Asm. Dawn Addis

Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires a health care service plan contract issued, amended, delivered, or renewed on or after January 1, 2000, or an individual or group policy of disability insurance or self-insured employee welfare benefit plan to provide coverage for mammography for screening or diagnostic purposes upon referral by specified professionals. Under existing law, mammography performed pursuant to those requirements or that meets the current recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force is provided to an enrollee or an insured without cost sharing. This bill would require a health care service plan contract, a policy of health insurance that provides hospital, medical, or surgical coverage, or a self-insured employee welfare benefit plan issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2025, to provide coverage without imposing cost sharing for, among other things, screening mammography and medically necessary diagnostic breast imaging, including diagnostic breast imaging following an abnormal mammography result and for an enrollee or insured indicated to have a risk factor associated with breast cancer, except as specified. 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 provides for the payment of unemployment compensation benefits and extended benefits to eligible individuals who meet specified requirements. Under existing law, unemployment benefits are paid from the Unemployment Fund, which is continuously appropriated for these purposes. Existing law makes an employee ineligible for benefits if the employee left work because of a trade dispute and specifies that the employee remains ineligible for the duration of the trade dispute. Existing case law holds that employees who left work due to a lockout by the employer, even if it was in anticipation of a trade dispute, are eligible for benefits. This bill would restore eligibility after the first 2 weeks for an employee who left work because of a trade dispute. The bill would codify specified case law that holds that employees who left work due to a lockout by the employer, even if it was in anticipation of a trade dispute, are eligible for benefits. The bill would specify that the bill's provisions do not diminish eligibility for benefits of individuals deprived of work due to an employer lockout or similar action, as specified. Because this bill would expand the categories of people eligible to receive benefits from a continuously appropriated fund, it would make an appropriation.

Existing law requires county offices of education and the governing boards of school districts and community college districts, except those incorporating the merit system, to employ persons for positions not requiring certification qualifications or that are not academic, as applicable, and to classify those employees and positions, and requires that they be known as the classified service, as provided. This bill would require these governing boards and county offices, including those incorporating the merit system and including certain joint powers authorities formed by them, to offer vacancies for part-time or full-time positions, as a right of first refusal for 10 business days, with specified priorities, to current regular nonprobationary classified employees who meet the minimum job qualifications of the position or who could meet the minimum job qualifications before their start date, unless otherwise negotiated by the education employer and the exclusive representatives of the applicable employees. The bill would require these employers, referred to in the bill as education employers, to adhere to specified requirements, including, among others, that they provide all of their classified employees and their exclusive representatives notice of, and instructions for applying for, any new classified position, and that they not offer the position to any applicant until after the position has been noticed for 10 business days. The bill would authorize an employee who accepts a new assignment to elect to either add the hours for the new assignment to their current assignment, if feasible, or, if the new assignment is more hours than their current assignment, would authorize the employee to replace their current assignment with the new assignment, and would require the education employer to provide reasonable modifications to the assignment schedules to allow the employee to work both assignments, as provided. The bill would require an education employer to accept a current part-time employee's number of years of service with the education employer, regardless of the capacity in which they were earned, when that part-time employee applies for an additional part-time assignment that requires a certain number of years of service. The bill would require classified employees who work part-time assignments that equal the number of hours for a full-time assignment for the same education employer to receive the same benefits as employees who work a full-time assignment. The bill would expressly prohibit retaliation against classified employees for either refusing or accepting a vacancy. The bill would prohibit applicants from being offered a vacancy if the total of the regular hours of the 2 positions would require overtime pay or otherwise violate the federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 or any other state or federal law. The bill would not apply to (1) an employee who is in the process of completing a written performance improvement plan, who was previously involuntarily demoted from the same position as the vacancy, who has been suspended, or who is the subject of a pending disciplinary action for suspension or dismissal, or (2) confidential or management employees or vacancies for their positions, as provided. Existing law requires a person laid off by a county office of education, school district, or community college district because of lack of work or funds to be eligible for reemployment for period of 39 months, as specified. This bill would provide that its provisions do not supersede that requirement, and would also not apply to an education employer with a contravening collective bargaining agreement in effect on January 1, 2024, until the expiration or renewal of that agreement.

