Asm. David Chiu

The State Bar Act provides for the licensure and regulation of attorneys by the State Bar of California, a public corporation governed by a board of trustees. That act requires 6 members of the 19-member board to be attorneys elected from State Bar Districts. That act requires protection of the public to be the highest priority for the State Bar and the board of trustees in exercising their licensing, regulatory, and disciplinary functions and requires protection of the public to be paramount whenever the protection of the public is inconsistent with any other interest sought to be promoted. That act prohibits the State Bar from awarding a contract for goods, services, or both, for an aggregate amount in excess of $50,000, or for information technology goods, services, or both, for an aggregate amount in excess of $100,000, except pursuant to specified public contracting provisions. That act provides that the State Bar is subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act and the California Public Records Act, as specified. That act, until January 1, 2017, requires the board to charge an annual membership fee for active members of up to $315 for 2016. The act requires the board of trustees to elect or select the president, vice president, and treasurer of the State Bar, as specified. Existing law prohibits the Legislature, when the board of trustees places a charge upon or otherwise makes available all or any portion of the income or revenue from membership fees for the payment of security of an obligation of the State Bar and so long as any obligation remains unpaid, from reducing the maximum membership fee below the maximum in effect at the time the obligation is created or incurred and provides that this provision constitutes a covenant to the holder of such an obligation. The act requires the board of trustees to contract with the California State Auditor's Office to conduct a performance audit of the State Bar's operations, as specified. That act establishes the State Bar Court to act in the place of the board of trustees in the determination of disciplinary proceedings, as specified. That act authorizes the State Bar to raise additional revenue by any lawful means, including, but not limited to, the creation of foundations or not-for-profit corporations. That act requires the board to establish and administer a Client Security Fund to relieve or mitigate pecuniary losses caused by dishonest conduct of active members of the State Bar, as specified. This bill would provide that the board of trustees consists of no more than 19 members and no fewer than 13 members and would require the board to transition to a 13-member board, as specified. The bill would remove from the board attorney members elected from State Bar Districts and would make conforming changes. The bill would require each appointing authority, when making appointments to the board after December 31, 2016, to consider appointing members who have demonstrated education or experience, or both, in one of 6 specified areas, including public finance. The bill would require that a minimum of 7 members of the board be public members, as appointed by specified entities, and would require members of the board to serve a term of 4 years. The bill would require the California Supreme Court to review the substance of any anticompetitive decision made by the board and specifies that California Supreme Court has the power to veto, modify, or take other appropriate actions over those decisions. The bill would require the California Supreme Court to select from the members of the board a chair and vice chair of the State Bar and would require the chair's term to be 2 years. This bill would require protection of the public as the highest priority for the State Bar and set the priority of the regulatory functions of the State Bar, as specified. This bill would require the Attorney General to appoint a State Bar enforcement program monitor prior to March 31, 2017, and would require the enforcement program monitor to evaluate the disciplinary system and procedures of the State Bar, as specified. The bill would require the enforcement program monitor to submit an initial report no later than October 1, 2019, and to issue a final report before March 31, 2020. The bill would make these provisions inoperative on March 31, 2020, and would repeal the provisions as of January 1, 2021. This bill would require the board of trustees to engage the services of an independent national or regional public accounting firm with at least 5 years of experience in governmental auditing for an audit of its revenues, expenditures, reserves, and its financial statements for each fiscal year and would require the California State Auditor, for the performance audit due in January 2017, to review all of the State Bar's expenses, including, but not limited to, executive salaries, and would require that audit to also include a recommendation by the California State Auditor of the appropriate methodology for the State Bar to calculate the portion of administrative costs that are appropriately allocated to the sections of the State Bar. The bill would also require the California State Auditor to conduct a performance audit evaluating the State Bar's progress in certain areas, including correcting any issues raised in prior California State Auditor audits, and would require the California State Auditor to report its findings and recommendations, as specified. This bill would provide that access to records of the State Bar Court is subject to the rules and laws applicable to the judiciary instead of the California Public Records Act and would exempt the State Bar Court from the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act. This bill would allow, beginning on and after January 1, 2016, the disclosure of specified information submitted by an applicant to the State Bar for admission and license to practice. This bill, until January 1, 2018, would require the board to charge an annual membership fee in a specified amount for 2017. The bill would repeal the provision prohibiting the Legislature from reducing the maximum membership fee and would prohibit the State Bar from creating any foundation or nonprofit corporations, as specified. The bill would require the State Bar to conduct a thorough analysis of the Client Security Fund and to submit a report to the Legislature on its analysis of that fund by March 15, 2017, as specified. 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.

