This measure would honor the late Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and commemorate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, makes specified employment and housing practices unlawful, including discrimination against or harassment of employees and tenants, among others. Existing law authorizes a person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful practice to file a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing within one year from the date upon which the unlawful practice occurred, unless otherwise specified. This bill would extend the above-described period to 3 years for complaints alleging employment discrimination, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes in provisions that grant a person allegedly aggrieved by an unlawful practice who first obtains knowledge of the facts of the alleged unlawful practice after the expiration of the limitations period, as specified. This bill would state that its changes shall not be interpreted to revive lapsed claims.
Existing law imposes various restrictions on employers with respect to contracts and applications for employment. A violation of those restrictions is a misdemeanor. Existing law creates the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, which is under the direction of the Labor Commissioner, and generally commits to the commissioner the authority and responsibility for the enforcement of employment laws. This bill would prohibit a person from, as a condition of employment, continued employment, the receipt of any employment-related benefit, or as a condition of entering into a contractual agreement, prohibiting an applicant for employment, employee, or independent contractor from disclosing to any person an instance of sexual harassment that the employee or independent contractor suffers, witnesses, or discovers in the workplace or in the performance of the contract, or otherwise opposing any lawful practice, or from exercising any right or obligation or participating in any investigation or proceeding with respect to unlawful harassment or discrimination. The bill would also prohibit an employer from requiring any applicant for employment or any employee to waive any right, forum, or procedure for a violation of any provision of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) or other specific statutes governing employment, as a condition of employment, continued employment, the receipt of any employment-related benefit, or as a condition of entering into a contractual agreement. The bill would also prohibit an employer from threatening, retaliating or discriminating against, or terminating any applicant for employment or any employee because of the refusal to consent to the waiver of any right, forum, or procedure for a violation of specific statutes governing employment. The bill would establish a specific exemption from those prohibitions. Because a violation of these prohibitions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. FEHA makes specified employment and housing practices unlawful and provides procedures for enforcement by the Department of Fair Employment and Housing. FEHA authorizes a person alleging a violation of specified provisions of the act relating to employment discrimination to submit a verified complaint to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, and requires the department to take actions to investigate and conciliate that complaint. FEHA authorizes the department to bring a civil action on behalf of the person who submitted the complaint upon the failure to eliminate an unlawful practice under these provisions. FEHA requires the department to issue a right-to-sue notice to a person who submitted the complaint if certain conditions occur, and FEHA requires a person who has been issued a right-to-sue notice to bring an action within one year from when the department issued that notice. This bill would additionally make violations of the prohibitions described above, relating to sexual harassment and waivers, unlawful employment practices under FEHA. 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.
The California Constitution grants the retirement board of a public employee retirement system plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and administration of the retirement fund and system. The California Constitution qualifies this grant of powers by reserving to the Legislature the authority to prohibit investments if it is in the public interest and the prohibition satisfies standards of fiduciary care and loyalty required of a retirement board. Existing law prohibits the boards of administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System and State Teachers' Retirement System from making investments in certain countries and in thermal coal companies, as specified, subject to the boards' plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and administration of the systems. This bill, upon the passage of a federal law that imposes sanctions on Turkey for failure to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, would prohibit the boards of administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System and State Teachers' Retirement System from making additional or new investments, or renewing existing investments, of public employee retirement funds in an investment vehicle in Turkey that is issued by the government of Turkey or that is owned, controlled, or managed by the government of Turkey. The bill would require the boards to liquidate existing investments in Turkey in these types of investment vehicles within 6 months of the passage of a federal law imposing those sanctions on Turkey. The bill would require these boards, within one year of the passage of a federal law imposing those sanctions on Turkey, to make a specified report to the Legislature and the Governor regarding these actions. The bill would specify that its provisions do not require a board to take any action that the board determines in good faith is inconsistent with its constitutional fiduciary responsibilities to the retirement system. The bill would indemnify from the General Fund and hold harmless the present, former, and future board members, officers, and employees of, and investment managers under contract with, the boards, in connection with actions relating to these investments. The bill would repeal these provisions if a determination is made by the Department of State or the Congress of the United States, or another appropriate federal agency, that the government of Turkey has officially acknowledged its responsibility for the Armenian Genocide.
Existing law imposes certain obligations in the context of particular transactions, and provides mechanisms to enforce those obligations. This bill would enact the California Internet Consumer Protection and Net Neutrality Act of 2018. This act would prohibit fixed and mobile Internet service providers, as defined, that provide broadband Internet access service, as defined, from engaging in specified actions concerning the treatment of Internet traffic. The act would prohibit, among other things, blocking lawful content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices, impairing or degrading lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application, or service, or use of a nonharmful device, and specified practices relating to zero-rating, as defined. It would also prohibit fixed and mobile Internet service providers from offering or providing services other than broadband Internet access service that are delivered over the same last-mile connection as the broadband Internet access service, if those services have the purpose or effect of evading the above-described prohibitions or negatively affect the performance of broadband Internet access service.
Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion, for a period no longer than 2 years, to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, in order to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law conditions eligibility on, among other criteria, a court finding that the defendant's mental disorder played a significant role in the commission of the charged offense. Existing law requires, if the defendant has performed satisfactorily in diversion, that the court dismiss the defendant's criminal charges, with a record filed with the Department of Justice indicating the disposition of the case diverted, that the arrest is deemed never to have occurred, and requires the court to order access to the record of the arrest restricted, except as specified. This bill would make defendants ineligible for the diversion program for certain offenses, including murder, voluntary manslaughter, and rape. The bill would authorize a court to require the defendant to make a prima facie showing that the defendant will meet the minimum requirements of eligibility for diversion and that the defendant and the offense are suitable for diversion, as specified. The bill would also require the court, upon request, to conduct a hearing to determine whether restitution is owed to any victim as a result of the diverted offense and, if owed, to order its payment during the period of diversion. The bill would provide that a defendant's inability to pay restitution due to indigence or mental disorder would not be grounds for denial of diversion or a finding that the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of diversion. The bill would also make technical changes.
Existing law makes it a crime to possess specified controlled substances or paraphernalia. Existing law makes it a crime to use or be under the influence of specified controlled substances. Existing law additionally makes it a crime to visit or be in any room where specified controlled substances are being unlawfully used with knowledge that the activity is occurring, or to open or maintain a place for the purpose of giving away or using specified controlled substances. Existing law makes it a crime for a person to rent, lease, or make available for use any building or room for the purpose of storing or distributing any controlled substance. Existing law authorizes forfeiture of property used for specified crimes involving controlled substances. This bill would, until January 1, 2022, authorize the City and County of San Francisco to approve entities to operate overdose prevention programs for adults that satisfies specified requirements, including, among other things, a hygienic space supervised by health care professionals, as defined, where people who use drugs can consume preobtained drugs, sterile consumption supplies, and access to referrals to substance use disorder treatment. The bill would require any entity operating a program under its provisions to provide an annual report to the city and county, as specified. The bill would exempt a person from existing criminal sanctions solely for actions or conduct on the site of a safer drug consumption services program for adults authorized by the city and county. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco.