(1) Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law establishes community college districts throughout the state and authorizes them to operate campuses and provide instruction to students. Existing law authorizes community college districts to admit nonresident students, and requires that nonresident students be charged a nonresident tuition fee unless an exemption applies. Existing law includes among these exemptions any nonresident who is both a citizen and resident of a foreign country if the nonresident has demonstrated a financial need, as specified. Existing law authorizes the attendance of certain exempted, nonresident students to be reported as resident full-time equivalent students (FTES) for state apportionment purposes. This bill would additionally exempt from the nonresident tuition fee a nonresident, low-income student who: (1) is a resident of Mexico, (2) registers for lower division courses at Cuyamaca College, Grossmont College, Imperial Valley College, MiraCosta College, Palomar College, San Diego City College, San Diego Mesa College, San Diego Miramar College, or Southwestern College, and (3) has residence within 45 miles of the California-Mexico border, as provided. The bill would, in any academic year, prohibit more than 150 FTES at each of these community colleges from being exempted from payment of the nonresident tuition fee. The bill would require the governing boards of the community colleges that choose to use this exemption to adopt one uniform policy to determine a student's residence classification, establish procedures for an appeal and review of the residence classification, and determine whether a student is low income. The bill also would require the governing boards of the community colleges that choose to use this exemption, as a condition of its students receiving the exemption described above, to collaborate with each other to ensure the adoption of the uniform policy. The bill would additionally authorize the attendance of nonresident students who receive this exemption to be reported as resident FTES for state apportionment purposes, as specified. The bill would provide that a nonresident student exempted under the above-mentioned exemption is not exempted pursuant to the existing provision involving any nonresident who is both a citizen and resident of a foreign country. The bill would require the governing boards of the community colleges that choose to use this exemption, on or before January 1, 2028, to jointly submit a report to the Legislature that includes, but is not limited to, the demographics, attendance rate, and class completion rate of nonresident students who receive the exemption described above. The bill's provisions would become inoperative on July 1, 2028, and would be repealed on January 1, 2029, as specified. The bill would also make related findings and declarations. (2) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for Cuyamaca College, Grossmont College, Imperial Valley College, MiraCosta College, Palomar College, San Diego City College, San Diego Mesa College, San Diego Miramar College, and Southwestern College. (3) This bill would not become operative unless the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges enters into an attendance agreement that provides reciprocal rights to California residents attending a university in the State of Baja California that reasonably conforms to the benefits conferred upon residents of Mexico pursuant to certain provisions of the bill, as provided.

Existing law provides for funding for the project for flood control on the Pajaro River in the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz, authorized by the federal Flood Control Act of 1966. Existing law also requires a flood management project that receives financial assistance, as provided, to meet specified requirements, and requires the Department of Water Resources or a specified state entity to submit a report to the Legislature that indicates whether the project meets those requirements. This bill would exempt the Pajaro River flood control project from various state and local environmental laws and regulations, only if specified criteria are met and only until a specified date, and as of that date would repeal these provisions. The bill would provide, among other exemptions, that a specified report, as described, shall be conclusively presumed to satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act for the Pajaro River Project, including to support the issuance of any permit, funding, or other approval by a state or local agency for the Pajaro River Project when implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. The bill would also require the Pajaro Regional Flood Management Agency to consult with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding the avoidance, minimization, or mitigation of specified environmental impacts, on or before March 1, 2024, as provided. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law makes it unlawful for any owner or operator of a motel, motor court, or like establishment to post or maintain outdoor advertising signs relating to room rates that has any untrue, misleading, false, or fraudulent representations, and specified other requirements on outdoor signs for those establishments. Existing law also prohibits an owner or operator of a hotel or motel from increasing the hotel or motel's rates upon the proclamation of a state of emergency by the President of the United States or the Governor or upon the declaration of a local emergency, as specified. This bill would prohibit a place of short-term lodging, as defined, from advertising or offering a room rate that does not include all fees or charges required to stay at the short-term lodging except taxes and fees imposed by a government on the stay, as specified. The bill would also require a place of short-term lodging to include in the total price to be paid, before the consumer reserves a stay, all taxes and fees imposed by a government on the stay. The bill would make a violation of those provisions subject to a specified civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 and would authorize an action to enforce those provisions to be brought by a city attorney, district attorney, county counsel, or the Attorney General. The bill would make the bill's provisions operative on July 1, 2024.

Existing law generally requires the minimum wage for all industries to not be less than specified amounts to be increased until it is $15 per hour commencing January 1, 2022, for employers employing 26 or more employees, and commencing January 1, 2023, for employers employing 25 or fewer employees. Existing law makes a violation of minimum wage requirements a misdemeanor. This bill would establish 5 separate minimum wage schedules for covered health care employees, as defined, depending on the nature of the employer. This bill would require, for any covered health care facility employer, as defined, with 10,000 or more full-time equivalent employees (FTEE) , as defined, any covered health care facility employer that is a part of an integrated health care delivery system or a health care system with 10,000 or more FTEEs, a covered health care facility employer that is a dialysis clinic or is a person that owns, controls, or operates a dialysis clinic, or a covered health facility owned, affiliated, or operated by a county with a population of more than 5,000,000 as of January 1, 2023, the minimum wage for covered health care employees to be $23 per hour from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2025, inclusive, $24 per hour from June 1, 2025, to May 31, 2026, inclusive, and $25 per hour from June 1, 2026, and until as adjusted as specified. This bill would require, for any hospital that is a hospital with a high governmental payor mix, an independent hospital with an elevated governmental payor mix, a rural independent covered health care facility, or a covered health care facility that is owned, affiliated, or operated by a county with a population of less than 250,000 as of January 1, 2023, as those terms are defined, the minimum wage for covered health care employees to be $18 per hour from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2033, inclusive, and $25 per hour from June 1, 2033, and until as adjusted as specified. This bill would require, for specified clinics that meet certain requirements, the minimum wage for covered health care employees to be $21 per hour from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2026, inclusive, and $22 per hour from June 1, 2026, to May 31, 2027, inclusive, and $25 from June 1, 2027, and until as adjusted as specified. This bill would require, for all other covered health care facility employers, the minimum wage for covered health care employees to be $21 per hour from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2026, inclusive, $23 per hour from June 1, 2026, to May 31, 2028, inclusive, and $25 per hour from June 1, 2028, and until as adjusted as specified. This bill would provide that a covered health care facility that is county owned, affiliated, or operated must implement the appropriate minimum wage schedule described above, as applicable, beginning January 1, 2025. This bill would also separately require, for a licensed skilled nursing facility, as described, the minimum wage for certain other covered health care employees, as described, to be $21 per hour from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2026, inclusive, $23 per hour from June 1, 2026, to May 31, 2028, inclusive, and $25 per hour from June 1, 2028, and until as adjusted as specified. The bill would make this minimum wage requirement effective only when a patient care minimum spending requirement applicable to skilled nursing facilities is in effect. This bill would provide that the health care worker minimum wages constitute the state minimum wage for covered health care employment for all purposes under the Labor Code and the Wage Orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission. The bill would provide that a health care worker minimum wage is enforceable by the Labor Commissioner or by a covered worker through a civil action, through the same means and with the same relief available for violation of any other state minimum wage requirement. By establishing new minimum wages, the violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require, for covered health care employment where the employee is paid on a salary basis, that the employee earn a monthly salary equivalent to no less than 150% of the health care worker minimum wage or 200% of the applicable minimum wage, whichever is greater, for full-time employment in order to qualify as exempt from the payment of minimum wage and overtime. This bill would require the Department of Health Care Access and Information to publish, on or before January 31, 2024, and on the department's internet website, specified information, including a list of hospitals that qualify under certain classifications. The bill would provide, until January 31, 2025, a process for hospitals excluded from that list to request classification. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2025, the adoption of any necessary rules and regulations for purposes of implementing certain provisions of the bill as emergency regulations in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act and would deem the adoption of those emergency regulations an emergency and necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, or general welfare. The bill would require the Department of Health Care Access and Information to consider input from specified stakeholders when adopting those rules and regulations, as specified. This bill would, by March 1, 2024, require the Department of Industrial Relations, in collaboration with the State Department of Health Care Services and the Department of Health Care Access and Information, to develop a waiver program that would allow a covered health care facility, as defined, to apply for and receive a temporary pause or alternative phase in schedule of the minimum wage requirements described above. In order to obtain a waiver, the bill would require a covered health care facility to demonstrate that compliance with the minimum wage requirements would raise doubts about the covered health care facility's ability to continue as a going concern under generally accepted accounting principles, as specified. The bill would provide that issuance of the terms of the pause or alternative phase in schedule is solely and exclusively within the authority of the Department of Industrial Relations, and the authority regarding whether the covered health care facility demonstrates the inability to continue as a going concern pursuant is solely and exclusively within the authority of the State Department of Health Care Services. This bill would prohibit any ordinance, regulations, or administrative action that is applicable to a covered health care facility and that establishes, requires, imposes, limits, or otherwise relates to wages or compensation for covered health care facility employees from being enacted or enforced in or by any city, county, or city and county, except as provided. This bill would also make its provisions severable. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for health care workers. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. 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, the Mobilehome Residency Law Protection Act, establishes the Mobilehome Residency Law Protection Program within the Department of Housing and Community Development to assist in taking and resolving complaints from homeowners relating to the Mobilehome Residency Law. Existing law requires the department to refer any alleged violations of law or regulations within the department's jurisdiction to the Division of Codes and Standards. Existing law requires the department to use good faith efforts to select the most severe, deleterious, and materially and economically impactful alleged violations, as specified. This bill would delete the requirement that the department select the most severe, deleterious, and materially and economically impactful alleged violations. Existing law requires the department to contract with one or more qualified and experienced nonprofit legal services providers and refer complaints selected for evaluation, as described, to those nonprofit legal services providers for possible enforcement action. If the department selects a complaint for referral to and evaluation by a nonprofit legal services provider, existing law requires the department to send a notice to the complaining party and the management or mobilehome park owner. Existing law requires that notice to advise the parties that they are required to negotiate the matter in good faith to resolve the matter in 25 days. If after 25 days either party responds to a department inquiry that the matter is not resolved, existing law authorizes the department to refer the complaint to an appropriate enforcement agency or a nonprofit legal services provider. This bill would remove the requirement that the department send the above-described notice and the requirement that the parties negotiate the matter in good faith to resolve the matter in 25 days. Existing law required the department, on January 1, 2023, to submit a written report to the Legislature outlining data collected from the program and to make that report available on its internet website, that included, among other things, the amount of registration fees collected, the total number of complaint allegations received, the total number of complaint allegations processed, and the total number of complaint allegations referred to another enforcement agency or to a nonprofit legal services provider. This bill would instead require the above-described information to be included in the department's annual report, as specified. Under existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law Protection Act is repealed on January 1, 2024. This bill would extend the above-described January 1, 2024, repeal date to January 1, 2027. Existing law, the Administrative Procedure Act, sets forth procedures a state agency is required to follow when adopting, amending, or repealing any regulation, including providing public notice and time for public comment, with exceptions for emergency regulations in the case of a situation that calls for immediate action to avoid serious harm to the public peace, health, safety, or general welfare. This bill would authorize the department to adopt regulations as necessary or appropriate to implement the Mobilehome Residency Law Protection Program. This bill, until January 1, 2027, would deem the adoption and readoption of regulations to be an emergency and necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, or general welfare for purposes of the Administrative Procedure Act and would exempt the department from the requirement that it describe facts showing the need for immediate action. This bill would require the department, before submitting an emergency regulation to the Office of Administrative Law, to solicit and consider stakeholder comments in the design and implementation of the program in at least one 30-day public comment period and provide responses in writing to substantive written comments received during the comment period.

