Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Under existing law, a health insurer that provides maternity coverage may not restrict inpatient hospital benefits, as specified, and is required to provide notice of the maternity services coverage. This bill would require new forms for health insurance policies submitted to the department after January 1, 2010, to provide coverage for maternity services, as defined. With respect to policy forms on file with the department as of January 1, 2010, the bill would require health insurers to submit to the department, on or before March 1, 2010, revised policy forms that provide coverage for maternity services and would require insurers to include that coverage in the corresponding policies that are issued, amended, or renewed following the department's approval of the revised forms, as specified.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law prohibits discrimination in housing through restrictive covenants based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, national origin, source of income, or ancestry and provides that discrimination in housing through a restrictive covenant includes the existence of a restrictive covenant regardless of whether accompanied by a statement that the covenant is repealed or void. Existing law similarly declares that any provision in any deed of real property in California that purports to restrict the right of any person to sell, lease, rent, use, or occupy the property to persons having any specified characteristic, including, but not limited to, race, color, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, disability, source of income, or sexual orientation, by providing for payment of a penalty, forfeiture, reverter, or otherwise, is void, except as specified. Existing law provides that any deed or other written instrument that relates to title to real property, or any written covenant, condition, or restriction annexed or made a part of, by reference or otherwise, any deed or instrument, that contains any provision that purports to forbid, restrict, or condition the right of any person or persons to sell, buy, lease, rent, use, or occupy the property on account of any of the above-specified characteristics, shall be deemed to be revised to omit that provision. Existing law also authorizes a person who holds an ownership interest of record in property that he or she believes is the subject of an unlawfully restrictive covenant based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, national origin, source of income, or ancestry, to record a Restrictive Covenant Modification, which would include a copy of the original document with the illegal language stricken. Before recording the modification document, the county recorder is required to submit the modification document and the original document to the county counsel who is required to determine whether the original document contains an unlawful restriction based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, national origin, source of income, or ancestry. The county recorder is required to make Restrictive Covenant Modification forms available to the public. Under existing law, a county recorder, title insurance company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent, or association that provides a copy of a declaration, governing document, or deed to any person is required to place a cover page or stamp on the previously recorded document stating that if the document contains an unlawful restriction, that restriction is void and may be removed by recording a Restrictive Covenant Modification. This bill would require a county recorder, title insurance company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent, or association that provides a copy of a declaration, governing document, or deed to a person who holds an ownership interest of record in property to also provide a Restrictive Covenant Modification form with specified procedural information to that person. The bill would authorize a title insurance company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent, or other person to record a Restrictive Covenant Modification, in addition to the owner of record, and would require the requester to provide a return address in order for the county recorder to notify the interested party of the action taken by county counsel on the respective property. The bill would require the county counsel to make a determination whether the language identified by the requester in the original document contains an unlawful restriction within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 3 months, as specified, and would authorize the county counsel to compile a list of phrases identified as unlawfully restrictive language for the purpose of expediting that determination. The bill would require the county recorder to make Restrictive Covenant Modification forms available to the public onsite in an appropriately designated area, and would permit multiple submissions on behalf of different homes and for processing homes in batches with respect to a modification document that affects multiple homes or lots. These new duties would impose a state‑mandated local program on the county recorder and county counsel. (2) Existing law requires the recorder of each county to establish a social security number truncation program in order to create a public record version of each official record so that the public record is in an electronic format and is an exact copy of the official record, except that any social security number contained in the official record shall be truncated by redacting the first 5 digits of that number. These provisions apply to any document recorded since January 1, 1980, as specified. If a public record version of an official record exists, and upon a request of any person to inspect, copy, or to otherwise publicly disclose that record, the recorder shall make available only the public record version of that record, and publicly disclose the official record only in response to a subpoena or court order. The county recorder may, upon authorization of the board of supervisors, charge an additional fee of $1 for recording the first page of each document to be used to implement a social security number truncation program pursuant to these provisions. The county auditor is required, at the request of the county board of supervisors, to verify that these fees are used only for the purpose of the program. This bill would require the recorder of each county to create a public record version of each official record for which a Restrictive Covenant Modification is recorded on or after January 1, 2010, so that the public record is in an electronic format and is an exact copy of the official