Existing law provides that a spouse has a privilege during the marital relationship and afterwards to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a communication if the spouse claims the privilege and the communication was made in confidence between the spouses while they were husband and wife. A married person also has a privilege not to testify against his or her spouse in any proceeding and, when the spouse is a party to a proceeding, a privilege not to be called as a witness by an adverse party to that proceeding without the prior express consent of the spouse having the privilege. The Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act provides various rights and protections to peace officers, including the procedure for interrogation of peace officers who are under investigation. This bill would provide that a peace officer who asserts any of the marital privileges described above shall not be subject to administrative discipline for failure to report information to his or her supervisor or department, except when the information concerns criminal or certain other conduct of the peace officer's spouse, who is also a peace officer employed by the department, and other specified conditions apply. The bill would provide that this provision would only apply to administrative disciplinary investigations and hearings, and not to other civil or criminal proceedings.
Sponsored bills
Existing law contains provisions that define unlawful discrimination and employment practices and establish procedures for an employee who has suffered discrimination or other unlawful practices, as defined, to file a complaint with the Fair Employment and Housing Department, or under certain circumstances, to bring a civil action against his or her employer. This bill would specify when a cause of action for unlawful discrimination or unlawful employment practice with respect to compensation accrues for determining whether a complaint was filed within statutory deadlines.
Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income persons are provided with health care services. Under existing law, the California Medical Assistance Commission is authorized to negotiate inpatient hospital services contracts binding upon the State Department of Health Care Services. Existing law requires the commission to consider certain factors in negotiating inpatient hospital services contracts. This bill would add graduate medical education programs to the list of factors the commission is required to consider when negotiating inpatient hospital services contracts. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 14083 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 366, that would become operative only if AB 366 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2010, and this bill is chaptered last.
The Real Estate Law provides for the regulation and licensure of real estate brokers and real estate salespersons by the Real Estate Commissioner. Existing law authorizes the commissioner to require that materials used in obtaining advance fee agreements be submitted to him or her at least 10 calendar days before the materials are used and makes it a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding 6 months, or both, to use any agreement that the commissioner has ordered not to be used. Existing law authorizes the commissioner to determine the form of the advance fee agreements. This bill would instead require the commissioner to determine the form of advance fee agreements and to mandate the submission of advance fee agreement materials prior to their use. The bill would also prohibit advertisements used in obtaining advance fee agreements from using words, letters, initials, symbols, or other devices that are similar to those used by a governmental agency or nonprofit entity, as specified. The bill would also increase the maximum fine for using any agreement that the commissioner has ordered not to be used from $1,000 to $2,500, and would increase the maximum imprisonment time for a violation to 12 months. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The Real Estate Law makes it unlawful for any person to claim, demand, charge, receive, collect, or contract for an advance fee for soliciting lenders on behalf of borrowers or performing services for borrowers in connection with a mortgage loan before the borrower becomes obligated to complete the loan and for performing any other activity for which a license is required, unless the person is a licensed real estate broker and has complied with the provisions of the Real Estate Law. A violation of that provision constitutes a public offense punishable by a fine of up to $10,000 for an individual or $50,000 for a corporation. Existing law exempts from that prohibition state-chartered banks, savings associations, credit unions, industrial loan companies, and licensed finance lenders and brokers. This bill would increase those fines to $20,000 and $60,000, respectively, and would increase the maximum imprisonment time for a violation to 12 months. The bill would also make it unlawful, until January 1, 2013, for a real estate broker, or any other person who performs loan modification services, as specified, to claim, demand, charge, receive, or collect a fee paid for by a borrower for a loan modification agreement, as defined, until the terms of the loan have been modified, and would require provision of a specified notice prior to entering into a loan modification agreement with a borrower. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make an attorney subject to disciplinary sanctions if he or she claims, demands, charges, receives, or collects a fee paid for by a borrower in connection with a loan modification agreement until the terms of the loan have been modified. The bill would further exempt from the fee prohibition licensed residential mortgage lenders and servicers. The bill would also exempt nonprofit community-based organizations, and employees of those organizations, that provide counseling services at no cost to borrowers in connection with loan modifications from certain provisions of the Real Estate Law regulating certain activities of real estate brokers and salespersons. 