Existing law, the Veterans Housing and Homeless Prevention Act of 2014, requires the California Housing Finance Agency, the Department of Housing and Community Development, and the Department of Veterans Affairs (referred to collectively as "the departments") to establish and implement programs that focus on veterans at risk for homelessness or experiencing temporary or chronic homelessness, as specified. In this regard, existing law requires the departments to establish and implement programs that, among other things, ensure projects combine housing and supportive services. Existing law requires the departments to ensure at least 50% of funds awarded for capital development are used to provide housing to veterans with extremely low incomes, and requires that at least 60% of units funded targeting extremely low income households are supportive housing. This bill would authorize an entity tasked with making referrals of units targeted to extremely low income households to submit a petition to the departments requesting authority to lease the qualified unit to a secondary tenant, as defined, if a qualified entity is unable to locate, match, or otherwise place a qualified tenant in a qualified unit with 60 days of the unit becoming available. The bill would require a qualified unit that is leased to a secondary tenant to be redesignated to an area median income level commensurate with the income level of the secondary tenant and would require the secondary tenant to pay rent commensurate with their household income's percentage of the area medium income. The bill would, 12 months after a petition is approved, require the next available comparable unit to be rented to a qualified tenant at 30% of the median income. The bill would require a qualified entity tasked with making referrals to these units to make a good faith effort to match a tenant with an extremely low income before submitting a petition, document these good faith efforts, submit this documentation as a part of the petition, and make this documentation available to the housing sponsor and, upon request, to the departments. The bill would prohibit the departments from approving a petition if it would result in changes that may impact the project's regulatory agreement, as specified. The bill would require the departments to create a standardized form for the submission of petitions described above. The bill would require the departments, upon receipt of a petition, to (1) review the petition and decide if the qualified unit is eligible to accept secondary tenants under all applicable guidelines, rules, and regulations, and (2) provide a written determination approving or denying the petition no later than 30 days after receipt of the petition. Existing law establishes the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, composed of specified members, and requires that the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, among other things, allocate specified federal low-income housing tax credits, as provided. This bill, for purposes of supportive housing units that are restricted to extremely low income veterans pursuant to a regulatory agreement with the committee, would authorize an entity tasked with making referrals of those units targeted to extremely low income households to match prospective secondary tenants with incomes at or below 60% of the area median income that are receiving income as a result of service-connected disability benefits if a qualified tenant is unable to be matched to and accept placement in an available unit within 28 days of the unit becoming available. If a secondary tenant is unable to be matched to and accept placement in an available unit within 14 days, the bill would authorize the entity to match a veteran experiencing homelessness with an income at or below 60% of the area median income, regardless of the source of the income, in an available unit. The bill would require a qualified unit that is leased to a secondary tenant or other veteran experiencing homelessness pursuant to these provisions to be redesignated to an area median income level commensurate with the income level of the tenant and would require the tenant to pay rent commensurate with their household income's percentage of the area medium income. The bill, 12 months after a secondary tenant or other tenant who is a veteran experiencing homelessness has been placed, would require the next available comparable unit to be rented to a qualified tenant at 30% of the median income. The bill would require a qualified entity tasked with making referrals to these units to make a good faith effort to match a tenant with an extremely low income, document these good faith efforts, and make this documentation available to the housing sponsor and, upon request, to the departments.

Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of residential care facilities for the elderly (RCFEs) by the State Department of Social Services. Under existing law, the California Health Facilities Financing Authority Act, the California Health Facilities Financing Authority is authorized to make and fund loans through the issuance of revenue bonds, and award grants, to finance or refinance projects by participating health institutions, as defined. Under the act, projects include construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing, or equipping, or funding, financing, or refinancing of a health facility, as defined, or acquisition of a health facility to be financed or refinanced with funds provided in whole or in part pursuant to the act. Under the act, the California Health Facilities Financing Authority Fund is created, with moneys in the fund continuously appropriated to the authority for carrying out the purposes of the act. This bill would expand the above-described program to include RCFEs by adding an RCFE to the definition of "health facility" under the program. The bill would make conforming changes to related provisions. The bill would clarify that other provisions under existing law relating to health facilities would not be affected by the expanded definition, as specified. Under existing law, an RCFE is defined as a housing arrangement chosen voluntarily by persons 60 years of age or over, or their authorized representative, where varying levels and intensities of care, supervision, and certain services are provided, and whereby persons under 60 years of age with compatible needs may be allowed to be admitted or retained in an RCFE, as specified. Under the California Health Facilities Financing Authority Act, one of the types of health facilities is a multilevel facility, which is an institutional arrangement where an RCFE is operated as a part of, or in conjunction with, an intermediate care facility, a skilled nursing facility, or a general acute care hospital. Under that provision, "elderly" means a person 62 years of age or older. This bill would modify that definition of "elderly" to mean a person 60 years of age or older. By expanding the purpose for which the above-described continuously appropriated fund may be used, with regard to RCFE projects, the bill would make an appropriation from that fund. The bill would make legislative findings relating to the purpose of the bill.