Rep. Ash Kalra

Existing law, the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, requires a business that provides an online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children to comply with certain requirements, including, among other things, prohibiting the business from collecting, selling, sharing, or retaining any personal information that is not necessary to provide the online service, product, or feature, except as specified. Existing law imposes specified civil penalties upon a business that violates these provisions. This bill would repeal the above-described act and would instead impose similar provisions without the above-referenced exceptions and would impose civil penalties for a violation of these provisions. The bill would require a business that provides an online product or service likely to be accessed by children to take reasonable steps to prevent specified risks of harm to children. The bill would authorize a child to void any provision of a contract that was entered into by the child or their parent or guardian as a result of a design feature of the online product or service. The bill would authorize the Attorney General or a public prosecutor to bring a civil action for a violation of these provisions, as specified.

This measure would call on Congress to enact legislation that restores and strengthens the full protections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and it would call on the President to sign the legislation.

(1) Existing law establishes the Department of Industrial Relations, which includes the Division of Occupational Safety and Health. Existing law requires the division to investigate the causes of any employment accident that is fatal to one or more employees or that results in a serious injury, illness, or exposure, except as specified. Existing law requires the chief of the division and all qualified inspectors and investigators authorized by the chief to have free access to any place of employment to investigate and inspect and sets forth various other duties related to investigation and inspection, as specified. This bill would make it a misdemeanor to willfully resist, prevent, impede, or interfere with the chief or their authorized representative in the performance of the above-described duties or to willfully violate an order of the court relating to those duties. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law makes it a public offense for any employer or any employee having direction, management, control, or custody of any employment, place of employment, or of any other employee who willfully violates any occupational safety or health standard, order, special order, if that violation caused death or permanent or prolonged impairment to the body of an employee, as specified. This bill would additionally make it a public offense if that violation caused serious injury, illness, or exposure. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law makes the Bureau of Investigations within the Division of Occupational Safety and Health responsible for directing accident investigations involving violations of laws, standards, and orders in which there is a serious injury to 5 or more employees, death, or request for prosecution by a division representative. Existing law requires the bureau to review inspection reports involving a serious violation if there have been serious injuries to one to 4 employees or a serious exposure, and authorizes the bureau to investigate cases for the purpose of prosecution, as specified. Existing law requires the bureau to refer the results of investigations it is required to conduct to the appropriate prosecuting authority having jurisdiction for appropriate action unless it determines that there is legally insufficient evidence of a violation of the law. This bill would revise and recast these requirements to, among other things, additionally require the bureau to investigate any accident in which there is a serious injury, illness, or exposure for which the division issues a citation for a willful violation. The bill would require the bureau to establish written policies and procedures for reviewing cases and deciding whether to investigate or refer them for prosecution. The bill would also require the division to establish a routine or automated process for transmitting information to the bureau about incidents with serious injuries, illnesses, or exposures so that the bureau can review them. Existing law authorizes the department, upon the request of a county district attorney, to develop a protocol for the referral of cases that may involve criminal conduct to the appropriate prosecuting authority in lieu of or in cooperation with an investigation by the bureau. This bill would require the division to immediately notify the appropriate prosecuting authority upon learning of an accident in which there is a serious injury, illness, or exposure to 5 or more employees, death, or request for prosecution by a division representative. The bill would delete the above-described provisions regarding developing a protocol and would instead authorize the bureau, upon request of an appropriate prosecuting authority, to refer cases that may involve criminal conduct to the appropriate prosecuting authority, as specified. The bill would require the bureau and the division, in cases accepted for investigation, to cooperate with the prosecuting authority. Existing law requires the bureau to submit an annual report to the division on its activities. This bill would additionally require the report to be submitted to the Legislature and to include information relating to certain cases involving a fatality that are referred by the bureau to the appropriate prosecuting authority, as specified. The bill would make the specifics of that information confidential. (3) Existing law requires all information reported to or otherwise obtained by the Chief of the Division of Occupational Safety and Health or representatives of the chief in connection with any inspection or proceeding of the division that contains or that might reveal a trade secret to be considered confidential, except that this information may be disclosed to other officers or employees of the division concerned with carrying out the purposes of the division or when relevant in any proceeding of the division, as specified. This bill would revise the above-described exception to also permit this information to be disclosed to law enforcement officers or prosecutors in any law enforcement investigation or prosecution. Existing law requires the responding agency, whenever a state, county, or local fire or police agency is called to an accident involving an employee covered by the California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 in which a serious injury or illness, or death occurs, to immediately notify the nearest division office. Existing law then requires the division to immediately notify the appropriate prosecuting authority of the accident. This bill would expand this requirement to include an accident in which a serious exposure occurs. The bill would also require the responding agency to immediately notify the district attorney's office in the county where the accident occurred. The bill would additionally require the division to immediately notify the bureau, and the district attorney's office or other appropriate prosecuting authority, of the accident, whether the division received notification by the responding agency, the employer, or by other means. The bill would make other related and conforming changes to those provisions. (4) 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. (5) 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 authorizes any employer or authorized bargaining representative, as specified, whose employee has suffered unlawful violence or a credible threat of violence that can reasonably be construed to be carried out or to have been carried out at the workplace, to seek a temporary restraining order and an order after hearing on behalf of the employee and other employees at the workplace, as described. This bill would, beginning on January 1, 2028, allow any party or witness to a petition for a restraining order to appear remotely at a hearing and would prohibit any fee for appearing remotely. The bill would require the court of each county to develop rules and instructions for such remote appearances and post them on its website. The bill would also, commencing on January 1, 2028, require courts to allow filings related to such protective orders to be submitted electronically, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 527.