(1) Existing law, the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) , generally requires a public retirement system, as defined, to modify its plan or plans to comply with the act. PEPRA, among other things, establishes new defined benefit formulas and caps on pensionable compensation. The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (CERL) authorizes counties to establish retirement systems pursuant to its provisions in order to provide pension benefits to their employees. CERL generally vests management of each retirement system in a board of retirement. CERL authorizes a board of retirement to correct errors in the calculation of a retired member's monthly allowances or other benefits under CERL in certain circumstances, including if the member caused their final compensation to be improperly increased or otherwise overstated at the time of retirement, and the system applied that overstated amount as the basis for calculating the member's monthly retirement allowance or benefits under CERL, subject to certain limitations. The Public Employees' Retirement Law (PERL) also authorizes its board of administration to adjust retirement payments due to errors or omissions, including for cases in which the retirement systems that the benefits of a member or annuitant are, or would be, based on disallowed compensation that conflicts with PEPRA and other specified laws and is thus impermissible. This bill would require a retirement system established under CERL, upon determining that the compensation reported for a member is disallowed compensation, to require the employer, as defined, to discontinue reporting the disallowed compensation. The bill would require, for an active member, the retirement system to credit all employer contributions made on the disallowed compensation against future contributions to the benefit of the employer that reported the disallowed compensation, and return any member contribution paid by, or on behalf of, that member, to the member directly or indirectly through the employer that reported the disallowed compensation, except in certain circumstances in which a system has already initiated a process, as defined, to recalculate compensation. The bill would require the system, for a retired member, survivor, or beneficiary whose final compensation was predicated upon the disallowed compensation, to credit the employer contributions made on the disallowed compensation against future contributions, to the benefit of the employer that reported the disallowed compensation, to return any member contributions paid by, or on behalf of, that member, to the member directly, and to permanently adjust the benefit of the affected retired member, survivor, or beneficiary to reflect the exclusion of the disallowed compensation. The bill would establish other conditions required to be satisfied with respect to a retired member, survivor, or beneficiary when final compensation was predicated upon disallowed compensation, including, among others, requiring a specified payment to be made by the employer that reported contributions on the disallowed compensation to the retired member, survivor, or beneficiary, as appropriate. The bill would authorize a retirement system that has initiated a process prior to January 1, 2024, to permanently adjust the benefit of the affected retired member, survivor, or beneficiary to reflect the exclusion of the disallowed compensation to use that system in lieu of specified provisions that the bill would enact. The bill would also require certain information regarding the relevant retired member, survivor, or beneficiary needed for purposes of these provisions to be kept confidential by the recipient. This bill would authorize an employer to submit to a retirement system for review a compensation item proposed to be included in an agreement, as specified, on and after January 1, 2025, that is intended to form the basis of a pension benefit calculation and would require the system to provide guidance on the matter. The bill would prescribe a process in this regard. The bill would specify that it does not affect or otherwise alter a party's right to appeal any determination regarding disallowed compensation made by the system after July 30, 2020. (2) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, and pharmacies by the California State Board of Pharmacy. Existing law requires the board to promulgate regulations that require a standardized, patient-centered, prescription drug label on all prescription medicine dispensed to patients in California. Existing law prohibits a pharmacist from dispensing a prescription except in a container that meets the requirements of state and federal law and is correctly labeled with prescribed information. Existing law makes a violation of its provisions a crime. Existing law requires a dispenser, upon request, to provide translated directions for use, as prescribed. Existing law authorizes a dispenser to use translations made available by the board pursuant to specified regulations of the board and provides that a dispenser is not required to provide translated directions for use beyond the languages that the board has made available or beyond the directions