Asm. Matt Haney

(1) 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 generally authorizes a health care service plan or disability insurer to use utilization review, under which a licensed physician or a licensed health care professional who is competent to evaluate specific clinical issues may approve, modify, delay, or deny requests for health care services based on medical necessity. Existing law requires these decisions to be made within 30 days, or less than 72 hours when the enrollee faces an imminent and serious threat to their health. Existing law requires a health care service plan to establish a grievance system to resolve grievances within 30 days, but limits that timeframe to 3 days when the enrollee faces an imminent and serious threat to their health. Existing law requires a plan to provide a written explanation for its grievance decisions, as specified. This bill would require that utilization review decisions be made within 72 hours from the health care service plan's receipt of the clinical information reasonably necessary to make the determination when the enrollee's condition is urgent. If the plan lacks the information reasonably necessary to make a decision regarding an urgent request, the bill would require the plan to notify the enrollee and provider about the information necessary to complete the request within 24 hours of receiving the request. The bill would require the plan to notify the enrollee and the provider of the decision within a reasonable amount of time, but not later than 48 hours after specified circumstances occur. If a health care service plan fails to make a utilization review decision, or provide notice of a decision, within the specified timelines, the bill would require the health care service plan to treat the request for authorization as a grievance and provide notice with specified information to the enrollee that a grievance has commenced, if the plan has received the information necessary to make a decision. This bill would require a plan's grievance system to include expedited review of urgent grievances, as specified. The bill would require a plan to communicate its final grievance determination within 72 hours of receipt if urgent and 30 days if nonurgent, except as specified. If a plan fails to make a utilization review decision within the applicable timelines, the bill would require a grievance to be automatically resolved in favor of the enrollee, except in specified circumstances. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law establishes the Independent Medical Review System in the Department of Managed Health Care to review grievances involving a disputed health care service. Existing law authorizes an enrollee to apply to the department for an independent medical review of a decision regarding health care services based in whole or in part on a finding that the disputed services are not medically necessary within 6 months of any specified qualifying periods and authorizes the director to extend that deadline if the circumstances of a case warrant the extension. This bill would extend the above deadline to 12 months beyond the specified qualifying periods. The bill would require the plan to provide specified correspondence and documents to an enrollee and their representative, if applicable, if the enrollee has submitted a grievance for review under the Independent Medical Review System. The bill would require the department to provide an enrollee and their representative a reasonable opportunity to respond to communications between the department and the plan before the grievance is resolved. The bill would prohibit the department and its independent medical review organization from engaging in ex parte communication with a plan, enrollee, or their representatives during the grievance process, except as specified. (3) Existing law provides for the regulation of disability insurers, including health insurers, by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires a disability insurer, including an insurer that delegates utilization review or utilization management functions to medical groups, independent practice associations, or other contracting providers, to comply with specified requirements and limitations on their utilization review or utilization management functions. Existing law requires a decision to approve, modify, or deny a request by a provider before, or concurrent with, the provision of health care services to insureds to be made no more than 5 business days from the insurer's receipt of information necessary to make the determination. If the insured's condition poses an imminent and serious threat to the insured's health, existing law requires the decision to be made within no more than 72 hours. Existing law requires a decision to be communicated to the requesting provider within 24 hours of the decision, but requires a decision resulting in denial, delay, or modification of all or part of the requested health care service to be communicated within 2 business days, except as specified. This bill would limit the applicability of the above-described provisions to health insurers. The bill would require a decision to approve, modify, or deny a request by a provider before the provision of health care services to be communicated no more than 5 business days from the health insurer's receipt of the request. If the insurer lacks information reasonably necessary to make the decision, the bill would require the insurer to notify the insured and provider within 5 business days from receipt of request and to afford the insured and provider at least 45 days from receipt of that notice to provide the information. If the insured's condition is urgent, as defined, the bill would require a decision to approve, modify, or deny a request by a provider before, or concurrent with, the provision of health care services to be communicated no more than 72 hours from the insurer's receipt of the request. If the insurer lacks information reasonably necessary to make the decision, the bill would require the insurer to notify the insured and provider no later than 24 hours from receipt of request and to afford the insured and provider at least 48 hours from receipt of that notice to provide the information. The bill would require an insurer to communicate a decision to modify or deny a concurrent care request, as specified, within 24 hours from the insurer's receipt of the request. If an insurer fails to provide notice of a decision, the bill would require an insurer to treat the request as a grievance and immediately notify the insured and provider that a grievance has commenced, if the insurer has received the information necessary to make a decision. (4) Existing law establishes the Independent Medical Review System in the department to review grievances involving a disputed health care service. Existing law requires a disability insurance policy issued, amended, renewed, or delivered on or after January 1, 2000, to provide an insured with the opportunity to seek an independent medical review when health care services have been denied, modified, or delayed if the decision was based in whole or in part on a finding that the proposed health care services are not medically necessary. Existing law authorizes an insured to apply to the department for an independent medical review when specified conditions are met. If a grievance is filed internally with an insurer, this bill would require an insurer to acknowledge receipt of the grievance within 24 hours of receipt if urgent and 5 calendar days if nonurgent, and then communicate its final grievance determination within 72 hours of receipt if urgent and 30 days if nonurgent. Upon notice from the department to a health insurer that an insured has submitted a complaint to the department, the bill would require an insurer to respond within 24 hours if a complaint is urgent, or within 5 calendar days regarding a nonurgent complaint. This bill would require the department to determine whether or not a complaint is urgent, as specified, unless the insured's provider has already designated the complaint as urgent. The bill would require the insurer to offer to provide specified correspondence and documents to an insured and their representative, if applicable, if the insured has submitted a complaint or independent medical review case to the department. The bill would require the department to provide an insured and their representative a reasonable opportunity to respond to communications between the department and the insurer before the grievance is resolved. The bill would prohibit an insurer from engaging in ex parte communication with the independent medical review organization deciding a case. (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.