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 1961 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1961 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law designates specific days as holidays in this state. Existing law adopts state holidays as judicial holidays, with certain exceptions, including Admission Day and Columbus Day. Existing law designates holidays on which community colleges and public schools are authorized to close pursuant to a memorandum of understanding between the governing board and represented employees, including "Native American Day" on the 4th Friday in September. This bill would add "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha" to the list of state holidays. The bill would exclude "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha" from designation as judicial holidays. The bill would authorize community colleges and public schools to close on "Eid al-Fitr" and "Eid al-Adha," as specified. Existing law entitles state employees, with specified exceptions, to be given time off with pay for specified holidays. Existing law, in addition, authorizes state employees to elect to use 8 hours of vacation, annual leave, compensating time off, or personal holiday credit corresponding with specified dates. This bill would, similarly, permit the employee to elect to receive the holiday credit for the holidays of "Eid al-Fitr" or "Eid al-Adha," as specified. The bill would, for those holidays whose dates vary annually, instead authorize the above-described election to be made on the date designated by their group. The bill would make findings and declarations related to the purpose of the Eid holidays. The bill would make its provisions severable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 2294 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2294 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill also would incorporate additional changes to Sections 45203, 79020, and 88203 of the Education Code proposed by SB 1394 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1394 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill further would incorporate additional changes to Section 6700 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2294 and SB 1394 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill further would incorporate additional changes to Sections 19853 and 19853.1 of the Government Code proposed by SB 1394 and AB 1841 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law requires each law enforcement agency, on or before January 1, 2021, to maintain a policy that provides a minimum standard on the use of force. Existing law requires that the policy include, among other things, training standards and requirements relating to demonstrated knowledge and understanding of the law enforcement agency's use of force policy by officers, investigators, and supervisors. Existing law prohibits a law enforcement agency from authorizing the use of a carotid restraint or choke hold by any peace officer employed by that agency. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit a law enforcement agency, including a federal law enforcement agency, from using a wearable electroshock device within the State of California. The bill would also prohibit a law enforcement agency from using state funds to purchase a wearable electroshock device. The bill would require a law enforcement agency to update their use of force policies to prohibit the use of a wearable electroshock device. By increasing the duties on local law enforcement, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Division of Law Enforcement within the Department of Justice to conduct a study on the safety and community impacts of wearable electroshock devices and provide recommendations for appropriate standards and safeguards for their use, and would require the department to report to the Legislature on the findings and recommendations of the study on or before January 1, 2029. 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 provides for the licensure and regulation of health facilities, including general acute care hospitals and skilled nursing facilities, by the State Department of Public Health. A violation of these provisions is generally a crime. Under existing law, if a person dies in a hospital, convalescent hospital, or board and care facility without known next of kin, the person in charge of the hospital or facility is required to give immediate notice of that fact to the public administrator of the county in which the hospital or facility is located, and if the person in charge fails to do so, the hospital or facility is liable for the cost of internment, as specified, and specified losses incurred by the estate or beneficiaries as a result of the failure to notify. This bill would instead require the licensee in charge of a general acute care hospital or a skilled nursing facility to make a reasonable attempt to notify any known next of kin, as specified. The bill would state that this requirement is met if a skilled nursing facility notifies the person's resident representative or has the body transferred to a hospital after death, or if the person notified the hospital or facility, prior to death and in writing, that they do not want their known next of kin to be notified of their presence or death. The bill would require, if a reasonable attempt is made or the person expressed a desire that next of kin not be notified, as specified, that the hospital or facility give notice to the public administrator as described above. The bill would make a hospital or facility that fails to notify any known next of kin liable for a continuing civil penalty of $200 per day, up to a maximum of $50,000, measured from the time it would take to make a reasonable attempt to notify the next of kin until the actual knowledge by the next of kin of the decedent's death. The bill would also make a hospital or facility that fails to notify the county public administrator, as specified, liable for a continuing civil penalty of up to $200 per day, up to a maximum of $50,000, measured from the 5th business day following a person's death until the county public administrator is notified. The bill would authorize a licensee that disputes the assessment of a civil penalty to, within 10 working days of the notification of the penalty, request a hearing pursuant to specified law.

