(1) Existing law provides for the funding of projects on the state highway system and other transportation improvements, including under the interregional transportation improvement program, the state highway operation and protection program, the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program, the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program, and the program within the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program commonly known as the Local Partnership Program. This bill would require, no later than January 1, 2024, the guidelines or plans applicable to those programs to include the strategies established in the Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure adopted by the Transportation Agency, as provided. The bill would also require the Transportation Agency, the California Transportation Commission, and the Department of Transportation, no later than January 1, 2024, to each establish guidelines to ensure transparency and accountability for specified transportation funding programs that they respectively administer and for the project selection processes applicable to those programs. The bill would require those guidelines to meet certain requirements and would require those agencies to hold public workshops to solicit input before establishing the guidelines. The bill, with regard to the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program, would require a project that receives funding under the program to be part of a comprehensive multimodal corridor plan rather than a comprehensive corridor plan. (2) Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to prepare the California Transportation Plan for submission to the Governor and the Legislature, to complete the 3rd update to the plan by December 31, 2025, and to update the plan every 5 years thereafter, as a long-range planning document that incorporates various elements and is consistent with specified expressions of legislative intent. This bill would also require the California Transportation Plan to include a financial element that summarizes the full cost of plan implementation, a summary of available revenues through the planning period, and an analysis of what is feasible within the plan if constrained by a realistic projection of available revenues. (3) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 164.6 of the Streets and Highways Code proposed by AB 2514 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2514 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Sponsored bills
Existing law authorizes a parking citation processing agency, as defined, to collect an unpaid parking penalty by requesting the Department of Motor Vehicles to place a registration hold on the vehicle to which the citations have been issued, or by obtaining a civil judgment against the registered owner of the vehicle, as specified. Existing law requires a processing agency to offer a payment plan for unpaid parking citations to qualified indigent persons. This bill would require a processing agency, if it seeks to collect an unpaid parking penalty by requesting the Department of Motor Vehicles to place a registration hold on the vehicle, to forgive at least $1,500 in parking fines and fees annually for a qualified homeless person, provide certain information regarding the parking citation forgiveness program, including on its internet website, and collect and have readily available specified information.
The California Hospice Licensure Act of 1990 (act) requires a person, political subdivision of the state, or other governmental agency to obtain a license from the State Department of Public Health to provide hospice services to an individual who is experiencing the last phase of life due to a terminal disease, as defined, and their family, except as provided. The act also provides for the renewal of a license. The act imposes criminal penalties on any person who violates any provision of the act or any rule or regulation promulgated under the act. Existing law prohibits any person, political subdivision of the state, or other governmental agency from establishing, conducting, maintaining, or representing itself as a hospice unless a license has been issued under the act. This bill would generally replace the term "hospice" with the term "hospice agency." The bill would provide that hospice agency licenses are not transferable. The bill would specify that only the person or entity initially issued the license may use the license for 5 years. The bill would prohibit the department from approving a change of ownership of a licensed hospice agency for 5 years from the date of initial licensure. The bill would authorize the department to make an exception to the 5-year prohibition under extenuating circumstances, as prescribed. Existing law requires an applicant for a hospice license to satisfy certain conditions, and to satisfy the definition of a hospice and provide specified services in order to be licensed as a hospice. Existing law authorizes the department to deny an application for licensure, or suspend or revoke any license issued to provide hospice services for various reasons, including, but not limited to, violation by the applicant or licensee of the act or related rules and regulations promulgated by the department. Existing law authorizes the department to conduct a survey of an accredited hospice to ensure that the accreditation requirements are met. This bill would revise and expand the department's application requirements, and would additionally require an applicant who has not previously qualified for a hospice agency license to, as a condition of licensure, demonstrate and provide evidence of an unmet need of hospice services in the geographic region the hospice would serve, except under specified circumstances. The bill would require a hospice agency to have specified personnel categories and would require the hospice agency to provide certain information for each individual on an initial application for those positions. The bill would add to the reasons for denial, suspension, or revocation of a license to include, among others, improperly certifying a patient as eligible for hospice care, and demonstrating