Asm. Ash Kalra

Existing law establishes a workers' compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers' Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries sustained in the course of his or her employment. Under existing law, an employer must provide reasonably required treatments, including, but not limited to, medical and surgical treatment, to cure or relieve an employee's injuries sustained in the course of his or her employment. This bill would require employers to provide immediate support from a nurse case manager to employees injured in the course of employment by an act of domestic terrorism, as defined, would require employer-appointed nurse case managers to assist claimants to obtain medically necessary medical treatments, as specified, and would require an employer to provide a prescribed notice to claimants, as specified. The bill would make its provisions applicable only if the Governor declares a state of emergency, as defined, in connection with the act of domestic terrorism. This bill would make related legislative findings and declarations.

Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy transactions and use taxes for general purposes in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in the county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, by a resolution approved by 23 of the board and with the approval of specified entities, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 0.125%, with net revenues from the tax to be used by the board for operating and capital purposes of the Caltrain rail service, subject to 23 voter approval of a regional measure submitted by the board to voters of the Counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara. The bill would authorize the board to exceed the 2% limit described above to impose the retail transactions and use tax. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara.

Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with the approval of the State Board of Education, to develop a high school exit examination in English language arts and mathematics in accordance with state academic content standards. Existing law requires each pupil completing grade 12 to successfully pass the high school exit examination as a condition of receiving a diploma of graduation or a condition of graduation from high school, except for the 2015–16, 2016–17, and 2017–18 school years. This bill would eliminate the high school exit examination and would remove it as a condition of receiving a diploma of graduation or a condition of graduation from high school. The bill would also make clarifying, conforming, and nonsubstantive changes. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 47605 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1360 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1360 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

(1) Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as a regional agency in the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) as a separate entity governed by the same governing board as MTC and makes BATA responsible for the programming, administration, and allocation of toll revenues from the state-owned toll bridges in the San Francisco Bay area. Existing law authorizes BATA to increase the toll rates for certain purposes, including to meet its bond obligations, provide funding for certain costs associated with the bay area state-owned toll bridges, including for the seismic retrofit of those bridges, and provide funding to meet the requirements of certain voter-approved regional measures. Existing law provided for submission of 2 regional measures to the voters of 7 bay area counties in 1988 and 2004 relative to specified increases in bridge auto tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges, subject to approval by a majority of the voters. This bill would require the City and County of San Francisco and the other 8 counties in the San Francisco Bay area to conduct a special election, to be known as Regional Measure 3, on a proposed increase in the amount of the toll rate charged on the state-owned toll bridges in that area to be used for specified projects and programs. The bill would require BATA to select the amount of the proposed increase, not to exceed $3, to be placed on the ballot for voter approval. If approved by the voters, the bill would authorize BATA, beginning 6 months after the election approving the toll increase, to phase in the toll increase over a period of time and to adjust the toll increase for inflation after the toll increase is phased in completely. The bill would specify that, except for the inflation adjustment, providing funding to meet the requirements of voter approved regional measures, and as otherwise specified in statute, the toll increase adopted pursuant to the results of this election may not be changed without the statutory authorization of the Legislature. By requiring this election, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require BATA to reimburse from toll revenues, as specified, the counties and the City and County of San Francisco for the cost of submitting the measure to the voters. This bill would require BATA to establish an independent oversight committee within 6 months of the effective date of the Regional Measure 3 toll increase with a specified membership, to ensure the toll revenues generated by the toll increase are expended consistent with a specified expenditure plan. The bill would require BATA to submit an annual report to the Legislature on the status of the projects and programs funded by the toll increase. (2) Existing law authorizes BATA to vary the toll structure on each of the bay area state-owned toll bridges and to provide discounts for vehicles classified by BATA as high-occupancy vehicles. This bill would additionally authorize BATA to provide discounts for vehicles that pay for tolls electronically or through other non-cash methods and to charge differential rates based on the chosen method. This bill, with respect to the Regional Measure 3 toll increase, would require BATA to provide a 50% discount on the amount of that toll increase on the 2nd bridge crossing for those commuters using a two-axle vehicle, who pay tolls electronically or through other noncash methods and who cross 2 bridges during commute hours, as specified. Existing law, if BATA establishes high-occupancy vehicle lane fee discounts or access for vehicles classified by BATA as high-occupancy vehicles for any bridge, requires BATA to collaborate with the Department of Transportation to reach agreement on how the occupancy requirements