(1) Existing law generally prohibits the possession or transfer of assault weapons, except for the sale, purchase, importation, or possession of assault weapons by specified individuals, including law enforcement officers. Under existing law, "assault weapon" means, among other things, a semiautomatic centerfire rifle or a semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has any one of specified attributes, including, for rifles, a thumbhole stock, and for pistols, a 2nd handgrip. This bill would revise this definition of "assault weapon" to mean a semiautomatic centerfire rifle or a semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of those specified attributes. The bill would also define "fixed magazine" to mean an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the firearm action. By expanding the definition of an existing crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law makes any person who, within this state, possesses an assault weapon, except as otherwise provided, guilty of a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would exempt from punishment under that prohibition a person who possessed an assault weapon prior to January 1, 2017, if specified requirements are met. (3) Existing law requires that, with specified exceptions, any person who, prior to January 1, 2001, lawfully possessed an assault weapon prior to the date it was defined as an assault weapon, and which was not specified as an assault weapon at the time of lawful possession, register the firearm with the Department of Justice. Existing law permits the Department of Justice to charge a fee for registration of up to $20 per person but not to exceed the actual processing costs of the department. Existing law, after the department establishes fees sufficient to reimburse the department for processing costs, requires fees charged to increase at a rate not to exceed the legislatively approved annual cost-of-living adjustment for the department's budget or as otherwise increased through the Budget Act. Existing law requires those fees to be deposited into the Dealers' Record of Sale Special Account. Existing law, the Administrative Procedure Act, establishes the requirements for the adoption, publication, review, and implementation of regulations by state agencies. This bill would require that any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool, register the firearm with the Department of Justice before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of specified regulations. The bill would permit the department to increase the $20 registration fee as long as it does not exceed the reasonable processing costs of the department. The bill would also require registrations to be submitted electronically via the Internet utilizing a public-facing application made available by the department. The bill would require the registration to contain specified information, including, but not limited to, a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely and specified information about the registrant. The bill would permit the department to charge a fee of up to $15 per person for registration through the Internet, not to exceed the reasonable processing costs of the department to be paid and deposited, as specified, for purposes of the registration program. The bill would require the department to adopt regulations for the purpose of implementing those provisions and would exempt those regulations from the Administrative Procedure Act. The bill would also make technical and conforming changes. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (5) This bill would become operative only if SB 880 of the 2015–16 Regular Session is enacted and takes effect on or before January 1, 2017.

This measure would urge the United States Department of Transportation, Department of Energy, and the Office of Management and Budget to expedite the rulemaking and implementation processes for federal safety regulations governing the transport by rail of flammable and combustible liquids, including crude oil, and would also urge the President and the Congress of the United States to pass specified federal legislation mandating public safety measures regulating the transport by rail of those liquids.

