Existing law imposes various restrictions on employers with respect to contracts and applications for employment. A violation of those restrictions is a misdemeanor. Existing law creates the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, which is under the direction of the Labor Commissioner, and generally commits to the commissioner the authority and responsibility for the enforcement of employment laws. This bill would prohibit a person from, as a condition of employment, continued employment, the receipt of any employment-related benefit, or as a condition of entering into a contractual agreement, prohibiting an applicant for employment, employee, or independent contractor from disclosing to any person an instance of sexual harassment that the employee or independent contractor suffers, witnesses, or discovers in the workplace or in the performance of the contract, or otherwise opposing any lawful practice, or from exercising any right or obligation or participating in any investigation or proceeding with respect to unlawful harassment or discrimination. The bill would also prohibit an employer from requiring any applicant for employment or any employee to waive any right, forum, or procedure for a violation of any provision of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) or other specific statutes governing employment, as a condition of employment, continued employment, the receipt of any employment-related benefit, or as a condition of entering into a contractual agreement. The bill would also prohibit an employer from threatening, retaliating or discriminating against, or terminating any applicant for employment or any employee because of the refusal to consent to the waiver of any right, forum, or procedure for a violation of specific statutes governing employment. The bill would establish a specific exemption from those prohibitions. Because a violation of these prohibitions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. FEHA makes specified employment and housing practices unlawful and provides procedures for enforcement by the Department of Fair Employment and Housing. FEHA authorizes a person alleging a violation of specified provisions of the act relating to employment discrimination to submit a verified complaint to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, and requires the department to take actions to investigate and conciliate that complaint. FEHA authorizes the department to bring a civil action on behalf of the person who submitted the complaint upon the failure to eliminate an unlawful practice under these provisions. FEHA requires the department to issue a right-to-sue notice to a person who submitted the complaint if certain conditions occur, and FEHA requires a person who has been issued a right-to-sue notice to bring an action within one year from when the department issued that notice. This bill would additionally make violations of the prohibitions described above, relating to sexual harassment and waivers, unlawful employment practices under FEHA. 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
(1) Existing law, as proposed by SB 10 of the 2017–18 Regular Session, commencing October 1, 2019, requires persons arrested and detained to be subject to a pretrial risk assessment conducted by Pretrial Assessment Services, defined as an entity, division, or program that is assigned the responsibility to assess the risk level of persons charged with the commission of a crime, report the results of the risk determination to the court, and make recommendations for conditions of release of individuals pending adjudication of their criminal case. SB 10 requires the courts to establish pretrial assessment services and authorizes those services to be performed by court employees or through a contract with a local public agency, as specified. SB 10 provides that if no local agency will agree to perform the pretrial assessments, and if the court elects not to perform the assessments, the court may contract with a new local pretrial assessment services agency established specifically to perform the role. SB 10 requires pretrial assessment services to be performed by public employees. This bill, notwithstanding the requirement that pretrial assessment services be performed by public employees, would authorize, until January 1, 2023, a qualified local public agency in the City and County of San Francisco to contract with the existing not-for-profit entity that is performing pretrial services in the city and county to provide continuity and sufficient time to transition the entity's employees into public employment. (2) SB 10 authorizes Pretrial Assessment Services to release a person assessed as being a low risk, as defined, on his or her own recognizance, and additionally requires superior courts to adopt rules authorizing Pretrial Assessment Services to release persons assessed as being a medium risk, as defined, on his or her own recognizance. However, SB 10 prohibits Pretrial Assessment Services from releasing persons who meet specified conditions, including, among others, tier 2 sex offenders subject to registration for a minimum of 20 years and tier 3 sex offenders subject to lifetime registration. This bill would provide that if SB 10 of the 2017–18 Regular Session becomes operative, the release prohibitions described above would be expanded to additionally include persons convicted of sex crimes and certain other offenses subject to the Sex Offender Registration Act, as specified. By increasing the length of time certain persons remain in county jails, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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 defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Existing law defines malice for this purpose as either express or implied and defines those terms. This bill would require a principal in a crime to act with malice aforethought to be convicted of murder except when the person was a participant in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of a specified felony in which a death occurred and the person was the actual killer, was not the actual killer but, with the intent to kill, aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, solicited, requested, or assisted the actual killer in the commission of murder in the first degree, or the person was a major participant in the underlying felony and acted with reckless indifference to human life. Existing law defines first degree murder, in part, as all murder that is committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, specified felonies, including arson, rape, carjacking, robbery, burglary, mayhem, and kidnapping. Existing law, as enacted by Proposition 7, approved by the voters at the November 7, 1978, statewide general election, prescribes a penalty for that crime of death, imprisonment in the state prison for life without the possibility of parole, or imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 25 years to life. Existing law defines 2nd degree murder as all murder that is not in the first degree and imposes a penalty of imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 15 years to life. This bill would prohibit a participant in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of one of the specified first degree murder felonies in which a death occurs from being liable for murder, unless the person was the actual killer or the person was not the actual killer but, with the intent to kill, aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, solicited, requested, or assisted the actual killer, or the person was a major participant in the underlying felony and acted with reckless indifference to human life, unless the victim was a peace officer who was killed in the course of performing his or her duties where the defendant knew or should reasonably have known the victim was a peace officer engaged in the performance of his or her duties. This bill would provide a means of vacating the conviction and resentencing a defendant when a complaint, information, or indictment was filed against the defendant that allowed the prosecution to proceed under a theory of first degree felony murder or murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine, the defendant was sentenced for first degree or 2nd degree murder or accepted a plea offer in lieu of a trial at which the defendant could be convicted for first degree or 2nd degree murder, and the defendant could not be charged with murder after the enactment of this bill. By requiring the participation of district attorneys and public defenders in the resentencing process, 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, 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 Youth Bill of Rights, enumerates various rights for youth confined in a facility of the Division of Juvenile Justice, including, among others, the right to maintain frequent and continuing contact with family members and the right to receive a quality education. This bill would require a minor detained in or committed to a juvenile hall or juvenile ranch, camp, or forestry camp, to be provided with access to computer technology and the Internet for the purposes of education, and would allow him or her to be provided with access to computer technology and the Internet for the purpose of maintaining relationships with family. The bill would specify that these provisions do not limit the authority of the chief probation officer, or his or her designee, to limit or deny access to computer technology or the Internet for safety and security or staffing reasons. By requiring counties to provide minors in their custody access to computer technology and the Internet, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Under existing law, (1) every child adjudged a dependent child of the juvenile court, and (2) every minor adjudged a ward of the juvenile court who is placed in a specified care setting by a probation agency, is entitled to participate in age-appropriate extracurricular, enrichment, and social activities. This bill would require that these age-appropriate extracurricular, enrichment, and social activities include access to computer technology and the Internet. By requiring counties to provide access to computer technology and Internet to dependent children and wards of the juvenile court, 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
(1) Existing law, the Emergency Medical Services System and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act, governs local emergency medical services (EMS) systems. The existing act establishes the Emergency Medical Services Authority, which is responsible for the coordination and integration of EMS systems. Among other duties, existing law requires the authority is required to develop planning and implementation guidelines for EMS systems, provide technical assistance to existing agencies, counties, and cities for the purpose of developing the components of EMS systems, and receive plans for the implementation of EMS and trauma care systems from local EMS agencies. Existing law makes violation of the act or regulations adopted pursuant to the act punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would establish within the act until January 1, 2025, the Community Paramedicine or Triage to Alternate Destination Act of 2018. The bill would authorize a local EMS agency to develop a community paramedicine or triage to alternate destination program, as defined, to provide specified community paramedicine services. The bill would require the authority to develop regulations to establish minimum standards for a program, and would further require the Commission on Emergency Medical Services to review and approve those regulations. The bill would require the authority to review a local EMS agency's proposed program and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposed program no later than 6 months after it is submitted by the local EMS agency. The bill would require a local EMS agency that opts to develop a program to perform specified duties that include, among others, integrating the proposed program into the local EMS agency's EMS plan. The bill would require the Emergency Medical Services Authority to contract with an independent 3rd party to prepare a report on community paramedicine or triage to alternate destination programs on or before June 1, 2023, as specified. The bill would prohibit a person or organization from providing community paramedicine or triage to alternate destination services or representing, advertising, or otherwise implying that it is authorized to provide those services unless it is expressly authorized by a local EMS agency to provide those services as part of a program approved by the authority. The bill would also prohibit a community paramedic from providing community paramedicine services if he or she has not been certified and accredited to perform those services and is working as an employee of an authorized community paramedicine provider. Because a violation of the act described above is punishable as a misdemeanor, and this bill would create new requirements within the act, the bill would expand an existing crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes a county to establish an emergency medical care committee and requires the committee, at least annually, to review the operations of ambulance services operating within the county, emergency medical care offered within the county, and first aid practices in the county. Existing law requires the county board of supervisors to prescribe the membership, and appoint the members, of the committee. This bill would require the committee to include additional members, as specified, and to advise a local EMS agency within the county on the development of its community paramedicine or triage to alternate destination program if the local EMS agency develops that program. The bill would specifically require the mayor of a city and county, rather than the county board of supervisors, to appoint the membership. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2025. (3) Existing law establishes the Commission on Emergency Medical Services with 18 members. The commission, among other things, reviews and approves regulations, standards, and guidelines developed by the authority. This bill would increase the membership of the commission to 20 members and modify the entities that submit names for appointment to the commission by the Governor, the Senate Committee on Rules, and the Speaker of the Assembly. (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.