shall apply on each segment of highway that connects with that bridge. This bill would instead require BATA to establish those occupancy requirements in consultation with the department. (3) Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) , governed by a board of directors, with specified powers and duties relative to the construction and operation of a rapid transit system. This bill would create the Independent Office of the BART Inspector General within BART. The bill would provide for the board of directors to nominate 3 persons to the Governor and for the Governor to appoint one of those nominees to serve as the Inspector General for a 4-year term. The bill would require the Inspector General to be removed from office by the board of directors, subject to the approval of the Governor, under certain circumstances. The bill would specify the duties and responsibilities of the Inspector General and would require the Inspector General to submit an annual report to the board of directors and the Legislature. The bill would provide for the office to receive $1,000,000 from an allocation of bridge toll revenue from BATA and, in the second and subsequent years of operation of the office, would authorize BATA to increase that amount, as specified. The bill would make these provisions operative upon an affirmative vote to increase tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges pursuant to Regional Measure 3 or related provisions. (4) Existing law authorizes the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) to conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane program on 2 corridors included in the high-occupancy vehicle lane system in Santa Clara County. Existing law authorizes a HOT lane established as part of this program on State Highway Route 101 to extend into the County of San Mateo as far as the high-occupancy lane in the County of San Mateo existed as of January 1, 2011, subject to agreement of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. This bill would delete the authorization for a HOT lane to extend into the specified portion of San Mateo County as part of a value pricing program established on 2 corridors in Santa Clara County. The bill would instead authorize VTA to specifically conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll lane program on State Highway Route 101 in San Mateo County in coordination with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, as prescribed. (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, 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.

The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to prohibit, by statute, investments of a retirement board if it is in the public interest to do so and if the prohibition satisfies the board's standards of fiduciary care and loyalty. Existing law prohibits the boards of administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System and the State Teachers' Retirement System from investing funds in a company with active business operations in Sudan, as specified, from investing in a company that has certain business operations in Iran, as specified, and from investing in thermal coal companies, as defined. This bill would require the boards of administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System and the State Teachers' Retirement System to make a specified report, on or before April 1, 2018, to the Legislature and the Governor regarding investments in the Dakota Access Pipeline, as defined. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that the boards, on or before April 1, 2018, review and consider factors related to tribal sovereignty and indigenous tribal rights as part of the boards' investment policies related to environmental, social, and governance issues. The bill would provide that it does not require a board to take any action unless the board determines in good faith that the action is consistent with the board's fiduciary responsibilities established in the constitution. The bill would make additional related legislative findings and declarations.

(1) Existing law, the Political Reform Act of 1974, provides for the comprehensive regulation of campaign financing and activities. The act requires a committee that supports or opposes ballot measures to name and identify itself using a name or phrase that clearly identifies the economic or other special interests of its major donors of $50,000 or more. The act also requires that the identity of a common employer shared by major donors be disclosed. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) The act defines "expenditure" as a payment, a forgiveness of a loan, a payment of a loan by a 3rd party, or an enforceable promise to make a payment, unless it is clear from the surrounding circumstances that it is not made for political purposes. This bill, which would be known as the California Disclose Act, would describe circumstances in which a payment would be made for political purposes within the meaning of the definition of "expenditure." (3) The act prohibits a candidate or committee from sending a mass mailing unless the name, street address, and city of the candidate or committee are shown on the outside of each piece of mail in the mass mailing, as specified. This bill would additionally require the name of such an entity to be disclosed in a mass electronic mailing, as defined, that the entity sends. The bill would provide that these disclosure requirements do not apply if the mass mailing or mass electronic mailing is paid for by an independent expenditure. (4) The act prohibits a candidate, committee, or slate mailer organization from expending campaign funds to pay for specified telephone calls that advocate support of, or opposition to, a candidate, ballot measure, or both, unless the name of the organization that authorized or paid for the call is disclosed to the recipient of the call during the course of each call. This bill would instead apply these requirements to a candidate, a candidate controlled committee established for an elective office for the controlling candidate, a political party committee, and a slate mailer organization that expends campaign funds to pay for such telephone calls. The bill would provide that these disclosure requirements do not apply if the telephone call is paid for by an independent expenditure. (5) The act also requires advertisements, as defined, to include prescribed disclosure statements, including, among others, a requirement that the disclosure statements include the names of the persons who made the 2 highest cumulative contributions, as defined, to the committee paying for the