Asm. Rebecca Bauer-Kahan

Existing law makes it unlawful to produce, process, sell, offer to sell, or possess olive oil that indicates on its label "California Olive Oil," or uses similar words to indicate that California is the source of the oil, unless 100% of that oil is derived from olives grown in California. Existing law also requires that olive oil produced, processed, sold, offered for sale, given away, or possessed in California, that indicates on its label that it is from a specific region of California, be made of oil at least 85% of which, by weight, is derived from olives grown in that region. Existing law makes a violation of the requirements relating to the manufacture and marketing of olive oil a misdemeanor. This bill would also require a container of olive oil produced, processed, sold, offered for sale, given away, or possessed in California that includes "California" in any form on its principal display panel and contains olive oil derived from olives grown outside California to disclose the minimum percentage of olive oil in the container derived from olives grown in California. The bill would prescribe specific language to make the disclosure and require that it be in a font size that is no less than the largest used in the word "California." Because a violation of this requirement would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law, the California Marketing Act of 1937, authorizes the Department of Food and Agriculture to regulate the quality of commodities produced and handled in California by prohibiting the production and handling of commodities that fall below its minimum standards. Existing law makes a violation of a marketing order duly issued by the Secretary of Food and Agriculture pursuant to the act a misdemeanor. This bill would require any olive oil produced, processed, sold, offered for sale, given away, or possessed in California with a principal display panel that uses "California" to comply with the quality and purity standards published by the Department of Food and Agriculture, as specified. The bill would specify that this requirement is declaratory of existing law. 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 regulates automatic renewal offers and continuous service offers that businesses make to California consumers. Existing law makes it unlawful for a business that makes an automatic renewal offer or continuous service offer to a consumer in this state, among other things, to fail to present the automatic renewal or continuous service offer terms in a clear and conspicuous manner, to charge the consumer for an automatic renewal or continuous service without first obtaining the consumer's affirmative consent, and to fail to provide an acknowledgment that includes the automatic renewal or continuous service offer terms, cancellation policy, and information regarding how to cancel in a manner that is capable of being retained by the consumer, as specified. This bill would, beginning July 1, 2022, revise and recast these provisions to also make it unlawful for the business to fail to provide a consumer with a notice containing specified information if the consumer accepted a free gift or trial, lasting 31 or more days that was included in an automatic renewal offer or continuous service offer or accepted an automatic renewal offer or continuous service offer at a promotional or discounted price, and the applicability of that price was more than 31 days. In these circumstances, the bill would require the notice to be provided at least 3 days before and at most 21 days before the expiration of the period of time for which the free gift or trial, or promotional or discounted price, applies. This bill would also require the notice, as specified, if the consumer accepted an automatic renewal offer or continuous service offer with an initial term of one year or longer that automatically renews for a subsequent term that is longer than one month, unless the consumer cancels the contract. In these circumstances, the bill would require the notice to be provided at least 15 days and not more than 45 days before the automatic renewal offer or continuous service offer renews. The bill would provide that if both types of notice are warranted, only the notice provisions requiring notice at least 15 days and not more than 45 days before the automatic renewal offer or continuous service offer renews apply. If sent electronically, the bill would require the notice to include a link that directs the consumer to the cancellation process, or another reasonably accessible electronic method that directs the consumer to the cancellation process if no link exists. Under existing law, if a consumer accepts an automatic renewal or continuous service offer online, then the business is required to allow the consumer to terminate the offer exclusively online, which may include a termination email formatted and provided by the business. This bill would additionally require the business to allow a consumer to terminate the automatic renewal or continuous service offer at will, and without engaging any further steps that obstruct or delay the consumer's ability to terminate immediately. The bill would require the business to provide a method of termination that is either online in the form of a prominently located direct link or button to cancel or by a termination email, as provided. This bill would also authorize a business to require a consumer to enter account information or otherwise authenticate online before termination of the automatic renewal or continuous service online, provided that a consumer who is unwilling or unable to enter account information or otherwise authenticate online before termination is not precluded from authenticating or terminating offline using another method, as specified. The bill would authorize these requirements to be fulfilled after completion of an initial order.

