(1) Under existing law, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act, if a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes or attempts to interfere, by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, is authorized to bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. Existing law also authorizes an action brought by the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, to seek a civil penalty of $25,000. This bill would provide that a threat, intimidation, or coercion under the act may be inherent in any interference with a civil right and would describe intentional acts for these purposes as an act in which the person acted with general intent or a conscious objective to engage in particular conduct. The bill would, with a specified exception, eliminate certain immunity provisions for peace officers or public entities employing peace officers sued under the act. The bill would also authorize specified persons to bring an action under the act for the death of a person. (2) Existing laws defines persons who are peace officers and the entities authorized to appoint them. Existing law requires certain minimum training requirements for peace officers including the completion of a basic training course, as specified. Existing law prescribes certain minimum standards for a person to be appointed as a peace officer, including moral character and physical and mental condition, and certain disqualifying factors for a person to be employed as a peace officer, including a felony conviction. This bill would disqualify a person from being employed as a peace officer if that person has been convicted of, or has been adjudicated in an administrative, military, or civil judicial process as having committed, a violation of certain specified crimes against public justice, including the falsification of records, bribery, or perjury. The bill would also disqualify any person who has been certified as a peace officer by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training and has surrendered that certification or had that certification revoked by the commission, or has been denied certification. The bill would require a law enforcement agency employing certain peace officers to employ only individuals with a current, valid certification or pending certification. (3) Existing law establishes the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to set minimum standards for the recruitment and training of peace officers and to develop training courses and curriculum. Existing law authorizes the commission to establish a professional certificate program that awards basic, intermediate, advanced, supervisory, management, and executive certificates on the basis of a combination of training, education, experience, and other prerequisites, for the purpose of fostering the professionalization, education, and experience necessary to adequately accomplish the general police service duties performed by peace officers. Existing law authorizes the commission to cancel a certificate that was awarded in error or obtained through misrepresentation or fraud, but otherwise prohibits the commission from canceling a certificate that has properly been issued. This bill would grant the commission the power to investigate and determine the fitness of any person to serve as a peace officer in the state. The bill would direct the commission to issue or deny certification, which includes a basic certificate or proof of eligibility, to a peace officer in accordance with specified criteria. The bill would require the commission to issue a proof of eligibility or basic certificate, as specified, to certain persons employed as a peace officer on January 1, 2021, who do not otherwise possess a certificate. The bill would require a proof of eligibility or basic certificate to be renewed at least every 2 years and would require the commission to assess a fee, in an amount determined by the commission, for the application and renewal of the certificate or proof of eligibility, as well as an annual certification fee. The bill would require the fees to be deposited into the Peace Officer Certification Fund, created by the bill, and would continuously appropriate those funds to the commission for the administration of the certification program, as specified, thereby making an appropriation. The bill would declare certificates or proof of eligibility awarded by the commission to be property of the commission and would authorize the commission to revoke a proof of eligibility or certificate on specified grounds, including the use of excessive force, sexual assault, making a false arrest, or participating in a law enforcement gang, as defined. The bill would create the Peace Officer Standards Accountability Division within the commission to investigate and prosecute proceedings to take action against a peace officer's certification. The bill would require the division to review and investigate grounds for decertification and make findings as to whether grounds for action against an officer's certification exist. The bill would require the division to notify the officer subject to decertification of their findings and allow the officer to request review. The bill would also create the Peace Officer Standards Accountability Advisory Board with 9 members to be appointed as specified. The bill would require the board to hold public meetings to review the findings after investigation made by the division and to make a recommendation to the commission. The bill would require the commission to adopt the recommendation of the board if supported by clear and convincing evidence and, if action is to be taken against an officer's certification, return the determination to the division to commence formal proceedings consistent with the Administrative Procedures Act. The bill would require the commission to notify the employing agency and the district attorney of the county in which the officer is employed of this determination, as specified. The bill would make all records related to the revocation of a peace officer's certification public and would require that records of an investigation be retained for 30 years. The bill would require an agency employing peace officers to report to the commission the employment, appointment, or separation from employment of a peace officer, any complaint, charge, allegation, or investigation into the conduct of a peace officer that could render the officer subject to revocation, findings by civil oversight entities, and civil judgements that could affect the officer's certification. In case of a separation from employment or appointment, the bill would require each agency to execute an affidavit-of-separation form adopted by the commission describing the reason for separation. The bill would require the affidavit to be signed under penalty of perjury. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the board to report annually on the activities of the division, board, and commission, relating to the certification program, including the number of applications for certification, the events reported, the number of investigations conducted, and the number of certificates surrendered or revoked. By imposing new requirements on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 832.7 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 776 to be operative only if this bill and SB 776 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law authorizes a county to establish a pretrial diversion program for defendants who have been charged with a misdemeanor offense and authorizes other diversion programs. This bill would establish the COVID-19 Alternative Adjudication Program. The bill would require a court to dismiss an accusatory pleading under the program if the defendant meets specified conditions including, among others, that 6 months have passed since the person was released from custody on the charge and the defendant or minor has not been charged with a misdemeanor or felony occurring after the charge at issue was filed, with specified exceptions. The bill would require a court dismissing a pleading pursuant to the program to determine whether restitution is owed to a victim as a result of an offense dismissed pursuant to the program, and would deem the arrest upon which the charges were based to have never occurred.