Existing law provides for the Department of Motor Vehicles to register vehicles used on the public streets and highways and to verify insurance coverage. Existing law provides for the Public Utilities Commission to regulate certain classes of passenger carriers, including charter-party carriers of passengers and passenger stage corporations, and to issue certificates or permits in that regard. Existing law requires the Department of the California Highway Patrol to regulate the safe operation of certain classes of vehicles, including buses and modified limousines. Existing law requires charter-party carriers of passengers and passenger stage corporations to report the vehicles they use in their operations to the commission. A violation of provisions governing charter-party carriers of passengers and passenger stage corporations is a crime. This bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles, in issuing or renewing a commercial vehicle registration, to require the owner of a bus, limousine, or modified limousine used by a charter-party carrier of passengers or a passenger stage corporation to disclose the name of the carrier or corporation that will be using the vehicle in its operations. The bill would require the Public Utilities Commission, in collaboration with the Department of Motor Vehicles, to annually verify that the buses, limousines, and modified limousines used by a carrier or corporation have been reported to the commission by the carrier or corporation, would require the carriers and corporations to provide the commission with vehicle registration information for each vehicle, and would prohibit the commission from issuing or renewing a noncompliant carrier's or corporation's permit, certificate, or authority. The bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to notify the Public Utilities Commission when a charter-party carrier of passengers or a passenger stage corporation first registers a bus, limousine, or modified limousine with the department, and to provide information to the commission that will allow the commission to identify the vehicle. The bill would require the commission, with respect to those newly registered buses, limousines, or modified limousines, to ensure that the vehicles meet all statutory and regulatory requirements for safe operation. The bill, upon the commission becoming aware of a bus, limousine, or modified limousine of a charter-party carrier of passengers or a passenger stage corporation that has not been reported to the commission by the carrier or corporation, would require the commission to immediately take steps to require the carrier or corporation to update its reporting of vehicles to the commission and to request the Department of the California Highway Patrol to conduct a safety inspection of the vehicle. All of these provisions of the bill would become operative on January 1, 2018. Because a violation of certain provisions of the bill 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 Barbering and Cosmetology Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of the practices of barbering, cosmetology, and electrolysis by the State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology. Existing law also requires any person, firm, or corporation operating an establishment where any activity licensed under the act is practiced to apply to the board for a license. Existing law requires protection of the public to be the highest priority for the board in exercising its licensing, regulatory, and disciplinary functions. Under existing law, whenever the protection of the public is inconsistent with other interests sought to be promoted, the protection of the public is required to be paramount. Under existing law, the board is authorized to assess administrative fines for a violation of the act or a violation of any rules and regulations adopted by the board pursuant to the act. Existing law requires the board to establish by regulation a schedule of administrative fines for violations of the act. This bill would require the board to determine by regulation when a fine is required to be assessed against both the holder of the establishment license and the individual licensee for the same violation. The bill would also require the board to determine by regulation when a fine shall be assessed to only the holder of the establishment license or to only an individual licensee for the same violation. In making these determinations, the bill would require the board to consider specified factors. Existing law requires the board to issue a citation with respect to any violation for which an administrative fine is authorized to be assessed. Existing law requires these citations to be in writing and to describe with particularity the nature of the violation alleged to have occurred. Under existing law, the administrative fine, if any, is required to be attached at the time the citation is written. The bill would authorize the board to enter into a payment plan for citations with administrative fines exceeding $500. The bill would require the board to define by regulation the parameters of the payment plans, as specified. Existing law prohibits issuing a license to, or renewing any issued licenses of, persons who fail to pay administrative fines that were not contested or were contested but the appeal has been adjudicated, until all fines are paid in addition to any application, renewal, or delinquency fees which are required. The bill would instead authorize making the issuance of a license to, or the renewal of a license of, a person who fails to pay administrative fines that were not contested or that were contested but the appeal has been adjudicated contingent upon all fines being paid in addition to any application, renewal, or delinquency fees which are required.

Existing law, the Barbering and Cosmetology Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of barbers, cosmetologists, estheticians, manicurists, electrologists, and apprentices by the State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology. The act requires the licensure of any person, firm, or corporation operating an establishment engaged in a practice regulated by the board, as specified, and requires a licensed establishment to comply with various requirements. A violation of the Barbering and Cosmetology Act is generally a misdemeanor. Existing law declares that every gratuity, as defined, is the sole property of the employee or employees to whom it was paid, given, or left for. Existing law prohibits an employer from collecting, taking, or receiving any gratuity, or part thereof, that is paid, given to, or left for an employee by a patron, from deducting any amount from wages due an employee on account of a gratuity, or requiring an employee to credit the amount, or any part thereof, of a gratuity against and as part of the wages due an employee. Existing law also requires an employer that permits patrons to pay gratuities by credit card to pay the employee the full amount of the gratuity without any deductions for any credit card payment processing or costs, and to pay a gratuity made by a patron using a credit card to an employee not later than the next regular payday. This bill would require an establishment offering nail care services, if it accepts a debit or credit card as payment for nail care services, to also accept a debit or credit card for payment of a tip or gratuity, consistent with the above existing law regarding gratuities. By expanding the scope of the criminal penalty provisions of the Barbering and Cosmetology Act, 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 measure would proclaim August 8, 2016, to August 12, 2016, inclusive, as Concrete Pipe Week.

This measure would proclaim April 12, 2016, as Equal Pay Day in recognition of the need to eliminate the gender gap in earnings by women and to promote policies to ensure equal pay for all.

Under existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control through the Director of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Existing law authorizes the department to issue a special on-sale general license to the operator of any for-profit theater located within the City and County of San Francisco, as specified. Existing law prohibits that special on-sale general license from being issued until any existing licenses issued by the department to the operator for the premises of the for-profit theater are canceled. This bill would delete that prohibition. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.