payment for the costs of an ignition interlock device and would require those manufacturers to provide information to an individual who is required to install an ignition interlock device pursuant to a restricted driver's license. The bill would make a violation of those requirements subject to a civil assessment not exceeding $1,000, as specified. 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law creates the Department of Finance and provides that the department has general powers of supervision over all matters concerning the financial and business policies of the state. The Public Employees' Retirement Law (PERL) creates the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) and provides a defined benefit to its members based on age at retirement, service credit, and final compensation. PERL vests management and control of PERS in the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, including the exclusive control of the investment of the retirement fund, and requires the board and its officers and employees to discharge their duties with respect to this system solely in the interest of the participants and beneficiaries. This bill would authorize the Department of Finance to identify infrastructure projects in the state for which the department will guarantee a rate of return on investment for an investment made in that infrastructure project by the Public Employees' Retirement System. The bill would create the Reinvesting in California Special Fund as a continuously appropriated fund and would require the moneys in the fund to be used to pay the rate of return on investment. The bill would require the rate of return on investment to be subject to the availability of moneys in the fund. The bill would also state the intent of the Legislature to identify special funds to be transferred into the fund for the purposes of these provisions. By creating a new continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act, an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, funds a system of county mental health plans for the provision of mental health services, as specified. Existing law provides for the operation and administration of various mental health programs at a statewide and county level, as specified. This bill, until January 1, 2022, would require the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission, subject to appropriation by the Legislature, to create a grant program for public community colleges, colleges, and universities for purposes of improving access to mental health services on those campuses, as specified. The bill would require campuses that have been awarded grants under these provisions to report annually on the use of those grant funds and to post that information on their Internet Web sites. The bill would also require the commission to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the impact of the program, as specified. The bill would require that evaluation to be conducted by a public or private research university or institute in this state and would require the Department of Finance to assist the commission in issuing a request for proposal for that contract.
Existing law governs the procurement process for contracts of specified public entities. Existing law, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, states that all persons within this state are free and equal and, no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status, are entitled to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments. Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, protects and safeguards the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain, and hold employment without discrimination, abridgment, or harassment on account of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status. This bill would, with certain exceptions, require a person that submits a bid or proposal to, or otherwise proposes to enter into or renew a contract with, a state agency with respect to any contract in the amount of $100,000 or more to certify, under penalty of perjury, at the time the bid or proposal is submitted or the contract is renewed that they are in compliance with the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and that any policy that they have adopted against any sovereign nation or peoples recognized by the government of the United States, including, but not limited to, the nation and people of Israel, is not used to discriminate in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act or the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. By requiring a person to certify under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the definition of a crime, thereby 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.
(1) Existing law authorizes the Director of Fish and Wildlife to order the closure of any waters or otherwise restrict the taking under a commercial fishing license in state waters of any species of fish if the Director of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, in consultation with the State Public Health Officer, determines that the species or subspecies of fish is likely to pose a human health risk from high levels of toxic substances. The closure or restriction is required to be adopted by emergency regulation, as specified. Under existing law, any violation of the Fish and Game Code, or of any rule, regulation, or order made or adopted under the code, is generally a misdemeanor. This bill would expand this authority to all fishing. The bill would require the Director of Fish and Wildlife, after ordering the closure of any waters or restricting the taking of any species of fish, to notify the Fish and Game Commission and request that the commission schedule a public discussion of the closure or restriction at its next scheduled full meeting. The bill would remove the requirement that the closure or restriction be adopted by emergency regulation and would instead exempt a closure or restriction from the Administrative Procedure Act. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law regulates the Dungeness crab fishery and requires the Director of Fish and Wildlife to adopt a program for Dungeness crab trap limits for all California permits. The program requires participants to pay a $5 crab trap tag fee and a $1,000 crab trap limit fee on a biennial basis, as provided, and requires a Dungeness crab trap that is fished to contain a trap tag that is fastened to the main buoy, and an additional tag attached to the trap. Existing law makes the program inoperative on April 1, 2019. This bill would require the department to issue a waiver from the biennial crab trap tag fee to a participant who is unable to fish due to mandatory military service, as provided. The bill would authorize a vessel to transit state waters with Dungeness crab traps that are not marked in the above-described manner if the traps contain either valid Oregon or Washington tags, no crab is onboard the vessel, and the traps are not deployed in state waters. (3) Existing law prohibits a person from using any vessel to take Dungeness crab for commercial purposes without a Dungeness crab vessel permit. Existing law prohibits a person from taking Dungeness crab for commercial purposes from a vessel in specified ocean waters for 30 days after the opening of the Dungeness crab fishing season if the opening of the season has been delayed in those waters and that person has taken, possessed, or landed Dungeness crab in other specified waters prior to that opening. Existing law requires the Fish and Game Commission to revoke the Dungeness crab vessel permit of any person who violates these provisions. Existing law makes these provisions inoperative on April 1, 2019. This bill would limit the 30-day start prohibition to a situation in which a person uses the same vessel that was used to take Dungeness crab in specified waters before the delayed opening of the season in the areas subject to the prohibition. (4) Existing law regulating commercial fishing traps makes it unlawful, except as specified, to willfully or recklessly disturb, move, or damage any trap that belongs to another person and that is marked with a buoy identification number. Existing law, until April 1, 2019, authorizes the department, in consultation with the Dungeness crab task force, to develop regulations as necessary to provide for the retrieval of lost or abandoned commercial crab traps. This bill would require the department, as part of the above-described regulations, to establish a retrieval permit program that would grant a person who obtains a retrieval permit the authority to retrieve during the closed season of the Dungeness crab commercial fishery lost or abandoned Dungeness crab traps belonging to another person and to receive compensation for that retrieval on a per trap basis. The bill would require the department to establish a fee to be charged to a Dungeness crab vessel permitholder for each trap belonging to the permitholder that is retrieved through the program. The bill would prohibit the department from renewing a Dungeness crab vessel permit until any fee imposed pursuant to the program has been paid. (5) 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. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 131052 of the Health and Safety Code, proposed by SB 1473, to be operative only if SB 1473 and this bill are chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law also provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services through, among other things, managed care plans licensed under the act that contract with the State Department of Health Care Services. Existing law requires a health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2016, to provide coverage for women for all prescribed and FDA-approved female contraceptive drugs, devices, and products, as well as voluntary sterilization procedures, contraceptive education and counseling, and related followup services. This bill would require a health care service plan or a health insurance policy issued, amended, renewed, or delivered on or after January 1, 2017, to cover up to a 12-month supply of FDA-approved, self-administered hormonal contraceptives when dispensed at one time for an enrollee or insured at one time by a provider, pharmacist, or at a location licensed or authorized to dispense drugs or supplies. The bill would specifically provide that a health care service plan contract or an insurance policy is not required to cover contraceptives provided by an out-of-network provider, pharmacy, or other location, except as authorized by state or federal law or by the plan or insurer's policies governing out-of-network coverage. The bill would also prohibit a health care service plan or health insurer, in the absence of clinical contraindications, from imposing utilization controls limiting the supply of FDA-approved, self-administered hormonal contraceptives that may be furnished by a provider or pharmacist, or at a location licensed or otherwise authorized to dispense drugs or supplies to an amount that is less than a 12-month supply. The bill would include Medi-Cal managed care plans, as specified, in the definition of a health care service plan for purposes of these provisions, and would require the State Department of Health Care Services to seek federal approval, if necessary, and to issue all-plan letters or similar instructions to implement these provisions. Because a willful violation of the bill's requirements by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law authorizes a pharmacist to dispense not more than a 90-day supply of a dangerous drug other than a controlled substance pursuant to a valid prescription that specifies an initial quantity of less than a 90-day supply followed by periodic refills of that amount if the patient has met specified requirements, including having completed an initial 30-day supply of the drug. Existing law prohibits a pharmacist from dispensing a greater supply of a dangerous drug if the prescriber indicates "no change to quantity" on the prescription. Existing law authorizes a pharmacist to furnish self-administered hormonal contraceptives in accordance with standardized procedures or protocols developed and approved by both the board and the Medical Board of California, as specified. This bill would require a pharmacist to dispense, at a patient's request, up to a 12-month supply of an FDA-approved, self-administered hormonal contraceptive pursuant to a valid prescription that specifies an initial quantity followed by periodic refills. The bill would authorize a pharmacist furnishing an FDA-approved, self-administered hormonal contraceptive, pursuant to the authorization described above, to furnish up to a 12-month supply at one time at the patient's request. This bill would incorporate changes to Section 4064.5 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by both this bill and SB 253, which would become operative only if both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered 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.
