Asm. Luz Rivas

Existing law establishes the University of California under the administration of the Regents of the University of California. Existing law, the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act, contains provisions relating to employer-employee relations between the State of California and the employees of the University of California. The act assigns major responsibilities for its implementation to the Public Employment Relations Board. A provision of the act relates to the factors to be considered in the determination of the appropriateness of an employee representation unit. The act specifies that the only appropriate representation units that include members of the Academic Senate of the University of California are either a single statewide unit consisting of all eligible members of the senate or divisional units consisting of all eligible members of a division of the senate. If the University of California adds to the academic senate an existing job classification that was previously outside of the academic senate, and employees in that job classification were represented by an exclusive representative, this bill would instead require continued representation of that job classification and those employees by that exclusive representative.

Existing law, until January 1, 2024, requires the Director of the Department of Managed Health Care to establish the Consumer Participation Program, which allows the director to award reasonable advocacy and witness fees to a person or organization that represents consumers and has made a substantial contribution on behalf of consumers to the adoption of a regulation or with regard to an order or decision impacting a significant number of enrollees. By March 1, 2004, and annually thereafter, existing law requires the department to report to specified committees of the Legislature on prescribed information relating to the program, including the amount of reasonable advocacy and witness fees awarded. This bill would indefinitely extend the operation of that program, would delete the annual reporting requirement to the specified legislative committees, and would instead require the department to annually post that information on its public internet website by March 1, 2022, and each March 1 thereafter.

(1) Existing law establishes the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, known as "GO-Biz," within the Governor's office to serve the Governor as the lead entity for economic strategy and the marketing of California on issues relating to business development, private sector investment, and economic growth. This bill would require the office to coordinate with other relevant state and local agencies and national organizations to explore ways to facilitate streamlining of local land use approvals and construction permit processes for projects related to broadband infrastructure deployment and connectivity. (2) Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations. Existing law requires the commission to develop, implement, and administer the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) to encourage deployment of high-quality advanced communications services to all Californians that will promote economic growth, job creation, and the substantial social benefits of advanced information and communications technologies. Existing law establishes 5 accounts, the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account, the Rural and Urban Regional Broadband Consortia Grant Account, the Broadband Public Housing Account, the Broadband Adoption Account, and the Federal Funding Account, within the CASF. Existing law provides that the goal of the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account is, by no later than December 31, 2026, to approve funding for infrastructure projects that will provide broadband access to no less than 98% of California households. Upon the accomplishment of that goal, existing law makes up to $30,000,000 remaining in the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account available for infrastructure projects that provide last-mile broadband access to households to which no facility-based broadband provider offers broadband service at speeds of at least 10 megabits per second (mbps) downstream and one mbps upstream. Existing law authorizes the commission to impose a surcharge to collect $330,000,000 for deposit into the CASF beginning January 1, 2018, and continuing through the 2022 calendar year. Existing law specifies the amount of surcharge revenues to be deposited into each account within the CASF, subject to appropriation by the Legislature. Existing law authorizes the commission, in administering Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account, to require each infrastructure grant applicant to indicate steps taken to first obtain any available funding from the Connect America Fund program or similar federal public programs that fund broadband infrastructure. This bill would provide that the goal of the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account is to approve funding for infrastructure projects that will provide broadband access to no less than 98% of California households by no later than December 31, 2032, rather than December 31, 2026. The bill would delete the provision making up to $30,000,000 available for infrastructure projects upon the accomplishment of that goal, as specified. The bill would authorize moneys appropriated from the CASF to be used to fund projects that deploy broadband infrastructure to unserved nonresidential facilities used for local and state emergency response activities, including fairgrounds. The bill would delete the commission's authorization to collect $330,000,000 for deposit into the CASF beginning January 1, 2018, and continuing through the 2022 calendar year. The bill would authorize the commission, through imposition of a surcharge, to collect up to $150,000,000 per year. The bill would delete the commission's authorization to require each infrastructure grant applicant to indicate steps taken to first obtain any available funding from federal public programs, as specified. (3) Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because certain of the above provisions would be part of the act and a violation of a commission action implementing this bill's requirements 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. (4) This bill would become effective only if AB 14 of the 2021–22 Regular Session is enacted and takes effect on or before January 1, 2022. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Existing law makes it a crime to, by force, threat of force, or physical obstruction that is a crime of violence, intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with, or attempt to injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person or entity because that person or entity is a reproductive health services client, provider, or assistant, or with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship. This bill would make it unlawful for a person to knowingly approach a person or an occupied vehicle at a vaccination site, as specified, for the purpose of obstructing, injuring, harassing, intimidating, or interfering with, as defined, that person or vehicle occupant. The bill would define "vaccination site" as the physical location where vaccination services are provided, including, but not limited to, a hospital, physician's office, clinic, or any retail space or pop-up location made available for large-scale vaccination services. The bill would impose a fine not exceeding $1,000, imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding 6 months, or by both that fine and imprisonment for a violation. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The bill would make related findings and declarations and a related intent statement. (3) 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. (4) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Existing law prohibits a person subject to a protective order, as defined, from owning, possessing, purchasing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition while that protective order is in effect and makes a willful and knowing violation of a protective order a crime. Existing law requires the court, when issuing the order with both parties present, to inform the parties of this information and to order the restrained person to relinquish any firearm in the person's immediate possession or control or subject to their immediate possession or control. Existing law specifies the means of relinquishment if the law enforcement officer serving the protective order does not request the immediate surrender of the firearm, including, surrender to law enforcement, or by selling the firearm to a licensed gun dealer. This bill would require a court to order the restrained person to relinquish ammunition and to notify the parties of how any firearms or ammunition still in the restrained party's possession are to be relinquished and how to submit a receipt to the court. The bill would require the court to review the file to determine whether the receipt has been filed and inquire as to whether the person has complied with the requirement. The bill would require violations of the firearms or ammunition prohibition to be reported to the prosecuting attorney in the jurisdiction where the order has been issued within 2 business days of the court hearing unless the restrained party provides a receipt showing compliance at a subsequent hearing or by direct filing with the clerk of the court. The bill would authorize the relinquishment to occur by transferring the firearm or ammunition or relinquishing them for storage if the firearm or ammunition is not immediately surrendered to law enforcement upon service of the protective order. This bill would also require the court, at a noticed hearing relating to a domestic violence protective order in family court or juvenile court, to consider information presented that the restrained person has possession or control of a firearm or ammunition. The bill would authorize the court, upon making this finding, to set a review hearing, as specified, to determine whether the person has possession or control of a firearm or ammunition in violation of the above provisions. Existing law requires a court, prior to a hearing on the issuance or denial of a protective order, to ensure that a search has been conducted to determine if the subject of the order has been convicted of a serious or violent felony, a misdemeanor conviction involving domestic violence, weapons, or other violence, has an outstanding warrant, is currently on parole or probation, has a registered firearm, or has a prior restraining order or a violation of a restraining order. Existing law requires the court to notify law enforcement officials if some of those conditions exist, including the person being on parole or probation or having an outstanding warrant. This bill, as part of the search, would require the court to make a written record as to whether the subject has relinquished the firearm. If evidence of compliance with the prohibition on firearms or ammunition is not provided, the bill would require the clerk of the court to notify law enforcement officials and would require those law enforcement officials to take all actions necessary to obtain any firearms or ammunition owned, possessed, or controlled and to address any violation of the order with respect to firearms or ammunition, as specified. By requiring additional duties of local law enforcement officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a family court to determine the best interest of the child for purposes of deciding child custody in proceedings for dissolution of marriage, nullity of marriage, legal separation of the parties, petitions for exclusive custody of a child, and proceedings under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. Existing law establishes a rebuttable presumption that an award of sole or joint physical or legal custody of a child to a person who has perpetrated domestic violence is detrimental to the best interest of a child and establishes factors to be considered in rebutting that presumption, including that the perpetrator is restrained by a protective order and has, or has not, complied with that order. This bill, for purposes of rebutting the presumption, would require the court to also consider whether the person is a restrained person in possession or control of a firearm or ammunition in violation of the law. Existing law authorizes the court to issue an ex parte order determining the temporary custody and visitation of a minor child, on the conditions the