Existing law, the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) , governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law excludes certain employees from coverage under the Dills Act, including, among others, managerial employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, as defined. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. This bill would enact the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act, to provide employees of the Legislature, except certain specified categories of excluded employees, the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters of employer-employee relations. The bill would prescribe rights, duties, and prohibitions in this context that parallel those in the Dills Act. For the purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring in good faith, the bill would define "employer" to mean the Assembly Committee on Rules or the Senate Committee on Rules. The bill would require the employer to meet and confer with representatives of recognized employee organizations regarding matters within the scope of representation. The bill would exclude certain matters from the scope of representation, as specified. The bill would grant exclusive jurisdiction to the Public Employment Relations Board to make an initial determination as to whether charges of unfair practices are justified, and, if so, the necessary remedy, as specified. However, the bill would prohibit the board from issuing a decision or order that intrudes upon or interferes with the Legislature's core function of efficient and effective lawmaking or the essential operation of the Legislature. The bill would require the board to determine appropriate bargaining units, and would prohibit the board from including employees in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the employer. The bill would prohibit the board from including within a bargaining unit employees from both the Assembly and Senate. This bill would make it a misdemeanor for any person to willfully resist, prevent, impede, or interfere with any member of the board, or any of its agents, in the performance of duties pursuant to its provisions. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that the provisions of the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act are severable. The bill would become operative on July 1, 2026. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would additionally exempt from public inspection records related to activities governed by the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act that reveal the employer's deliberative processes, impressions, evaluations, opinions, recommendations, meeting minutes, research, work product, theories, or strategy, or that provide instruction, advice, or training to employees who do not have full collective bargaining and representation rights under the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act. 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.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976, requires anyone wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, except as specified, in addition to obtaining any other permit required by law from any local government or from any state, regional, or local agency, to obtain a coastal development permit from the California Coastal Commission or a local government with a certified local coastal program, as provided. The act authorizes the commission to process and act upon a consolidated coastal development permit application if a proposed project requires a coastal development permit from both a local government with a certified local coastal program and the commission and if the applicant, the local government, and the commission consent to consolidate the permit action. This bill would require the commission to process a consolidated coastal development permit for any new development that requires a coastal development permit and that is associated with, appurtenant to, or necessary for the construction and operation of offshore wind energy projects, and transmission facilities needed for those projects, located in the coastal zone, provided that public participation is not substantially impaired by the review of the consolidated coastal development permit, as provided. The bill would require the commission to forward an application for a consolidated coastal development permit to local governmental agencies having land use and related jurisdiction in the area in which the project would occur and would authorize those local governmental agencies to review and comment on the application, as provided. (2) 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 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. This bill would require the State Lands Commission to be the lead agency for purposes of CEQA for offshore wind energy projects and to prepare, or cause to be prepared, all environmental documents required by law. The bill would require the California Coastal Commission and the State Lands Commission to coordinate with relevant local, state, and federal agencies to encourage and facilitate the preparation of joint environmental documents pursuant to CEQA and the federal National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for proposed offshore wind energy projects. (3) Existing law requires the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) , in coordination with specified state entities and other relevant federal, state, and local agencies, to develop a strategic plan for offshore wind energy developments installed off the California coast in federal waters, and requires the Energy Commission to submit the strategic plan to the Natural Resources Agency and the Legislature on or before June 30, 2023. This bill would establish the California Offshore Wind Energy Fisheries Working Group, composed of representatives of the California Coastal Commission, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, the State Lands Commission, the Ocean Protection Council, representatives of the commercial and recreational fishing industries, the offshore wind energy industry, representatives of relevant federal agencies, representatives of California Native American tribes with affected tribal fisheries, and other stakeholders, as determined by the California Coastal Commission. The bill would require the California Coastal Commission, in coordination with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to convene the working group on or before January 1, 2025, for the purpose of developing a statewide strategy for ensuring that offshore wind energy projects avoid and minimize impacts to ocean fisheries to the maximum extent possible, avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to fishing and fisheries in a manner that prioritizes fishery productivity, viability, and long-term resilience, and fairly and reasonably compensate persons engaged in the commercial and recreational fishing industries and tribal fisheries for economic impacts to ocean fisheries resulting from offshore wind energy projects. The bill would require the statewide strategy to include best practices for addressing impacts to the commercial and recreational fishing industries, tribal fisheries, and environmental resources associated with offshore wind energy projects, as specified, and to be completed on or before January 1, 2026. The bill would require the California Coastal Commission to adopt the statewide strategy on or before May 1, 2026, and to review the statewide strategy as needed to determine if changes are necessary. The bill would require an applicant seeking approval or concurrence from a state agency for an offshore wind energy project to comply with the terms, recommendations, and best practices established in the statewide strategy. The bill would require the working group to develop a framework for reasonable compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts associated with offshore wind energy projects, including a payment structure to reasonably compensate commercial, tribal, and recreational fisheries and impacted commercial fish processors. The bill would require the payment structure to include, among other things, investments in fleet improvements to promote resiliency, reasonable compensation for the commercial fishing industry for personal property losses caused by offshore wind energy projects, and reasonable compensation for lost commercial and tribal revenue due to reduced fishing grounds, as specified. The bill would require the State Lands Commission or a local trustee of granted public trust lands to consider including within a lease for an offshore wind energy project reasonable compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts to fishing and tribal interests. The bill would create the Offshore Wind Energy Resiliency Fund and would require the State Lands Commission to deposit revenue generated from an offshore wind energy project lease in the fund. The bill would make moneys in the fund available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for reasonable compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts associated with offshore wind energy projects.