Existing law, the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act, requires a distributor to pay a redemption payment for every beverage container sold or offered for sale in the state by the distributor to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery for deposit in the California Beverage Container Recycling Fund. Moneys in the fund are continuously appropriated to the department for certain payments, including market development payments. Existing law authorizes the department, until that authorization is repealed on January 1, 2017, to (1) annually expend up to $10,000,000 from the fund to make market development payments to an entity certified by the department as a recycling center, processor, or dropoff or collection program for empty plastic beverage containers that are subsequently washed and processed into flake, pellet, or other form, and made usable for the manufacture of a plastic product, or to a product manufacturer for empty plastic beverage containers that are subsequently washed and processed into flake, pellet, or other form, and used by that product manufacturer to manufacture a product, and to (2) expend additional amounts to make market development payments, calculated as provided. This bill would postpone that repeal until January 1, 2018. By extending the term of a continuous appropriation, this bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law establishes the Department of Fish and Wildlife in the Natural Resources Agency. Under existing law, the department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. The California Endangered Species Act prohibits the taking of an endangered, threatened, or candidate species, except as specified. Under the act, the department may authorize the take of listed species if the take is incidental to an otherwise lawful activity and the impacts are minimized and fully mitigated. Existing law prohibits an entity from substantially diverting or obstructing the natural flow of, or substantially changing or using any material from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river, stream, or lake, or from depositing certain material where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake, without first notifying the department of that activity, and entering into a lake or streambed alteration agreement if required by the department to protect fish and wildlife resources. This bill would authorize the department, or any other public agency, to propose a regional conservation investment strategy, to be developed in consultation with applicable local agencies that have land use authority, for the purpose of informing science-based nonbinding and voluntary conservation actions and habitat enhancement actions that would advance the conservation of focal species and providing voluntary nonbinding guidance for various activities. The bill would authorize the department to approve a regional conservation investment strategy only if one or more state agencies request approval of the strategy through a letter sent to the Director of Fish and Wildlife, as prescribed. The bill would require the strategy to contain specified information and would authorize the strategy to include a regional conservation assessment proposed by the department or any other public agency and approved by the department. The bill would authorize the department to approve a regional conservation investment strategy or amended strategy for an initial period of up to 10 years after a public meeting and a public comment period regarding the proposed strategy or amended strategy have been held and after it finds that the strategy meets certain requirements. The bill would authorize a conservation action and a habitat enhancement action that measurably advance the conservation objectives of an approved strategy and that meet other specified requirements to be used to create mitigation credits. The bill would authorize these mitigation credits to be used to fulfill compensatory mitigation requirements established under any state or federal environmental law, as determined by the applicable local, state, or federal regulatory agency, including compensatory mitigation requirements to compensate for take or other adverse impacts of activities authorized pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act, to reduce adverse impacts to fish or wildlife resources, or both, from activities authorized pursuant to a lake or streambed alteration agreement to less than substantial, or to mitigate significant effects on the environment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. To create these mitigation credits, the bill would require a person or entity to enter into a mitigation credit agreement with the department that meets specified requirements. The bill would prohibit the release of mitigation credits for use, sale, or transfer under a mitigation credit agreement unless the department approves the release in accordance with certain requirements. The bill would require the department to collect fees or other compensation from a person or entity that proposes to enter into a mitigation credit agreement, and from a public agency that proposes a strategy or a regional conservation assessment, to pay for all or a portion of the department's costs relating to the mitigation credit agreement, proposed strategy, or proposed regional conservation assessment. The bill would authorize the department to adopt guidelines and criteria to aid in the implementation of these provisions and would exempt the adoption of these guidelines and criteria from the Administrative Procedure Act. The bill would require the department to submit a report regarding the implementation of these provisions to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2020. The bill would prohibit the department from approving more than 8 regional conservation investment strategies before January 1, 2020, and would prohibit the department from approving a regional conservation investment strategy or regional conservation assessment on or after January 1, 2020, and from entering into a mitigation credit agreement on or after January 1, 2020.
