Existing law provides that building standards shall be filed by the California Building Standards Commission with the Secretary of State and codified only after they have been approved by the commission. Existing law regulates the issuance and renewal of liability insurance policies in this state. This bill would require the commission, in collaboration with the State Architect and the State Fire Marshal, to consider standards, and to update standards as it determines necessary, for the installation of vehicle barriers, as specified, to protect persons located within, or in or on the property of, buildings, or to protect pedestrians, from collisions into those buildings by motor vehicles. The bill would also authorize an insurer to consider the installation of vehicle barriers in or on a commercial property parking lot as a safety measure and would authorize an insurer to provide or offer a discount on the property owner's insurance covering damage or loss to the covered commercial property, or liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of the commercial property relative to the reduced risk of installation of the barriers. The bill would require that any discounts be determined to be actuarially sound and approved by the commissioner prior to their use.
Sponsored bills
Existing law prohibits dumping waste matter in or upon a public or private highway or road, or in or upon private property into or upon which the public is admitted by easement or license, or upon private property without the consent of the owner, or in or upon a public park or other public property. A violation of these provisions is an infraction punishable by a fine between $250 and $1,000 for a first conviction, between $500 and $1,500 for a 2nd conviction, and between $750 and $3,000 for a 3rd or subsequent conviction. This bill would make dumping waste matter on private property, including on any private road or highways, without the consent of the owner punishable by a fine between $250 and $1,000 for a first conviction, between $500 and $1,500 for a 2nd conviction, and between $750 and $3,000 for a 3rd conviction. The bill would make a 4th or subsequent conviction a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than 30 days and by a fine of not less than $750 nor more than $3,000. By changing the definition of a crime, 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.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires, when a developer of housing proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of the local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. Existing law requires continued affordability for 55 years or longer, as specified, of all very low and low-income units that qualified an applicant for a density bonus. Existing law prohibits a city, county, or city and county from requiring a vehicular parking ratio for a housing development that meets these criteria in excess of specified ratios. This prohibition applies only at the request of the developer and specifies that the developer may request additional parking incentives or concessions. This bill would, notwithstanding the above-described provisions, additionally prohibit, at the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county from imposing a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, in excess of 0.5 spaces per bedroom on a development that includes the maximum percentage of low- or very low income units, as specified, and is located within12 mile of a major transit stop, as defined, and there is unobstructed access to the transit stop from the development. The bill would also prohibit, at the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county from imposing a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, in excess of specified amounts per unit on a development that consists solely of units with an affordable housing cost to lower income households, as specified, if the development is within12 mile of a major transit stop and there is unobstructed access to the transit stop from the development, is a for-rent housing development for individuals that are 62 years of age or older that complies with specified existing laws regarding senior housing, or is a special needs housing development, as those terms are defined. The bill would require a subject development that is a for-rent housing development for individuals that are 62 years of age or older or a special needs housing development to have either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within 12 mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least 8 times per day. The bill would authorize a city, county, or city and county to impose a higher vehicular parking ratio based on substantial evidence found in an areawide or jurisdictionwide parking study, as specified. The bill would make findings and declarations, including that the subject of the bill is a matter of statewide concern and not a municipal affair. By imposing additional duties on local governments in awarding density bonuses, 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.
Existing law requires a city, including a charter city, or county to administratively approve an application for a collocation facility on or immediately adjacent to a wireless telecommunications collocation facility, as defined, through the issuance of a building permit or a nondiscretionary permit, as specified. Existing law prohibits a city or county from taking certain actions as a condition of approval of an application for a permit for construction or reconstruction for a development project for a wireless telecommunications facility. Under existing federal law, the Federal Communications Commission issued rulings establishing reasonable time periods within which a local government is required to act on a collocation or siting application for a wireless telecommunications facility. This bill would provide that a collocation or siting application for a wireless telecommunications facility is deemed approved if the city or county fails to approve or disapprove the application within the reasonable time periods specified in applicable decisions of the Federal Communications Commission, all required public notices have been provided regarding the application, and the applicant has provided a notice to the city or county that the reasonable time period has lapsed.