advertisement. This bill would repeal and recast provisions of the act relating to advertisement disclosure statements. The bill would revise the definition of "advertisement" to exclude a number of communications, including communications that involve wearing apparel, sky writing, and certain electronic media communications, as specified. The bill would also replace existing advertisement disclosure statements with newly prescribed disclosure statements that identify the name of the committee paying for the advertisement and the top contributors to that committee. The bill would define "top contributors" for purposes of these provisions as the persons from whom the committee paying for the advertisement received its 3 highest cumulative contributions, as specified. The bill would exempt certain committees, including committees that make independent expenditures totaling $1,000 or more in a calendar year, from the requirement to disclose the top contributors in advertisement disclosure statements. The bill would also prescribe location and format criteria for the disclosure statements that are specific to radio and telephone, television and video, print, and electronic media advertisements. (6) The act imposes, in addition to other penalties, a fine of up to triple the amount of the cost of an advertisement on a person who violates the disclosure requirements for advertisements. This bill would revise the scope of violations subject to that fine by specifying that it applies to certain disclosure requirements and intentional violations. (7) The act prohibits a person from making a contribution as an intermediary on behalf of another person without disclosing to the recipient of the contribution specified information about both the intermediary and the source of the contribution. The act also prohibits a person from making a contribution to a committee on the condition or with the agreement that it will be contributed to a particular candidate unless the contribution is disclosed in compliance with those requirements for contributions made by an intermediary. This bill would prohibit a person from making a contribution to a committee or candidate that is earmarked unless the contribution is disclosed in compliance with the requirements for contributions made by an intermediary. The bill would also describe circumstances in which a contribution is deemed to be earmarked. The bill would impose additional disclosure requirements in connection with earmarked contributions from one committee to another. (8) Because a violation of the act is punishable as a misdemeanor, 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. (9) The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Existing law, the State Bar Act, makes it a cause for suspension, disbarment, or other discipline for any member of the State Bar to report suspected immigration status or threaten to report suspected immigration status of a witness or party to a civil or administrative action or his or her family member, as defined, to a federal, state, or local agency because the witness or party exercises or has exercised a right related to his or her employment. This bill would expand that provision to make it a cause for suspension, disbarment, or other discipline for a member of the State Bar to report suspected immigration status or threaten to report suspected immigration status of a witness or party to a civil or administrative action or his or her family member, as defined, to a federal, state, or local agency because the witness or party exercises or has exercised a right related to the hiring of residential real property. (2) Existing law provides that a tenant of real property, property for a term less than life, or the executor of his or her estate, is guilty of unlawful detainer if, among other things, he or she continues in possession, in person or by subtenant, of the property or any part of the property, after the expiration of the term for which it is let to him or her, except as specified. Existing law authorizes a tenant of residential real property to assert as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action based upon a default in the payment of rent that the lessor failed to comply with certain requirements relating to the safety and habitability of the dwelling. This bill would prohibit a lessor from causing a tenant or occupant to quit involuntarily or bring an action to recover possession because of the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant, occupant, or other person known to the lessor to be associated with a tenant or occupant, unless the lessor is complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. The bill would authorize a tenant or occupant to assert as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action that a lessor violated this provision. The bill would also establish a rebuttable presumption that an affirmative defense is successful if the lessor approved the tenant or occupant to take possession of the unit before filing the unlawful detainer action and included in the unlawful detainer action specified claims. (3) Existing law makes it unlawful for a lessor to engage in specified activities for the purpose of influencing a lessee to vacate a dwelling, including using, or threatening to use, force, willful threats, or menacing conduct that interferes with the tenant's quiet enjoyment of the premises and that would create an apprehension of harm in a reasonable person. This bill would also prohibit a lessor from threatening to disclose information regarding or relating to the immigration status or citizenship status of a tenant, occupant, or other person associated with a tenant or occupant for the purpose of influencing a tenant to vacate a dwelling. (4) Existing law prohibits a lessor, or an agent of a lessor, from making any inquiry regarding or based on the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of residential real property, or from requiring a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of the rental property make any statement, representation, or certification concerning his or her immigration or citizenship status. Existing law provides that the prohibitions described above do not prohibit a lessor from complying with any legal obligation under federal law. This bill would also prohibit a lessor, or an agent of a lessor, from disclosing to any person or entity information regarding or relating to the immigration or citizenship status of any tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of the rental property for the purpose of, or with the intent of, harassing or intimidating