court determines, to a party who has established a parent and child relationship with the child, based on the best interest of the child. Existing law authorizes the court to suspend or deny custody or visitation or to limit visitation or custody only to situations in which a 3rd person is present. This bill would require the court, in making that determination, to consider whether the party is a restrained person in possession or control of a firearm or ammunition. (2) Existing law requires a law enforcement agency to enter all firearms that have been reported stolen, lost, found, recovered, held for safekeeping, or under observation into the Automated Firearms System (AFS) . This bill would also require law enforcement to enter in all firearms that are relinquished as part of a domestic violence protective order. (3) Existing law specifies how firearms and ammunition may be transported and prohibits open or concealed carry in specified circumstances. Existing law requires a license to sell, lease, or transfer firearms. Existing law, the Safety for All Act of 2016, enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 8, 2016, General Election, requires a valid ammunition vendor license to sell more than 500 rounds of ammunition in any 30-day period. Proposition 63 authorizes amendments of its provisions by a vote of 55% of both houses of the Legislature if the amendments are consistent with, and further the purposes of, the act. This bill would exempt people who are complying with the firearms provisions of a protective order from those provisions, including amending Proposition 63 to exempt a person from the limitation on the sale of over 500 rounds of ammunition in a 30-day period in order to comply with the protective order. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 3044 of the Family Code proposed by AB 1579 and AB 1171, to be operative only if this bill and AB 1579, AB 1171, or both are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 11108.2 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 715, to be operative only if this bill and SB 715 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (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, 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 a public school maintaining any combination of classes from grade 6 to grade 12, inclusive, that meets a 40% pupil poverty threshold specified in federal law, to stock 50% of the school's restrooms with feminine hygiene products, and prohibits a public school from charging for any menstrual products provided to pupils. This bill would enact the Menstrual Equity for All Act of 2021, which would require a public school, as provided, maintaining any combination of classes from grades 6 to 12, inclusive, to stock the school's restrooms with an adequate supply of free menstrual products, as defined, available and accessible, free of cost, in all women's restrooms and all-gender restrooms, and in at least one men's restroom, at all times, and to post a designated notice, on or before the start of the 2022–23 school year, as prescribed. This bill would require the California State University and each community college district, and would encourage the Regents of the University of California and private universities, colleges, and institutions of higher learning, to stock an adequate supply of menstrual products, available and accessible, free of cost, at no fewer than one designated and accessible central location on each campus and to post a designated notice, as provided. By imposing additional requirements on public schools and community college districts, 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.

Under existing law, classified employees of school districts and community college districts subject to layoff as a result of the expiration of a specially funded program at the end of a school year are required to be given written notice on or before April 29 informing them of certain rights. Existing law also requires that notice be given not less than 60 days before the effective layoff date if the termination date of a specially funded program is other than June 30, or if classified employees are subject to layoff as a result of a bona fide reduction or elimination of a service performed by a department. This bill instead would revise and recast provisions relating to the layoff of classified employees of school districts and community college districts to require certain notices and opportunities for a hearing when a permanent classified employee's services will not be required for the ensuing year due to lack of work or lack of funds. The bill would, for the purposes of specified notice and hearing rights, define "permanent classified employee" to include both an employee who was permanent at the time the notice or right to a hearing was required and an employee who became permanent after the date of the required notice. The bill would express the intent of the Legislature in enacting the bill to provide permanent classified school employees and those who become permanent classified school employees with the same rights to notice and hearing with respect to layoffs as are provided to certificated employees of school districts, including teachers and administrators, and academic employees of community college districts. If classified positions must be eliminated as a result of the expiration of a specially funded program, the bill would require written notice of the layoff date and certain rights be given to the classified employees not less than 60 days before the effective layoff date. If, after January 1, 2021, the Legislature provides certificated or academic employees with any additional rights to notice or hearing as to layoffs, the bill would require the respective permanent classified employees, as described, to be afforded the same rights by the school district or community college district, as applicable. To the extent school districts and community college districts are required to perform additional duties, 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, 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 establishes various social services and programs to address the needs of young people in this state including the California Youth Leadership Project to support and promote civic engagement through scholarships to