Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, establishes the Medical Board of California for the licensing, regulation, and discipline of physicians and surgeons. Existing law establishes the California Board of Podiatric Medicine within the Medical Board of California for the licensing, regulation, and discipline of podiatrists. Existing law, the Osteopathic Act, enacted by an initiative measure, establishes the Osteopathic Medical Board of California for the licensing and regulation of osteopathic physicians and surgeons and requires the Osteopathic Medical Board of California to enforce specified provisions of the Medical Practice Act with respect to its licensees. Existing law, the Naturopathic Doctors Act, establishes the Naturopathic Medicine Committee within the Osteopathic Medical Board of California for the licensing and regulation of naturopathic doctors. Existing law, the Chiropractic Act, enacted by an initiative measure, establishes the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners for the licensing and regulation of chiropractors. Existing law, the Acupuncture Licensure Act, establishes the Acupuncture Board for the licensing and regulation of acupuncturists. Existing law authorizes each of these regulatory entities to discipline its licensee by placing her or him on probation, as specified. This bill, on and after July 1, 2019, would require the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Naturopathic Medicine Committee, the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, and the Acupuncture Board to require a licensee to provide a separate disclosure, as specified, to a patient or a patient's guardian or health care surrogate before the patient's first visit if the licensee is on probation pursuant to a probationary order made on and after July 1, 2019. The bill, on and after July 1, 2019, would require the Medical Board of California and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California to require a licensee to provide a separate disclosure, as specified, to a patient or a patient's guardian or health care surrogate before the patient's first visit if the licensee is on probation pursuant to a probationary order made on and after July 1, 2019, under specified circumstances. The bill would also require the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Naturopathic Medicine Committee, the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, the Acupuncture Board, the Medical Board of California, and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California to provide specified information relating to licensees on probation on the regulatory entity's online license information Internet Web site.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law establishes the Department of Consumer Affairs, specifies the various boards that comprise the department, and requires the boards to meet at least 3 times a year. This bill would instead require the boards to meet at least 2 times a year. (2) Existing law requires the Director of Consumer Affairs to implement complaint prioritization guidelines for boards to use in prioritizing their respective complaint and investigative workloads. This bill would require the director to amend those guidelines to include the category of "allegations of serious harm to a minor," as specified. (3) Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, establishes the Medical Board of California for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons. Existing law prohibits a postgraduate trainee, intern, resident, postdoctoral fellow, or instructor from engaging in the practice of medicine unless he or she holds a valid, unrevoked, and unsuspended physician's and surgeon's certificate issued by the board. Existing law provides an exemption to this provision and authorizes a graduate of an approved medical school to engage in the practice of medicine as a part of a postgraduate training program, as specified. Existing law, on and after January 1, 2020, limits to 12 months the practice of medicine, and receipt of compensation for that practice, by a medical school graduate as a part of an approved first-year postgraduate training program. Existing law, on and after January 1, 2020, limits to 27 months the practice of medicine, and receipt of compensation for that practice, by a medical school graduate as a part of an approved residency or fellowship. Existing law, on and after January 1, 2020, requires all privileges and exemptions under these provisions to cease automatically if the resident or fellow fails to receive a license to practice medicine within 27 months from the commencement of the residency or fellowship or if the board denies his or her application for licensure. Existing law, on and after January 1, 2020, requires all approved postgraduate training that the medical school graduate has successfully completed in the United States or Canada to count toward the aggregate 39-month license exemption. Existing law, on and after January 1, 2020, requires a medical school graduate to successfully complete a minimum of 36 months of approved postgraduate training with at least 24 consecutive months in the same program to be eligible for a California physician's and surgeon's certificate. This bill would, on and after January 1, 2020, delete the 12-month and 27-month limitations on the license exemptions for medical school graduates in first-year postgraduate training programs and residencies and fellowships, respectively. The bill would, on and after January 1, 2020, authorize the board, upon review of supporting documentation, to grant an extension beyond the 39-month license exemption to a postgraduate training licensee