that the board has made available in translated form. Existing law authorizes a dispenser to provide their own translated directions for use to comply with these provisions and prohibits the provisions from being construed to prohibit a dispenser from providing translated directions for use in languages beyond those that the board has made available or beyond the directions that the board has made available in translated form. This bill would also expressly require a dispenser to provide translated directions for use in the languages the board has made available. This bill, except as specified, would require a dispenser, if a person informs a pharmacy that the person identifies as a person who is blind, has low-vision, or is otherwise print disabled, to provide to the person or their authorized representative, at no additional cost, an accessible prescription label affixed to the container that meets prescribed requirements. If the accessible prescription label does not fit on the container, the bill would require the dispenser, upon dispensing the prescription drug, to provide the patient or their authorized representative with a supplemental document that otherwise meets those prescribed requirements. The bill would not apply to prescriptions issued by a veterinarian. The bill would require the board to promulgate regulations necessary to implement the bill. By imposing new requirements on dispensers, the violation of which 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 provides for the licensure and regulation by the State Department of Public Health of health facilities, as defined. Existing law requires a health facility to allow a patient's domestic partner, the children of the patient's domestic partner, and the domestic partner of the patient's parent or child to visit unless no visitors are allowed, the facility reasonably determines that the presence of a particular visitor would endanger the health or safety of a patient, member of the health facility staff, or other visitor to the health facility, or would significantly disrupt the operations of a facility, or the patient has indicated to the health facility staff that the patient does not want this person to visit. A violation of this provision is a misdemeanor. This bill, Dianne's Law, would require a health facility to allow specified persons to visit, including the patient's children and grandparents. The bill would require the health facility to develop alternate visitation protocols, if circumstances require the health facility to restrict visitor access to the facility due to health or safety concerns, that allow visitation to the greatest extent possible while maintaining patient, visitor, and staff health and safety. Notwithstanding the requirement mentioned above, the bill would prohibit a health facility from prohibiting in-person visitation in end-of-life situations unless the patient has indicated to the health facility staff that the patient does not want this person to visit, as specified, and would authorize a health facility to require visitors to adhere to personal protective equipment and testing protocols not greater than those required of facility staff for the duration of their visit. The bill would also require the facility to provide personal protective equipment and testing resources to each visitor for a patient in an end-of-life situation, to the extent that those resources have been made readily available to the facility by state or local entities for that purpose. By expanding an existing 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 requires the State Board of Education to adopt at least 5 basic instructional materials in specified subject areas, including, among others, social science, for use in kindergarten and grades 1 to 8, inclusive, as specified. Existing law establishes the Instructional Quality Commission, as specified, and requires the commission to, among other things, develop criteria for evaluating instructional materials. This bill would require the commission, when the state board adopts new instructional materials for history-social science on or after January 1, 2025, to consider providing for inclusion, in its evaluation criteria, content on the case of Mendez v. Westminster School District of Orange County. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 51226.3 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1821 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1821 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
The California High-Speed Rail Act creates the High-Speed Rail Authority, composed of 11 members, to develop and implement a high-speed rail system in the state, with specified powers and duties. The act authorizes the authority to enter into contracts with private or public entities for the design, construction, and operation of high-speed trains. The act requires the authority to appoint an executive director to administer the affairs of the authority as directed by the authority. This bill, notwithstanding the authority's ability to delegate power to the executive director, would require any contract change order with a value greater than $100,000,000 to be approved by the authority.
