Asm. Rebecca Bauer-Kahan

Existing law subjects a person between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who commits a crime, and a person under 12 years of age who commits specified crimes, to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge that person to be a ward of the court. Existing law authorizes a probation officer, in certain circumstances, to delineate a specific program of supervision for a minor who is alleged to have committed a crime. Existing law makes a minor ineligible for that program of supervision for specified reasons, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which the restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000, except in those unusual cases in where the interest of justice would best be served. This bill would instead prohibit a minor from participating in a program of supervision if the minor has committed an offense in which the restitution owed exceeds $5,000. Upon receipt of an application to commence proceedings in the juvenile court, as specified, existing law requires a probation officer to make any investigation the officer deems necessary to determine whether proceedings in the juvenile court should be commenced. Existing law requires the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor has been referred to the probation officer for specified offenses, including if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $1,000. This bill would instead require the probation officer to commence proceedings within 48 hours if the minor is alleged to have committed an offense in which restitution owed to the victim exceeds $5,000.

Existing law establishes the Office of the State Fire Marshal in the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and requires the office to aid in the enforcement of specified laws and ordinances relating to fires or fire prevention and protection. Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to prepare and adopt rules and regulations establishing minimum requirements for the prevention of fire and panic in connection with the use of tents, awnings, or other fabric enclosures. Existing law provides that it is unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to establish, maintain, or operate a specified event in or under which 10 or more persons may gather for any lawful purpose in any tent, awning, or other fabric enclosure unless a tent, awning, or other fabric enclosure, and all auxiliary tents, curtains, drops, awnings, and all decorative materials, are made from a nonflammable material or are treated and maintained in a flame-retardant condition. Existing law provides specified exceptions to the above-described provision. This bill would instead apply the above-described requirement relating to tents to a gathering of 15 or more persons. The bill would expand the exceptions to the above-described requirement by including any tent designed or manufactured for children's play, camping, backpacking, or mountaineering. Existing law provides that it is unlawful for any person to sell or offer for sale any tent designed and intended for use for occupancy by less than 10 persons unless the tent is made from flame-retardant fabrics or materials approved by the State Fire Marshal. Existing law requires all tents manufactured for sale in this state to be flame retardant, as provided. This bill would instead provide that it is unlawful for any person to manufacture, sell, or offer for sale any tent designed and intended for use for occupancy by less than 15 persons unless the tent is made from flame-retardant fabrics, as provided. The bill would, for purposes of this provision, provide that a tent that is constructed with fabric entirely from synthetic fibers shall be classified as being made from flame-retardant fabrics or materials. The bill would delete the requirement that all tents manufactured for sale in this state be flame retardant, as provided.

Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, establishes the Medical Board of California within the Department of Consumer Affairs and sets forth its powers and duties relating to the licensure and regulation of the practice of medicine by physicians and surgeons. Existing law generally prohibits the practice of medicine without a physician's and surgeon's certificate issued by the board. Existing law authorizes a health care provider to deliver health care via telehealth to a patient pursuant to specified protocols and conditions. Existing law defines "telehealth" as the delivery of health care services and public health via information and communication technologies to facilitate the diagnosis, consultation, treatment, education, care management, and self-management of a patient's health care, and that telehealth includes synchronous interactions and asynchronous store and forward transfers. Under this bill, the David Hall Act, a person licensed as a physician and surgeon in another state, as specified, would be authorized to deliver health care via telehealth to an eligible patient who, among other requirements, has an immediately life-threatening disease or condition, as specified.

Existing law makes it unlawful for any owner or operator of a motel, motor court, or like establishment to post or maintain outdoor advertising signs relating to room rates that has any untrue, misleading, false, or fraudulent representations, and specified other requirements on outdoor signs for those establishments. Existing law also prohibits an owner or operator of a hotel or motel from increasing the hotel or motel's rates upon the proclamation of a state of emergency by the President of the United States or the Governor or upon the declaration of a local emergency, as specified. This bill would prohibit a place of short-term lodging, as defined, from advertising or offering a room rate that does not include all fees or charges required to stay at the short-term lodging except taxes and fees imposed by a government on the stay, as specified. The bill would also require a place of short-term lodging to include in the total price to be paid, before the consumer reserves a stay, all taxes and fees imposed by a government on the stay. The bill would make a violation of those provisions subject to a specified civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 and would authorize an action to enforce those provisions to be brought by a city attorney, district attorney, county counsel, or the Attorney General. The bill would make the bill's provisions operative on July 1, 2024.