a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant, retaliating against a tenant or occupant for the exercise of his or her rights, influencing a tenant or occupant to vacate a dwelling, or recovering possession of the dwelling. The bill would clarify that the term "federal law" in the provision described above includes any legal obligation of a lessor under a federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant, and would broaden that provision to include any legal obligation of a lessor under a subpoena, warrant, or other order issued by a court. This bill would make it unlawful for a lessor to disclose to any immigration authority, law enforcement agency, or local, state, or federal agency information regarding or relating to the immigration or citizenship status of any tenant, occupant, or other person known to the lessor to be associated with a tenant or occupant, as provided, for the purpose of, or with the intent of, harassing or intimidating a tenant or occupant, retaliating against a tenant or occupant for the exercise of his or her rights, influencing a tenant or occupant to vacate a dwelling, or recovering possession of the dwelling, unless the lessor is complying with any legal obligation under federal law, or a subpoena, warrant, or order issued by a court. The bill would require a court to order a lessor to pay specified civil penalties in the event of a violation of these provisions to the tenant, and to issue injunctive relief to prevent the lessor from engaging in similar conduct in the future, and would require the court to notify the district attorney of the county in which the real property for hire at issue was located of a potential violation of specified laws relating to extortion. The bill would also require a court to award attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party in an action under these provisions. The bill would prohibit a tenant, occupant, or person known to the landlord to be associated with a tenant or occupant, from waiving his or her rights under these provisions. The bill would authorize a nonprofit organization exempt from federal income taxation to bring an action for injunctive relief under these provisions. (5) Existing law provides that, if a lessor retaliates against a lessee of a dwelling for exercising his or her rights or because of a complaint to an appropriate agency as to tenantability and if the lessee is not in default as to the payment of rent, the lessor may not recover possession, cause the lessee to quit involuntarily, increase the rent, or decrease any services within 180 days of the occurrence of specified events. This bill would provide that a lessor would violate that prohibition if the lessor reported, or threatened to report, the lessee, or individuals known to the lessor to be associated with the lessee, to immigration authorities, but would provide that a lessor would not violate that prohibition if the lessor was complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. (6) Existing law prohibits a lessor from retaliating against a lessee because he or she has lawfully organized or participated in a lessees' association or an organization advocating lessees' rights or has lawfully and peaceably exercised any rights under the law by increasing rent, decreasing services, causing a lessee to quit involuntarily, bringing an action to recover possession, or from threatening to do any of those acts. This bill would provide that a lessor would violate that prohibition if the lessor reported, or threatened to report, the lessee, or individuals known to the lessor to be associated with the lessee, to immigration authorities, but would provide that a lessor would not violate that prohibition if the lessor was complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. (7) Existing law declares that all protections, rights, and remedies available under state law are available to all individuals in the state who have applied for employment or are employed, regardless of immigration status, as specified. Existing law also declares, for the purposes of enforcing state labor, employment, civil rights, and employee housing laws, that a person's immigration status is irrelevant to the issue of liability and that discovery into a person's immigration status is prohibited unless the person seeking to make the inquiry has shown by clear and convincing evidence that the inquiry is necessary to comply with federal immigration law. Existing law also provides that the immigration status of a minor child seeking recovery under any applicable law is irrelevant to the issues of liability or remedy and would prohibit discovery or other inquiry in a civil action or proceeding into a minor child's immigration status, with specified exceptions. This bill would declare that the immigration or citizenship status of any person is irrelevant to any issue of liability or remedy under specified provisions of law relating to the rights of tenants, and would prohibit inquiry being made in a civil action initiated to enforce those laws into a person's immigration or citizenship status unless 2 exceptions to that prohibition apply. (8) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1940.3 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 299 to be operative only if this bill and AB 299 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

(1) Existing law establishes the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University; the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California; the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges; and independent institutions of higher education as the 4 segments of postsecondary education in this state. Existing provisions of the Donahoe Higher Education Act set forth the missions and functions of these 4 postsecondary educational segments. No provision of the Donahoe Higher Education Act applies to the University of California except to the extent that the regents, by appropriate resolution, make that provision applicable. This bill would express findings and declarations of the Legislature relating to the possible impacts on public postsecondary educational institutions in this state of changes in federal immigration policies and enforcement. The bill would add to the Donahoe Higher Education Act provisions that would require the Trustees of the California State University, the governing boards of community college districts, and independent institutions of higher education that are qualifying institutions for purposes of the Cal Grant Program, and would request the regents, to the fullest extent consistent with state and federal law, to: refrain