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) Under existing law, Section 4 of Chapter 217 of the Statutes of 2009, provides that it becomes operative only if SB No. 598 of the 2009–10 Regular Session is enacted and becomes operative on or before January 1, 2010. SB No. 598 (Chapter 193 of the Statutes of 2009) provides that it shall become operative on July 1, 2010. This bill would instead require that Chapter 217 of the Statutes of 2009 become operative if SB No. 598 of the 2009–10 Regular Session is enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 2010. (2) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law requires the Department of Water Resources to convene an independent technical panel to provide information to the department and the Legislature on new demand management measures, technologies, and approaches. "Demand management measures" means those water conservation measures, programs, and incentives that prevent the waste of water and promote the reasonable and efficient use and reuse of available supplies. This bill would require the state to achieve a 20% reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31, 2020. The state would be required to make incremental progress towards this goal by reducing per capita water use by at least 10% on or before December 31, 2015. The bill would require each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets and an interim urban water use target, in accordance with specified requirements. The bill would require agricultural water suppliers to implement efficient water management practices. The bill would require the department, in consultation with other state agencies, to develop a single standardized water use reporting form. The bill, with certain exceptions, would provide that urban retail water suppliers, on and after July 1, 2016, and agricultural water suppliers, on and after July 1, 2013, are not eligible for state water grants or loans unless they comply with the water conservation requirements established by the bill. The bill would repeal, on July 1, 2016, an existing requirement that conditions eligibility for certain water management grants or loans to an urban water supplier on the implementation of certain water demand management measures. (2) Existing law, until January 1, 1993, and thereafter only as specified, requires certain agricultural water suppliers to prepare and adopt water management plans. This bill would revise existing law relating to agricultural water management planning to require agricultural water suppliers to prepare and adopt agricultural water management plans with specified components on or before December 31, 2012, and update those plans on or before December 31, 2015, and on or before December 31 every 5 years thereafter. An agricultural water supplier that becomes an agricultural water supplier after December 31, 2012, would be required to prepare and adopt an agricultural water management plan within one year after becoming an agricultural water supplier. The agricultural water supplier would be required to notify each city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies with regard to the preparation or review of the plan. The bill would require the agricultural water supplier to submit copies of the plan to the department and other specified entities. The bill would provide that an agricultural water supplier is not eligible for state water grants or loans unless the supplier complies with the water management planning requirements established by the bill. (3)  The bill would take effect only if SB 1 and SB 6 of the 2009–10 7th Extraordinary Session of the Legislature are enacted and become effective.
Existing law requires the Department of Water Resources to convene an independent technical panel to provide information to the department and the Legislature on new demand management measures, technologies, and approaches. "Demand management measures" means those water conservation measures, programs, and incentives that prevent the waste of water and promote the reasonable and efficient use and reuse of available supplies. (1) This bill would require the state to achieve a 20% reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31, 2020. The state would be required to make incremental progress towards this goal by reducing per capita water use by at least 10% on or before December 31, 2015. The bill would require each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets and an interim urban water use target, in accordance with specified requirements. The bill would require agricultural water suppliers to implement efficient water management practices. The bill would require the department, in consultation with other state agencies, to develop a single standardized water use reporting form. The bill, with certain exceptions, would provide that urban retail water suppliers, on and after July 1, 2016, and agricultural water suppliers, on and after July 1, 2013, are not eligible for state water grants or loans unless they comply with the water conservation requirements established by the bill. The bill would repeal, on July 1, 2016, an existing requirement that conditions eligibility for certain water management grants or loans to an urban water supplier on the implementation of certain water demand management measures. (2) Existing law, until January 1, 1993, and thereafter only as specified, requires certain agricultural water suppliers to prepare and adopt water management plans. This bill would revise existing law relating to agricultural water management planning to require agricultural water suppliers to prepare and adopt agricultural water management plans with specified components on or before December 31, 2012, and update those plans on or before December 31, 2015, and on or before December 31 every 5 years thereafter. An agricultural water supplier that becomes an agricultural water supplier after December 31, 2012, would be required to prepare and adopt an agricultural water management plan within one year after becoming an agricultural water supplier. The agricultural water supplier would be required to notify each city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies with regard to the preparation or review of the plan. The bill would require the agricultural water supplier to submit copies of the plan to the department and other specified entities. The bill would provide that an agricultural water supplier is not eligible for state water grants or loans unless the supplier complies with the water management planning requirements established by the bill.
