Asm. Cecilia Aguiar-Curry

Existing federal law, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on Indian lands within a state. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude those compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts, and amendments to tribal-state gaming compacts, between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. This bill would ratify the amendment to the tribal-state gaming compact entered into between the State of California and the Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake, executed on August 16, 2018. The bill would provide that, in deference to tribal sovereignty, certain actions are not projects for the purposes of CEQA. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law consolidated within the State Department of Health Care Services all substance use disorder functions and programs from the former State Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. The existing Adolescent Alcohol and Drug Treatment and Recovery Program Act of 1998, which authorized the State Department of Alcohol and Drug programs to establish community-based nonresidential and residential recovery programs to intervene and treat the problems of alcohol and other drug use among youth, became inoperative on July 1, 2013. This bill would repeal those inoperative provisions and would enact the Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults Substance Use Disorder Treatment Act. The bill would require the department to convene an expert panel on or before January 1, 2020, to advise the department solely on the development of youth substance use disorder (SUD) treatment quality standards, as specified. The bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2021, to adopt regulations to establish youth SUD treatment quality standards, as specified. The bill would require each county to designate a single public agency that is responsible for administering the provision of youth SUD treatment services within that county. The bill would require the agency to, among other things, ensure, in conjunction with the county office of education and other local education agencies, that all programs in the county providing youth SUD prevention and treatment services are providing coordinated services. By requiring additional duties of local governments, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would additionally define youth SUD treatment services as including any publicly funded direct services intended to treat substance use disorders for individuals from birth to 26 years of age, inclusive. The bill would require a public agency or private entity that provides youth SUD treatment services after January 1, 2022, to comply with the standards adopted by the department and would limit which entities may provide youth SUD treatment services. The bill would, after July 1, 2022, require youth SUD treatment programs to be certified in accordance with the regulations adopted by the department. The bill would prohibit a county from contracting to provide youth SUD treatment services with an entity that does not comply with these provisions. The bill would require the department to report to the Legislature regarding the standards on or before January 1, 2023, and annually thereafter. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

(1) Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, authorizes the Governor to proclaim a state of emergency, and local officials and local governments to proclaim a local emergency, when specified conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property exist, and authorizes the Governor or the appropriate local government to exercise certain powers in response to that emergency. Existing law authorizes the Governor, during a state of emergency, to direct all state agencies to utilize and employ state personnel, equipment, and facilities to perform activities that are designed to prevent or alleviate actual and threatened damage due to that emergency. Existing law authorizes a state agency so directed to expend any of the moneys that have been appropriated to it in order to perform that activity. This bill would authorize the Governor, during a state of emergency, to direct all state agencies to utilize, employ, and direct state personnel, equipment, and facilities for the performance of any and all activities that are designed to allow community clinics and health centers to provide and receive reimbursement for services provided during or immediately following the emergency. The bill would authorize any agency directed by the Governor to perform those activities to expend any of the moneys that have been appropriated to it in order to perform those activities, irrespective of the particular purpose for which the moneys were originally appropriated. (2) Existing law, the Pharmacy Law provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists and pharmacies by the California State Board of Pharmacy. Existing law authorizes a pharmacy to furnish dangerous drugs only to specified persons or entities, and subjects certain pharmacies and persons who violate the provision to specified fines. Existing law authorizes a pharmacist to, in good faith, furnish a dangerous drug or device in reasonable quantities without a prescription during a federal, state, or local emergency, in order to further the health and safety of the public by complying with certain record-keeping requirements, and authorizes the board to waive any application of the Pharmacy Law during an emergency if the board determines that the waiver will aid in the protection of the public health or the provision of patient care. Existing law requires the board, during a declared federal, state, or local emergency, to allow for the employment of a mobile pharmacy in impacted areas under specified conditions, and authorizes the board to allow the temporary use of a mobile pharmacy when a pharmacy is destroyed or damaged under specified conditions. The Pharmacy Law authorizes certain clinics to purchase drugs at wholesale for administration or dispensing, under the direction of a physician or surgeon, to patients registered for care at the clinic, provided those clinics obtain a license from the board and comply with various requirements. This bill would expand the emergency provision described above to authorize a clinic licensed by the board to purchase drugs at wholesale for administration or dispensing to patients to furnish dangerous drugs or devices in reasonable quantities without a prescription during a federal, state, or local emergency, subject to the standards that apply to pharmacists as described above. The bill would also require the board, during an emergency, to allow for the employment of a mobile pharmacy clinic in impacted areas under specified conditions that are similar to the conditions that apply to a mobile pharmacy. The bill would authorize the board to continue to waive application of any provision of the Pharmacy Law for up to 90 days following the termination of the emergency if, in the board's opinion, the continued waiver will aid in the protection of public health or the provision of patient care. The bill would also make conforming changes.