The Unclaimed Property Law governs the disposition of unclaimed property, including the escheat of certain property to the state. Those provisions require a person holding funds or other property escheated to the state to report to the Controller certain information regarding the property and the owner, and set forth procedures whereby a person may file a claim to the property or to the net proceeds from its sale. This bill would authorize the Controller to implement additional measures designed to streamline the secure payment of claims, as specified.
(1) The Child Care and Development Services Act establishes a system of childcare and development services for children up to 13 years of age. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to implement a plan that establishes reasonable standards and assigned reimbursement rates, which vary with the length of the program year and the hours of service. Existing law requires the reimbursement system to be submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. This bill would require the Superintendent to implement a reimbursement system plan that establishes reasonable standards and assigned reimbursement rates that would vary with additional factors, including a quality adjustment factor to address the cost of staffing ratios, as provided. The bill would require the reimbursement system plan, including methodology, standards, county rate targets as provided, and the total statewide funding amount necessary to reach annual rate targets for all agencies to be annually submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, on or before November 10. The bill would require the plan to include a formula for annually adjusting reimbursement rates, as provided. The bill would require the department, by July 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, as provided, to establish a reimbursement rate target for each contracting agency that meets specific quality standards based on specified elements, including quality adjustment factors for the age range of children proposed to be served by the contracting agency, as a multiplier, which the bill would also require the department to establish. (2) Existing law establishes adjustment factors for a provider agency's reported child days of enrollment in order to reflect the additional expense of serving specified children, including an adjustment factor for infants and toddlers who are 0 to 36 months and are served in a child daycare center or family childcare home, as provided. This bill would, as of July 1, 2020, delete the above adjustment factors and would make conforming changes. (3) Existing law requires reimbursement rates to be adjusted by specified adjustment factors for childcare and development programs and, for childcare and development providers serving children for less than 4 hours per day, requires the reimbursement factor to be 55% of the standard reimbursement rate. This bill would instead require the above-described reimbursement factor to be 50% of the standard reimbursement rate. (4) The bill would make its operation contingent on the enactment of SB 174 of the 2019–20 Regular Session on or before January 1, 2020.
(1) The Child Care and Development Services Act, administered by the State Department of Education, requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to administer childcare and development programs that offer a full range of services to eligible children from infancy to 13 years of age, inclusive. The act requires that families meet specified requirements to be eligible for federal- and state-subsidized childcare and development services. This bill would extend eligibility to a family in which a member of that family has been certified as fully eligible to receive CalFresh or Medi-Cal benefits. The bill would require a parent to provide documentation of current enrollment in CalFresh or Medi-Cal, unless the contractor providing childcare and development services has, and elects to use, other means of obtaining verification of that enrollment. The bill would authorize a family to submit a self-certification of income that is signed by the parent for the purpose of prioritizing enrollment and calculating family fees. (2) Existing law requires the department to arrange intraagency adjustments between California state preschool contracts and general childcare contracts for the same agency and funding allocation, and to establish timelines for intraagency contract fund transfers. This bill would additionally require the department to allow and arrange for interagency adjustments between those contracts for the same agency or different agencies and the same funding allocation, and to establish timelines for those interagency contract fund transfers. (3) Existing law requires the Superintendent to implement a plan establishing assigned reimbursement rates, per unit of average daily enrollment, to be paid by the state to provider agencies for the provision of childcare and development services. Existing law provides for an adjustment factor to be applied to units of average daily enrollment if a provider agency serves children who meet specified criteria. Existing law sets the adjustment factor based on the age of the child served, among other criteria. This bill would require those adjustment factors to continue to apply irrespective of whether a child is served in a commingled classroom that serves children from 0 to 12 years of age. The bill, during the 2020–21 fiscal year, would authorize a contractor providing childcare and development services under the act to provide those services to children from 0 to 12 years of age in classrooms with children of varying ages. (4) Existing law requires the Superintendent to establish a fee schedule for families using preschool and childcare and development services, as specified, and requires family fees to be assessed at initial enrollment and reassessed at the update of certification or recertification. Existing law encourages child development contractors to develop and maintain a reserve within the child development fund in the county treasury, derived from earned but unexpended funds. Existing law authorizes reserve funds to be expended for specified purposes. Existing law requires that 10% of specified reserve funds to be used solely for the purpose of professional development for California state preschool program instructional staff. This bill would authorize a contractor to waive family fees for families who are enrolled but who receive services only through distance learning. The bill would provide that the cost of waiving family fees under the above-described provision is an allowable use of contract funds received for providing childcare and development services, and would authorize a contractor to use reserve funds to cover the costs of a waiver. The bill would also delete the requirement that 10% of the specified reserve funds be used for that professional development purpose.