Existing law, the Uniform TOD Security Registration Act, provides for the transfer of ownership or proceeds of a security, as defined, by a registering entity to the designated beneficiary or beneficiaries upon the death of the owner without probate or estate administration. Existing law authorizes a security to be registered in beneficiary form if the form is authorized by statute, as specified. Existing law specifies that, upon the death of the sole owner or the last to die of multiple owners, ownership of a security registered in beneficiary form passes to the beneficiary or beneficiaries who survive all owners. This bill would require a registering entity that receives information establishing knowledge of the death of all owners of a security designated for nonprobate transfer held by that registering entity to initiate its beneficiary notification process, as specified. The bill would require the registering entity to make a reasonable and good faith effort, as defined, to notify each named beneficiary. The bill would require a beneficiary to receive their designated share within 60 days of providing all required documentation to the registering entity, as specified. This bill would specify the necessary information for a nonprofit corporation, charitable trust, or entity that is exempt from federal taxation to establish its legal identity for these purposes. The bill would prohibit a registering entity from requesting additional information, including, among other things, a social security number and driver's license number, from an individual employed by, or serving on the board of, those types of beneficiaries, except as specified. The bill would require a registering entity to permit those types of beneficiaries to demonstrate their entitlement to a security by providing specific documentation. The bill would make its provisions applicable to those types of beneficiaries commencing January 1, 2027. The bill would make its provisions applicable to all other beneficiaries commencing January 1, 2028, if the death of the final owner occurs on or after that date. This bill would make its provisions inapplicable if the death of all owners of a security occurred before January 1, 2027.

Existing law, the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act, prohibits an operator of an addictive internet-based service or application from providing an addictive feed, as defined, to a user unless the operator does not have actual knowledge that the user is a minor, as specified, or the operator has obtained verifiable parental consent to provide an addictive feed to the user who is a minor. Existing law, the Digital Age Assurance Act, beginning January 1, 2027, requires a person who owns, maintains, or controls a software application, as defined, to request age bracket data sent by a real-time secure application programming interface or operating system with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched. This bill would prohibit a covered platform, as defined, from providing an addictive feature, as defined, to a user who is under 16 years of age and would require a covered platform to implement reasonable measures to ensure that users under 16 years of age are not offered or provided any addictive feature on the covered platform. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General to adopt regulations to implement and enforce the bill in order to further the purpose of protecting minors online, including by altering the scope of "covered platform" if the Attorney General determines that doing so is necessary to ensure that "covered platform" applies to internet websites, online services, online applications, or mobile applications that make addictive features, as defined, available to users under 16 years of age. This bill would impose a civil penalty upon a noncompliant platform and would require its provisions to be enforced by a civil action brought only by the Attorney General or a local public prosecutor, as specified. This bill would also establish the e-Safety Advisory Commission within the Department of Justice as an independent advisory body that is only for administrative purposes to advise state government on certain matters related to online safety and would require the commission to, on or before January 1 of each year, report to the Legislature and the Governor on, among other things, its activities under the bill.

Existing law requires the Department of Technology to conduct, in coordination with other interagency bodies as it deems appropriate, a comprehensive inventory of all high-risk automated decision systems (ADS) that have been proposed for use, development, or procurement by, or are being used, developed, or procured by, any state agency. Existing law establishes the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, which is composed of various departments responsible for protecting and promoting the rights and interests of workers in California, including the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, led by the Labor Commissioner, within the Department of Industrial Relations. This bill, beginning on July 1, 2027, would prohibit an employer, as defined, from using an ADS to perform certain functions and would limit the purposes for and way in which an ADS may be used. The bill would, when an employer primarily uses an ADS to make a disciplinary or termination decision, authorize an employee to request, and require an employer to provide, a description of the employee's own data primarily used by an ADS to make a disciplinary or termination decision, as specified. The bill would require an employer that primarily relied upon an ADS to make a disciplinary or termination decision to provide the affected employee with a written postuse notice, as specified. This bill would prohibit an employer from discharging, threatening to discharge, demoting, suspending, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against any employee for taking certain actions asserting their rights under the bill. The bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions and also authorize a public prosecutor to bring a civil enforcement action, as specified. The bill would set forth specified types of relief that a plaintiff may seek and specified penalties that an employer that violates these provisions is subject to, including a $500 civil penalty per violation. This bill would also provide that an employer who complies with the requirements related to notice in this bill is not required to comply with any substantially similar provisions under any other state law, except as specified. The bill would not apply to parties covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement if the agreement contains specified information, including an explicit waiver of the bill's provisions. The bill would provide that it does not prohibit the use of an automated decision system relating to the development of aircraft for use in the national airspace or the development of products or services for national security, military, space, or defense purposes, if the use of an automated decision system is reasonably necessary to comply with the federal statute, the federal regulation, or the binding federal contract, as specified. The bill would include a statement 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. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable.