Under existing law, a person who enters a house, room, apartment, or other specified structure, with intent to commit larceny or any felony, is guilty of burglary in the first or 2nd degree, as specified. Burglary in the first degree is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 2, 4, or 6 years, and burglary in the 2nd degree is punishable as a misdemeanor by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or as a felony by imprisonment in a county jail for 16 months, or 2 or 3 years. This bill would prohibit a person from entering the curtilage of a home, as defined, with the intent to commit theft of a package shipped through the mail or delivered by a public or private carrier. The bill would make a violation of that prohibition punishable as a misdemeanor by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding 6 months or by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both that imprisonment and fine, or, under specified circumstances, as a misdemeanor by imprisonment in a county jail for a term not exceeding one year or by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or both that imprisonment and fine, or as a felony by imprisonment in a county jail for 16 months, or 2 or 3 years. By creating a new 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. The bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Sponsored bills
Existing law establishes within the Department of Housing and Community Development the California Housing Finance Agency and provides that the primary purpose of the agency is to meet the housing needs of persons and families of low or moderate income. Existing law requires the California Housing Finance Agency administer the Roberti-Greene Home Purchase Assistance Program, to provide home purchase assistance to low- and moderate-income homebuyers to qualify for the purchase of owner-occupied homes. Existing law authorizes the agency, pursuant to specified objectives, to create its own home purchase assistance programs, home purchase assistance products, or both, on terms and conditions as the agency deems prudent. Existing law requires the agency to provide to the Legislature and the Legislative Analyst an annual report containing information concerning all units produced, assisted, or insured using agency funds. This bill would require the Legislative Analyst to conduct a study, and present the findings thereof to the Legislature, to inform the creation of a low-interest loan program for first responders. The bill would require the report to be submitted on or before January 1, 2024. The bill would require the report to include a recommendation as to which state department is best suited to administer the program, an estimation of the amount of funding that would be necessary to conduct the program, and recommendations for qualifications for participation in the program.
(1) Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that satisfies specified planning objective standards to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. This bill would authorize a development proponent of a neighborhood multifamily project located on an eligible parcel to submit an application for a streamlined, ministerial approval process that is not subject to a conditional use permit. The bill would define a "neighborhood multifamily project" to mean a project to construct a multifamily structure on vacant land, or to convert an existing structure that does not require substantial exterior alteration into a multifamily structure, consisting of up to 4 residential dwelling units and that meets local height, setback, and lot coverage zoning requirements as they existed on July 1, 2019. The bill would also define "eligible parcel" to mean a parcel that meets specified requirements, including requirements relating to the location of the parcel and restricting the demolition of certain housing development that may already exist on the site. This bill would require a local agency to notify the development proponent in writing if the local agency determines that the development conflicts with any of the requirements provided for streamlined ministerial approval within 60 days of the submission of the development to the local agency. If the local agency does not notify the development proponent within this time period, the development would be deemed to comply with those requirements. The bill would limit the authority of a local agency to impose parking standards or requirements on a streamlined development approved pursuant to these provisions, as provided. The bill would provide that the approval of a project under these provisions expires automatically after 3 years, unless that project qualifies for a one-time, one-year extension of that approval. The bill would provide that approval pursuant to its provisions would remain valid for 3 years and remain valid thereafter, so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress, and would authorize a discretionary one-year extension, as provided. The bill would prohibit a local agency from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project receives ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. This bill would allow a local agency to exempt a project from the streamlined ministerial approval process described above by finding that the project will cause a specific adverse impact to public health and safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. 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. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill would establish a streamlined ministerial approval process for neighborhood multifamily projects, thereby exempting these projects from the CEQA approval process. (2) Existing law, known as the density bonus law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a 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 for 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. This bill, on or after January 1, 2023, would require a specified city, county, or city and county to grant upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things, that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with specified law within specified time periods; and the residential development complies with specified additional requirements under existing law. The bill would impose additional requirements on a residential development located within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000. The bill would require that a residential development within a county with