Existing law imposes taxes upon income and real property, as well as taxes upon certain transactions and excise taxes. This bill would impose an annual tax at a rate of 0.4% of a resident of this state's worldwide net worth in excess of $30,000,000, or in excess of $15,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately. The bill would describe worldwide net worth with reference to specific federal provisions and would provide that worldwide net worth does not include specific assets, including directly held real property or liabilities related to directly held real property. The bill would also authorize the Franchise Tax Board to adopt regulations to carry out these provisions, including regulations regarding the valuation of certain assets that are not publicly traded. Existing law requires the Franchise Tax Board to administer the Personal Income Tax Law. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to amend or create returns with regard to the Wealth Tax. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
The Personal Income Tax Law and California Constitution imposes taxes based upon taxable income of individuals, estates, and trusts at specified rates. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2020, in addition to those taxes, would impose an additional tax of at the rates of 1%, 3%, and 3.5% on that portion of a taxpayer's taxable income over specified thresholds, as provided. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law confers a power of sale upon a mortgagee, trustee, or any other person to be exercised after a breach of the obligation for which the mortgage or transfer is a security. Existing law requires a trustee, mortgagee, or beneficiary to first file a record in the office of the recorder a notice of default, and establishes other requirements and procedures for completion of a foreclosure sale. This bill would prohibit a person from taking any action to foreclose on a residential real property while a state or locally declared state of emergency related to the COVID-19 virus is in effect and until 91 days after the state of emergency has ended, including, but not limited to, causing or conducting the sale of the real property or submitting for recordation a notice of default. Existing property tax law attaches taxes that are owed on that property as a lien against that property. Existing law generally requires the tax collector to attempt to sell residential property that has become tax defaulted 5 years or more after that property has become tax defaulted. This bill would require a tax collector to suspend the sale, and not attempt to sell, tax-defaulted properties while a state or locally declared state of emergency related to the COVID-19 virus is in effect and until 91 days after the state of emergency has ended. Existing law requires a county recorder to record any instrument, paper, or notice that is authorized or required to be recorded upon payment of proper fees and taxes. This bill would prohibit a party from submitting to a county recorder any instrument, paper, or notice that constitutes a notice of default, a notice of sale, or a trustee's deed upon sale for residential real property during the above-specified declared state of emergency relating to the COVID-19 virus. The bill would provide that any action for foreclosure on a mortgage or deed of trust of residential real property is stayed and the court may take no action unless the court finds that the action is required to further public health and safety and would extend the period for exercising rights, including right of redemption, until 90 days after the state of emergency ends. Existing law establishes a procedure, known as an unlawful detainer action, that a landlord must follow in order to evict a tenant. Existing law provides that a tenant is subject to such an action if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord in specified circumstances, including when the tenant has violated the lease by defaulting on rent or failing to perform a duty under the lease. This bill would prohibit a party from submitting for filing a residential unlawful detainer complaint except to address issues of damage to the property, nuisance, or health and safety during the timeframe in which a state of emergency related to the COVID-19 virus is in effect and 91 days thereafter. The bill would prohibit a court from issuing a summons on a complaint for a residential unlawful detainer unless the court finds it is necessary to address damage to the property, nuisance, or health and safety, and would prohibit a court from entering a default or default judgment for restitution in an unlawful detainer action unless it is necessary to protect public health and safety. The bill would authorize a period of rent deferment of up to 12 months from 90 days after the state of emergency ends for a tenant who provides specified documentation to their landlord showing economic hardship resulting from COVID-19, including a substantial reduction in income or substantial out-of-pocket medical expenses. The bill would prohibit the imposition of late fees, fines, or interest during that time. The bill would make these provisions effective in a jurisdiction in which a state or locally declared state of emergency is in effect until 91 days after the state of emergency ends and would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2022. By expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would contain related findings regarding the economic hardships imposed by the COVID-19 virus. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. 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) Existing law, the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement (STAKE) Act, prohibits a person from selling or otherwise furnishing tobacco products, as defined, to a person under 21 years of age. The STAKE Act requires a person engaged in the retail sale of tobacco products to check the identification of a tobacco purchaser to establish the purchaser's age if the purchaser reasonably appears to be under 21 years of age. This bill would, among other things, require a person engaged in the retail sale of tobacco products to use age verification software or an age verification device to establish the age of a tobacco purchaser. The act requires the State Department of Public Health to, among other things, establish and develop a program to reduce the availability of tobacco products to persons under 21 years of age through enforcement activities, and conduct random, onsite sting inspections at retail sites. The act authorizes the department to also conduct onsite sting inspections in response to public complaints or at retail sites where violations have previously occurred. This bill would, among other things, instead require the department to conduct random, onsite sting inspections at retail sites of at least 20% of the total number of licensed tobacco retailers, and in the event of a violation at a retail site, would require the department to conduct a 2nd sting inspection at that retail site within 6 months of the first violation, and a 3rd sting inspection within 12 months of the first violation. The act imposes specified civil penalties for the furnishing of tobacco products to a person under 21 years of age. Existing law imposes additional civil penalties in the amount of $250 for a 3rd, 4th, and 5th violation, requires a 45-day suspension of the license to sell tobacco or cigarettes for a 3rd violation at the same location within a 5-year period, a similar 90-day suspension of the license for a 4th violation, and a revocation of the license for a 5th violation. This bill would decrease the 5-year period for calculating the civil penalties and license suspensions and revocations for violations to a 36-month period and increase the penalty amount for a first, 2nd, and 3rd or subsequent violation imposed by an enforcement agency, as specified. The bill would instead impose the additional $250 civil penalty and the license suspensions and revocation for the first, 2nd, and 3rd violations in a 36-month period, and would require a 60-day suspension of the license for the first violation, except as specified, a 90-day suspension for the 2nd violation, and a revocation of the license for a 3rd violation. The bill would also prohibit anyone under 21 years of age from entering a tobacco store, as defined, except for active duty military personnel who are 18 years of age or older, as specified. (2) Existing law, the California Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003, provides for the licensure by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration of manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, importers, and retailers of cigarette or tobacco products that are engaged in business in California. The act prohibits retailers, manufacturers, distributors, and wholesalers from distributing or selling those cigarette and tobacco products unless they are licensed. The act authorizes the board to suspend or revoke the license of any manufacturer, distributor, wholesaler, importer, or retailer of tobacco products that is in violation of the act's provisions. Existing law makes a violation of the act a misdemeanor. This bill, commencing 90 days after the effective date of the bill, would prohibit a licensed retailer from selling a non-tobacco-flavored vapor product, as specified, or a single-use electronic cigarette, as defined. The bill would authorize the State Department of Public Health to assess specified civil penalties for each violation. (3) Existing law makes every person, firm, or corporation that knowingly or under circumstances in which it has knowledge, or should otherwise have grounds for knowledge, sells, gives, or in any way furnishes to another person who is under 21 years of age any tobacco, cigarette, cigarette papers, or blunt wraps, or any other preparation of tobacco, or any other instrument or paraphernalia that is designed for the smoking or ingestion of tobacco, tobacco products, or any controlled substance, subject to either a criminal action for a misdemeanor or a civil action, punishable by a fine, as specified. This bill would instead subject a person described above to that criminal or civil fine, specified community service, or the criminal or civil fine and community service. (4) Existing law requires that cartridges for electronic cigarettes and solutions for filling or refilling an electronic cigarette be in child-resistant packaging, as defined. This bill would create various advertising, promoting, packaging, and selling prohibitions on electronic cigarettes, including, among others, prohibiting an electronic cigarette manufacturer from advertising, promoting, or packaging the electronic cigarette in a manner that is attractive to persons under 21 years of age, as specified, or is intended to encourage persons under 21 years of age to use the device, prohibiting a person from displaying on an electronic cigarette, or on its packaging, an indication or illustration that could cause a person to believe that the product is flavored if there is reasonable belief that the indication or illustration could be appealing to persons under 21 years of age. The bill would authorize the State Department of Public Health to assess specified civil penalties for each violation. (5) Existing law, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , approved by the voters as Proposition 64 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, regulates the cultivation, distribution, transport, storage, manufacturing, testing, processing, sale, and use of cannabis for nonmedical purposes by people 21 years of age and older. 