(1) The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , an initiative measure approved as Proposition 64 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, authorizes a person who obtains a state license under AUMA to engage in commercial adult-use cannabis activity pursuant to that license and applicable local ordinances. The Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , among other things, consolidates the licensure and regulation of commercial medicinal and adult-use cannabis activities. Existing administrative law prohibits a retailer licensee from providing free cannabis goods to any person or allowing individuals who are not employed by the retailer to provide free cannabis goods to any person on the licensed premises. Existing administrative law provides an exception to this prohibition for specified medicinal retailer and microbusiness licensees to provide access to medicinal cannabis patients who have difficulty accessing medicinal cannabis goods, as specified. This bill would similarly authorize those specified licensees to provide free cannabis or cannabis products to a medical cannabis patient if specified requirements are met, including that the cannabis or cannabis products otherwise meet specified requirements of MAUCRSA. The bill would authorize those specified licensees to contract with an individual or organization to coordinate the provision of free medicinal cannabis and medicinal cannabis products on the retailer's premises. (2) Existing sales and use tax laws impose use taxes on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state, presumes tangible personal property purchased outside the state that is stored, used, or consumed in this state is purchased for use in this state, and excludes from use taxes, specified tangible personal property purchased and used for specified purposes. This bill, on or after January 1, 2019, and until January 1, 2024, would exempt from the use tax the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products that are donated, for no consideration, under specified circumstances. The bill would require the exemption to apply only if the donee certifies in writing, as specified, that the medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis product will be used as specified. The bill would make a licensee that uses the donated medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis product in some other manner, or for some other purpose, liable for the payment of use tax and would make the measure of tax the licensee's purchase price for similar product. The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing laws authorize districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which generally conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Amendments to the Sales and Use Tax Law are automatically incorporated into the local tax laws. Existing law requires the state to reimburse counties and cities for revenue losses caused by the enactment of sales and use tax exemptions. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding Section 2230 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse any local agencies for sales and use tax revenues lost by them pursuant to this bill. (3) AUMA imposes an excise tax on the purchase of cannabis and cannabis products, as defined, at the rate of 15% of the average market price of any retail sale by a cannabis retailer. The bill would require that these provisions not be construed to impose an excise tax upon medicinal cannabis, or medicinal cannabis products, donated for no consideration to a medicinal cannabis patient, as specified. (4) AUMA imposes a cultivation tax on all harvested cannabis that enters the commercial market upon all cultivators. Existing law defines entering the commercial market to mean cannabis or cannabis products, except for immature cannabis plants and seeds, that complete and comply with specified quality assurance review and testing. This bill would prohibit the cultivation tax from being imposed on medicinal cannabis designated for donation. The bill would make a licensee that certifies in writing that medicinal cannabis or a medicinal cannabis product will be donated to a medicinal cannabis patient and sells or uses the medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis product in some manner, or for some purpose other than donation, liable for the cultivation tax. The bill would specify that the certification in writing relieves the cultivator that donates the medicinal cannabis from liability for the cultivation tax and the distributor from liability for collecting the cultivation only if the certification is taken in good faith. The bill would prohibit a distributor or a manufacturer from collecting or remitting the cultivation tax for medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products designated for donation. The bill would require a cultivator to keep records of any medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products designated for donation. The bill would require that the cannabis tax provisions not be construed to impose a cultivation tax upon medicinal cannabis or medicinal cannabis products designated for donation. (5) This bill would provide that the provisions of the act are severable. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 26001 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 2980 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2980 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (7) The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act, an initiative measure, authorizes the Legislature to amend the act to further the purposes and intent of the act with a 23 vote of the membership of both houses of the Legislature, except as provided. This bill would declare that its provisions further specified purposes and intent of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires a pupil to complete designated coursework while in grades 9 to 12, inclusive, in order to receive a diploma of graduation from high school. Existing law requires the Instructional Quality Commission to develop, and the State Board of Education to adopt, modify, or revise, a model curriculum in ethnic studies. Existing law also encourages each school district and charter school that maintains any of grades 9 to 12, inclusive, and that does not otherwise offer a standards-based ethnic studies curriculum to offer, beginning in the school year following the adoption of the model curriculum, a course of study in ethnic studies based on the model curriculum. This bill would authorize the governing board of a school district to, during the 2019–20 school year, apply to the State Department of Education for a grant to fund, for the 2020–21, 2021–22, and 2022–23 school years, a semester- or year-long course in ethnic studies that the governing board of the school district would require each pupil to complete, except as specified, while in any of grades 9 to 12, inclusive, in order to receive a diploma of graduation from high school. The bill would require the governing board of a school district to base any course required as part of the grant program on the model curriculum in ethnic studies adopted by the state board. The bill would require the department to award grants for these purposes, as specified, to provide professional development and technical assistance to school districts for purposes of applying for and implementing grants, and to submit a report to the Legislature that contains best practices and recommendations for including an ethnic studies course in the state's high school graduation requirements. The bill would make implementation of its provisions contingent upon funding being provided for those purposes from private or public sources. The bill would make these provisions inoperative on March 1, 2028, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2029.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA establishes a procedure by which a person may seek judicial review of the decision of the lead agency made pursuant to CEQA. CEQA requires a court to make specified orders if it finds that any determination, finding, or decision of a public agency has been made without compliance with CEQA. This bill would establish specified procedures for the administrative and judicial review of the environmental review and approvals granted for the Oakland Sports and Mixed-Use Project, as defined, located in the City of Oakland that is certified by the Governor as meeting certain requirements. Because a public agency would be required to comply with those new procedures, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would apply certain rules of court establishing procedures requiring actions or proceedings seeking judicial review pursuant to CEQA or the granting of project approvals, including any appeals therefrom, to be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court to an action or proceeding seeking judicial review of the lead agency's action related to the Oakland Sports and Mixed-Use Project under CEQA. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Oakland Sports and Mixed-Use Project. 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 imposes certain obligations in the context of particular transactions, and provides mechanisms to enforce those obligations. This bill would enact the California Internet Consumer Protection and Net Neutrality Act of 2018. This act would prohibit fixed and mobile Internet service providers, as defined, that provide broadband Internet access service, as defined, from engaging in specified actions concerning the treatment of Internet traffic. The act would prohibit, among other things, blocking lawful content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices, impairing or degrading lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application, or service, or use of a nonharmful device, and specified practices relating to zero-rating, as defined. It would also prohibit fixed and mobile Internet service providers from offering or providing services other than broadband Internet access service that are delivered over the same last-mile connection as the broadband Internet access service, if those services have the purpose or effect of evading the above-described prohibitions or negatively affect the performance of broadband Internet access service.
The California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) prohibits various actions as unlawful employment practices and makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer, labor organization, employment agency, apprenticeship training program, or any training program leading to employment, to engage in harassment of an employee or other specified person. FEHA also makes harassment of those persons by an employee, other than an agent or supervisor, unlawful if the entity, or its agents or supervisors, knows or should have known of this conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. Under FEHA, an employer may also be responsible for the acts of nonemployees, with respect to sexual harassment of employees and other specified persons, if the employer, or its agents or supervisors, knows or should have known of the conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. FEHA defines harassment for these purposes to include sexual harassment, gender harassment, and harassment based on pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. Existing law also requires a client employer, as defined, to share with a labor contractor, as defined, all civil legal responsibility and civil liability for all workers supplied by that labor contractor for the payment of wages and the failure to obtain valid workers' compensation coverage. This bill would require a client employer to share with a labor contractor all civil legal responsibility and civil liability for harassment for all workers supplied by that labor contractor. Existing law prohibits an employer from discharging or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against an employee who is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking for taking time off work to obtain specified relief or because of the employee's status as a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking, if the victim provides notice to the employer of the status or the employer has actual knowledge of the status. Existing law authorizes an employee to file a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement for a violation of these prohibitions or that reasonable accommodations requirement within one year from the date of occurrence of the violation. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for an employer to refuse to rehire, promote, or restore an employee who has been determined to be so eligible by a grievance procedure or legal hearing. This bill would also prohibit an employer from discharging or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against an employee because of the employee's status as a victim of sexual harassment, as defined by FEHA. The bill would establish a rebuttable presumption of unlawful retaliation based on the employee's status as a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, sexual harassment, or stalking if an employer takes specific actions within 30 days following the date that the victim provides notice to the employer or the employer has actual knowledge of the status. By expanding the definition of 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.