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. This bill would make a change to an obsolete reference to the former Healthy Families Program, whose health services for children have been transitioned to the Medi-Cal program. The bill would make a change to an obsolete reference to the former Access for Infants and Mothers Program and would revise a related provision to instead refer to the successor Medi-Cal Access Program. The bill would delete, within certain Medi-Cal provisions, obsolete references to a repealed provision relating to nonprofit hospital service plans. Existing law establishes, under Medi-Cal, the County Health Initiative Matching Fund, a program administered by the department, through which an applicant county, county agency, local initiative, or county organized health system that provides an intergovernmental transfer, as specified, is authorized to submit a proposal to the department for funding for the purpose of providing comprehensive health insurance coverage to certain children. The program is sometimes known as the County Children's Health Initiative Program (CCHIP) . This bill would revise certain provisions to rename that program as CCHIP. Existing law requires the Director of Health Care Services to enter into contracts with managed care plans under Medi-Cal and related provisions, including health maintenance organizations, prepaid health plans, or other specified entities, for the provision of medical benefits to all persons who are eligible to receive medical benefits under publicly supported programs. This bill would delete that list of entities and would instead specify that the director would be required to enter into contracts with managed care plans licensed pursuant to the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, except as otherwise authorized under the Medi-Cal program. The bill would require the director, prior to issuing a new request for proposal or entering into new contracts, to provide an opportunity for interested stakeholders to provide input to inform the development of contract provisions. The bill would also make technical changes to some of the provisions described above.
Existing law declares another state's law authorizing a civil action against a person or entity that receives or seeks, performs or induces, or aids or abets the performance of an abortion, or who attempts or intends to engage in those actions, to be contrary to the public policy of this state, and prohibits the application of that law to a controversy in state court and the enforcement or satisfaction of a civil judgment received under that law. This bill would specifically include within these provisions, in addition to abortion performers, abortion providers. Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. The bill would also prohibit a contract issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2024, between a health care service plan or health insurer and a health care services provider from containing any term that would result in termination or nonrenewal of the contract or otherwise penalize the provider based on a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or another professional disciplinary action in another state if the judgment, conviction, or professional disciplinary action is solely based on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive care that would be lawful if provided in California. The bill would also prohibit a health care service plan or health insurer from discriminating against a licensed provider solely on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or another professional disciplinary action in another state if the judgment, conviction, or professional disciplinary action is solely based on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive care that would be lawful if provided in California. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires that the State Department of Public Health automatically suspend as a Medi-Cal provider any individual or entity that has a license, certificate, or other approval to provide health care that is revoked or suspended by a federal, California, or another state's licensing, certification, or approval authority, has otherwise lost that license, certificate, or approval, or has surrendered that license, certificate, or approval while a disciplinary hearing was pending. The bill would also authorize the department, subject to obtaining necessary federal approvals and the availability of federal financial participation under Medi-Cal, to elect to not suspend an individual or entity as a provider in the Medi-Cal program if the revocation, suspension, or loss of the individual or entity's license, certification, or approval authority in another state or the pending disciplinary hearing during which the individual or entity surrendered the license, certification, or approval authority in another state is based solely on conduct that is not deemed to be unprofessional conduct under California law. The bill would also require the department to seek any necessary federal approvals to implement these provisions. Under existing law, the Director of Health Care Services is authorized, for purposes of administering the Medi-Cal program, to suspend a provider of service from further participation under the program for specified reasons, including conviction of any felony or any misdemeanor involving fraud, abuse of the Medi-Cal program or any patient, or otherwise substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a provider of service. Existing law requires the director, upon receipt of written notification from the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services that a physician or other individual practitioner has been suspended from participation in the Medicare or Medicaid programs, to promptly suspend the practitioner from participation in the Medi-Cal program. Existing law also requires the Director of Health Care Services to notify the administrative director of a suspension of a physician from participation in the Medi-Cal program imposed pursuant to provisions authorizing the director to suspend a provider of service from participation. This bill would authorize the director, subject to obtaining necessary federal approvals and the availability of federal financial participation under Medi-Cal, to request a waiver under federal law, as permitted, if the provider's suspension from participating in the Medicare or Medicaid program was based solely on conduct that is not deemed to be unprofessional conduct under California law. The bill would also require the department to seek any necessary federal approvals to implement these provisions. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes the California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP) Grant Program, administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections, to award competitive grants for the purpose of violence intervention and prevention. Existing law imposes various taxes, including taxes on the privilege of engaging in certain activities. The Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, provides procedures for the collection of certain fees and surcharges. This bill, the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Act, would, commencing July 1, 2024, impose an excise tax in the amount of 11% of the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of a firearm, firearm precursor part, and ammunition, as specified. The tax would be collected by the state pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law. The bill would require that the revenues collected be deposited in the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Fund, which the bill would establish in the State Treasury. The bill would require the moneys received in the fund to be used to fund various gun violence prevention, education, research, response, and investigation programs, as specified. The bill would require the Director of Finance to transfer, as a loan, $2,400,000 from the General Fund to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to implement these provisions, as specified. The bill would require each licensed firearms dealer, firearms manufacturer, and ammunition vendor to register with the department for a certificate, as specified. The bill would also provide procedures for the issuance, revocation, and reinstatement of a permit. 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. Because this bill would expand the scope of the Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is 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.