from disclosing personal information concerning students, faculty, and staff, except under specified circumstances; advise all students, faculty, and staff to notify the office of the chancellor or president, or his or her designee, as soon as possible, if he or she is advised that an immigration officer, as defined, is expected to enter, or has entered, the campus to execute a federal immigration order; notify, as soon as possible, the emergency contact of a student, faculty, or staff person if there is reason to suspect that the person has been taken into custody as the result of an immigration enforcement action; comply with a request from an immigration officer for access to nonpublic areas of the campus only upon presentation of a judicial warrant, except as specified; advise all students, faculty, and staff responding to or having contact with an immigration officer executing a federal immigration order, to promptly refer the entity or individual to the office of the chancellor or president, or his or her designee, for purposes of verifying the legality of any warrant, court order, or subpoena; designate a staff person to serve as a point of contact for those who may be subject to immigration actions, as specified; maintain a contact list of legal services providers who provide legal immigration representation, and provide it free of charge to any and all students who request it; adopt and implement, by March 1, 2019, the model policy developed by the Attorney General or an equivalent policy pursuant to a specified statute, limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible consistent with federal and state law, as specified; post on its Internet Web site, and provide via email quarterly or each semester to all students, faculty, and staff, and update as often as is necessary, a copy of the policy referenced above, and guidance informing them of their rights under state and federal immigration laws and how to respond to a federal immigration action or order; and ensure that certain benefits and services provided to undocumented students are continued in the event that they are subject to a federal immigration order. Because this bill would create new duties for community college districts, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. (2) 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 requires a person who is acting as an agent for a transferor of real property that is located within either a special flood hazard or an area of potential flooding, determined as provided, or the transferor if he or she is acting without an agent, to disclose to any prospective transferee the fact that the property located in a special flood hazard or an area of potential flooding if certain criteria are met. This bill would require, for every lease or rental agreement for residential property entered into on or after July 1, 2018, the owner or person offering the property for rent to disclose to the tenant specified information pertaining to the risk of flooding. The bill would make findings and declarations in this regard.

Existing law states the policy of the State of California to afford all persons in public schools, regardless of their disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other specified characteristic, equal rights and opportunities in the educational institutions of the state. Existing law prohibits discrimination on the basis of those specific characteristics in any program or activity conducted by an educational institution that receives, or benefits from, state financial assistance or enrolls pupils who receive state student financial aid. Existing law requires the State Department of Education to assess whether local educational agencies have taken certain actions related to educational equity, including adopting a policy that prohibits, and adopting a process for receiving and investigating complaints of, discrimination, harassment, intimidation, and bullying based on those actual or perceived specified characteristics. This bill would expressly include immigration status in the specified characteristics for purposes of those provisions. This bill would prohibit school officials and employees of a school district, county office of education, or charter school, except as required by state or federal law or as required to administer a state or federally supported educational program, from collecting information or documents regarding citizenship or immigration status of pupils or their family members. The bill would require the superintendent of a school district, the superintendent of a county office of education, and the principal of a charter school, as applicable, to report to the respective governing board or body of the local educational agency in a timely manner any requests for information or access to a schoolsite by an officer or employee of a law enforcement agency for the purpose of enforcing the immigration laws in a manner that ensures the confidentiality and privacy of any potentially identifying information. The bill would encourage a school, when an employee of the school is aware that a pupil's parent or guardian is not available to care for the pupil, to work with parents or guardians to update the emergency contact information and not to contact Child Protective Services to arrange for the pupil's care unless the school is unable to arrange for care through the use of emergency contact information or instructions provided by the pupil's parent or guardian. The bill would require the governing board or body of a local educational agency to perform specified actions relating to pupils and immigration status, including, among others, providing information to parents and guardians, as appropriate, regarding their children's right to a free public education, regardless of immigration status or religious beliefs. The bill would require the Attorney General, by April 1, 2018, in consultation with appropriate stakeholders, to publish model policies limiting assistance with immigration enforcement at public schools, to the fullest extent possible consistent with federal and state law, and ensuring that public schools remain safe and accessible to all California residents, regardless of immigration status. The bill would require the Attorney General to, at a minimum, consider specified issues when developing the model policies. The bill would require all local educational agencies to adopt the model policies, or equivalent policies, by July 1, 2018. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, 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, 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.