Asm. Marc Steinorth

This measure would proclaim support for the mission of the California World War One Centennial Task Force, by designating the time period between August 5, 2017, and November 11, 2018, inclusive, to be observed as the commemoration period of the 100th anniversary of the United States' involvement in World War I.

This measure would recognize the month of June 2017 as Alzheimer's and Brain Awareness Month, would recognize Wednesday, June 21, 2017, as The Longest Day in California, and would urge all Californians to wear purple on this day to help spread global awareness of the Alzheimer's Association's vision of a world without Alzheimer's disease.

This measure would recognize the month of August 2017 as Opportunity Youth Reengagement Month, and state the intent of the Legislature to encourage the expansion of schools authorized to specifically reengage "opportunity youth" 16 to 24 years of age by developing recommendations for a statewide student reengagement strategy and identifying the cost of the strategy compared to the cost of inaction; authorizing systems for accountability to students, parents, and families through transparency, active engagement, and outreach strategies; and highlighting, promoting, and uplifting evidence-based practices for successful student reengagement efforts that maintain multiple measures for evaluation of student success.

This measure would urge the President and the Congress of the United States to continue to place an emphasis on increasing funding to NASA's budget and encouraging the expansive use of public-private partnerships to propel the industry forward into the next generation of advancement.

Existing civil law requires every person to abstain from injuring another and makes a person who commits a sexual battery, as defined, upon another liable to that person for specified damages. This bill would impose civil liability and specific penalties upon a person over the age of majority who, in exchange for property or money, commits an act that would violate certain criminal provisions pertaining to sexual acts upon a child, solicitation of a child, or aiding or abetting in one of these acts. The bill would authorize a victim of the unlawful act, his or her parent or guardian, or guardian ad litem to bring an action for civil penalties, damages, injunctive relief, equitable remedies, and for the cost of the suit and reasonable attorney's fees, as specified. The bill would require, if the victim is under 18 years of age, and the action results in a monetary award, for that award to be held in trust for the victim, and used exclusively for the victim's benefit in accordance with certain procedures. The bill also would require the court, if the parties seek to settle the action, to either affirm, modify, or reject the settlement, subject to first providing notice of the proposed settlement to the Attorney General within a certain timeframe. The bill would require the victim, victim's parent, guardian, or guardian ad litem, if the action is dismissed or subject to final judgment, to submit to the Attorney General a report that includes the results of the action or its final disposition. The bill would also specify procedures by which the court may issue temporary restraining or protective orders in an action brought pursuant to these provisions. Existing law requires counties to transmit specific data concerning protective and domestic violence orders electronically through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System to the Department of Justice. Under existing law, upon issuance of a protective order, issuance of a temporary restraining order or injunction relating to harassment, unlawful violence, or the threat of violence under specified provisions, the Department of Justice is required to be immediately notified of the contents of the order, including certain information, including the name, race, date of birth, and other personal descriptive information of the respondent and the names of the protected persons. This bill also would require notification of the issuance of a restraining order pertaining to sexual abuse of a child, as specified. By imposing new duties on local government agencies and expanding the scope of 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