a pattern and practice of violations of state or federal standards during the last 3 years of a hospice agency owned, operated, or managed by the applicant or licensee. The bill would require the department to conduct annual surveys of 5% of initial hospice agency licenses approved by accrediting organizations during the previous calendar year to ensure that the accreditation requirements are met, using a selective sample basis, and would authorize the department to survey an accredited hospice agency not included as part of the required surveys. The bill would establish a procedure for a person to request an investigation of an accredited hospice agency by making an oral or written complaint alleging a violation of the requirements applicable to hospice agencies. The bill would require the department to make a preliminary review and to make an onsite investigation within 10 business days after receiving the complaint, except as specified. The bill would require the department to notify the complainant in writing of its determination as a result of the investigation within 10 business days of completing the investigation. Existing law imposes a moratorium on the department issuing a new license to provide hospice services, except as specified. Existing law requires the moratorium to end on the earlier of 365 days from the date that the California State Auditor publishes a report on hospice licensure or on January 1, 2027, when the moratorium provisions are repealed. This bill would require the department, by January 1, 2024, to adopt emergency regulations to implement the recommendations in a specified report of the California State Auditor. The bill would require the department to maintain the general moratorium on new hospice agency licenses until the department adopts the regulations. The bill would require the regulations, among other things, to establish guidelines for assessing the appropriateness of a hospice agency's ratio of patients to nurses, require hospice agency management personnel to meet minimum standards of training and experience, and to establish timelines for reporting changes to application information, as specified. The bill would require the moratorium to end on the earlier of 2 years from the date that the California State Auditor publishes a report on hospice agency licensure, or the date the emergency regulations are adopted. The bill would exempt licensed hospice facilities, as defined, from the moratorium. Because a violation of certain of the bill's requirements would be a misdemeanor, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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, beginning January 1, 2025, prohibits the manufacture, sale, delivery, hold, or offer for sale in commerce of any cosmetic product that contains any of several specified intentionally added ingredients, including specified perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) . This bill would prohibit, beginning January 1, 2025, a person or entity from manufacturing, selling, delivering, holding, or offering for sale in commerce any cosmetic product that contains intentionally added perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances PFAS, as defined.
Existing law prohibits the state from seeking a criminal conviction or sentence on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national origin, as specified, and, in a case in which judgment has not been entered prior to January 1, 2021, allows a petition to be filed alleging a violation of that prohibition. Existing law authorizes a court that finds a violation of that prohibition to impose specified remedies, including, among other things, vacating the conviction or sentence and ordering new proceedings. This bill would additionally authorize that petition to be filed for cases in which a judgment was entered as final prior to January 1, 2021, as specified, and in cases in which a juvenile disposition resulted in a commitment to the Division of Juvenile Justice, as specified. The bill would, if a motion under these provisions is based on the conduct or statements by the judge, require the judge to disqualify themselves from those proceedings. The bill would additionally make other technical changes. Existing law allows a defendant to file a motion requesting disclosure of all evidence related to a potential violation of the prohibition on seeking a criminal conviction or sentence on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national origin, and requires the court to order the records to be released upon a showing of good cause. If the records are not privileged, existing law allows the court to permit the prosecution to redact information prior to disclosure. This bill would require the court, upon a showing of good cause, to order disclosure unless a statutory privilege or constitutional privacy right cannot be adequately protected by redaction or a protective order. Under existing law, a conviction or sentence is unlawfully imposed on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national origin if the defendant proves, among other things, that the defendant was charged or convicted of a more serious offense than defendants of other races, ethnicities, or national origins, or received a longer or more severe sentence, and the evidence establishes that the prosecution more frequently sought or obtained convictions for more serious offenses against people who share the defendant's race, ethnicity, or national origin, as specified, or if a longer or more severe sentence was more frequently imposed on defendants of a particular race, ethnicity, or national origin, as specified. Existing law requires this determination to be made pursuant to statistical evidence or aggregate data, as specified. This bill would allow that evidence to include nonstatistical evidence and would require the court to consider the totality of the evidence in determining whether a significant difference in seeking or obtaining convictions or in imposing sentences has been established. The bill would require the court to consider whether systemic and institutional racial bias, racial profiling, and historical patterns of racially biased policing and prosecution may have contributed to, or caused differences observed in, the data or impacted the availability of data overall. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1473 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 467 to be operative only if this bill and SB 467 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law, the Alatorre-Zenovich-Dunlap-Berman Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975, grants agricultural employees the right to form and join labor organizations and engage in collective bargaining with respect to wages, terms of employment, and other employment conditions, and authorizes employees to elect exclusive bargaining representatives for these purposes. Existing law creates the Agricultural Labor Relations Board and prescribes its composition, duties, and powers. Existing law authorizes the board to hold hearings and conduct investigations and requires that certain procedures be the exclusive method of redressing unfair labor practices. Under existing law, any person who willfully resists, prevents, or interferes with a member of the board or its agents or agencies in the performance of their duties is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law requires the board to certify the results of an election conducted by secret ballot of employees in a collective bargaining unit to designate a collective bargaining representative, unless the board determines there are sufficient grounds to refuse to do so. Existing law further provides that if the board refuses to certify an election because of employer misconduct that would render slight the chances of a new election reflecting the free and fair choice of employees, the labor organization shall be certified as the bargaining representative for the bargaining unit. This bill would refer to the election by secret ballot process as a polling place election. The bill would establish alternative procedures to the polling place election and authorize a labor organization to be certified as the exclusive bargaining representative of a bargaining unit through either a labor peace election or a non-labor peace election, as prescribed, dependent on whether an employer enrolls and agrees to a labor peace election for labor organization representation campaigns. The bill would provide that a labor peace election or a non-labor peace election permits a bargaining unit to summarily select a labor organization as its representative for collective bargaining purposes without using the existing polling place process. Under the bill, a labor peace election would be a mail ballot election and a non-labor peace election would establish a process for the submission of a petition with proof of majority support, subject to certification by the board. Among other provisions, the bill would require for both alternative procedures that an employer respond to the board with regard to a petition, including providing a specified list of employees to the board. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would establish a schedule for agricultural employers to indicate to the board whether they agree to a labor peace compact, defined to mean an agreement by the employer to, among other things, make no statements for or against union representation to its employees or publicly, in any written or oral form, at any time during employee hire, rehire, or orientation, or after certain documents regarding organization are filed with the board. The bill would prohibit a labor peace compact from prohibiting an employer from communicating truthful statements to employees regarding workplace policies or benefits, as specified. The bill would require the board to develop an online web-based labor peace election process that will allow employers to indicate their labor peace choice online, and that will allow labor organizations to see whether a specific agricultural employer has agreed to a labor peace election campaign. This bill would repeal the above provisions on January 1, 2028. This bill would prescribe civil penalties to be imposed upon an agricultural employer who commits an unfair labor practice in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for each violation, and would increase that sum to an amount not to exceed $25,000 for specified violations. The bill would require the board to consider specified factors in determining the amount of a civil penalty pursuant to these provisions. The bill would also authorize the board to impose personal liability for these penalties upon a director or officer of an employer in certain circumstances. Existing law authorizes a person aggrieved by the final order of the board granting or denying in whole or in part the relief sought for an unfair labor practice, to obtain a review of the order in a specified court of appeal by filing in the court a written petition requesting that the order of the board be modified or set aside. This bill would require an employer who appeals or petitions for a writ of review of any order of the board involving make-whole, backpay, or other monetary awards to employees, to post an appeal bond in the amount of the entire economic value of the order, as specified, and would provide for the bond to be forfeited under specified conditions. This bill would state that its provisions are severable. 