Existing law, the Alfred E. Alquist Hospital Facilities Seismic Safety Act of 1983, establishes, under the jurisdiction of the Department of Health Care Access and Information, a program of seismic safety building standards for certain hospitals constructed on and after March 7, 1973. Existing law requires that, by January 1, 2030, owners of these hospitals must either demolish, replace, or change to nonacute care use all hospital buildings that are not in compliance with these standards or seismically retrofit all acute care inpatient hospital buildings so they are in substantial compliance with these standards, unless subject to an abeyance. This bill would authorize a hospital owner or operator to submit an application, by specified dates, to the department for additional extensions to the compliance deadline. The bill would require the department to grant or deny an extension of the deadline for substantial compliance with seismic safety regulations or standards up to January 1, 2035. The bill would require the application to contain a seismic compliance plan, a specified evaluation report, a financial plan, and an attestation to the department that the appropriate governing board of that hospital is aware that the hospital building is required to be in substantial compliance with the seismic safety regulations or standards. By imposing the above-described attestation, this bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the hospital and the department to identify specified milestones that are used for determining whether the hospital is making progress towards meeting the hospital's seismic compliance deadline. The bill would require the hospital to demonstrate efforts to comply with the seismic compliance deadline by providing the department with a plan outlining how seismic construction costs and other financial responsibilities will be met and what funding sources will be used if the hospital fails to meet an agreed-upon milestone due to circumstances that were within the hospital owner's or operator's control. The bill would require the owner or operator of that hospital to submit to the department an attestation that the appropriate governing board of that hospital is aware of the hospital's responsibility to comply with the associated construction costs to meet the seismic compliance deadlines. By requiring the owner or operator of a hospital to submit to the department an attestation, this bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the department, before granting an extension past January 1, 2030, to provide public notice of a hospital's request for an extension, provide copies, upon request, of any publicly available material submitted by the hospital in support of their extension to interested parties, and allow the public to submit written comments on the extension proposal, as specified. The bill would require the department, beginning January 1, 2027, to post on the department's internet website specified information, including, among other things, its decision to grant or deny any extension. The bill would require the department to notify the county board of supervisors, the city council, and the Assembly and Senate representative in writing and electronically if a hospital within their district has been granted or denied an extension. This bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2026, to adopt regulations and standards or revise regulations and standards, or both, to extend the deadlines for meeting the structural performance and nonstructural performance requirements. The bill would specify that regulatory submissions made by the department to the California Building Standards Commission are deemed to be emergency regulations and that the adoption of these regulations are to be deemed an emergency and necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, and general welfare. Existing law requires, before January 1, 2024, the owner of an acute care inpatient hospital that includes a building that does not substantially comply with seismic safety regulations or standards to post in a lobby or waiting area generally accessible to patients or the public a notice provided by the department that the hospital is not in compliance with the seismic safety requirements the hospital is required to meet by January 1, 2030. Existing law requires, on or before January 1, 2024, and annually thereafter, the owner of an acute care inpatient hospital that includes a building that does not substantially comply with seismic safety regulations or standards to provide an annual status update on the Structural Performance Category ratings of the buildings and the services provided in each hospital building on the hospital campus to specified entities until each of the hospital buildings owned by that hospital building owner is compliant. This bill would require, before January 1, 2025, the owner or operator of an acute care inpatient hospital that includes a building that does not substantially comply with the seismic safety regulations or standards to post in any lobby or waiting area generally accessible to patients or the public the notice mentioned above. The bill would also require, on or before January 1, 2025, and annually thereafter, the owner or operator to provide an annual status update, as specified. This bill would specify that the provisions of this act are severable. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
This measure would, among other things, urge the United States Congress and President Joseph R. Biden to fully fund the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Comprehensive Infrastructure Solution for the Tijuana River due to the ongoing impacts to public health, the environment, and the local economy caused by cross-border pollution and would urge President Joseph R. Biden to declare a national emergency due to those ongoing impacts.
This measure would urge the Congress of the United States to repeal the state and local tax deduction limitation so that residents of California and married taxpayers are no longer penalized by the federal tax code.
Maddy summaryAssembly Concurrent Resolution 120 designates January 2024 as Positive Parenting Awareness Month in California. This measure does not change laws or allocate funding but instead encourages state agencies, communities, and organizations to focus on the importance of positive parenting strategies. The resolution highlights how supportive family environments can improve children's health and well-being while acknowledging the diverse forms families take in the state. It serves as a formal acknowledgment of existing programs and resources rather than creating new mandates or policies.
This measure would proclaim September 20, 2024, and September 20 of each year thereafter, as California Youth Climate Action Day to honor and support the efforts of young people in their pursuit of environmental sustainability, climate justice, and the preservation of biodiversity.