The measure would apply to the United States Congress to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the Constitution of the United States for the purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment relating to firearms, as specified.
This measure would denounce the actions of the Tennessee House of Representatives in expelling two African-American Democratic Representatives.
(1) The California Constitution prohibits the ad valorem tax rate on real property from exceeding 1% of the full cash value of the property, subject to certain exceptions. This measure would create an additional exception to the 1% limit that would authorize a city, county, city and county, or special district to levy an ad valorem tax to service bonded indebtedness incurred to fund the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, including downpayment assistance, or permanent supportive housing, or the acquisition or lease of real property for those purposes, if the proposition proposing that tax is approved by 55% of the voters of the city, county, city and county, or special district, as applicable, and the proposition includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would prohibit a city, county, city and county, or special district from placing a proposition on the ballot pursuant to these provisions if the voters have previously approved a proposition pursuant to these provisions or the below special tax provisions until all funds from the previous proposition are committed to programs and projects listed in the specific local program or ordinance, as described. The measure, subject to certain vote thresholds, would authorize the Legislature to enact laws establishing additional accountability measures and laws for the downpayment assistance programs authorized by the measure, as specified. The measure would specify that these provisions apply to any city, county, city and county, or special district measure imposing an ad valorem tax to pay the interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (2) The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax by a local government upon the approval of 23 of the voters of the local government voting on that tax. This measure would authorize a local government to impose, extend, or increase a sales and use tax or transactions and use tax imposed in accordance with specified law or a parcel tax for the purposes of funding the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, including downpayment assistance, or permanent supportive housing, or the acquisition or lease of real property for those purposes, if the proposition proposing that tax is approved by a majority vote of the membership of the governing board of the local government and by 55% of its voters voting on the proposition and the proposition includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would prohibit a local government from placing a proposition on the ballot pursuant to these provisions if the voters have previously approved a proposition pursuant to these provisions or the above ad valorem tax provisions until all funds from the previous proposition are committed to programs and projects listed in the specific local program or ordinance, as described. The measure, subject to certain vote thresholds, would authorize the Legislature to enact laws establishing additional accountability measures and laws for the downpayment assistance programs authorized by the measure, as specified. This measure would also make conforming changes to related provisions. The measure would specify that these provisions apply to any local measure imposing, extending, or increasing a sales and use tax, transactions and use tax, or parcel tax for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (3) The California Constitution prohibits specified local government agencies from incurring any indebtedness exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided in that year, without the assent of 23 of the voters and subject to other conditions. In the case of a school district, community college district, or county office of education, the California Constitution permits a proposition for the incurrence of indebtedness in the form of general obligation bonds for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of school facilities, or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities, to be adopted upon the approval of 55% of the voters of the district or county, as appropriate, voting on the proposition at an election. This measure would expressly prohibit a special district, other than a board of education or school district, from incurring any indebtedness or liability exceeding any applicable statutory limit, as prescribed by the statutes governing the special district. The measure would also similarly require the approval of 55% of the voters of the city, county, city and county, or special district, as applicable, to incur bonded indebtedness, exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided in that year, that is in the form of general obligation bonds issued to fund the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, or permanent supportive housing projects, if the proposition proposing that bond includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would specify that this 55% threshold applies to any proposition for the incurrence of indebtedness by a city, county, city and county, or special district for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (4) This measure would deem another measure on the same statewide election ballot relating to state or local requirements for the imposition, adoption, creation, or establishment of taxes, charges, and other revenue measures in conflict with it and would make the other measure null and void if this measure receives more affirmative votes.
This measure would proclaim the month of September 2023 as Suicide Prevention Awareness Month.
This measure would proclaim September 2023 as California Emergency Preparedness Month.