Existing law specifies that a hiring of residential real property, for a term not specified by the parties, is deemed to be renewed at the end of the term implied by law unless one of the parties gives written notice to the other of that party's intention to terminate. Existing law requires an owner of a residential dwelling to give notice at least 60 days prior to the proposed date of termination, or at least 30 days prior to the proposed date of termination if any tenant or resident has resided in the dwelling for less than one year, as specified. Existing law requires any notice given by an owner to be given in a prescribed manner, to contain certain information, and to be formatted, as specified. This bill would, with certain exceptions, prohibit an owner, as defined, of residential real property from terminating a tenancy without just cause, as defined, which the bill would require to be stated in the written notice to terminate tenancy when the tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied the residential real property for 12 months, except as provided. The bill would require, for certain just cause terminations that are curable, that the owner give a notice of violation and an opportunity to cure the violation prior to issuing the notice of termination. The bill, if the violation is not cured within the time period set forth in the notice, would authorize a 3-day notice to quit without an opportunity to cure to be served to terminate the tenancy. The bill would require, for no-fault just cause terminations, as specified, that the owner, at the owner's option, either assist certain tenants to relocate, regardless of the tenant's income, by providing a direct payment of one month's rent to the tenant, as specified, or waive in writing the payment of rent for the final month of the tenancy, prior to the rent becoming due. The bill would require the actual amount of relocation assistance or rent waiver provided to a tenant that fails to vacate after the expiration of the notice to terminate the tenancy to be recoverable as damages in an action to recover possession. The bill would provide that if the owner does not provide relocation assistance, the notice of termination is void. The bill would except certain properties and circumstances from the application of its provisions. The bill would require an owner of residential property to provide prescribed notice to a tenant of the tenant's rights under these provisions. The bill would not apply to residential real property subject to a local ordinance requiring just cause for termination adopted on or before September 1, 2019, or to residential real property subject to a local ordinance requiring just cause for termination adopted or amended after September 1, 2019, that is more protective than these provisions, as defined. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2030. Existing law governs the hiring of residential dwelling units and requires a landlord to provide specified notice to tenants prior to an increase in rent. Existing law, the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, prescribes statewide limits on the application of local rent control with regard to certain properties. That act, among other things, authorizes an owner of residential real property to establish the initial and all subsequent rental rates for a dwelling or unit that meets specified criteria, subject to certain limitations. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property from, over the course of any 12-month period, increasing the gross rental rate for a dwelling or unit more than 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, as defined, or 10%, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for the immediately preceding 12 months, subject to specified conditions. The bill would prohibit an owner of a unit of residential real property from increasing the gross rental rate for the unit in more than 2 increments over a 12-month period, after the tenant remains in occupancy of the unit over a 12-month period. The bill would exempt certain properties from these provisions. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to submit a report, on or before January 1, 2030, to the Legislature regarding the effectiveness of these provisions. The bill would provide that these provisions apply to all rent increases occurring on or after March 15, 2019. The bill would provide that in the event that an owner increased the rent by more than the amount specified above between March 15, 2019, and January 1, 2020, the applicable rent on January 1, 2020, shall be the rent as of March 15, 2019, plus the maximum permissible increase, and the owner shall not be liable to the tenant for any corresponding rent overpayment. The bill would authorize an owner who increased the rent by less than the amount specified above between March 15, 2019, and January 1, 2020, to increase the rent twice within 12 months of March 15, 2019, but not by more than the amount specified above. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. The Planning and Zoning Law requires the owner of an assisted housing development in which there will be an expiration of rental restrictions to, among other things, provide notice of the proposed change to each affected tenant household residing in the assisted housing development subject to specified procedures and requirements, and to also provide specified entities notice and an opportunity to submit an offer to purchase the development prior to the expiration of the rental restrictions. This bill would authorize an owner of an assisted housing development, who demonstrates, under penalty of perjury, compliance with the provisions described above with regard to the expiration of rental restrictions, to establish the initial unassisted rental rate for units without regard to the cap on rent increases discussed above, but would require the owner to comply with the above cap on rent increases for subsequent rent increases in the development. The bill would authorize an owner of a deed-restricted affordable housing unit or an affordable housing unit subject to a regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a government agency limiting rental rates that is not within an assisted housing development to establish the initial rental rate for the unit upon the expiration of the restriction, but would require the owner to comply with the above cap on rent increases for subsequent rent increases for the unit. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. By requiring an owner of an assisted housing development to demonstrate compliance with specified provisions under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the existing crime of perjury and thus 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law establishes criteria and procedures pursuant to which cities and counties adjust or adopt council and supervisorial district area boundaries, as applicable, for the purpose of electing members of the governing body of each of those local jurisdictions. This bill would revise and recast these provisions. The bill would require the governing body of each local jurisdiction described above to adopt new district boundaries after each federal decennial census, except as specified. The bill would specify redistricting criteria and deadlines for the adoption of new boundaries by the governing body. The bill would specify hearing procedures that would allow the public to provide input on the placement of boundaries and on proposed boundary maps. The bill would require the governing body to take specified steps to encourage the residents of the local jurisdiction to participate in the redistricting process. By increasing the duties of these local jurisdictions, 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 governs the procedure by which crime victims may obtain compensation from the Restitution Fund, a continuously appropriated fund. Existing law establishes eligibility for compensation when prescribed requirements are met and authorizes the California Victim Compensation Board to grant compensation from the fund for pecuniary loss when the board determines it will best aid the person seeking compensation. Existing law authorizes the board to provide compensation equal to the loss of income or loss of support, or both, that a victim or derivative victim incurs as a direct result of the victim's or derivative victim's injury or the victim's death. Under existing law, as amended by Proposition 35, the Californians Against Sexual Exploitation Act, an initiative measure approved by the voters at the November 6, 2012, statewide general election, a person who deprives or violates another person's personal liberty with the intent to obtain forced labor or services or who deprives or violates another person's personal liberty for the purpose of prostitution or sexual exploitation is guilty of human trafficking, a felony. This bill would authorize the board to provide compensation equal to loss of income or support that a victim incurs as a direct result of the victim's deprivation of liberty during the crime, if the qualifying crime is human trafficking, in an amount not exceeding the value of the victim's labor as guaranteed under California law for up to 40 hours per week, as specified. The bill would require the board to adopt guidelines on or before July 1, 2020, that allow the board to rely on evidence other than official employment documentation in considering and approving an application for loss of income or support, including any reliable corroborating information approved by the board. The bill would prohibit compensation for loss of income paid by the board if the qualifying crime is human trafficking from exceeding $10,000 per year that the services were performed, for a maximum of 2 years. By expanding the authorizations for use of moneys in the Restitution Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, this bill would make an appropriation. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 13957 of the Government Code proposed by AB 415 to be operative only if this bill and AB 415 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law authorizes a Medi-Cal provider of ground emergency medical transportation services, that is owned or operated by the state, a city, county, city and county, fire protection district, special district, community services district, health care district, or a federally recognized Indian tribe, to receive supplemental Medi-Cal reimbursement, in addition to the rate of payment the eligible provider would otherwise receive for those services. Existing law requires the department to develop a modified supplemental reimbursement program, with necessary federal approvals, that would seek to increase the reimbursement to the above-described eligible providers. Existing law requires the nonfederal share of any supplemental reimbursement provided under the modified program to be derived from voluntary intergovernmental transfers of local funds. Existing law states the Legislature's intent in enacting these provisions to provide the supplemental reimbursement without any expenditure from the General Fund. The bill would instead require the department to implement, subject to any necessary federal approvals, and no sooner than July 1, 2021, the Public Provider Intergovernmental Transfer Program (program) , for the duration of any Medi-Cal managed care rating period, and would authorize the department to continue conducting any administrative duties related to the above-specified supplemental Medi-Cal reimbursement. The bill would require an eligible provider, defined, in part, as a provider of emergency medical transport, to receive an add-on increase to the associated Medi-Cal fee-for-service payment schedule, and would require the department to develop the add-on increase pursuant to specified standards, including an eligible provider's average cost directly associated with providing a Medi-Cal emergency medical transport under the Medi-Cal program. The bill would require Medi-Cal managed care health plans and emergency medical transport providers to comply with specified federal standards relating to the payment standards for emergency medical transport. The bill would limit the amount that a noncontract eligible provider may collect for emergency medical transport. The bill would require the department to assess a 10% fee on each transfer of public funds to the state to pay for health care coverage and to reimburse the department for its administrative costs relating to the program. The bill would limit the operation of the program on the condition that the program would be financially and programmatically supportive of the Medi-Cal program. The bill would authorize the department to implement these provisions by various means, including all-county letters or provider bulletins, without taking regulatory action. Existing law, the Medi-Cal Emergency Medical Transportation Reimbursement Act, commencing July 1, 2018, and subject to federal approval and the availability of federal financial participation, imposes a quality assurance fee for each emergency medical transport provided by an emergency medical transport provider subject to the fee in accordance with a prescribed methodology. Existing law requires the Director of Health Care Services to deposit the collected quality assurance fee into the continuously appropriated Medi-Cal Emergency Medical Transport Fund, for exclusive use in a specified order of priority, including to enhance federal financial participation for ambulance services under the Medi-Cal program. Existing law requires each emergency medical transport provider to report to the department specified data and material, including the number of actual emergency medical transports by payer type. The act increases Medi-Cal reimbursement to emergency medical transport providers for emergency medical transports. The bill would exempt an eligible provider from the quality assurance fee and add-on increase for the duration of any Medi-Cal managed care rating during which the Public Provider Intergovernmental Transfer Program is implemented.