(1) Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations and gas corporations, as defined. Existing law requires the commission to require an electrical or gas corporation to perform home weatherization services for low-income customers if the commission determines that a significant need for those services exists in the corporation's service territory. For these purposes, existing law authorizes weatherization, where feasible, to include certain measures for a dwelling unit. Existing law also authorizes weatherization, for these purposes, to include other measures determined by the commission to be feasible, taking into consideration the cost-effectiveness of the measures as a whole and the policy of reducing energy-related hardships facing low-income households. This bill would authorize weatherization, for the above-specified purposes, to include energy management technology determined by the commission to be feasible, taking into consideration the above-described factors. (2) Existing law requires the commission, by July 1, 2010, and in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, the Independent System Operator, and other key stakeholders, to determine the requirements for a smart grid deployment plan consistent with specified policies and federal law. Existing law requires each electrical corporation, by July 1, 2011, to develop and submit a smart grid deployment plan to the commission for approval. This bill would require the commission to require an electrical or gas corporation to develop a program to provide incentives to a residential or small or medium business customer to acquire energy management technology for use in the customer's home or place of business. The bill would require the commission to require an electrical or gas corporation to develop a plan to educate residential customers and small and medium business customers about the incentive program. The bill would require the commission to require the electrical or gas corporation to annually report to the commission on actual customer savings resulting from the incentive program. The bill would require the commission to evaluate all electrical or gas corporation energy savings claims achieved pursuant to the incentive program described above in a manner consistent with commission-adopted evaluation protocols. (3) Because a violation of any part of any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the Public Utilities Commission 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 California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 establishes the State Air Resources Board as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources emitting greenhouse gases. The act requires the state board to adopt a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit to be achieved by 2020 equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions levels of 1990. The state board additionally is required to adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions. Pursuant to the act, the state board has adopted the Low-Carbon Fuel Standard regulations. This bill, commencing January 1, 2017, would require, except as provided, at least 3% of the aggregate amount of bulk transportation fuel purchased by the state government to be procured from very low carbon transportation fuel sources. The bill would require, except as provided, the percentage to be increased by 1% each year thereafter until January 1, 2024. The bill would require the Department of General Services to coordinate with state agencies that are buyers of transportation fuel and submit an annual progress report to the Legislature. The bill would define very low carbon transportation fuel for these purposes.
The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act contains various provisions regulating the application for, the issuance of, the suspension of, and the conditions imposed upon, alcoholic beverage licenses by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Existing law provides for various annual fees for the issuance of alcoholic beverage licenses, depending upon the type of license issued. This bill, the Craft Distillers Act of 2015, would authorize the department to issue a craft distiller's license to manufacture distilled spirits, subject to specified conditions, including that the licensee manufacture no more than 100,000 gallons of distilled spirits per fiscal year, excluding brandy the craft distiller manufactures or has manufactured for them. The bill would allow the craft distiller's licensee to sell distilled spirits to specified consumers, to own interests in on-sale retail licenses, and to sell beer, wines, brandies, and distilled spirits to consumers for consumption on the premises of a bona fide eating place, as provided. The bill would impose an original fee and an annual renewal fee for the license, which would be deposited in the Alcohol Beverage Control Fund. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act authorizes a licensed distilled spirits manufacturer to conduct tastings of distilled spirits produced or bottled by, or produced or bottled for, the licensee, on the licensed premises, under specified conditions, including that tasting not be given in the form of a cocktail or mixed drink. This bill would extend that authorization to a licensed craft distiller and would revise the tasting conditions by allowing a tasting to be given in the form of a cocktail or mixed drink. Existing law prohibits a distilled spirits manufacturer's or distilled spirits manufacturer's agent's license from being held by a person that holds any ownership or interest in any distilled spirits wholesaler's, rectifier's, or retailer's license, as specified. This bill would additionally prohibit a distilled spirits manufacturer's or distilled spirits manufacturer's agent's license from being held by a person that holds any ownership or interest in a craft distiller's license.