to successfully complete the 36 months of required approved postgraduate training. The bill would, on and after January 1, 2020, require an applicant who has successfully completed 36 months of approved postgraduate training in another state or in Canada and who is accepted into an approved postgraduate training program in California to obtain his or her license within 90 days after beginning the program. The bill would, on and after January 1, 2020, replace the requirement that the 24 months in the postgraduate training program be consecutive with a requirement that there be successful progression through the 24 months. The bill would, on and after January 1, 2020, require the program director for a postgraduate training program in California to report to the board, on a form approved by the board, and provide any supporting documents as required by the board, specified events regarding a postgraduate trainee's status in the postgraduate program within 30 days of the event. Existing law requires the board to issue a physician's and surgeon's certificate to an applicant who holds a specified license from another state or a Canadian province or Canadian provinces and who, in addition to meeting other requirements, has satisfactorily completed at least 2 years of approved postgraduate training or has satisfactorily completed at least one year of approved postgraduate training and takes and passes the clinical competency written examination. Existing law, on and after January 1, 2020, revises this provision to, among other things, exclude the applicant from licensure. This bill instead would continue to include such an applicant who meets the other requirements as revised on and after January 1, 2020. Existing law authorizes a person who voluntarily cancels his or her license or fails to renew his or her license within 5 years after its expiration under the Medical Practice Act to apply for and obtain a new license upon satisfaction of specified requirements, including satisfactory completing 2 years of approved postgraduate training. This bill would instead require the person to satisfactorily complete 3 years of approved postgraduate training. Existing law establishes various fees in connection with the issuance of licenses under the Medical Practice Act, and requires those fees to be paid into the State Treasury and credited to the Contingent Fund of the Medical Board of California, available to the board for specified purposes upon appropriation by the Legislature. Existing law requires that an applicant for a physician's and surgeon's postgraduate training license be required to pay only 50% of the initial license fee. Existing law requires the applicant to, among other things, pay the reduced licensing fee to be considered for a postgraduate training license. This bill would instead require the applicant to pay a nonrefundable application and processing fee. (4) Existing law regulates the practice of podiatric medicine by the California Board of Podiatric Medicine and prescribes various fees relating to, among others, an application, licensure, and renewal. All revenue received by the board is required to be deposited into the Board of Podiatric Medicine Fund, which is available to the board upon appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would revise those fee provisions by, among other things, deleting the oral examination fee and increasing, until January 1, 2021, the amount of the biennial renewal fee. (5) Existing law, the Nursing Practice Act, regulates the practice of nursing by the Board of Registered Nursing and authorizes the board to appoint an executive officer. This bill would authorize the executive officer to adopt a decision entered by default and a stipulation for surrender of a license. Existing law establishes various fees in connection with the issuance of licenses under the act, and requires those fees to be deposited in the Board of Registered Nursing Fund, available to the board upon appropriation by the Legislature. Existing law establishes that the fee paid by a registered nurse for an evaluation of his or her qualifications to use the title "public health nurse" shall be not less than $500 or more than $1,500. This bill would instead establish a fee for that purpose of not less than $300 or more than $1,000, would establish a penalty for failure to renew a certificate to practice as a public health nurse within the prescribed time, and would require the Board of Registered Nursing to reimburse any registered nurse who paid more than $300 for an evaluation between April 5, 2018, and December 31, 2018. (6) Existing law, the Vocational Nursing Practice Act, provides for the regulation of vocational nurses by the Board of Vocational Nursing and Psychiatric Technicians of the State of California, establishes the Vocational Nursing and Psychiatric Technician Fund, and makes those funds available to the board upon appropriation by the Legislature. Existing law prescribes various fees in connection with the issuance of licenses under the act and requires the board to collect a biennial fee not to exceed $200 from a continuing education course provider. This bill would instead require the board to collect an initial approval and a biennial renewal fee of $150 unless a higher fee, not to exceed $250, is established by the board. The bill would also require the board to collect an initial approval and a biennial renewal fee of $150, unless a higher fee, not to exceed $250, is established by the board, from any provider of a course in intravenous therapy, blood withdrawal, or intravenous therapy with blood withdrawal. The bill would revise the fees and fee amounts to be assessed under the act, including, but not limited to, application, examination, and renewal fees. (7) Existing law, the Optometry Practice Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of the practice of optometry by the State Board of Optometry. Existing law authorizes a person to renew an expired optometrist license by paying specified fees and filing a form prescribed by the board. Existing law, commencing July 1, 2018, requires the board to charge an applicant for licensure a fee of $2, and an applicant for renewal a fee of $4, for purposes of developing an interface with the National Practitioner Data Bank. This bill would also authorize the renewal of expired statements of licensure, branch office licenses, and fictitious name permits by filing an application for renewal and paying renewal and delinquency fees prescribed by the board, and would make the National Practitioner Data Bank fee $4 for both licensure and renewal applicants. (8) Existing law, the Naturopathic Doctors Act, provides for the regulation of the practice of naturopathic medicine by the Naturopathic Medicine Committee within the Osteopathic Medical Board of California. Existing law establishes various fees in connection with the issuance of a license to practice naturopathic medicine, which are deposited in the Naturopathic Doctor's Fund and are available to the committee upon appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would revise those provisions by, among other things, increasing the application, initial licensing, and renewal fees, and establishing a fee for a certified license verification. (9) Existing law makes it unprofessional conduct for certain unlicensed persons who have completed clinical training in psychoanalysis and are registered to engage in psychoanalysis to use controlled substances, dangerous drugs, or alcoholic beverages under prescribed circumstances, including if the use impairs the ability of the registrant to practice safely. Existing law requires an unlicensed person registered to engage in psychoanalysis pursuant to those provisions to pay a sum not in excess of $100 and a renewal fee not in excess of $50 to the Contingent Fund of the Medical Board of California. Existing law requires the board to revoke the exemption from licensure of any person who has been required to register as a sex offender, as specified. Existing law makes all of the these provisions inoperative on and after January 1, 2019. This bill would delete the repeal of the above-specified provisions. By extending the term for an existing appropriation, the bill would make an appropriation. (10) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of psychiatric technicians by the Board of Vocational Nursing and Psychiatric Technicians of the State of California, and authorizes the board, if it adopts a continuing education program, to collect a fee from continuing education course providers. Existing law also prescribes various fees in connection with the issuance of a psychiatric technician license. This bill would instead require the board, if it adopts a continuing education or blood withdrawal program, to collect an initial approval and a biennial renewal fee from a provider of a course in continuing education or blood withdrawal, as specified. The bill would also revise the fees and fee amounts required for licensure as a psychiatric technician. (11) Existing law, the Massage Therapy Act, provides for the certification and regulation of massage therapists by the California Massage Therapy Council and requires an applicant for certification as a massage therapist to pass a massage and bodywork competency assessment examination. This bill would make that examination requirement inoperative from January 1, 2019, until January 1, 2021. (12) The Veterinary Medicine Practice Act regulates the practice of veterinary medicine by the Veterinary Medical Board and makes a violation of its provisions a crime. Existing law separately provides immunity from liability to a veterinarian or registered veterinary technician who renders services during certain states of emergency. This bill would authorize a California-licensed veterinarian at a registered premises located within a 25-mile radius of any declared condition of emergency to, in good faith, provide veterinary services without establishing a veterinarian-client-patient relationship and dispense or prescribe a dangerous drug or device where failure to provide services or medications may result in loss of life or intense suffering. The bill would provide immunity from liability for a veterinarian providing those services. Existing law excludes specified persons from the provisions regulating the practice of veterinary medicine, including veterinary medicine students in 2 specified schools of veterinary medicine who participate in diagnosis and treatment, as specified. This bill would instead exclude students from any veterinary medical program accredited by the American Veterinary Medical Association Council on Education who participate in diagnosis or treatment with direct supervision, or surgery with immediate supervision, subject to specified conditions. Existing law provides for a veterinary assistant controlled substance permit issued by the Veterinary Medical Board to qualified applicants and authorizes the board to deny, revoke, or suspend a veterinary assistant controlled substance permit for specified reasons. This bill would add to the list of reasons the conviction of a crime substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of veterinary medicine, veterinary surgery, or veterinary dentistry. The bill would also authorize the board, in addition to denial, revocation, or suspension, to issue a