a population greater than 600,000 that is eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive, upon request, waivers from maximum controls on density; minimum automobile parking requirements greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit; and specified additional waivers if the residential development is located within a 12-mile or 14-mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined. For a residential development within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000, the bill would instead require that the incentive provide waivers from maximum controls on density, subject to certain limitations; maximum height limitations less than or equal to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height for mixed use or residential use; certain requirements governing the size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy; and minimum automobile parking requirements, as provided. The bill would require a local government to grant an equitable communities incentive unless it makes a specified finding regarding the effects of the incentive on any real property or historic district that is listed on a federal or state register of historical resources. The bill would authorize a local government to modify or expand the terms of an equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable communities incentive is consistent with these provisions. The bill would delay implementation of these provisions in potentially sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2023. The bill would further delay implementation of these provisions in sensitive communities, determined as provided, until January 1, 2026, unless the city or county in which the area is located votes to make these provisions applicable after a specified petition and public hearing process. On and after January 1, 2026, the bill would apply these provisions to a sensitive community unless the city or county adopts a community plan for the area that meets certain requirements. The bill would also exempt from these provisions a local government that has a local flexibility plan that has been reviewed and certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified. The bill, on or before July 1, 2021, would require the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, to develop and publish on its internet website rules, regulations, or guidelines for the submission and approval of a local flexibility plan, as specified. The bill, on or after July 1, 2021, would authorize a local government to submit a local flexibility plan for review and approval by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to those rules, regulations, or guidelines. The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by these provisions address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project that complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That law provides that the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. This bill would additionally provide that the receipt of an equitable communities incentive is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. (3) By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) 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 measure would name the public street, circle, and plaza at 914 and 915 Capitol Mall in the City of Sacramento as the Willie L. Brown, Jr. Circle and Plaza. The measure would request the Department of General Services to determine the cost of erecting the appropriate signage commemorating this special designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources, to cover that cost to erect that signage.
(1) Existing law authorizes a person who is 18 years of age or older to circulate an initiative, referendum, or recall petition anywhere within the state. This bill would provide that a person or organization who pays a person money or any other thing of value based on the number of signatures obtained on a state or local initiative, referendum, or recall petition is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a specified fine, imprisonment, or both that fine and imprisonment. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires that each section of a petition for a statewide initiative or referendum measure have attached thereto the declaration of the person soliciting the signatures that includes specified information. This bill would require a person who solicits signatures for a proposed initiative measure and does not receive money or other valuable consideration for the specific purpose of soliciting signatures of electors to make additional declarations, as specified. (3) Existing law requires local elections officials to perform various duties with respect to statewide initiative and referendum petitions including, within 8 days after the filing of a petition, determining the total number of signatures affixed to the petition. Existing law also requires an elections official, within 30 days of notification from the Secretary of State that a petition has received 100% or more of the signatures needed to declare the petition sufficient, to determine the number of qualified voters who signed the petition. This bill would extend the time a local elections official is required to determine the total number of signatures affixed to a petition to 10 days, and would extend the time a local elections official is required to determine the number of qualified voters who signed the petition to 35 days after receiving notice from the Secretary of State that the petition has received the signatures needed to declare the petition sufficient. This bill would require at least 10% of the signatures that are required to qualify an initiative measure to be solicited by a person who does not receive money or other valuable consideration for the specific purpose of soliciting signatures of electors. The bill would require an elections official who determines the total number of signatures affixed to a petition and verifies those signatures to also determine the total number of signatures submitted by persons who do not receive money or other valuable consideration for the specific purpose of soliciting signatures of electors and verify those signatures. (4) Existing law requires, if the statistical sampling shows that the number of valid signatures on a petition is within 95 to 110% of the number of signatures of qualified voters needed to declare the petition sufficient, the Secretary of State to order the examination and verification