Existing law authorizes the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District to jointly adopt a commute benefit ordinance that requires covered employers operating within the common area of the 2 agencies with a specified number of covered employees to offer those employees certain commute benefits through a pilot program. Existing law requires that the ordinance specify certain matters, including any consequences for noncompliance, and imposes a specified reporting requirement. Existing law makes these provisions inoperative on January 1, 2017. This bill would extend these provisions indefinitely, thereby establishing the pilot program permanently. The bill would also delete bicycle commuting as a pretax option under the program and instead would authorize a covered employer, at its discretion, to offer commuting by bicycling as an employer-paid benefit in addition to commuting via public transit or by vanpool. The bill would also delete the reporting requirement.
Existing law establishes the Department of Parks and Recreation and vests the department with the control of the state park system. Existing law authorizes the Director of Parks and Recreation to negotiate or renegotiate a concession contract within state parks if specified conditions exist and generally requires that a concession contract within state parks for a period of more than 2 years be awarded to the best responsible bidder. This bill would enact the California Heritage Protection Act, which would make various changes to the process for negotiating or renegotiating state parks concession contracts. The bill would modify the definition of a best responsible bidder to include that the bidder, among other things, will operate the concession in a manner that protects the state's trademark and service mark interest in the names associated with a state park venue and its historical, cultural, and recreational resources. This bill would prohibit a concession contract from providing a contracting party with a trademark or service mark interest in the name or names associated with a state park venue, or its historical, cultural, or recreational resources, and would prohibit a concession contract from serving as the basis for any legal claim that the contracting party has that interest. The bill would declare that these provisions do not constitute a change in, but are declaratory of, existing law. The bill would prohibit a bidder who makes that legal claim or assertion, and a bidder who a court has determined has made that legal claim or assertion with respect to a state or federal park venue without reasonable cause and in bad faith, from being awarded a concession contract within state parks. The bill would require the department to adopt regulations to provide a bidder who is denied a contract award based on these reasons with written notice and an opportunity to rebut the basis of the contract denial at a formal hearing. The bill would render a provision of a concession contract that, on and after January 1, 2017, provides a contracting party with a trademark or service mark interest in the name or names associated with a state park venue, or its historical, cultural, or recreational resources, void and unenforceable. This bill would require a concession contract to contain provisions requiring the concessionaire to forfeit the right to bid on future state park concession contracts if the concessionaire makes the above-described legal claim or assertion and requiring a concessionaire to be responsible for the state's attorney fees, costs, and expenses if the concessionaire in bad faith files a federal or state trademark or service mark application for a trademark or service mark that incorporates or implies association with a state park venue, or its historical, cultural, or recreational resources, and the state files a successful opposition or cancellation of the trademark or service mark application. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 5080.18 of the Public Resources Code proposed by SB 1473 to be operative only if SB 1473 and this bill are chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.