probationary veterinary assistant controlled substance permit. The bill would prohibit a graduate of a veterinary college from performing animal health care tasks otherwise performed by a registered veterinary technician, except as specified, and would require a veterinarian to offer a consultation to the client each time he or she initially prescribes, dispenses, or furnishes a dangerous drug, as defined, to an animal patient in an outpatient setting. Because a violation of that provision would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the Veterinary Medical Board to establish a regular inspection program, and provides that the board is required to make every effort to inspect at least 20% of veterinary premises annually. This bill would instead require the board to inspect at least 20% of veterinary premises annually. (13) Existing law requires a person to meet specified requirements in order to use the title "certified common interest development manager," and requires a certified common interest development manager to make specified disclosures to the board of directors of a common interest development before providing services to the common interest development. Existing law repeals those provisions governing certified common interest development managers on January 1, 2019. This bill would delete the repeal provision, thereby extending those provisions indefinitely. (14) Existing law, the Chiropractic Act, enacted by initiative, provides for the licensure and regulation of chiropractors by the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, which is composed of 7 members appointed by the Governor, and establishes an application fee of not more than $100 and, on and after January 1, 2019, a renewal fee of $250. Existing law authorizes the Legislature to fix the amounts of the fees payable by applicants and licensees, and directs the deposit of these fees into the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners' Fund, a continuously appropriated fund. This bill would delete the provisions providing for the application and renewal fees and would instead establish a schedule of regulatory fees necessary to carry out the responsibilities required by the Chiropractic Initiative Act, including, among others, application and renewal fees for licensure, fees to apply for approval for a continuing education course, and satellite office certificate fees. By increasing specified fees and establishing new fees for deposit into a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. (15) The bill would make technical changes to various provisions of the Business and Professions Code. The bill would also make technical changes to various provisions of the Health and Safety Code by eliminating cross-references to obsolete provisions governing cemeteries. (16) 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 generally prescribes the operation of a motorized scooter, defined as 2-wheeled device that has handlebars, has a floorboard that is designed to be stood upon when riding, and is powered by an electric motor or by a source other than electric power. Existing law requires a driver's license or permit to operate a motorized scooter. Existing law prohibits the operation of a motorized scooter on a highway with a speed limit in excess of 25 miles per hour unless the motorized scooter is operated within a Class II bike lane. Existing law prohibits an operator of a motorized scooter from operating the motorized scooter without wearing a properly fitted and fastened helmet meeting specified standards. Existing law prohibits a person from operating a motorized scooter at a speed in excess of 15 miles per hour. A violation of prescriptions or prohibitions regarding motorized scooters is a crime. This bill would permit a local authority to authorize the operation of a motorized scooter on a highway with a speed limit of up to 35 miles per hour and would additionally allow for operation of a motorized scooter on a highway with a higher speed limit if the motorized scooter is operated within a Class IV bikeway. The bill would specify that the existing maximum 15 mile per hour speed limit for the operation of a motorized scooter applies regardless of a higher speed limit applicable to the highway. The bill would require the operator of a motorized scooter to wear a helmet only if the operator is under 18 years of age.
Existing law establishes the Structural Pest Control Board within the Department of Consumer Affairs to define, license, and regulate structural pest control operators and companies. Existing law authorizes the board to revoke, suspend, or deny a license under the Structural Pest Control Act and authorizes the director to levy a civil penalty against a person for any violation of the act. Existing law also authorizes county agricultural commissioners, among other things, to levy fines against Branch 1 registered companies for any major violations, as defined by the act. Existing law repeals the provisions relating to the board on January 1, 2019. This bill would authorize a person whose license or registration has been revoked, suspended, or surrendered, or who has been placed on probation, to petition the board, after specified minimum time periods, for reinstatement or modification of the penalty. The bill would additionally authorize specified county agricultural commissioners to levy a civil penalty against a person for any violation of the act. The bill would also authorize the board and all county agricultural commissioners to levy fines for serious or moderate violations, as defined. The bill would also change the minimum and maximum penalties applicable for a violation of this chapter. The bill would extend the provisions establishing the board until January 1, 2023. Existing law prohibits a registered company or licensee from commencing work on a contract relating to the absence or presence of wood destroying pests or organisms until an inspection has been made, as provided, and an inspection report has been delivered to the person requesting the inspection and to the property owner. Existing law authorizes a person who orders an inspection report to also request a certification on whether evidence of the absence or presence of wood destroying pests or organisms was found and requires the registered company performing the inspection to provide this certification, as specified. Existing law requires a Branch 1 registered company who performs a fumigation following an inspection by a Branch 3 registered company to issue a specified certification of completion of the fumigation to the Branch 3 registered company. Upon failure of a fumigation, existing law requires the Branch 1 registered company that performed the fumigation to verify the need for refumigation and file specified reports with the Branch 3 registered company and with the consumer. This bill would require a specified certification when the property is free of evidence of active infestation or infection and require all certifications to be included on the complete, limited, supplemental, or reinspection reports. The bill would, where the consumer has directly contracted for the fumigation, require the Branch 1 registered company to also provide the certification of completion of the fumigation to the consumer who ordered the fumigation and would require the Branch 1 registered company to provide a warranty for fumigation to the owner or the owner's designated agent. The bill would specify additional requirements for a potential failed fumigation, including a requirement that, when a consumer authorizes a Branch 3 registered company to subcontract the fumigation to a Branch 1 registered company, the Branch 3 registered company verify the need for a refumigation and issue an inspection report. The bill would require, when the consumer elects to contract directly with a Branch 1 registered company to perform a fumigation, the Branch 1 registered company to take additional specified actions. Existing law makes a violation of the act a crime. Because a violation of the bill's requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law classifies certain controlled substances into designated schedules. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES) for the electronic monitoring of the prescribing and dispensing of Schedule II, Schedule III, and Schedule IV controlled substances by a health care practitioner authorized to prescribe, order, administer, furnish, or dispense a Schedule II, Schedule III, or Schedule IV controlled substance. Existing law requires prescription forms for controlled substance prescriptions to be obtained from security printers approved by the department, as specified. Existing law requires a dispensing pharmacy, clinic, or other dispenser to report specified information to the department. This bill would authorize the department to reduce or limit the number of approved printers to 3, as specified. The bill would require prescription forms for controlled substance prescriptions to have a uniquely serialized number, in a manner prescribed by the department, and would require a printer to submit specified information to the department for all prescription forms delivered. The bill would require the information submitted by a dispensing pharmacy, clinic, or other dispenser to the department to include the serial number for the corresponding prescription form, if applicable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 11165 of the Health and Safety Code proposed by AB 1751 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1751 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Under existing law, a person who is 18 years of age or older may circulate an initiative, referendum, or recall petition. 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. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) Existing law, commencing on January 1, 2019, requires every city or county in which a taxicab is substantially located to adopt an ordinance or resolution in regard to taxicab transportation service and requires each city or county to provide for a policy for entry into the business of providing taxicab transportation service, the establishment or registration of rates for the provision of taxicab transportation service, and a mandatory controlled substance and alcohol testing certification program for drivers. Existing law similarly authorizes the City and County of San Francisco, regardless of whether or not a taxicab company is substantially located within that city and county. Existing law prohibits a city or county from requiring a taxicab company or driver to comply with specified local regulations, unless that taxicab company or driver is substantially located within that city or county. Existing law prohibits a taxicab company or a taxicab driver from operating within a county unless the company and driver are substantially located in at least one city within that county or the unincorporated area of that county. Existing law authorizes a permitted taxicab company to arrange prearranged trips anywhere within the county in which it has obtained a permit. This bill would, instead, require each city or county in which a taxicab company is substantially located to adopt an ordinance or resolution in regards to taxicab transportation service, that includes provisions for a permitting program for taxicab drivers, and would provide that it is unlawful to operate a taxicab company without a valid permit to operate issued by each city or county in which the taxicab company is substantially located. The bill would remove the prohibition on a taxicab company or a taxicab driver from operating within a county unless the company and driver are substantially located in at least one city within that county or the unincorporated area of that county. The bill would authorize a taxicab company permitted by a city or a county to arrange prearranged trips anywhere within that county. The bill would define "permitted taxicab company" for these purposes to mean a taxicab service provider that obtains all necessary permits required by these provisions, and to include a taxicab driver if a taxicab company consists of only one driver. (2) Existing law requires a permitted taxicab company to comply with certain requirements, including that it be subject to an annual inspection by the Bureau of Automotive Repair. This bill would, instead, require a permitted taxicab company to be subject to an annual inspection by the city or county in which it is substantially located, at a facility that is certified by the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence or a facility registered with the Bureau of Automotive Repair. (3) Existing law deems a city or county in which a taxicab company operates as a city or county in which a taxicab company driver is substantially located if the city or county enacts a resolution of intention to enter into a joint exercise of powers agreement or join a joint powers authority, or to enter into an agreement with a transit agency, for the purpose of regulating or administering taxicab companies. This bill would, instead, authorize a city or county to enter into an agreement with another city or county to form a joint powers authority, or to enter into an agreement with a transit agency, for the purpose of regulating or administering taxicab companies and taxicab drivers, as applicable, that are substantially located within the jurisdictional boundaries of that entity. (4) Existing law defines the term "substantially located" for these purposes to mean that the taxicab company has a primary business address within that jurisdiction, or that trips originating within that jurisdiction account for the largest share of the company's total number of trips within the county within the past year, and determined every 5 years thereafter. Existing law requires a taxicab company to collect specified data in order to determine what jurisdiction that company is substantially located in. This bill would modify the test to specify that a taxicab company is substantially located within a city or county if that company has a primary business address within the jurisdiction of that entity, or if the total number of prearranged and nonprearranged trips that originate within that city's or county's jurisdiction account for the largest share of the taxicab company's total number of trips within each county where the taxicab company operated over the previous calendar year, as determined annually. The bill would establish a modified test for a taxicab company that initiates taxicab operations after January 1, 2019, in a county in which that company had not previously operated, by providing that for the first year of its operation the taxicab company is substantially located only in the jurisdiction in which it has a primary business address, and from that point forward would provide that the general substantially located test described above applies to determine whether the taxicab company is substantially located in a jurisdiction. The bill would make conforming changes to that effect. The bill would require a taxicab company that changes from being substantially located in one city or county to another to notify the new city or county 6 months before making that change. (5) By imposing additional duties on local governments, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (6) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) Existing law, the Automotive Repair Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of automotive repair dealers. Under existing law, there is a Bureau of Automotive Repair, which is under the supervision of the Director of Consumer Affairs. Existing law vests the duty of enforcing and administering that act in the Chief of the Bureau of Automotive Repair and makes the chief responsible to the director. Existing law requires that the powers and duties of the bureau be subject to review by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature as if the act was scheduled to be repealed on January 1, 2019. This bill would instead provide that the powers and duties of the bureau be subject to review by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature as if the act was scheduled to be repealed on January 1, 2023. Existing law requires automotive repair dealers to give the customer a written estimated price for labor and parts necessary for a specific job. Existing law defines "automotive repair dealer" to mean a person who, for compensation, engages in the business of diagnosing and repairing motor vehicles. Existing law defines repair to include all maintenance, except specified functions including minor services. Existing law makes a violation of the Automotive Repair Act, except as specified, punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would delete the exceptions and would, instead, exclude roadside services, as defined. The bill would define the term "preventative maintenance services" to mean checking tire pressure, rotating tires, changing transmission fluid and filters, and other related