(1) Existing law provides that a search warrant may only be issued upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, naming or describing the person to be searched or searched for, and particularly describing the property, thing, or things and the place to be searched. Existing law also states the grounds upon which a search warrant may be issued, including, among other grounds, when the property or things to be seized consist of any item or constitute any evidence that tends to show a felony has been committed, or tends to show that a particular person has committed a felony, or when there is a warrant to arrest a person. This bill would prohibit a government entity from compelling the production of or access to electronic communication information or electronic device information, as defined, without a search warrant, wiretap order, order for electronic reader records, or subpoena issued pursuant under specified conditions, except for emergency situations, as defined. The bill would also specify the conditions under which a government entity may access electronic device information by means of physical interaction or electronic communication with the device, such as pursuant to a search warrant, wiretap order, or consent of the owner of the device. The bill would define a number of terms for those purposes, including, among others, "electronic communication information" and "electronic device information," which the bill defines collectively as "electronic information." The bill would require a search warrant for electronic information to describe with particularity the information to be seized and would impose other conditions on the use of the search warrant or wiretap order and the information obtained, including retention, sealing, and disclosure. The bill would require a warrant directed to a service provider to be accompanied by an order requiring the service provider to verify by affidavit the authenticity of electronic information that it produces, as specified. The bill would authorize a service provider to voluntarily disclose, when not otherwise prohibited by state or federal law, electronic communication information or subscriber information, and would require a government entity to destroy information so provided within 90 days, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would, subject to exceptions, require a government entity that executes a search warrant pursuant to these provisions to contemporaneously provide notice, as specified, to the identified target, that informs the recipient that information about the recipient has been compelled or requested, and that states the nature of the government investigation under which the information is sought. The bill would authorize a delay of 90 days, subject to renewal, for providing the notice under specified conditions that constitute an emergency. The bill would require the notice to include a copy of the warrant or statement describing the emergency under which the notice was delayed. The bill would provide that any person in a trial, hearing, or proceeding may move to suppress any electronic information obtained or retained in violation of its provisions, according to specified procedures. The bill would provide that a California or foreign corporation, and its officers, employees, and agents, are not subject to any cause of action for providing records, information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a warrant, wiretap order, or other order issued pursuant to these provisions. (2) The California Constitution provides for the Right to Truth in Evidence, which requires a 23 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. Because this bill would exclude evidence obtained or retained in violation of its provisions in a criminal proceeding, it requires a 23 vote of the Legislature.
Existing law authorizes an adult to give an individual health care instruction and to appoint an attorney to make health care decisions for that individual in the event of his or her incapacity pursuant to a power of attorney for health care. This bill, until January 1, 2026, would enact the End of Life Option Act authorizing an adult who meets certain qualifications, and who has been determined by his or her attending physician to be suffering from a terminal disease, as defined, to make a request for a drug prescribed pursuant to these provisions for the purpose of ending his or her life. The bill would establish the procedures for making these requests. The bill would also establish specified forms to request an aid-in-dying drug, under specified circumstances, an interpreter declaration to be signed subject to penalty of perjury, thereby creating a crime and imposing a state-mandated local program, and a final attestation for an aid-in-dying drug. This bill would require specified information to be documented in the individual's medical record, including, among other things, all oral and written requests for an aid-in-dying drug. This bill would prohibit a provision in a contract, will, or other agreement from being conditioned upon, or affected by, a person making or rescinding a request for the above-described drug. The bill would prohibit the sale, procurement, or issuance of any life, health, or annuity policy, health care service plan contract, or health benefit plan, or the rate charged for any policy or plan contract, from being conditioned upon or affected by the request. The bill would prohibit an insurance carrier from providing any information in communications made to an individual about the availability of an aid-in-dying drug absent a request by the individual or his or her attending physician at the behest of the individual. The bill would also prohibit any communication from containing both the denial of treatment and information as to the availability of aid-in-dying drug coverage. This bill would provide a person, except as provided, immunity from civil or criminal liability solely because the person was present when the qualified individual self-administered the drug, or the person assisted the qualified individual by preparing the aid-in-dying drug so long as the person did not assist