Existing law specifies the time period within which various proceedings may be commenced under provisions of law relating to workers' compensation. With certain exceptions, a proceeding to collect death benefits is required to be commenced within one year from several circumstances, including, but not limited to, from the date of death if it occurs within one year from the date of injury. Existing law prohibits proceedings from being commenced more than one year after the date of death, and generally not more than 240 weeks from the date of injury. Existing law, for specified deceased members, including peace officers and active firefighting members, extends until January 1, 2019, the time period to commence proceedings to collect death benefits, if the proceedings are brought by, or on behalf of, a person who was a dependent on the date of death, from 240 weeks from the date of injury to no later than 420 weeks from the date of injury, not to exceed one year after the date of death for certain injuries, as specified. This bill would delete the January 1, 2019, date of repeal operation of the above-referenced extension.

Existing federal law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) , enacts various health care coverage market reforms that took effect January 1, 2014. Among other things, PPACA required each state to establish an American Health Benefit Exchange to facilitate the purchase of qualified health plans by qualified individuals and qualified small employers. Existing state law establishes the Council on Health Care Delivery Systems as an independent body to develop a plan that includes options for advancing progress toward achieving a health care delivery system in California that provides coverage and access through a unified financing system for all Californians. Existing law requires the council, on or before October 1, 2021, to submit to the Legislature and the Governor a plan with options that include a timeline of the benchmarks and steps necessary to implement health care delivery system changes, including steps necessary to achieve a unified financing system. This bill would also require the council to prepare an analysis and evaluation, known as a feasibility analysis, to determine the feasibility of a public health insurance plan option to increase competition and choice for health care consumers. The bill would require the feasibility analysis to contain, among other things, an actuarial and economic analysis of a public health insurance plan and an analysis of the extent to which a new public health insurance plan option could address the underlying factors that limit health plan choices in some regions. The bill would require the council to submit the feasibility analysis to the Legislature and the Governor on or before October 1, 2021.

Existing law, known as tied-house restrictions, generally prohibits a manufacturer, winegrower, manufacturer's agent, rectifier, California winegrower's agent, distiller, bottler, importer, and wholesaler, and any officer, director, or agent of any of those persons, from giving or lending money or a thing of value to a person operating, owning, or maintaining any on-sale premises where alcoholic beverages are sold. The law provides certain exceptions to this prohibition if specified requirements are met. Tied-house restrictions permit specified licensees to conduct or participate in, and serve specified alcoholic beverages at, an instructional event or instructional tasting event for consumers held at a retailer's premises, if specified conditions are met. In this regard, these parties may list certain information in advertisements for the event, but those advertisements are prohibited from containing pictures or illustrations of the retailer premises. This bill would revise the advertising prohibitions to, among other things, allow for pictures, illustrations, and depictions of the retailer's premises and for the name, address, telephone number, email address, Internet Web site address, and any other electronic media of the licensee upon whose licensed premises the event will be held. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 25503.56 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 1891 and SB 1164 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1891 are enacted, this bill and SB 1164 are enacted, or all three bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 25503.57 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 1891 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1891 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law provides that fire companies in unincorporated and incorporated towns may be organized, as provided, and be subject to specified provisions and requirements. Existing law provides that the city council of an incorporated city may, by ordinance, regulate the formation and continued existence of fire companies providing service within its city. Existing law establishes in state government, within the office of the Governor, the Office of Emergency Services. Existing law requires the office to be responsible for the state's emergency and disaster response services for natural, technological, or manmade disasters and emergencies, including responsibility for activities necessary to prevent, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of emergencies and disasters to people and property. Existing law, the FIRESCOPE Act of 1989, requires the office to establish and administer a program, known as the FIRESCOPE Program, to maintain and enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of managing multiagency firefighting resources in responding to an incident. This bill would require the office, in collaboration with the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the board of directors of the FIRESCOPE Program, to develop standards and regulations for any privately contracted private fire prevention resources operating during an active fire incident in the state, as provided, and to develop regulations to govern the use of equipment used by privately contracted private fire prevention resources during an active fire incident, as provided.