Existing law, the Cal Grant Program, establishes the Cal Grant A Entitlement Awards, the Cal Grant B Entitlement Awards, the California Community College Transfer Cal Grant Entitlement Awards, the Competitive Cal Grant A and B Awards, the Cal Grant C Awards, and the Cal Grant T Awards under the administration of the Student Aid Commission. Existing law also establishes the Middle Class Scholarship Program under the commission's administration. Existing law establishes eligibility requirements for awards under these programs for participating students attending qualifying institutions. The eligibility requirements under these programs, as well as other financial aid programs administered by the commission, include meeting various application deadlines. Existing law, for example, requires applicants for Cal Grant A Entitlement Awards and Cal Grant B Entitlement Awards to submit, by March 2, complete financial aid applications in the academic year of high school graduation or equivalent or in the academic year immediately following high school graduation for the immediately following award year. Similarly, existing law requires applicants for Middle Class Scholarship Program awards to complete and submit a Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) application or an equivalent application by no later than March 2 of the award year. This bill would authorize the Student Aid Commission to grant a postponement of an application deadline of up to 30 calendar days for any financial aid program administered by the commission, as specified. This authority would apply if the commission receives a formal request to extend a deadline from a designated educational official and the commission finds that a qualifying event, as defined, has occurred that, in the judgment of the commission, has had an adverse effect on the ability of pupils or students within a school district, community college district, or an area or region within the state, such as a city or county, to successfully complete and submit their financial aid applications by the established application deadline. The bill would specify procedures for the submission of requests for the postponement of deadlines under the bill and the notification of designated individuals and entities if such a request is granted. With respect to application deadlines for pupils or students applying for financial aid for the 2019–20 academic year, in response to a formal request from an individual referenced in the bill that is received no later than 10 business days after the act adding this provision becomes operative, the bill would authorize the commission, by a unanimous vote of its elective officers, to retroactively postpone these deadlines in accordance with the procedures established in the bill. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes the California College Promise, under the administration of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, to provide funding, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to each community college meeting prescribed requirements. Existing law authorizes a community college to use that funding to accomplish specified policy goals and to waive some or all of the fees for 2 academic years for certain first-time students who are enrolled in 12 or more semester units or the equivalent at the college and complete and submit either a Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) or a California Dream Act application. This bill would make ineligible for the fee waiver a community college student who has previously earned a degree or certificate from a postsecondary educational institution. The bill would authorize an institution to deem as full time, for the purposes of eligibility for a fee waiver, specified students who are not enrolled in 12 or more semester units. The bill would require the chancellor's office to submit a report to the Legislature on or before July 1, 2024, evaluating the use of funding for the California College Promise to waive student fees, with specified content.