services. The bill would specify that a written estimate is not required for an automotive repair dealer to perform preventative maintenance services, if the customer authorizes the service and either the service is performed free of charge or the total price for labor and parts necessary to perform the service is displayed conspicuously or is made available to and acknowledged by the customer at the automotive repair facility where the service is performed. The bill would reorganize the definition of terms for purposes of the act, and would make conforming changes. By expanding the scope of a crime to apply to additional automotive repair activities, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes the Bureau of Real Estate to obtain copies of fullface engraved pictures or photographs of individuals directly from the Department of Motor Vehicles for purposes of enforcing specified laws. Existing law also authorizes the city attorney of a city and county and his or her investigators to obtain copies of these records directly from the department for purposes of performing functions related to city and county operations. This bill would authorize the Bureau of Automotive Repair to obtain copies of the records described above directly from the department for purposes of enforcing the Automotive Repair Act and the Motor Vehicle Inspection Program. (3) 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 classifies certain controlled substances into designated schedules. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain the Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES) for the electronic monitoring of the prescribing and dispensing of Schedule II, Schedule III, and Schedule IV controlled substances by a health care practitioner authorized to prescribe, order, administer, furnish, or dispense a Schedule II, Schedule III, or Schedule IV controlled substance. This bill would require the department, no later than July 1, 2020, to adopt regulations regarding the access and use of the information within CURES by consulting with stakeholders, and addressing certain processes, purposes, and conditions in the regulations. The bill would authorize the department, once final regulations have been issued, to enter into an agreement with any entity operating an interstate data sharing hub, or any agency operating a prescription drug monitoring program in another state, for purposes of interstate data sharing of prescription drug monitoring program information, as specified. The bill would require any agreement entered into by the department for those purposes to ensure that all access to data obtained from CURES and the handling of data contained within CURES comply with California law and meet the same patient privacy, audit, and data security standards employed and required for direct access to CURES. The bill would make conforming changes to related provisions concerning exceptions to the prohibition on a state agency from disclosing personal information. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 11165 of the Health and Safety Code proposed by AB 1753 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1753 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(1) Existing law prescribes various requirements to be satisfied before the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust. In this regard, existing law requires that a notice of default and a notice of sale be recorded and that specified periods of time elapse between the recordings and the sale. Certain laws enacted in 2012 and repealed on January 1, 2018, commonly referred to as the California Homeowner Bill of Rights, established a variety of requirements in connection with foreclosures on mortgages and deeds of trust, including restrictions on mortgage servicers actions while a borrower is attempting to secure a loan modification or has submitted a loan modification application. The foreclosure provisions of the act were generally limited to first lien mortgages and deeds of trust on owner-occupied residences, as specified. This bill would reenact various provisions of the California Homeowner Bill of Rights, as described above, and make other changes. With regard to first lien mortgages or deeds of trust on residential real property, as specified, the bill would prohibit an entity that forecloses on more than 175 real properties from recording a notice of default or notice of sale, or conducting a trustee's sale after a borrower submits a complete application for a first lien loan modification and that application is pending. The bill would require that the complete application be submitted at least 5 business days before a scheduled foreclosure sale. The prohibition on recording a notice of default or a notice of sale would continue until one of 3 specified events occur. The bill would grant a borrower 30 days to appeal if the loan modification is denied and authorize the borrower to provide evidence that the mortgage servicer's determination was in error. During this appeal period, the bill would prohibit filing a notice of default, or if that notice has already been filed, from recording a notice of sale or conducting a trustee's sale until the later of specified events. The bill would require a mortgage servicer to send a written notice to the borrower that identifies the reasons for denial and that includes certain information in connection with the denial. The bill would provide that a mortgage servicer satisfies specified telephone contact requirements if the borrower makes a written request to cease communications. This bill would also prohibit these entities from recording a notice of default until a mortgage servicer provides the borrower specified information in writing, 30 days have passed after contacting the borrower or after making diligent effort, as specified, to do so, and after compliance by the mortgage servicer with the requirements for completed applications for loan modification described above, as may be applicable. The bill would require that a notice of default include a specified declaration regarding contact with a borrower. The bill would make technical changes to provisions requiring a mortgage servicer to establish a single point of contact for a borrower requesting a foreclosure prevention alternative. In connection with the entities and mortgages and deeds of trust described above, among other things, the bill also would require a mortgage servicer that offers a foreclosure prevention alternative to send a written communication containing specified information regarding the alternative to a borrower within 5 days after recording a notice of default, except as specified. The bill would require a mortgage servicer to provide a borrower who submits a complete first lien loan modification application, or any document connected to that modification, written acknowledgment of receipt within 5 business days of receipt along with other information regarding the loan modification process. The bill would define "complete" for these purposes. The bill would prohibit recording a notice of default if a foreclosure prevention alternative is approved in writing before the notice is recorded and other specified conditions are met. If a foreclosure prevention alternative is approved after recording the notice, the bill would prohibit recording a notice of sale or conducting a trustee sale if specified conditions are met. The bill would require that a notice of default be rescinded or a pending trustee sale canceled when a borrower executes a permanent foreclosure alternative. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer from charging fees for a first lien loan modification or other foreclosure prevention alternative, as specified, and would require modifications and prevention alternatives previously approved to be honored following transfer or sale to another servicer. The bill would provide for liability to borrowers for material violations of these provisions, as specified, and would permit a court to award the greater of treble actual damages or specified statutory damages in cases of intention or reckless violations. Violations of certain of the provisions described above by licensees of the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate would also be deemed violations of those respective licensing laws. Because certain violations of those licensing laws are crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that a mortgage servicer that engages in multiple and repeated filing of unsubstantiated documents related to foreclosure is liable for a civil penalty of up to $7,500 per mortgage or deed of trust, in an action brought by specified state and local government entities, and would also authorize administrative enforcement against specified licensees by their regulatory agencies. With regard to first lien mortgages or deeds of trust on residential real property, as specified, in connection with an entity that forecloses on fewer than 175 real properties in a reporting period, as specified, the bill would prohibit recording a notice of default, notice of sale, or conducting a trustee's sale while a complete first lien loan modification application is pending and until the mortgage servicer provides the borrower a written determination regarding his or her eligibility for the requested modification. The bill would require that the complete application be submitted at least 5 business days before a scheduled foreclosure sale. The bill would prohibit recording a notice of default if a foreclosure prevention alternative is approved in writing before the notice is recorded and other specified conditions are met. If a foreclosure prevention alternative is approved after recording the notice, the bill would prohibit recording a notice of sale or conducting a trustee sale if specified conditions are met. The bill would prescribe a process by which these entities become subject to the provisions described above that are applicable to entities that foreclose on more than 175 real properties. The bill would require modifications and prevention alternatives previously approved to be honored following transfer or sale to another servicer. The bill would authorize a borrower to seek injunctive relief to enjoin material violations certain of its provisions if a trustee's deed upon sale has not been recorded. If the deed has been recorded, the bill would provide for liability to borrowers for material violations of these provisions, as specified, and would permit a court to award the greater of treble actual damages or specified statutory damages in cases of intention or reckless violations. The bill would authorize a court to award attorney's fees and costs, as specified. Violations of certain of the provisions described above by licensees of the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate would also be deemed violations of those respective licensing laws. Because certain violations of those licensing laws are crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make a statement of legislative intent regarding the amendment, addition, or repeal of provisions of the California Homeowner Bill of Rights that took effect on January 1, 2018, on liability incurred prior to January 1, 2018. The bill would make conforming changes and repeal duplicate provisions of law. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.