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 the Department of Water Resources, in coordination with the State Water Resources Control Board, and including collaboration with and input from stakeholders, to conduct necessary studies and investigations and authorizes the department and the board to jointly recommend to the Legislature a standard for indoor residential water use. Existing law, until January 1, 2025, establishes 55 gallons per capita daily as the standard for indoor residential water use. Existing law establishes, beginning January 1, 2025, the greater of 52.5 gallons per capita daily or a standard recommended by the department and the board as the standard for indoor residential water use, and beginning January 1, 2030, establishes the greater of 50 gallons per capita daily or a standard recommended by the department and the board as the standard for indoor residential water use. Existing law requires the board, in coordination with the department, to adopt by regulation variances recommended by the department and guidelines and methodologies pertaining to the calculation of an urban retail water supplier's urban water use objective recommended by the department. This bill would eliminate the option of using the greater of 52.5 gallons per capita daily and the greater of 50 gallons per capita daily, as applicable, or a standard recommended by the department and the board as the standard for indoor residential water use. The bill would instead require that from January 1, 2025, to January 1, 2030, the standard for indoor residential water use be 47 gallons per capita daily and beginning January 1, 2030, the standard be 42 gallons per capita daily. The bill would require the department, in coordination with the board to conduct necessary studies and investigations to assess and quantify the economic benefit and impacts of the 2030 indoor residential use standard on water, wastewater, and recycled water systems, as specified. The bill would require the department, in coordination with the board, to summarize the findings of these studies and investigations in a report to the Legislature by October 1, 2028. The bill would prohibit enforcement of specified provisions against an urban retail water supplier solely for failing to meet the indoor residential use standard. The bill would require, on or before January 1, 2028, the department, in coordination with the board, to submit a report to the Legislature on the progress of urban retail water suppliers towards achieving their urban water use objective.
Existing property tax law, in accordance with the California Constitution, provides for a "welfare exemption" for property used exclusively for religious, hospital, scientific, or charitable purposes and that is owned or operated by certain types of nonprofit entities, if certain qualifying criteria are met. Existing property tax law states that property is within that welfare exemption if the property is owned and operated by a nonprofit corporation, otherwise qualifying for the welfare exemption, that is organized and operated for the specific and primary purpose of building and rehabilitating single or multifamily residences for sale at cost to low-income families, with financing in the form of a zero interest rate loan and without regard to religion, race, national origin, or the sex of the head of household. This bill would also provide, for lien dates occurring on or after January 1, 2023, and before January 1, 2028, that property is fully exempt from property taxation and is also within that welfare exemption if that property is owned and operated by a nonprofit corporation, as described, that is organized and operated for the specific and primary purpose of building and rehabilitating single or multifamily residential units and the property has units that meet specified requirements. The bill would limit the exemption to the portion of the property proposed to be built or rehabilitated with units meeting the requirements and would limit, following completion of construction, the exemption to the portion of the property with units that meet the requirements, as specified. The bill would prohibit the denial of this exemption for property not previously designated as open space on the basis that the property does not currently include a single or multifamily residential unit, as described, or a single or multifamily residential unit, as described, that is in the course of construction. This bill would require a nonprofit corporation that utilizes this welfare exemption to be subject to an annual independent audit and to make the audit available to specified entities in order to continue to qualify for the exemption. The bill would make a nonprofit corporation liable for property tax for the years for which the property was exempt from taxation pursuant to the bill's provisions if the property was not developed or rehabilitated, or if the development or rehabilitation is not in the course of construction, by specified dates depending on the date the nonprofit corporation acquired the property. The bill would require an officer of the nonprofit corporation claiming the exemption to sign under penalty of perjury an affidavit affirming to the county assessor that the property owned and operated by the nonprofit corporation is for the future construction of single or multifamily residential units on that property, as described. By adding to the duties of local tax officials and expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the State Board of Equalization to annually collect and report to the Legislature, by June 1, 2025, and every June 1 thereafter until June 1, 2028, data from county assessors to quantify the amount of assessed value exempted and the number of owner-occupied dwelling units created by nonprofits granted the exemption in the bill. The bill would require nonprofits to provide information to county assessors about the additional dwelling units created under the exemption. 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. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law establishes the Air Quality Improvement Program that is administered by the State Air Resources Board for the purposes of funding projects related to, among other things, the reduction of criteria air pollutants and improvement of air quality. Pursuant to its existing statutory authority, the state board has established the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, as a part of the Air Quality Improvement Program, to promote the production and use of zero-emission vehicles by providing rebates for the purchase of new zero-emission vehicles. Existing law specifies the types of projects eligible to receive funding under the program. This bill would specify projects providing incentives for purchasing electric bicycles, as defined, as projects eligible for funding under the program. The bill would establish an Electric Bicycle Incentives Project to provide incentives, in the form of vouchers, to income-qualified individuals for the purchase of electric bicycles, as provided.