The Planning and Zoning Law, among other things, authorizes the legislative body of any county or city to adopt ordinances to regulate land use. Existing law also establishes procedures by which city or county ordinances may be enacted or amended by initiative, including requiring that an ordinance proposed by the voters of the city or county be approved by a majority of the votes cast on the ordinance. This bill, in the case of an ordinance or an amendment of an ordinance that would reduce density or stop development or construction of any parcels located less than one mile from a major transit stop, as defined, within a city, county, or city and county that is proposed by the voters of the city, county, or city and county in accordance with specified law, would require that the proposed ordinance or amendment of an ordinance receive 55% of the votes cast on the ordinance in order to become effective. The bill would exclude from this requirement the proposal and submission to the voters of an ordinance or amendment of an ordinance by the legislative body of the city, county, or city and county and the adoption or amendment of a city, county, or city and county charter, and would exclude ordinances that apply to or implement amendments to a city or county general plan pertaining to certain lands specified in that general plan. The bill would also exclude ordinances that apply primarily to lands located outside an established city urban restriction boundary or ordinances that revise or continue previously established city urban restriction boundaries. This bill would limit application of this requirement to a county or city and county that had a population of 750,000 or more, or a city located within such a county, as of January 1, 2017. The bill would require the county counsel for the county or city and county in which the proposed ordinance or amendment of an ordinance would apply, or the city attorney of the city in which the proposed ordinance or amendment of an ordinance would apply, to determine whether the proposed ordinance or amendment of an ordinance would reduce density or stop development or construction of any parcels located less than one mile from a major transit stop within the city, county, or city and county. The bill would declare that it addresses a matter of statewide concern and would therefore apply to charter cities and charter counties. By requiring local officials to determine whether a proposed ordinance or amendment of an ordinance would reduce density or stop development or construction of any parcels located less than one mile from a major transit stop within a city, county, or city and county, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires, in all cases in which a criminal defendant has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence, as defined, or one of specified sex offenses, the court to consider issuing an order, valid for up to 10 years, restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim. Existing law states the intent of the Legislature in enacting that provision that the duration of any restraining order issued by the court be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and his or her immediate family. Under existing law, a willful and knowing violation of a protective order or stay-away court order, issued under specified conditions, including the above-described provision, constitutes contempt of court, a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both the imprisonment and the fine, except as specified. This bill would require the court to consider issuing an order restraining a criminal defendant who has been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence from any contact with a minor who was not a victim of, but who was physically present at the time of, an act of domestic violence. The bill would provide that the minor, under those circumstances, is a witness. The bill would make conforming changes relating to the stated intent of the Legislature. The bill would authorize a no-contact order issued for purposes of a minor witness to include, either at the time of sentencing or on subsequent application upon a showing of good cause at a noticed hearing, as specified, an order authorizing a family or juvenile court to make a subsequent order for safe and appropriate visitation with the defendant's child who is a minor witness. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require an order restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim or a minor witness under the above-described provisions to have precedence in enforcement over a civil court order against the defendant, except for an emergency protective order, 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 requires every person 16 years of age or older who takes any fish, reptile, or amphibian for any purpose other than profit to first obtain a sport fishing license for that purpose, with specified exceptions, and to have that license on his or her person or in his or her immediate possession when engaged in carrying out any activity authorized by the license. Existing law requires a resident or a nonresident, 16 years of age or older, upon payment of a specified fee, to be issued a sport fishing license for the period of a calendar year, or, if issued after the beginning of the year, for the remainder thereof. Existing law also requires the issuance of shorter term licenses upon payment of a specified lesser fee. Existing law requires the Fish and Game Commission to adjust the amount of the fees, as prescribed, to fully recover, but not exceed, all reasonable administrative and implementation costs of the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the commission relating to those licenses. Existing law specifies that the requirements for issuance of a license only apply to licenses, permits, reservations, tags, and other entitlements issued through the Automated License Data System. This bill would require a resident or a nonresident, 16 years of age or older, upon payment of a specified fee, to be issued a sport fishing license for the period of 12 consecutive months beginning on the date specified on the license, instead of for the period of a calendar year, or the remainder thereof. The bill would require the commission to include, among the costs required to be recovered by an adjustment of the fee amount, transition costs related to the new licensing period. The bill would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to collect all relevant and appropriate information necessary to justify the amount of the sport fishing license fees, including information about enforcement costs. The bill would require the department to submit to the Legislature a written report on the implementation of the new licensing period that also includes the information collected to justify the amount of the fees for licenses issued for the new licensing period. The bill would delete the provision specifying that the license issuance requirements only apply to licenses, permits, reservations, tags, and other entitlements issued through the Automated License Data System. The provisions of this bill would be operative beginning January 1, 2020, until January 1, 2025, except for the change regarding the Automated License Data System, which would be operative on January 1, 2018.