record, except that any unlawfully restrictive covenant contained in the official record shall be redacted. The bill would specify that an electronic version of the unredacted record, for which a Restrictive Covenant Modification is recorded, would become the official record for the purposes of these provisions. If a public record version of an official record exists, and upon request of any person to inspect, copy, or to otherwise publicly disclose that record, the recorder shall make available only the public record version of that record, and publicly disclose the official record only in response to a subpoena or court order. The bill would provide that the county recorder shall not incur any liability for a procedural, clerical, or administrative error in the recording of a modification document or any other activity related to the redaction of an unlawfully restrictive covenant pursuant to these provisions. The bill would also exempt the county counsel from liability, as specified. The bill would require the county recorder to charge an initial fee of not more than $2, as specified, for recording the first page of each property-related document to be used by the county for the sole purpose of performing activities related to the redaction of an unlawfully restrictive covenant pursuant to these provisions or those described in (1) above. The bill would require the board of supervisors to adjust the fee to a whole dollar amount reasonably sufficient to recover costs. By creating new duties for county recorders, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) This bill would make legislative findings that any limitation on the public's right of access to the writings of public officials and agencies made by its provisions is necessary to protect against the risk of discrimination. (4) 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 the Legislature finds there is no mandate contained in the bill that will result in costs incurred by a local agency or school district for a new program or higher level of service which require reimbursement pursuant to these constitutional and statutory provisions.
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations, as defined. The Public Utilities Act imposes various duties and responsibilities on the PUC with respect to the purchase of electricity and requires the PUC to review and approve a renewable energy procurement plan for each electrical corporation pursuant to the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program (RPS program) . The RPS program requires that a retail seller of electricity, including electrical corporations, community choice aggregators, and electric service providers, purchase a specified minimum percentage of electricity generated by eligible renewable energy resources, as defined, in any given year as a specified percentage of total kilowatthours sold to retail end-use customers each calendar year. The RPS program requires the PUC to implement annual procurement targets for each retail seller to increase its total procurement of electricity generated by eligible renewable energy resources by at least an additional 1% of retail sales per year so that 20% of its retail sales of electricity are procured from eligible renewable energy resources no later than December 31, 2010. Existing law requires the PUC to make a determination of the existing market cost for electricity, which PUC decisions call the market price referent, and to limit an electrical corporation's obligation to procure electricity from eligible renewable energy resources, that exceeds the market price referent, by a specified amount. This bill would instead require the PUC to require that a retail seller procure the following percentages of electricity from eligible renewable energy resources by the following dates: (A) Until December 31, 2012, the same percentage as actually achieved by the retail seller during 2009; (B) 20% by December 31, 2013; (C) 25% by December 31, 2016; and (D) 33% by December 31, 2020. The bill would authorize the PUC to permit a retail seller to delay compliance with (B) or (C) procurement levels when specified circumstances are present, but would not authorize the PUC to permit a retail seller to delay compliance with the (D) procurement level. The bill would delete the existing market price referent provisions and instead require the PUC to establish a methodology to determine the market price of electricity for terms corresponding to the length of contracts with eligible renewable energy resources, in consideration of, and reflecting, certain matters. The bill would require the PUC to establish a limitation on the annual expenditures made above the market price, by an electrical corporation, in order to achieve the procurement levels established by the PUC. The bill would require the PUC to permit an electrical corporation to limit its procurement of electricity from eligible renewable energy resources to that quantity that can be procured at or below the market prices established by the PUC, up to the limitation. The bill would delete an existing requirement that the PUC adopt flexible rules for compliance for retail sellers. The bill would revise the definitions of certain terms for purposes of the RPS program. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill are within the act and require action by the PUC to implement its requirements, a violation of these provisions would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the definition of a crime. 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 relating to the administration of personal income taxes authorizes individual taxpayers to contribute amounts in excess of their tax liability for the support of specified funds or accounts. This bill would allow individual taxpayers to designate on their tax returns, that a specified amount in excess of their tax liability be transferred to the Safely Surrendered Baby Fund, which would be created by this bill. This bill would provide that all moneys contributed to the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be allocated to the Franchise Tax Board and the Controller for reimbursement of costs, as provided, and to the State Department of Social Services for programs to increase public awareness and outreach regarding the Safely Surrendered Baby Law, as specified. This bill would provide that these voluntary contribution provisions are repealed on either January 1 of the 5th taxable year following the taxable year the fund first appears on the personal income tax return or on January 1 of an earlier calendar year, if the Franchise Tax Board estimates that the annual contribution amount will be less than $250,000, or an adjusted amount, as specified, for subsequent taxable years.