Existing law requires any person that sells firefighter personal protective equipment to provide written notice to the purchaser if the equipment contains intentionally added perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) . Existing law requires the seller to retain a copy of the written notice and provide the notice to specified law enforcement entities, including the Attorney General, upon request. Existing law makes a violation of those provisions subject to a penalty of up to $5,000 for a first violation and up to $10,000 for a subsequent violation. This bill, commencing July 1, 2026, would prohibit a person from manufacturing, knowingly selling, offering for sale, distributing for sale, distributing for use, or purchasing or accepting for future use in this state firefighter personal protective equipment containing intentionally added PFAS chemicals. The bill would make a violation of this provision subject to the civil penalty provisions described above. The bill would specify that an individual firefighter shall not be personally liable for payment of the civil penalty. Existing law requires the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, in consultation with the Department of Industrial Relations, every 5 years, as specified, to review all revisions to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards pertaining to personal protective equipment covered by specified safety orders. If the review finds the revisions provide a greater degree of personal protection than the safety orders, existing law requires the board to consider modifying existing safety orders and to render a decision regarding changing safety orders or other standards and regulations to maintain alignment of the safety orders with the NFPA standards no later than July 1 of the subsequent year. This bill would require the board, in consultation with the department, within one year of the NFPA updating a specified standard on protective ensemble for structural firefighting and proximity firefighting to include PFAS-free turnout gear, to update the applicable safety orders, or other standards or regulations, to maintain alignment with the NFPA standard. The bill would state related findings and declarations of the Legislature.

Existing law, the Displaced Janitor Opportunity Act, requires contractors and subcontractors, as defined, that are awarded contracts or subcontracts, on and after January 1, 2002, for janitorial or building maintenance services at a particular job site or sites, to retain, for a period of 60 days, certain employees who were employed at that site by the previous contractor or subcontractor. Under the act, a "contractor" means any person that employees 25 or more individuals and that enters into a service contract with the awarding authority. Existing law requires employees retained for that 60-day period to be offered continued employment if their performance during that 60-day period is satisfactory. This bill would, instead, define the term "contractor" to mean any person that employs janitor employees and that enters into a service contract with the awarding authority. The bill would make related changes to various definitions used in the act. This bill would extend the above-described timeframe for which a successor contractor or subcontractor is required to retain employees of a terminated contractor or subcontractor to 90 days. The bill would require the successor contractor or subcontractor, during the 90-day transition period, to maintain a preferential hiring list of eligible covered employees by seniority within job classifications. The bill would also require employees retained for the 90-day period to be offered continued employment if their performance during that 90-day period is satisfactory. The bill would require that offer to be contemporaneously shared with the union representing the employees, if applicable. Among other changes, the bill would require an awarding authority that enters into contracts or subcontracts for janitorial or building services to provide written notification to both the contractor and the union, if the employees are represented by a union, within 5 days of making the decision to terminate a service contract and to post a notice in a conspicuous location at the worksite. The bill would prescribe specified elements to be included in those notices, including the termination date of the service contract. Additionally, the bill would require a successor contractor or subcontractor to maintain the same number of hours and pay the same wages and benefits as those of the prior contractor or subcontractor. Existing law authorizes an employee who was not offered employment or was discharged in violation of these provisions to bring an enforcement action against a successor contractor or successor subcontractor in a court of competent jurisdiction. Existing law requires a court to award backpay to an employee if the court finds that the contractor or subcontractor has violated the act, in addition to other specified remedies. This bill would require a court to award treble damages for a violation, if it finds that a party's violation of the act was willful. The bill would additionally authorize the Labor Commissioner to enforce these provisions and to recover specified remedies on behalf of an aggrieved employee, including hiring and reinstatement rights. The bill would make an employer, agent of any employer, or other person who violates these provisions subject to specified civil penalties and liquidated damages, and would require the liquidated damages to be deposited into the Labor and Workforce Development Fund and paid to the employee as compensatory damages. The bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to promulgate and enforce rules and regulations and to issue determinations and interpretations.

Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, provides for the regulation of various subjects relating to the manufacturing, processing, labeling, advertising, and sale of food, drugs, and cosmetics, under the administration and enforcement of the State Department of Public Health (department) and in accordance with the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. A violation of the act is a crime. This bill would add kratom products, as defined, to the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law and require processors of kratom products to register with the department. The bill would authorize the department to establish an annual fee for processors and would authorize the fee to be based on certain criteria, including annual sales in California. The bill would prescribe specified quantities of alkaloids present in kratom products and would establish labeling and packaging requirements. The bill would require that kratom products be registered with the department annually, which would include certification by a laboratory specifying that the product meets certain qualifications. The bill would prohibit the sale of kratom leaf and kratom products to those under 21 years of age and would prohibit the sale and manufacture of a kratom product that is attractive to children or an inhalable kratom product. The bill would authorize the department to take various enforcement actions, including executing interagency agreements for the implementation of these provisions, among others. The bill would authorize a kratom processor who is operating in conformance with these provisions and in good faith compliance with their responsibilities to manufacture or sell kratom or kratom products without authorization until April 1, 2025. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would create 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 establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to oversee the implementation of Housing First guidelines and regulations, and, among other things, identify resources, benefits, and services that can be accessed to prevent and end homelessness in California. Existing law requires a state agency or department that funds, implements, or administers a state program that provides housing or housing-related services to people experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness to revise or adopt guidelines and regulations to include enumerated Housing First policies. Existing law specifies the core components of Housing First, including services that are informed by a harm-reduction philosophy that recognizes drug and alcohol use and addiction as a part of tenants' lives and where tenants are engaged in nonjudgmental communication regarding drug and alcohol use. This bill would authorize state programs to fund supportive recovery residences, as defined, that emphasize abstinence under these provisions as long as the state program meets specified criteria, including using at least 90% of its funds in each county for housing or housing-based services using a harm-reduction model. The bill would specify requirements for applicants seeking funds under these programs and would require the state to perform periodic monitoring of select supportive recovery residence programs to ensure that the supportive recovery residences meet certain requirements, including that core outcomes of the supportive recovery housing emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness. The bill would also prohibit eviction on the basis of relapse, as specified. The bill would require, if a tenant is no longer interested in living in a supportive recovery residence or is at risk of eviction, that the supportive recovery residence secure the tenant a permanent housing unit at a partner or other housing program operated with harm-reduction principles. Existing law requires the State Department of Health Care Services to license and regulate facilities that provide residential nonmedical services to adults who are recovering from problems related to alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug misuse or abuse, and who need alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug recovery treatment or detoxification services. Existing law also requires the department to certify alcohol and other drug treatment recovery services, as specified. This bill would require the department to adopt the most recent standards approved by the National Alliance for Recovery Residences, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, or other equivalent standards as the minimum standard for supportive recovery residences that receive public funds under these provisions. The bill would require the department to establish a separate process for determining if the supportive recovery residence complies with the core components of Housing First. The bill would authorize the department to charge a fee for certification of a supportive recovery residence in an amount not to exceed the reasonable cost of administering the program, not to exceed $1,000, and would establish the Supportive Recovery Residency Program Fund for collection of the fee.

Maddy summaryThis California Assembly resolution encourages the U.S. Congress to pass legislation creating a National Infrastructure Bank to fund critical repairs and upgrades for roads, bridges, dams, and other public works. The bill cites reports from the American Society of Civil Engineers highlighting billions of dollars in investment gaps and poor conditions affecting California's transportation and water systems. It advocates for a financing model that uses existing federal debt rather than new taxes, aiming to stimulate the economy, create jobs, and prioritize projects in disadvantaged communities. The resolution formally requests that federal leaders adopt this approach to address the state's urgent infrastructure needs.

Maddy summaryThis California House Resolution condemns the July 13, 2024, assassination attempt on former President Donald J. Trump and calls for an end to political violence. The measure highlights the event where Trump was wounded while speaking at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, and notes that one attendee died and others were injured while trying to protect him. It urges the state to foster a political environment based on respectful discourse and nonviolence. The resolution is a formal statement of the Assembly's stance and does not create new laws or change existing policies.

This measure would recognize the importance of California Native American Day, celebrated this year on September 27, 2024, and the annual California Indian Cultural Awareness Conference, to the enhancement of awareness of California Indian culture.

Maddy summaryThis bill establishes Filipino American History Month to recognize the long-standing contributions of Filipinos to California and the United States. It directly affects state officials and the public by designating a specific month for commemoration and education. The resolution highlights historical milestones, including early Spanish-era interactions, the development of Filipino communities in cities like Stockton and San Francisco, and the significant roles Filipinos played in agriculture, shipbuilding, and military service during World War II. By formally acknowledging these events, the bill aims to promote awareness of Filipino American heritage within the state.

Maddy summaryThis bill designates November 22, 2024, as Kimchee Day in California to honor the traditional Korean dish and its cultural significance. It acknowledges the long history of kimchee, the contributions of Korean Americans, and the dish's recognized health benefits and growing popularity in the United States. The resolution directs the Assembly's Chief Clerk to send copies of the document to the author for distribution.