The Unruh Civil Rights Act provides that all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status, or sexual orientation are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever. This bill would provide that any discount or other benefit offered to, or conferred on, a consumer or prospective consumer by a business because the consumer or prospective consumer has suffered the loss or reduction of employment or reduction of wages would not be considered an arbitrary discrimination in violation of that act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation by the State Department of Public Health of long-term health care facilities, including skilled nursing facilities. Existing law creates the State Health Facilities Citation Penalties Account in the Special Deposit Fund, with the moneys in this account to be used, upon appropriation, for prescribed purposes. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2011, require skilled nursing facilities to post, in accordance with prescribed requirements, the overall facility rating information determined by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and to inform consumers regarding information available at the department's Internet Web site. A violation of these provisions would be a class B violation, as defined, with the proceeds from fines collected to be deposited into the State Health Facilities Citation Penalties Account.
(1) Existing law requires all manufacturers of ignition interlock devices that meet specified requirements and are certified in a manner approved by the Department of Motor Vehicles, that intend to market the devices in this state, to first apply to the department on forms provided by the department and to pay an accompanying fee in an amount not to exceed the amount necessary to cover the costs incurred by the department in carrying out those provisions. This bill would require a manufacturer and a manufacturer's agent, certified by the department to provide ignition interlock devices, to provide each year to the department information on the number of false positives and the time to reset the device. The bill would also require the department to use this information in evaluating the continued certification of an ignition interlock device. (2) Existing law requires a person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle to be suspended or revoked for a specified period of time if the person has been convicted of violating specified provisions prohibiting driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or drug or the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and drug, or with 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood or while addicted to the use of any drug, with or without bodily injury to another. Existing law also authorizes a person whose privilege is suspended or revoked in that manner to receive a restricted driver's license if specified requirements are met, including, in some instances, the installation of an ignition interlock device on the person's vehicle. This bill would require the department to establish a pilot program from July 1, 2010, to January 1, 2016, in the Counties of Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Tulare that requires, as a condition of being issued a restricted driver's license, being reissued a driver's license, or having the privilege to operate a motor vehicle reinstated subsequent to a conviction for a violation of the above offenses, a person to install for a specified period of time an ignition interlock device on all vehicles he or she owns or operates, except as provided. The amount of time the ignition interlock device would be required to be installed would be based upon the number of convictions, as prescribed. The bill would prohibit the implementation of the pilot program if the department fails to obtain, by January 31, 2010, nonstate funds for the programming costs of the pilot program. The bill would set up a statutory scheme under which the department would, with regard to the installation of an ignition interlock device described above, notify the person of the ignition interlock device installation requirements established under the bill, accept notification from the installer of the ignition interlock device of attempts to remove, bypass, or tamper with the ignition interlock device or if the person fails 3 or more times to comply with the maintenance requirements, monitor the installation and maintenance of the ignition interlock device, and keep specified records. The bill would also require that manufacturers and manufacturer's agents, certified by the department to provide ignition interlock devices, adopt a fee schedule for payment of the costs of the ignition interlock device based on the offender's ability to pay, and would require the court to adopt a similar fee schedule with regard to the fees for the county alcohol and drug problem assessment program. On or before January 1, 2015, the department would be required to report to the Legislature regarding the effectiveness of the pilot program in reducing the number of first-time driving under the influence violations and repeat offenses in those counties. (3) This bill would require that it become operative only if SB 598 of the 2009–10 Regular Session becomes operative on or before January 1, 2010. (4) Because it is a crime to operate a vehicle that is not equipped with a functioning, certified ignition interlock device by a person whose driving privilege is so restricted, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the scope of that crime. (5) 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.