Existing law voids contractual provisions by which a person is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind, except as otherwise provided. Existing case law, as established in the case of Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP (2008) 44 Cal.4th 937, interprets this provision to void noncompete agreements in an employment context and noncompete clauses within employment contracts, even if that agreement is narrowly tailored, unless an exception applies. Existing law, the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) , makes various practices unlawful and makes a person who engages in unfair competition liable for a civil penalty, as specified. Existing law provides for enforcement of these provisions exclusively by the Attorney General or other specified local agency attorneys. This bill would codify existing case law by specifying that the statutory provision voiding noncompete contracts is to be broadly construed to void the application of any noncompete agreement in an employment context, or any noncompete clause in an employment contract, no matter how narrowly tailored, that does not satisfy specified exceptions. The bill would state that this provision is declaratory of existing law. The bill would make these provisions applicable to contracts where the person being restrained is not a party to the contract. This bill would also make it unlawful to include a noncompete clause in an employment contract, or to require an employee to enter a noncompete agreement, that does not satisfy specified exceptions. The bill would require employers to notify current and former employees in writing by February 14, 2024, that the noncompete clause or agreement is void, as specified. This bill would make a violation of these provisions an act of unfair competition pursuant to the UCL.

Existing law, until January 1, 2028, and subject to specified exceptions, requires a social media platform, as defined, that operates in the state to create and publicly post a policy statement that includes, among other things, the social media platform's policy on the use of the social media platform to illegally distribute a controlled substance, as defined, and a link to the social media platform's reporting mechanism for illegal or harmful content or behavior if one exists. Existing law requires a social media platform with 1,000,000 or more discrete monthly users to clearly and conspicuously state whether it has a mechanism for reporting violent posts, as defined, that is available to users and nonusers of the platform. Existing law authorizes a person who is the target of a violent post, or reasonably believes the person is the target of a violent post, to seek an order requiring the social media platform to remove the violent post and any related violent post the court determines shall be removed in the interests of justice, as prescribed. This bill would authorize a person to seek an order requiring a social media platform to remove content that includes an offer to transport, import into this state, sell, furnish, administer, or give away a controlled substance in violation of specified law, as prescribed.

Existing law establishes the State Water Resources Control Board within the California Environmental Protection Agency. Existing law provides generally for the appropriation of water. Existing law authorizes the board to investigate bodies of water, to take testimony in regard to the rights to water or the use of water, and to ascertain whether or not water is appropriated lawfully, as provided. Under existing law, the diversion or use of water other than as authorized by specified provisions of law is a trespass, subject to specified civil liability. This bill would instead authorize the board to investigate and ascertain whether or not a water right is valid. The bill would authorize the board to issue an information order in furtherance of an investigation, as executed by the executive director of the board, as specified. The bill would authorize a diversion or use of water ascertained to be unauthorized to be enforced as a trespass, as specified.