Existing law establishes the Money Transmission Act to protect the interests of persons in this state who use money transmission services. The act prohibits a person from engaging in the business of money transmission in the state, as specified, unless the person is licensed or exempt from licensure. The act places various requirements on licensees, including requiring each licensee to give a customer a receipt containing specified information at the time of a money transmission transaction, and to post a notice on their premises informing individuals where complaints relating to money transmission activities at the location may be directed. This bill would, starting July 1, 2022, require a licensee to display on its internet website a toll-free telephone number through which a customer may contact the licensee for customer service issues and receive live customer assistance, and would specify the days and time that telephone line must be operative. The bill would require that telephone number to be included among the information contained in a receipt given to a customer at the time of a money transmission transaction.

(1) Existing law establishes the Multifamily Housing Program administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development. Existing law requires assistance for projects under the program to be provided in the form of deferred payment loans to pay for eligible costs of the development, as provided. Existing law also requires that funds appropriated in the 2020 Budget Act or an act related to the 2020 Budget Act, including moneys received from the Coronavirus Relief Fund established by the federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, to provide housing for individuals and families who are experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness and who are impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, be disbursed in accordance with the Multifamily Housing Program for specified uses, and provides that the above-described deferred payment loan requirement under the program does not apply to assistance provided pursuant to these provisions, as specified. Existing law, the Veterans Housing and Homeless Prevention Act of 2014, requires the California Housing Finance Agency, the Department of Housing and Community Development, and the Department of Veterans Affairs to establish and implement programs that focus on veterans at risk for homelessness or experiencing temporary or chronic homelessness, as specified. In this regard, existing law requires those departments to establish and implement programs that, among other things, prioritize projects that combine housing and supportive services. Existing law, the No Place Like Home Program, as ratified and amended by Proposition 2, which was approved by the voters at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election, provides funding to provide permanent supportive housing for the target population, which is defined to include individuals who have a serious mental disorder and who are homeless, chronically homeless, or at risk of chronic homelessness. Existing law authorizes the Legislature to amend Proposition 2 by a 23 vote, so long as the amendment is consistent with and furthers the intent of that measure. This bill would require, beginning January 1, 2023, that a grantee or entity operating specified state homelessness programs, including the No Place Like Home Program, as a condition of receiving state funds, to enter Universal Data Elements and Common Data Elements, as defined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Homeless Management Information System Data Standards, on the individuals and families it serves into its local Homeless Management Information System, unless otherwise exempted by state or federal law. The bill would require the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council to specify the format and disclosure frequency of the required data elements. The bill would apply the data entry requirements to all new state homelessness programs that commence on or after July 1, 2021. The bill would require the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council to provide technical assistance and guidance to any grantee or entity that operates a program subject to the bill, if the grantee or entity does not already collect and enter into the local Homeless Management Information System the data elements required. The bill would require the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council to provide the aggregate data summaries collected under these provisions to specified state agencies or departments within 45 days of receipt, as specified. Existing law creates the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council and requires it, among other things, to create a statewide data system or warehouse that collects local data through Homeless Management Information Systems, with the ultimate goal of matching data on homelessness to programs impacting homeless recipients of state programs. This bill would specify that the statewide data storage system described above be known as the Homeless Data Integration System and would grant staff of the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council specified powers in regard to its operation. The bill would require that a continuum of care, as defined in federal law, provide collected data elements, including health information, as specified, to the Homeless Data Integration System, and would except health information and personal identifying information from disclosure to the public. By imposing new duties on local entities to provide information to the state, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes the Legislature to amend Proposition 2 by a 23 vote, so long as the amendment is consistent with and furthers the intent of that measure. The bill would state the findings of the Legislature that these provisions are consistent with, and further the intent of, the No Place Like Home Act. (3) 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. 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. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 8256 and 8257 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 1220 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1220 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law establishes procedures for the formation of infrastructure financing districts, enhanced infrastructure financing districts, infrastructure and revitalization financing districts, community revitalization and investment authorities, and public-private partnerships, as specified, to undertake various economic development projects, including financing public facilities and infrastructure, affordable housing, and economic revitalization. This bill, until January 1, 2028, would authorize establishment of a Green Empowerment Zone for the Northern Waterfront area of the County of Contra Costa. The bill would authorize the Green Empowerment Zone to be composed of specified cities, upon adoption of a resolution by the city or county, and would provide for the Green Empowerment Zone to be governed by a board of directors. The bill would task the Green Empowerment Zone with various duties, including, among other things, identification of projects and programs that will best utilize public dollars and improve the economic vitality of the Northern Waterfront area of the County of Contra Costa in a coordinated effort to support the development of the clean energy economy. The bill would require the Green Empowerment Zone to create and maintain an internet website that is managed and updated by an entity designated by the board of directors, produce a report each year that includes recommendations for action by the Legislature and the progress of the zone, and post the report on its internet website, as specified. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Contra Costa

Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) , establishes the Department of Fair Employment and Housing within the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency and sets forth its powers and duties relating to enforcement of civil rights laws with respect to housing and employment and to protect and safeguard the right of all persons to obtain and hold employment without discrimination based on specified characteristics or status. Existing law grants the department the power to receive, investigate, conciliate, mediate, and prosecute complaints alleging unlawful employment practices. Existing law, the Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act, commonly known as the California Family Rights Act, which is a part of FEHA, makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer, as defined, to refuse to grant a request by an eligible employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period for family care and medical leave, as specified. Existing law defines family care and medical leave to include, among other things, leave to care for a parent. This bill would additionally include leave to care for a parent-in-law within the definition of family care and medical leave, and would make other conforming changes. Existing law requires the department to create a small employer family leave mediation pilot program, for alleged violations of these family care and medical leave provisions, applicable to employers with between 5 and 19 employees. Existing law authorizes the employer or the employee to request that all parties participate in mediation through the department's dispute resolution division after the department issues a right-to-sue notice. Existing law requires the department to initiate the mediation promptly following a request, prohibits an employee from pursuing a civil action until the mediation is complete, and tolls the statute of limitations for the employee, including for all related claims not subject to mediation, from the date of receipt of a request to participate in the program until the mediation is complete. Existing law repeals the pilot program on January 1, 2024. This bill would recast those provisions to require the department, when an employee requests an immediate right to sue alleging a violation of the above-described family care and medical leave provisions by an employer, to notify the employee in writing of the requirement for mediation prior to filing a civil action, if mediation is requested by the employer or employee. The bill would also require the employee to contact the department's dispute resolution division, in the manner specified by the department, prior to filing an action and to indicate whether they are requesting mediation. This bill would require the department, upon contacting the dispute resolution division regarding the intent to pursue a legal action for an employer's violation of the family and medical leave provisions, to notify all named respondents of the alleged violation and the requirement for mediation, if mediation is requested by the employee or employer, in writing. The bill would require the department to terminate its activity if neither the employee nor the employer requests mediation within 30 days of receipt by all named respondents of the notification, as specified. The bill would require the department, if it receives a request for mediation from the employer or employee within 30 days of receipt, as described above, to initiate the mediation within 60 days of the department's receipt of the request or the receipt of the notification by all named respondents, whichever is later. The bill would require the mediator, once mediation has been initiated and no later than 7 days before the mediation date, to notify the employee of their right to request certain labor-related information and to help facilitate other reasonable requests for information, as specified. The bill would prohibit the employee from pursuing a civil action unless the mediation is not initiated by the department within the time period prescribed above or until the mediation is complete or deemed unsuccessful. The bill would toll the statute of limitations applicable to the employee's claim from the date the employee contacts the department's dispute resolution division regarding the intent to pursue a legal action until the mediation is complete or deemed unsuccessful. This bill would entitle a respondent or defendant in a civil action that did not receive the required notification as a result of the employee's failure to contact the department's alternative dispute resolution prior to filing a civil action and who had 5 to 19 employees at the time that the alleged violation occurred, to a stay of any pending civil action or arbitration until the mediation is complete or deemed unsuccessful. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 12945.2 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1041 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1041 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city or a county to make, by ordinance, any violation of an ordinance subject to an administrative fine or penalty and limits the maximum fine or penalty amounts for infractions, to $100 for the first violation, $200 for a 2nd violation of the same ordinance within one year of the first violation, and $500 for each additional violation of the same ordinance within one year of the first violation. Existing law also sets specific monetary limits on the fines that may be imposed by city or county authorities for any violation of local building and safety codes that is an infraction, as prescribed. Existing law requires a city or county levying fines pursuant to these provisions to establish a process for granting a hardship waiver in certain cases. This bill would, notwithstanding those provisions and with certain exceptions, raise the maximum fines for violation of an ordinance relating to a residential short-term rental, as defined, that is an infraction and poses a threat to health or safety, to $1,500 for a first violation, $3,000 for a 2nd violation of the same ordinance within one year, and $5,000 for each additional violation of the same ordinance within one year of the first violation. The bill would make these violations subject to the process for granting a hardship waiver. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law establishes the Tri-Valley-San Joaquin Valley Regional Rail Authority for purposes of planning, developing, and delivering cost-effective and responsive transit connectivity, between the Bay Area Rapid Transit District's rapid transit system and the Altamont Corridor Express commuter rail service in the Tri-Valley, as defined, region of California. Existing law gives the authority all of the powers necessary for planning, acquiring, leasing, developing, jointly developing, owning, controlling, using, jointly using, disposing of, designing, procuring, and constructing facilities to achieve transit connectivity, including, among other powers, the power to enter into cooperative or joint development agreements with local governments or private entities necessary to achieve transit connectivity. This bill would require the authority to be considered a rail transit district, thereby exempting the authority from specified provisions related to regulation by counties and cities regarding building, zoning, and related matters.

(1) Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, which is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, regulates the application, issuance, and suspension of alcoholic beverage licenses. Existing law defines a licensed branch office with reference to certain winegrower and brandy manufacturer facilities for which a duplicate license has been issued. Existing law prohibits a winegrower or brandy manufacturer from selling wine or brandy to consumers, or engaging in winetasting activities, at more than one licensed branch premise. Existing law limits the effect of this prohibition in connection with other premises, as specified. Existing law generally provides that a violation of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act is a misdemeanor. This bill would revise the prohibition described above to allow a winegrower or brandy manufacturer to sell wine or brandy to consumers, or to engage in winetasting activities, at up to 2 licensed branch premises. By broadening the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also make technical, clarifying changes. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act also provides for application fees for a new license, not including a duplicate license, and for various annual renewal fees, depending on the type of license, including an annual fee for the renewal of a duplicate winegrower's license. The bill would provide for an application fee of $440 for a duplicate winegrower's license application. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Under existing law, the State Water Resources Control Board and the California regional water quality control boards prescribe waste discharge requirements for the discharge of stormwater by municipalities and industries in accordance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Existing law requires regulated municipalities and industries to obtain a stormwater permit. The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 provides the authority and procedure for the initiation, conduct, and completion of changes of organization, reorganization, and sphere of influence changes for cities and districts, as specified. This bill would authorize a municipal wastewater agency, as defined, to enter into agreements with entities responsible for stormwater management for the purpose of managing stormwater and dry weather runoff, as defined, to acquire, construct, expand, operate, maintain, and provide facilities for specified purposes relating to managing stormwater and dry weather runoff, and to levy taxes, fees, and charges consistent with the municipal wastewater agency's existing authority in order to fund projects undertaken pursuant to the bill. The bill would require the exercise of any new authority granted under the bill to comply with the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. The bill would require a municipal wastewater agency that enters into or amends one of these agreements after January 1, 2022, to file a copy of the agreement or amendment with the local agency formation commission in each county where any part of the municipal wastewater agency's territory is located, but would exempt those agreements and amendments from local agency formation commission approval except as required by the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. To the extent this requirement would impose new duties on local agency formation commissions, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.