of each signature filed and to notify the elections officials. This bill, with regard to an initiative petition for which the statistical sampling shows that the number of valid signatures for all signatures submitted is more than 110% of the number of qualified voters needed to find the petition sufficient, but the number of valid signatures submitted for purposes of the 10% requirement described above is within 95 to 110% of the number of signatures needed to satisfy that requirement, would require the Secretary of State to only order an examination and verification of each signature filed to satisfy the 10% requirement. (5) Existing law requires every proposed initiative measure, prior to circulation, to include on the petition, among other things, the circulating title and summary prepared by the Attorney General and a heading for the initiative measure, as specified. Existing law also permits a petition for a proposed initiative or referendum measure to be presented in sections, as specified. This bill would provide that its provisions do not apply to any initiative petition for which the Attorney General issued a circulating title and summary before July 1, 2020. The bill would additionally require a petition for a proposed initiative measure that is circulated by persons who do not receive money or other valuable consideration for the purpose of obtaining signatures of electors to be printed on green paper in a contrasting color ink. The bill also would require a petition for a proposed initiative measure that is circulated by persons who do receive money or other valuable consideration for the purpose of obtaining signatures of electors to be printed on white paper in a contrasting color ink. (6) Under existing law, an initiative petition must contain specified language advising the public of its right to ask whether the person circulating the petition is a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer. This bill would, for statewide initiative or referendum measures, instead require an initiative petition to include a disclosure, as specified, notifying the public that the petition circulator is receiving money or other valuable consideration for the specific purpose of soliciting signatures of electors, or is a volunteer or employee of a nonprofit organization. (7) Existing law provides that a person who engages in specified conduct in connection with the collection of signatures on any initiative, referendum, or recall petition is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would require that an initiative petition section be deemed invalid, and would prohibit use of the petition section for the purpose of determining whether the initiative measure qualifies for the ballot, if the signatures are solicited and submitted by a person who engages in fraud, misrepresentation, or any of the specified conduct for which the person may be found guilty of a misdemeanor. The bill would authorize specified persons to enforce this provision by a civil action upon a showing of clear and convincing evidence. (8) Because this bill would impose new requirements on local elections officials relative to calculating and verifying signatures on a petition, it 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. (9) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 101 of the Elections Code proposed by SB 47 to be operative only if this bill and SB 47 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 9030 of the Elections Code proposed by AB 698 and AB 1829 to be operative only if this bill and those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 9031 of the Elections Code proposed by AB 698 to be operative only if this bill and AB 698 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law establishes the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, independent institutions of higher education, and private postsecondary educational institutions as the segments of postsecondary education in this state. Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that budget and policy decisions regarding postsecondary education generally adhere to 3 specified goals and that appropriate metrics be identified, defined, and formally adopted to monitor progress toward the achievement of the goals. Existing law establishes the California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC) as the statewide postsecondary education coordinating and planning agency, and provides for its functions and responsibilities. Existing law also provides for the composition of CPEC's membership. The annual state Budget Acts from the 2011–12 fiscal year to the 2018–19 fiscal year, inclusive, have provided no funding for CPEC. This bill would establish the Higher Education Performance, Accountability, and Coordination Commission, composed of 5 public members with experience in postsecondary education, appointed as specified, as the statewide postsecondary education oversight, coordination, and planning entity. The bill would require the commission to develop and publish an independent annual report on the condition of higher education in California, as provided. The bill would establish other functions and responsibilities of the commission, which would include specified advisory duties and acting as a clearinghouse for postsecondary education information. The bill would authorize the commission to require the governing boards and institutions of public postsecondary education to submit specified information and student data to the commission on plans and programs, costs, selection and retention of students, enrollments, plant capacities, and other matters pertinent to the commission's functions and responsibilities. To the extent that these provisions would impose new duties on community college districts, the bill would constitute a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to report to the Legislature on the performance of the commission on or before January 1, 2025. 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.
This measure would recognize September 2020 as Sickle Cell Disease Awareness Month and encourage the Legislature to appropriate funds for research, treatment, and monitoring of sickle cell disease, and for related education and outreach.
This measure would urge specified state departments and the Attorney General to use their authority to ensure that health care service plans and health insurers subject to their authority comply with the federal Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008.