Existing law authorizes the Director of Fish and Wildlife, pursuant to the California Waterfowl Habitat Program, to enter into land use contracts for an initial term of 10 years to conserve waterfowl and waterfowl habitat with nonpublic entities that are owners of record or with lessees of land determined by the director to be important for the conservation of waterfowl, subject to the appropriation of money for that purpose. Under those contracts, the use of the land is restricted for waterfowl conservation and habitat purposes and the Department of Fish and Wildlife makes payments for that restriction. Existing law requires the contract to be recorded by the county recorder, as specified, and, if the land is divested, the successor to the owner or lessee of the land is subject to the contract. This bill would establish a similar program, to be known as the California Winter Rice Habitat Incentive Program, to authorize the director to enter into contracts for an initial term of 3 years with nonpublic entities that are owners of record or with lessees of productive agricultural rice lands that are winter-flooded and that are determined by the director to be important for the conservation of waterfowl. Under these contracts, the use of the land would be restricted for waterfowl conservation and habitat purposes in a manner that allows for the use of the land for rice farming. The bill would create the California Winter Rice Habitat Incentive Program Account in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund and would make funds deposited in the account available for expenditure, upon appropriation, to the department for purposes of the program. The bill would make available certain moneys appropriated in the Budget Act of 2018 for purposes of this program.

Under existing law, upon the proclamation of a state of emergency, as defined, declared by the President of the United States or the Governor, or upon the declaration of a local emergency, as defined, by the executive officer of any county, city, or city and county, and for a period of 30 days following that declaration, it is a misdemeanor with specified penalties for a person, contractor, business, or other entity to sell or offer to sell certain goods and services, including housing, for a price that exceeds by 10% the price charged by that person immediately prior to the proclamation of emergency, except as specified. Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, establishes the Office of Emergency Services and vests the office with responsibility for the state's emergency and disaster response services for natural, technological, or manmade disasters and emergencies, as specified. This bill would additionally, upon the proclamation or declaration of an emergency as described above, make it a misdemeanor for a person, business, or other entity to increase the rental price, as defined, advertised, offered, or charged for housing to an existing or prospective tenant by more than 10%. The bill would extend the prohibition with regards to housing for any period that the proclamation or declaration is extended. The bill would additionally make it a misdemeanor for a person, business, or entity to evict a housing tenant after the proclamation of a state of emergency and then rent or offer to rent to another person at a rental price higher than the evicted tenant could be charged. By creating a new crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Office of Emergency Services, upon the proclamation of an emergency by the Governor, to include information about these provisions and guidance to property owners, as specified, on an appropriate Internet Web site. 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 defines the measure of indemnity for a loss under an open fire insurance policy and specifies time limits under which an insured must collect the full replacement cost of the loss. Existing law prohibits, in the event of a total loss of the insured structure, a fire insurance policy issued or delivered in the state from limiting or denying payment of the replacement cost of property if the insured decides to rebuild or replace the property at a location other than the insured premises. Existing law requires the measure of indemnity to be based upon the replacement cost of the insured property and prohibits it from being based upon the cost to repair, rebuild, or replace at a location other than the insured premises. This bill would instead prohibit, in the event of a total loss of an insured structure, a fire insurance policy issued or delivered in this state from containing a provision that limits or denies, on the basis that the insured has decided to rebuild at a new location or to purchase an already built home at a new location, payment of the building code upgrade cost or the replacement cost, including any extended replacement cost coverage, to the extent those costs are otherwise covered by the terms of the policy or any policy endorsement. The bill would prohibit the measure of indemnity from exceeding, rather than requiring it to be based upon, the replacement cost, as specified. The bill would require all policy forms issued or renewed on and after July 1, 2019, to contain these provisions. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2051.5 of the Insurance Code proposed by AB 1772 and SB 894 to be operative only if this bill, AB 1772, and SB 894 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.