(1) The Charter Schools Act of 1992 authorizes the establishment and operation of charter schools. Existing law generally requires a petition to establish a charter school to be submitted to the governing board of a school district, and, under specified circumstances, authorizes a petition to be submitted to and approved by a county board of education or the State Board of Education. Existing law authorizes a county board of education to approve a petition for the operation of a charter school that operates at one or more sites within the geographic boundaries of the county and that provides instructional services that are not generally provided by a county office of education. Existing law also authorizes a petition for the operation of a state charter school to be submitted directly to the state board, and authorizes the state board to approve a charter for the operation of a state charter school that may operate at multiple sites throughout the state. Existing law prohibits the governing board of a school district from denying a petition to establish a charter school unless it makes written factual findings in support of one or more specific findings. Existing law authorizes a charter school to appeal a school district's decision to deny a petition for a charter to the county board of education and, if the county board of education upholds the decision, to appeal the county board of education's decision to the state board. Existing law authorizes a charter to be granted by a chartering authority under designated provisions for a period not to exceed 5 years. Existing law requires that charter renewals are for periods of 5 years. This bill would revise and recast numerous provisions relating to the submission of petitions to establish charter schools, the appeal to county boards of education and to the state board of decisions of the governing boards of school districts to deny approval or renewal of charter schools, and the revocation of charters by chartering authorities. The bill would specify criteria and procedures for the consideration and determination of these issues. The bill would require that a petition to establish a charter school be submitted only to the governing board of the school district or county office of education within the boundaries of which the charter school proposes to locate. The bill would authorize a chartering authority to deny renewal of a charter school upon a finding that the school is demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the program set forth in the petition due to substantial fiscal or governance factors, or is not serving all pupils who wish to attend, as specified. The bill would prohibit, from January 1, 2020, to January 1, 2022, inclusive, the approval of a petition for the establishment of a new charter school offering nonclassroom-based instruction and funded as specified. (2) Existing law requires teachers in charter schools to hold a Commission on Teacher Credentialing certificate, permit, or other document equivalent to what a teacher in other public schools would be required to hold. This bill would instead require teachers in charter schools to hold the Commission on Teacher Credentialing certificate, permit, or other document required for the teacher's certificated assignment, except that a person employed as a teacher in a charter school during the 2019–20 school year would have until July 1, 2025, to obtain that certificate, permit, or other document. The bill would require all teachers in charter schools to satisfy specified requirements for professional fitness by July 1, 2020. The bill would require the commission, by June 30, 2022, to conduct a comprehensive study to examine whether existing certificates, permits, or other documents adequately address the needs for noncore, noncollege preparatory courses in all schools and, if necessary, to make recommendations to appropriate policy committees of the Legislature. The bill would require the State Department of Education, in consultation with the State Board of Education, to collect data to track the implementation of the changes in law enacted by the bill. (3) This bill would prohibit certain provisions of the Education Code from being waived by the State Board of Education. The bill, except for the provisions (A) relating to prohibition of the approval of a petition for the establishment of certain new charter schools between January 1, 2020, and January 1, 2022, as described above, and (B) relating to the reimbursement of state-mandated costs, would become operative on July 1, 2020. The bill would also make conforming and nonsubstantive changes. To the extent the bill would impose additional requirements on local educational agencies and charter schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 47605 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1507 and AB 1595, to be operative only if this bill and AB 1507 or AB 1595, or both, are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 47605.6 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1595, to be operative only if this bill and AB 1595 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) 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 prescribes various requirements regarding the formation, content, and enforcement of state and local public contracts. Existing law establishes, until January 1, 2020, for contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2017, a claim resolution process applicable to any claim by a contractor in connection with a public works project against a public entity, as defined. Existing law defines a claim for these purposes as a separate demand by the contractor for one or more of the following: a time extension for relief from damages or penalties for delay, payment of money or damages arising from work done pursuant to the contract for a public work, or payment of an amount disputed by the public entity, as specified. This bill would extend the operation of this claim resolution process until January 1, 2027.
Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California. Under the act, a physician and surgeon is required to demonstrate satisfaction of continuing education requirements, including cultural and linguistic competency in the practice of medicine, as specified. This bill, by January 1, 2022, would require all continuing education courses for a physician and surgeon to contain curriculum that includes specified instruction in the understanding of implicit bias in medical treatment. The bill, by January 1, 2022, would require associations that accredit these continuing education courses to develop standards to comply with these provisions. Existing law, the Nursing Practice Act, regulates the practice of nursing by the Board of Registered Nursing. The act requires persons licensed by the board to complete specified courses of instruction, including instruction regarding alcoholism and substance dependency and spousal abuse. This bill would require the Board of Registered Nursing, by January 1, 2022, to adopt regulations requiring all continuing education courses for its licensees to contain curriculum that includes specified instruction in the understanding of implicit bias in treatment. Beginning January 1, 2023, the bill would require continuing education providers to comply with these provisions and would require the board to audit education providers for compliance with these provisions, as specified. Existing law, the Physician Assistant Practice Act, authorizes the Physician Assistant Board to require a licensee to complete not more than 50 hours of continuing education every two years as a condition of license renewal. This bill would require the Physician Assistant Board, by January 1, 2022, to adopt regulations requiring all continuing education courses for its licensees to contain curriculum that includes specified instruction in the understanding of implicit bias in treatment. Beginning January 1, 2023, the bill would require continuing education providers to comply with these provisions and would require the board to audit continuing education providers for compliance with these provisions.
Existing law, the Financial Institutions Law, regulates the activities of various financial entities, including commercial banks, industrial banks, trust companies, credit unions, and savings associations. The Banking Law defines and regulates state banks and commits the enforcement of banking laws to the Commissioner of Business Oversight. Existing law prohibits a county from giving or loaning its credit to, or in aid of, any person or corporation. Existing law requires a local agency, as defined, to deposit all money belonging to, or in the custody of, that local agency into specified state or national banks, as defined. Existing law regulates the investment of public funds by local agencies. Existing law, the Nonprofit Corporation Law, regulates the formation and conduct of a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation and a nonprofit public benefit corporation. This bill would define the term "bank" for purposes of the Financial Institutions Law and the Banking Law to include a public bank. The bill would define the term "public bank" to mean a corporation, organized as either a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation or a nonprofit public benefit corporation for the purpose of engaging in the commercial banking business or industrial banking business, that is wholly owned by a local agency, as specified, local agencies, or a joint powers authority. The bill would require a public bank to obtain a certificate of authorization to transact business as a bank from the commissioner and to obtain and maintain insurance, subject to specified requirements. The bill would prohibit the commissioner from issuing more than 2 public bank licenses, as defined, in a calendar year and would prohibit the commissioner from authorizing more than 10 public banks at one time. The bill would require a public bank to include a specified purpose statement in its articles of incorporation and make conforming changes. The bill would require a local agency to conduct and approve, as specified, a study of the viability of a public bank containing specified elements before submitting an application to the commissioner to organize and establish a public bank and would require the local agency to include a copy of that study in the application submitted to the commissioner. The bill would require a local agency that is not a charter city to obtain voter approval of a motion to submit an application to the commissioner, as specified. The bill would authorize a county to lend its available funds to a public bank. The bill also would authorize a local agency to deposit funds in a public bank, and to invest in a public bank, subject to certain requirements. The bill would authorize a public bank to make distributions to its members. The bill would require, as specified, a public bank to conduct retail activities in partnership with local financial institutions and would prohibit a public bank from competing with local financial institutions. The Corporation Tax Law imposes a franchise tax on financial corporations, but provides that the tax is in lieu of all other state and local taxes and licenses, with certain exceptions. That law also exempts specified classes of entities from the franchise and income taxes imposed by that law, including state-chartered credit unions. This bill would additionally exempt from those franchise and income taxes any public bank. This bill would also exempt a public bank from all other state and local taxes and licenses, with certain exceptions. Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, requires that all meetings of the legislative body, as defined, of a local agency be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend unless a closed session is authorized. This bill would authorize the governing board of a public bank or a committee of that governing board to meet in a closed session to consider and take action on matters pertaining to a loan or investment decision, a decision of the internal audit committee, the compliance committee, or the governance committee, and a meeting with a state or federal regulator. The bill would authorize a public bank to make all information received by a shareholder, member, or owner of a public bank confidential, as specified. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires that public records, as defined, be available to the public for inspection and made promptly available to any person. This bill would exempt specified information and records of a public bank, and related decisions of the directors, officers, and managers of the public bank, from the disclosure requirements of the act, including, among others, records related to alternative investments of the bank, as specified, meeting materials of any closed session, a record containing information regarding a portfolio position in which the public bank invests, information related to a specific account in the bank, and specified correspondence related to meetings with, or a memorandum or letter received from, state and federal banking regulators. 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 local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.