with the ingestion of the drug, and would specify that the immunities and prohibitions on sanctions of a health care provider are solely reserved for conduct of a health care provider provided for by the bill. The bill would make participation in activities authorized pursuant to its provisions voluntary, and would make health care providers immune from liability for refusing to engage in activities authorized pursuant to its provisions. The bill would also authorize a health care provider to prohibit its employees, independent contractors, or other persons or entities, including other health care providers, from participating in activities under the act while on the premises owned or under the management or direct control of that prohibiting health care provider, or while acting within the course and scope of any employment by, or contract with, the prohibiting health care provider. This bill would make it a felony to knowingly alter or forge a request for drugs to end an individual's life without his or her authorization or to conceal or destroy a withdrawal or rescission of a request for a drug, if it is done with the intent or effect of causing the individual's death. The bill would make it a felony to knowingly coerce or exert undue influence on an individual to request a drug for the purpose of ending his or her life, to destroy a withdrawal or rescission of a request, or to administer an aid-in-dying drug to an individual without their knowledge or consent. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that nothing in its provisions is to be construed to authorize ending a patient's life by lethal injection, mercy killing, or active euthanasia, and would provide that action taken in accordance with the act shall not constitute, among other things, suicide or homicide. This bill would require physicians to submit specified forms and information to the State Department of Public Health after writing a prescription for an aid-in-dying drug and after the death of an individual who requested an aid-in-dying drug. The bill would authorize the Medical Board of California to update those forms and would require the State Department of Public Health to publish the forms on its Internet Web site. The bill would require the department to annually review a sample of certain information and records, make a statistical report of the information collected, and post that report to its Internet Web site. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires 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 provides the procedure by which a temporary restraining order and an injunction prohibiting harassment or abuse may be sought by, or on behalf of, specified persons. Existing law requires the petitioner seeking the restraining order to personally serve the person against whom the temporary restraining order and injunction are sought, known as the respondent, with notice of hearing within 5 days of the hearing on the petition, as specified. If the petitioner files a declaration with the court that he or she could not serve the respondent within the time required, existing law authorizes the court to reissue an order that was dissolved by the court for failure to serve the respondent. Existing law provides that a reissued order will remain in effect until the date of the hearing, and requires that the reissued order state the date that the order expires. This bill would permit either party to request a continuance of the hearing, as specified, which the court would be required to grant on a showing of good cause. The bill would permit the request to be made in writing before or at the hearing or orally at the hearing, and would additionally authorize the court to grant a continuance on its own motion. If the court grants a continuance, the bill would require that any temporary restraining order that had previously been granted remain in effect until the conclusion of the continued hearing, and would authorize the court to modify or terminate any temporary restraining order. (2) Existing law provides that a person who has suffered harassment, defined as unlawful violence, a credible threat of violence, or a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, or harasses the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose, may seek a temporary restraining order and an injunction prohibiting harassment. If issued, the injunction would be in effect for a period of up to 5 years and may be renewed for another period of up to 5 years. Under existing law, however, the notice of the hearing must notify the respondent that, if he or she does not attend the hearing on the petition, the court may make orders against him or her that could last up to 3 years. This bill would modify the requirements for the notice to a respondent so that the respondent is warned that, if he or she does not attend the hearing, the court may make orders against him or her that could last up to 5 years. (3) In a matter in which a temporary restraining order or order after hearing prohibiting harassment or abuse is sought under specified provisions of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, existing law provides that a respondent is entitled, as a matter of course, to one continuance for a reasonable period, to respond to the petition. This bill would, in a matter in which a civil harassment, workplace violence, or elder or dependent adult abuse temporary restraining order or order after hearing prohibiting harassment or abuse is sought, provide that the respondent would be entitled, as a matter of course, to one continuance for a reasonable period, to respond to the petition. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 213.5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, proposed by AB 494, that would become operative only if AB 494 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2016, and this bill is chaptered last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 15657.03 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, proposed by AB 494 and SB 196, that would become operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2016, and this bill is chaptered last.