(1) Existing law provides for the establishment of various special districts that may support and finance housing development, including affordable housing special beneficiary districts that are authorized to promote affordable housing development with certain property tax revenues that a city or county would otherwise be entitled to receive. Existing law, the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Housing Finance Act, establishes the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority to raise, administer, and allocate funding for affordable housing in the San Francisco Bay area, as defined, and provide technical assistance at a regional level for tenant protection, affordable housing preservation, and new affordable housing production. This bill, the Los Angeles County Regional Housing Finance Act, would establish the Los Angeles County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency and would state that the agency's purpose is to increase the supply of affordable housing in Los Angeles County by providing for significantly enhanced funding and technical assistance at a regional level for renter protections, affordable housing preservation, and new affordable housing production, as specified. The bill would require a board composed of 21 voting members and one nonvoting member from Los Angeles County, as specified, to govern the agency. This bill would permit the board to determine its organizational structure and to delegate specified powers. The bill would require the board to form an oversight committee composed of 11 members and one nonvoting member to assist in the development of funding guidelines, implementation of agency programs, and approval of an expenditure plan, as specified. The bill would require the board to provide for annual audits of the agency's general administration, accounts, and records, including an independent financial and performance audit for bonds secured by ad valorem property taxes, and provide for financial reports. The bill would include findings that the provisions proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities within Los Angeles County, including charter cities. This bill would authorize the agency to, among other things, raise and allocate new revenue, incur and issue bonds and other indebtedness, and place on the ballot in Los Angeles County, including all of its incorporated cities, funding measures, in accordance with applicable constitutional and statutory requirements, to raise and allocate funds to the county, the cities in the county, and other public agencies and affordable housing projects within its jurisdiction for purposes of preserving and enhancing existing housing, funding renter protection programs, and financing new construction of housing developments, as specified. In this regard, the bill would authorize the entity, among other things, to impose various special taxes, including a parcel tax and a documentary transfer tax, within its jurisdiction, and to issue bonds secured by the levy of ad valorem property taxes, in accordance with applicable constitutional requirements, and revenue bonds payable from the revenues of the agency, other than revenues generated from ad valorem property taxes. The bill would require that revenue generated by the agency pursuant to these provisions be used for specified housing purposes and would require the agency to distribute those funds in accordance with specified requirements, including the adoption of an annual plan by the board. This bill would require that revenue be allocated according to a geographic distribution schedule, as specified. Existing law defines "public works," for the purposes of regulating public works contracts, as, among other things, construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work done under contract and paid for, in whole or in part, out of public funds. Existing law further requires that, except as specified, not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages be paid to workers employed on public works and imposes misdemeanor penalties for a willful violation of this requirement. Under this bill, a construction or rehabilitation project receiving certain funding associated with the agency, as described, would constitute a public work for which prevailing wages are required to be paid. The bill would also provide that certain projects with 40 units or greater are eligible to receive funding or financing from the agency only if all construction and rehabilitation is subject to the City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works PLA, as defined and specified, except that if a specific countywide project labor agreement, as defined, is negotiated, then the bill would provide that those projects are eligible for funding or financing from the agency only if all construction and rehabilitation is subject to that labor agreement rather than the Department of Public Works PLA, as specified. Because the willful violation of prevailing wage requirements when engaged in these public works projects would result in the imposition of misdemeanor penalties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA includes exemptions from its environmental review requirements for numerous categories of projects. This bill would exempt from the CEQA requirements certain actions taken by the agency. (3) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for Los Angeles County. (4) By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to elections procedures for revenue measures on behalf of the agency, 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 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.