This measure would provide that the 2009–10 Fifth Extraordinary Session of the Legislature shall stand adjourned sine die at midnight on the date that this measure has been adopted by both houses of the Legislature.
Existing law regulates the licensing and operation of talent services within the entertainment industry. These provisions govern the making and canceling of contracts, fees to be charged for services, records to be maintained by talent services, bonding requirements, and remedies for violations of these provisions, a violation of which constitutes a crime. This bill would prohibit a person from engaging, as specified, in an advance-fee talent representation service, as defined. This bill would also impose additional disclosure and contract requirements for a talent service, as defined. The bill would make a willful violation of its provisions a misdemeanor and subject to a civil action. Because the bill would create new crimes, it 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 regulates the taking or possession of birds, mammals, fish, amphibians, and reptiles. Except as expressly provided otherwise in the Fish and Game Code, any violation of that code, or of any rule, regulation, or order made or adopted under that code, is a misdemeanor. Existing law specifically imposes a fine of up to $30,000 or up to one year of imprisonment, or both, for the knowing unlawful taking of listed animals for commercial purposes, for the knowing unlawful possession for commercial purposes of any part of a mountain lion, bear, wild pig, bighorn sheep, elk, antelope, or deer, a pelt of a furbearing mammal, a live reptile or amphibian, any fully protected, threatened, or endangered species, or any quantity of fish or shellfish in excess of the quantity permitted by the code, and for the knowing unlawful sale for commercial purposes, or the unlawful possession with the intent to sell, of any part of, or product made from, any wildlife. Existing law, except as specified, also prohibits any person convicted of a violation punishable under those unlawful taking and possession and sale provisions from thereafter taking wildlife in this state for a period of not less than one year from the date of conviction, and provides for the revocation of related entitlements. Existing law prohibits a person, upon the 3rd conviction of a specified violation relating to the taking or possession of fish, reptiles, or amphibia, or parts thereof, in any 5-year period, and upon any subsequent conviction during a 5-year period, from taking any fish, reptiles, or amphibia in the state for 3 years from the date of the last conviction, and requires the Fish and Game Commission to revoke the sport fishing license of such a person for the period of the prohibition. This bill would delete those unlawful taking and possession and sale provisions and those specific taking and entitlement prohibitions. The bill would, instead, except as specified, provide that any person who illegally takes, possesses, imports, exports, sells, purchases, barters, trades, or exchanges any amphibian, bird, fish, mammal, or reptile, or part thereof, for profit or personal gain, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $5,000, nor more than $40,000, or imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. The bill would increase the fine for a 2nd or subsequent violation. The bill would require that moneys equivalent to 50% of the revenue deposited in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund from fines and forfeitures collected pursuant to these provisions be allocated for the support of the Special Operations Unit of the Department of Fish and Game and used for law enforcement purposes and 50% of the revenue from a fine be paid to the county in which the offense was committed. The bill would require the county board of supervisors to first use those revenues to reimburse the costs incurred by the district attorney or city attorney in investigating and prosecuting the violation and would authorize the expenditure of any excess revenues in accordance with specified existing law. The bill would provide that any person who illegally takes or possesses in the field more than 3 times the daily bag limit, or who illegally possesses more than 3 times the legal possession limit, of fish, reptiles, birds, amphibians, or mammals is guilty of a misdemeanor subject to a fine of not less than $5,000 nor more than $40,000, or imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. The bill would increase the fine for a 2nd or subsequent violation. The bill, except as specified, would provide that any person who maliciously and intentionally maims, mutilates, or physically tortures any fish, reptile, bird, amphibian, or mammal provided for in the code is guilty of a crime punishable as prescribed. The bill would require that 50% of the revenue from a fine collected pursuant to these provisions be paid to the county in which the offense was committed. The bill would require the county board of supervisors to first use those revenues to reimburse the costs incurred by the district attorney or city attorney in investigating and prosecuting the violation and would authorize the expenditure of any excess revenues in accordance with specified existing law. The bill would authorize the department, upon a conviction of certain violations, to suspend or permanently revoke a person's hunting or sport fishing license or permit privileges. The bill would authorize any person whose privileges are suspended or revoked to appeal the suspension or revocation to the commission, and would require the commission to initiate the appeal process within 12 months of the violator's appeal request. The bill would authorize the department to adopt regulations to implement those