Existing law, added by the Governor's Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1991, creates the Department of Pesticide Regulation, which is administered by the Director of Pesticide Regulation. Existing law requires the director to endeavor to eliminate from use a pesticide that endangers the agricultural or nonagricultural environment. Existing law requires pesticides to be registered by the department, and requires that a pesticide be thoroughly evaluated prior to registration. Existing law provides for the continued evaluation of registered pesticides. Existing law requires the department, by July 1, 2018, to issue a determination with respect to its reevaluation of neonicotinoids and to adopt any control measures necessary to protect pollinator health within 2 years after making that determination. Existing law provides that every person who violates a provision of any of certain laws relating to pesticides, or a regulation issued pursuant to any of those laws, is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by specified fines or by imprisonment of not more than 6 months, or both. This bill, beginning January 1, 2025, would prohibit a person from selling, possessing, or using a pesticide containing one or more neonicotinoid pesticides, as defined, for any nonagricultural use on nonproduction outdoor ornamental plants, trees, or turf, except as provided. The bill would require the department to evaluate, taking into account relevant routes of exposure, the potential impacts of those neonicotinoid pesticide uses on pollinating insects, aquatic organisms, and human health. The bill would require the department, among other things, to issue a determination on those impacts on or before July 1, 2027, and adopt necessary control measures for the use of neonicotinoid pesticides on or before July 1, 2029. Because the adoption of control measures for the use of neonicotinoid pesticides would require regulations, and a violation of those regulations and the above-described prohibition of the sale, possession, and use of neonicotinoid pesticides would be 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the Menstrual Equity for All Act of 2021, requires a public school, as provided, maintaining any combination of classes from grades 6 to 12, inclusive, to stock the school's restrooms with an adequate supply of free menstrual products, as defined, available and accessible, free of cost, in all women's restrooms and all-gender restrooms, and in at least one men's restroom, at all times, and to post a certain notice, on or before the start of the 2022–23 school year, as prescribed. This bill would extend these requirements, commencing on or before the start of the 2024–25 school year, to instead apply to public schools maintaining any combination of classes from grades 3 to 12, inclusive. By imposing new duties on local educational agencies, 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.

Existing law, the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, establishes the Veterinary Medical Board within the Department of Consumer Affairs for the licensure and regulation of veterinarians and the practice of veterinary medicine. Existing law specifies that a violation of the act is a crime. The act prohibits any person from practicing veterinary medicine, as defined, without a license. The act authorizes the board to deny, revoke, or suspend a license or registration or assess a fine for, among other things, violation of a regulation adopted by the board and unprofessional conduct, as specified. A regulation adopted by the board makes it unprofessional conduct to provide specified treatment of an animal without having first established a veterinarian-client-patient relationship, as specified. That regulation also prohibits a person from practicing veterinary medicine in this state outside the context of a veterinarian-client-patient relationship or as otherwise permitted by law. This bill similarly would prohibit the practice of veterinary medicine outside the context of a veterinarian-client-patient relationship, as defined, except as specified. Existing administrative law requires telemedicine to be conducted within an existing veterinarian-client-patient relationship, with the exception for advice given in an emergency, as specified, and defines "telemedicine" to mean the mode of delivering animal health care services via communication technologies to facilitate consultation, treatment, and care management of the patient. This bill similarly would authorize a licensee to practice veterinary medicine via telehealth, as prescribed. The bill would require a veterinarian who practices veterinary medicine via telehealth, among other things, to employ sound professional judgment to determine whether using telehealth is an appropriate method for delivering medical advice or treatment to the animal patient and providing quality of care consistent with prevailing veterinary medical practice, be familiar with available medical resources, be able to provide the client with a list of nearby veterinarians who may be able to see the animal patient in person upon the request of the client, keep, maintain, and make an animal patient record summary available, provide the client with information about the veterinarian, and secure an alternative means of contacting the client if the electronic means is interrupted, as specified. The bill would also define the term "client" for purposes of the act and make other conforming changes. Existing law requires all veterinary premises to be registered with the board. Existing law defines "premises" for these purposes as inclusive of mobile units or vehicles, but exempts them from independent registration with the board if they are operated from a building or facility that is the licensee manager's principal place of business, the building is registered with the board, and the registration identifies and declares the use of the mobile unit or vehicle. Existing law specifies that the registration of veterinary premises is nontransferable and requires that, in the event of change of an owner or operator of the premises, the premises registration holder notify the board within 30 days after the change. This bill would exempt the location where a veterinarian practices telehealth from the requirement that it be registered if specified conditions are met, including, among other things, that the veterinarian does not perform any in-person examination or treatment of animal patients at that location. Because the bill would impose new requirements and prohibitions under the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, the violation of which is 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.