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. This bill would amend AUMA by, among other things, commencing 90 days after the effective date of the bill, prohibiting a licensed retailer from selling an artificially-flavored vapor product, as defined. The bill would also prohibit the use of flavors not derived from the cannabis plant or other natural botanical sources or flavors derived or synthesized from tobacco in the production of cannabis products that can be used to deliver cannabis to a person in aerosolized or vaporized form. The bill would authorize the licensing authority to issue a citation for each violation. AUMA authorizes the Legislature to amend the act to further the purposes and intent of the act with a 23 vote of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would declare that its provisions further specified purposes and the intent of AUMA. (6) The Cigarette and Tobacco Products Tax Law, the violation of which is a crime, imposes a tax on distributors of cigarettes at the rate of $2.87 per package of 20 cigarettes and a tax on distributors of tobacco products, based on wholesale cost, at a rate determined annually that is equivalent to the combined rate of all taxes imposed on cigarettes plus an additional rate equivalent to $0.50 per package of 20 cigarettes. These taxes are inclusive of the taxes imposed under the Tobacco Tax and Health Protection Act of 1988, the California Families and Children Act of 1998, and the California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016. The California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 (Proposition 56) , an initiative measure approved at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, revised the definition of tobacco products to include electronic cigarettes, thereby extending the taxes on distributors of tobacco products to distributors of electronic cigarettes, which is based on the wholesale cost of these products. Proposition 56 requires the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to adopt regulations providing for the implementation of the equivalent tax on electronic cigarettes and the methods for collection of the tax. This bill would impose, commencing January 1, 2021, an additional tax on electronic cigarettes at a rate of $2.40 per every 40 milligrams of base product nicotine contained in the electronic cigarette, as specified. The bill, commencing January 1, 2021, would require a manufacturer of any electronic cigarette offered for sale in this state to include, on its sales invoice, the amount of base product nicotine contained in the product that is clearly identified by the milligrams. The bill would require, commencing January 1, 2021, on or before the 25th day of each month, every wholesaler of electronic cigarettes to file a report in the form, as prescribed by the department, which may include, but not be limited to, electronic media respecting the wholesaler's inventory, purchases, and sales of electronic cigarettes during the preceding month. The bill would require the revenues, interest, and penalties derived from the tax imposed above to be deposited into a newly created fund, the California Healthy Families Health Care Access Fund, which would be continuously appropriated for specified health-related purposes. By creating a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. By imposing new requirements in the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Tax Law, the violation of which is a crime, the bill would also impose a state-mandated local program. (7) 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. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires that the legislative body of each county and each city adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county and city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. That law also authorizes the legislative body of any county or city, pursuant to specified procedures, to adopt ordinances that, among other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land as between industry, business, residences, open space, and other purposes. This bill, notwithstanding any inconsistent provision of a city's or county's general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, or regulation, would require that a housing development be an authorized use on a site designated in any local agency's zoning code for commercial uses if certain conditions apply. Among these conditions, the bill would require that the housing development be subject to a recorded deed restriction requiring that at least 20% of the units have an affordable housing cost or affordable rent for lower income households, as those terms are defined, and located on a site that satisfies specified criteria. The bill would require the city or county to apply certain height, density, and floor area ratio standards to a housing development that meets these criteria. The bill would deem a housing development consistent, compliant, and in conformity with local development standards, zoning codes, and general plan if it meets the requirements of the bill. The bill would require a jurisdiction to comply with these requirements only until it has completed the rezoning, required as described above, for the 6th revision of its housing element. The bill would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2030. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. By adding to the duties of local planning officials, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.