suspension and revocation provisions. The bill would authorize the forfeiture of any device or apparatus, including a vessel, vehicle, or hunting or fishing gear, used in the commission of specified offenses. The bill, by creating new crimes, 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 establishes the criteria for determining when a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer, including conduct involving illegally selling a controlled substance, or the commission of an offense involving the unlawful possession or use of illegal weapons or ammunition or the use of the premises to further that purpose. Any of those acts may be deemed to constitute committing a nuisance on the premises. Existing law authorizes, in specified counties, only until January 1, 2010, a city prosecutor or city attorney to file an action for unlawful detainer in the name of the people against any person who is in violation of the nuisance or the illegal purpose provisions of the unlawful detainer provision described above, with respect to controlled substances or unlawful weapons or ammunition. These provisions also impose specified reporting requirements regarding the implementation of these programs upon the city attorney and city prosecutor of each participating jurisdiction. The information compiled pursuant to these provisions is reported annually to the Judicial Council on or before January 30 of each year. The Judicial Council is required to report to the Legislature, as specified. This bill would expand the scope of the latter provisions to apply in additional specified counties, revise the reporting requirements to require, among other changes, that the reports be made to the California Research Bureau, rather than the Judicial Council, and that the California Research Bureau report to the Legislature, as specified, and would make the provisions operative until January 1, 2014. In the County of Los Angeles, however, in courts that have a specified jurisdiction, the provision authorizing an action for unlawful detainer with respect to a violation relating to controlled substances would be operative indefinitely, except as specified. The bill would also require the 2013 report to indicate whether the City of Los Angeles has regularly reported to the bureau. In the City of Los Angeles, certain provisions would remain in effect indefinitely if the city has regularly reported to the bureau. The bill would provide that the city would be deemed to have regularly reported if the 2013 report indicates that fact. The bill would also make related technical changes.
Existing law authorizes the legislative body of any city, defined as a city, county, or city and county, to determine that it would be convenient and advantageous to designate an area within which authorized city officials and free and willing property owners may enter into contractual assessments and make arrangements to finance public improvements to specified lots or parcels or to finance the installation of distributed generation renewable energy sources or energy efficiency improvements that are permanently fixed to real property, as specified. Existing law requires the legislative body to make these determinations by adopting a resolution indicating its intention to do so and requires the resolution to include certain specified information. This bill would expand these provisions to authorize the legislative body of any public agency, as defined, to determine that it would be in the public interest to designate an area within which authorized city officials and free and willing property owners may enter into contractual assessments to finance the installation of water efficiency improvements that are permanently fixed to real property, as specified. The bill would also, with respect to all of its provisions, modify its definitions and require a legislative body to perform additional record keeping duties and provide specified notice to any entity that provides energy or water within the boundaries of the area within which contractual assessments may be entered into. This bill would also require additional specified disclosures for a transfer of real property subject to a contractual assessment. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature in regard to these provisions. This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
Existing law, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) , establishes certain requirements relating to the provision of health insurance and, among other things, requires the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services to publicize the standards for the electronic exchange, privacy, and security of protected health information, as defined. Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, prohibits a health care provider, a contractor, or a health care service plan from disclosing medical information, as defined, regarding a patient of the provider or an enrollee or subscriber of the health care service plan without first obtaining an authorization, except as specified. Existing law makes a violation of the act that results in economic loss or personal injury to a patient a misdemeanor. This bill would authorize a health care provider or a health care service plan to disclose medical information to a specified type of employee welfare benefit plan formed under the Taft-Hartley Act, or to an entity contracting with that employee welfare benefit plan, as specified, if, among other requirements, the disclosure is for a specified purpose, is made pursuant to a request accompanied by a written authorization for the release of the information, as specified, and is authorized by and made in a manner consistent with HIPAA. By changing the definition 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.