Existing law permits a person, corporation, or public agency to apply to the Secretary of State for certification or conditional approval of a remote accessible vote by mail system. Existing law requires the Secretary of State to examine and certify remote accessible vote by mail systems, as specified. Existing law permits a voter, including a voter with a disability or a military or overseas voter, to apply for and receive a vote by mail ballot from his or her county elections official. Existing law also authorizes specified counties to conduct an election as an all-mailed ballot election if specified requirements are satisfied, including requirements relating to accessibility by voters with disabilities. This bill would require a county elections official to permit a voter with a disability, or a military or overseas voter, to cast his or her ballot using a certified remote accessible vote by mail system. This requirement would not apply to a county when conducting an all-mailed ballot election, as specified. These provisions would become operative on January 1, 2020, or one year after the date on which the Secretary of State certifies a remote accessible vote by mail system pursuant to existing provisions of law, whichever is later. By imposing additional duties on local elections officials, 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, 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.
Sponsored bills
The Planning and Zoning 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. That law also authorizes a city council or county board of supervisors to establish a procedure by ordinance to grant the developer of a commercial or industrial project that meets specified criteria a density bonus, defined for this purpose as a floor area ratio bonus over the otherwise maximum allowable density permitted, when the developer has set aside a specified area to be used for a child care facility, as provided. This bill would authorize a city council or county board of supervisors to establish a procedure by ordinance to grant a developer of an eligible housing development, upon the request of the developer, a floor area ratio bonus, calculated as provided, in lieu of a density bonus awarded on the basis of dwelling units per acre. The bill would define "eligible housing development" as a development that meets specified criteria related to residential use or mixed use, location, zoning, replacement of units, and affordability. The bill would prohibit the city council or county board of supervisors from imposing any parking requirement on an eligible housing development in excess of specified ratios. The bill would require a city or county that adopts a floor area ratio bonus ordinance to allow an applicant seeking to develop an eligible residential development to calculate impact fees based on square feet, instead of on a per unit basis. The bill would also authorize an applicant for a floor area ratio bonus to submit a proposal for specified additional incentives or concessions, as provided.
The California Constitution generally limits ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property. For purposes of this limitation, "full cash value" is defined as, among other things, the appraised value of that real property when a change in ownership has occurred. Existing law provides that specified transfers are not deemed a change in ownership, including any transfer between registered domestic partners, as provided. This bill would also exclude from the definition of "change in ownership" any transfer of property occurring on or after January 1, 2000, to June 26, 2015, inclusive, between local registered domestic partners, as defined. The bill would require any transferee whose property was reassessed in contravention of this provision to obtain a reversal of that reassessment upon application to the county assessor, as provided. The bill would authorize the county to charge a fee related to the application and reassessment reversal. The bill would require the State Board of Equalization to prescribe the form for claiming the reassessment reversal. The bill would require any reassessment reversal to apply commencing with the lien date of the assessment year in which the claim is filed. By imposing new duties upon local county officials with respect to the change in ownership exclusion described above, 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 the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
(1) Existing law contains provisions relating to employer-employee relations between the state and its employees, public schools and their employees, local public agencies and their employees, and postsecondary educational institutions and their employees. The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, in this regard, generally governs employer-employee relations between local public agencies and their employees. Existing laws provide these public employees with the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations for the purpose of representation on all matters of employer-employee relations. The selected employee organization has the right to represent its members on all matters of employer-employee relations, including disputes. Existing law also prescribes the powers and duties of public transit districts, including administering employer-employee relations. The courts have held that the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, pertaining to employer-employee relations between local public agencies and their employees, does not apply to public transit districts that have a statutorily prescribed method of administering employer-employee relations that was in existence at the time the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act was enacted. This bill would give employees within the supervisory units of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of their own choosing for the purposes of representation on all employer-employee relations matters and would permit these employees to meet, confer, and enter into memoranda of understanding for these purposes pursuant to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. The bill would provide that the act governs these employer-employee relations and that they are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of, and are to be administered by, the Public Employment Relations Board. By increasing the duties of local public transit officials, the bill would create 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 makes it a crime for a person who has been taken into custody, assessed, and admitted to a designated facility because he or she is a danger to himself, herself, or others, as a result of a mental health disorder to own a firearm for a period of 5 years after the person is released from the facility. Existing law allows a person who is prohibited from owning a firearm pursuant to these provisions to petition the court for a hearing in which the district attorney is required to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the person would not be likely to use firearms in a safe and lawful manner. If the people do not meet this burden, existing law requires the court to order that the person not be subject to this prohibition on the possession of firearms. This bill would prohibit a person who has been taken into custody, assessed, and admitted to a designated facility because he or she is a danger to himself, herself, or others, as a result of a mental health disorder and who was previously taken into custody, assessed, and admitted one or more times within a period of one year preceding the most recent admittance from owning a firearm for the remainder of his or her life. The bill would extend the above hearing process to a person under these provisions. Because a violation of the firearm prohibition would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the facility to provide a person subject to the prohibition with a form to request a hearing and to forward the form to the superior court if the person requests a hearing. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to prescribe the form. This bill would require that form to include an authorization for the release of the person's mental health records, upon request, to the appropriate district attorney solely for use in the hearing. The bill would require the Department of Justice to update the form in accordance with these requirements and distribute the form to facilities by January 1, 2020. The bill would prohibit the facility from submitting the form on behalf of the person. Existing law requires the court to set a hearing within 30 days of receipt of a request. Existing law authorizes a continuance of 14 days, upon a showing of good cause by the district attorney. This bill would instead require the court to set the hearing within 60 days. The bill would further authorize a continuance of 30 days, upon a showing of good cause by the district attorney. The bill would allow a person who is subject to a lifetime firearm prohibition to file a subsequent petition every 5 years to show by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she can use firearms in a safe and lawful manner, as provided. Existing law makes it a crime for a person who has been certified for intensive treatment after being admitted to a designated facility because he or she is a danger to himself, herself, or others, as a result of a mental health disorder, to own a firearm for a period of 5 years. Existing law allows a person who is prohibited from owning a firearm pursuant to these provisions to petition the court for an order that he or she may own a firearm. Existing law requires the clerk of the court to set a hearing date at the time the petition is filed. Existing law authorizes a continuance of 14 days after the district attorney is notified of the hearing date. This bill would require the court to set a hearing date within 60 days. The bill would further authorize a continuance of 30 days after the district attorney has been notified of the hearing date. If additional continuances are granted, the bill would limit the total length of time for continuances to 60 days. This bill would make these provisions operative on January 1, 2020. 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 prohibits a person who has been convicted of a misdemeanor violation of specified animal cruelty provisions, within 5 years after the conviction, from owning, possessing, maintaining, having custody of, residing with, or caring for any animal. Existing law prohibits a person who has been convicted of a felony for animal cruelty or animal fighting, as specified, within 10 years after the conviction, from owning, possessing, maintaining, having custody of, residing with, or caring for any animal. This bill would clarify that an animal shelter administered by a public animal control agency or specified nonprofit entities and an animal rescue or animal adoption organization may ask an individual who is attempting to adopt an animal from that entity whether he or she is prohibited from owning or possessing an animal based on those prohibitions.
Existing law authorizes a public entity to require a bidder, contractor, or other entity to use a skilled and trained workforce to complete a contract or project, and requires that the commitment to use a skilled and trained workforce be made in an enforceable agreement that meets specified requirements. Existing law defines a "skilled and trained workforce" to mean a workforce that meets certain conditions, including specified apprenticeship graduation requirements. Existing law requires at least 30% of the skilled journeypersons employed to perform work on these contracts or projects, on or after January 1, 2017, to be graduates of an apprenticeship program. Existing law increases that percentage for work performed on or after January 1, 2018, and increases that percentage again for work performed on or after January 1, 2019, but excludes the same set of specified occupations from both of these increased percentage requirements. Existing law requires a contractor, bidder, or other entity to provide to the public entity or other awarding body, on a monthly basis while the project or contract is being performed, a report demonstrating compliance with skilled and trained workforce requirements. This bill would, for work performed on or after January 1, 2018, clarify that the same set of specified occupations continues to be subject to the current requirement that only 30% of skilled journeypersons employed to perform work on those contracts or projects be graduates of an apprenticeship program. The bill would require the public agency or other awarding body to forward a copy of the monthly report to the Labor Commissioner for issuance of a civil wage and penalty assessment and a copy of the plan, if any, to achieve substantial compliance with skilled and trained workforce requirements and the response to that plan, as prescribed, if the monthly report does not demonstrate compliance with skilled and trained workforce requirements. The bill would limit the public agency or awarding body to withholding 150% of the value of the monthly billing for a subcontractor that failed to timely submit the required information or did not demonstrate compliance, and would allow the contractor, bidder, or other entity to withhold the same amount from the subcontractor. The bill would require a contractor or subcontractor to pay a civil penalty to the state of not more than $5,000 per month of work performed in violation of the skilled and trained workforce requirements if the Labor Commissioner or his or her designee determines that the contractor or subcontractor failed to use a skilled and trained workforce. The bill would require a contractor or subcontractor that commits a second or subsequent violation within a 3-year period to pay a civil penalty to the state of not more than $10,000 per month of work performed in violation of the skilled and trained workforce requirements. The bill would require a contractor to obtain a declaration signed under penalty of perjury from the subcontractor that he or she has met the skilled and trained workforce requirements before making the final payment to the subcontractor. The bill would make a contractor or subcontractor who, with the intent to defraud, violates the above-described requirements ineligible to bid on, be awarded, or perform work on a contract for a public works project, as specified. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to publish on the commissioner's Internet Web site a list of contractors who are ineligible under these provisions. By expanding the crime of perjury, 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 existing federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on Indian lands within a state. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude tribal-state gaming compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts, and amendments of tribal-state gaming compacts, between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. This bill would ratify the tribal-state gaming compacts entered into between the State of California and the following Indian tribes: the La Jolla Band of Luiseño Indians, the Mechoopda Indian Tribe of Chico Rancheria, the San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians, the Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, and the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians. The bill would also ratify the amendment to the tribal-state gaming compact between the State of California and the Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians, executed on August 1, 2018, and the amendment to the tribal-state gaming compact between the State of California and the Karuk Tribe, executed on August 1, 2018. The bill would provide that, in deference to tribal sovereignty, certain actions related to these compacts and amended compacts are not projects for purposes of CEQA. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, the Dental Practice Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of the practice of dental hygienists by the Dental Hygiene Committee of California, which is comprised of 9 members appointed by the Governor, within the jurisdiction of the Dental Board of California. Existing law repeals the committee and its authority to appoint an executive officer on January 1, 2019, at which time the committee is subject to review by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature. This bill would remove the Dental Hygiene Committee from the jurisdiction of the Dental Board of California and continue the Dental Hygiene Committee of California by creating the Dental Hygiene Board of California within the Department of Consumer Affairs. The bill would change the manner of appointment of the hygiene board by requiring one public member to be appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules and one public member to be appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly rather than the Governor. The bill would extend the repeal date of the hygiene board and related appointment provisions to January 1, 2023. (2) Existing law requires an applicant for licensure as a registered dental hygienist to furnish electronic fingerprint images. This bill would require an out-of-state applicant or a specified licensee to instead furnish a hardcopy of fingerprint cards if electronic fingerprint images are not available or shared in the applicant's or licensee's state of residence. (3) Existing law authorizes the committee to condition dental hygienist licensure renewal on a licensee's submission of assurances that he or she will complete specified continuing education if the committee makes a specified determination. This bill would delete the requirement that the committee make a determination and would require the hygiene board to conduct random audits of licensees to ensure compliance with the continuing education requirements. (4) Existing law requires the committee to grant initial licensure as a registered dental hygienist to a person who satisfies specified requirements, including satisfactory performance on the state clinical examination or satisfactory completion of the dental hygiene examination given by the Western Regional Examining Board, or any other clinical dental hygiene examination approved by the committee. This bill would instead require, within the preceding 2 years, satisfactory completion of the dental hygiene examination given by the Western Regional Examining Board or any other clinical or dental hygiene examination approved by the hygiene board. (5) Existing law requires the committee to grant approval of educational programs for dental hygienists that meet specified standards and requirements. This bill would require the hygiene board to renew approval of educational programs for dental hygienists that certify to the hygiene board that the program continues to meet the requirements prescribed by the hygiene board, would authorize the hygiene board to conduct periodic surveys, evaluations, and site visits to educational programs, and would authorize the hygiene board to place a noncompliant educational program on probation, issue a citation and fine, or have its approval withdrawn. (6) Existing law requires the committee to establish the amount of fees relating to the licensing of dental hygienists and limits the fee for a site evaluation for dental hygienist educational programs that are not accredited to no more than $2,100. This bill would delete the limit for conducting the site evaluations specified above and would instead specify that the fee to conduct a site visit to educational programs for dental hygienists shall not exceed the actual costs incurred by the hygiene board. The bill would limit the fee for a retired license to 12 of the current license renewal fee. (7) This bill would make other conforming changes. (8) The bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 101 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by SB 1483 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1483 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1680 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by SB 1491 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1491 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law establishes the segments of the public postsecondary education system in the state, including the University of California administered by the Regents of the University of California and the California State University administered by the Trustees of the California State University. Existing law provides that a student, other than a nonimmigrant alien, as defined, who has attended high school in California for 3 or more years, who has graduated from a California high school or attained the equivalent thereof, who has registered at or attends an accredited institution of higher education in California not earlier than the fall semester or quarter of the 2001–02 academic year, and who, if he or she is an alien without lawful immigration status, has filed an affidavit, as specified, is exempt from paying nonresident tuition at the California State University. This bill would, commencing with the 2019–20 academic year, require the California State University, and request the University of California, to designate a Dream Resource Liaison on each of their respective campuses, as specified, to assist students meeting specified requirements, including undocumented students, by streamlining access to all available financial aid and academic opportunities for those students. The bill would encourage those institutions to establish Dream Resource Centers, and would authorize those centers to provide specified support services. The bill would authorize the trustees and the regents to seek and accept on behalf of the state any gift, bequest, devise, or donation whenever the gift and the terms and conditions thereof will aid in the creation and operation of Dream Resource Centers for their respective systems.