disconnected and disadvantaged youth. This bill would create the California Youth Empowerment Act to address, among other issues, the growing need to engage youth directly with policymakers. The bill would establish the California Youth Empowerment Commission in state government consisting of 13 voting commissioners between 14 and 25 years of age and meeting specified requirements, with 11 members appointed by the Governor, one at-large member appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules, and one at-large member appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly, along with several ex officio, nonvoting members from various geographic regions of the state. The bill would establish the commission to be advisory in nature, for the main purpose of providing meaningful opportunities for civic engagement to improve the quality of life for California's disconnected and disadvantaged youth. The bill would require the commission to conduct regular meetings, in accordance with specified timeframes and procedures, and, among other duties, formally advise and make recommendations to the Legislature, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the Governor, on various legislative and fiscal issues affecting youth. The bill would also authorize the commission to draft and approve resolutions, draft model legislation, provide testimony during legislative committee meetings, conduct public hearings, and award prizes or direct grants to organizations. The bill would require the Governor to appoint an executive director of the California Youth Empowerment Commission to assist the commission in carrying out its work, would authorize the commission to accept gifts and grants, and would create the Youth Commission Fund in the State Treasury, with moneys deposited in the fund available for expenditure, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to carry out the duties of the commission. The bill would require that its provisions be implemented only if funds are made available in the budget or through gifts and grants. The bill would require the Department of Finance to determine if sufficient funds have been provided and would require the department to publish notice of this determination on its website.

(1) Existing law allows a person who was arrested or convicted of a nonviolent offense while they were a victim of human trafficking to petition the court, under penalty of perjury, for vacatur relief. Existing law requires, to receive that relief, that the person establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that the arrest or conviction was the direct result of being a victim of human trafficking. This bill would create similar relief for a person who was arrested or convicted of an offense that was the direct result of being a victim of intimate partner violence or sexual violence. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law creates an affirmative defense against a charge of a crime that the person was coerced to commit the offense as a direct result of being a human trafficking victim at the time of the offense and when the person had reasonable fear of harm. Existing law prohibits this defense from being used with respect to a serious or violent felony, as defined, or a charge of human trafficking. This bill would allow that defense to be used with respect to a serious felony or a charge of human trafficking. The bill would additionally create a defense against a charge of a crime that the person was coerced to commit the offense as a direct result of being a victim of intimate partner violence or sexual violence at the time of the offense and had a reasonable fear of harm. (2) Existing law specifies the pleas that may be made to an indictment, information, or complaint charging a misdemeanor or infraction, including the pleas of guilty, not guilty, or nolo contendere. Existing law defines "plea bargaining" as any bargaining, negotiation, or discussion between a criminal defendant, or their counsel, and a prosecuting attorney or judge, whereby the defendant agrees to plead guilty or nolo contendere, in exchange for any promises, commitments, concessions, assurances, or consideration by the prosecuting attorney or judge relating to any charge against the defendant or to the sentencing of the defendant. This bill would require the prosecutor, during plea negotiations, to consider in support of a mitigated sentence whether the person has experienced psychological, physical, or childhood trauma, was a youth, as defined, at the time of the commission of the offense, or was a victim of intimate partner violence or human trafficking. (3) Existing law, after January 1, 2022, requires the court, when a judgment of imprisonment is imposed and specifies 3 possible terms, to impose the middle term unless there are circumstances in aggravation or mitigation of the crime. This bill would require the court to impose the lower term if the person has experienced psychological, physical, or childhood trauma, was a youth, as defined, at the time of the commission of the offense, or was a victim of intimate partner violence or human trafficking, unless the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances that the imposition of the lower term would be contrary to the interests of justice. Existing law authorizes a court, within 120 days after sentencing the defendant or at any time upon a recommendation from specified correctional entities, to recall an inmate's sentence and resentence that inmate to a lesser sentence. This bill would require the court, when resentencing, to consider if the defendant has experienced psychological, physical, or childhood trauma, including, but not limited to, abuse, neglect, exploitation, or sexual violence, if the defendant was a victim of intimate partner violence or human trafficking prior to or at the time of the commission of the offense, or if the defendant is a youth or was a youth at the time of the commission of the offense, and whether those circumstances were a contributing factor in the commission of the offense. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1170 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1540 and SB 567 to be operative only if this bill, AB 1540, and SB 567 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (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.