(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.
Sponsored bills
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.
(1) Existing law establishes various default speed limits for vehicles upon highways, as specified. Existing law authorizes state and local authorities to adjust these default speed limits, as specified, based upon certain findings determined by an engineering and traffic survey. Existing law defines an engineering and traffic survey and prescribes specified factors that must be included in the survey, including prevailing speeds and road conditions. Existing law authorizes local authorities to consider additional factors, including pedestrian and bicyclist safety. This bill would authorize local authorities to consider the safety of vulnerable pedestrian groups, as specified. (2) Existing law establishes a prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour on any highway, other than a state highway, located in any business or residence district, as defined. Existing law authorizes a local authority to change the speed limit on any such highway, as prescribed, including erecting signs to give notice thereof. This bill would establish a prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour on state highways located in any business or residence district and would authorize the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to change the speed limit on any such highway, as prescribed, including erecting signs to give notice thereof. (3) Existing law establishes a speed limit of 65 miles per hour on state highways, as specified. Existing law authorizes Caltrans to declare a speed limit on any such highway, as prescribed, of 60, 55, 50, 45, 40, 35, 30, or 25 miles per hour, including erecting signs to give notice thereof. Existing law also authorizes a local authority, on a section of highway, other than a state highway, where the speed limit is 65 miles per hour to declare a lower speed limit, as specified. This bill would additionally authorize Caltrans and a local authority to declare a speed limit of 20 or 15 miles per hour, as specified, on these highways. (4) Existing law authorizes a local authority, without an engineering and traffic survey, to declare a lowered speed limit on portions of highway, as specified, approaching a school building or school grounds. Existing law limits this authority to sections of highway meeting specified requirements relating to the number of lanes and the speed limit of the highway before the school zone. This bill would similarly authorize a lowered speed limit on a section of highway contiguous to a business activity district, as defined, and would require that certain violations be subject to a warning citation, for the first 30 days of implementation. (5) Existing law requires Caltrans, by regulation, to provide for the rounding up or down to the nearest 5 miles per hour increment of the 85th percentile speed of free-flowing traffic on a portion of highway as determined by a traffic and engineering survey. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to create and implement an online tool by June 30, 2024, for the adjudication of traffic infractions, among other things. This bill would authorize a local authority to further reduce the speed limit, as specified, and require that certain violations be subject to a warning citation, for the first 30 days of implementation. The bill would, in some circumstances, authorize the reduction of a speed limit beginning June 30, 2024, or when the Judicial Council has developed an online tool for adjudicating traffic infraction violations, whichever is sooner. The bill would require Caltrans to accordingly revise the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, as specified. (6) Existing law defines a speed trap and prohibits evidence of a driver's speed obtained through a speed trap from being admissible in court in any prosecution against a driver for a speed-related offense. Existing law deems a road where the speed limit is not justified by a traffic and engineering survey conducted within the previous 7 years to be a speed trap, unless the roadway has been evaluated by a registered engineer, as specified, in which case the speed limit remains enforceable for a period of 10 years. Existing law exempts a school zone, as defined, from certain provisions relating to defining a speed trap. This bill would extend the period that a speed limit justified by a traffic and engineering survey conducted more the 7 years ago remains valid, for purposes of speed enforcement, if evaluated by a registered engineer, as specified, to 14 years. This bill would also exempt a senior zone and business activity district, as defined, from those provisions.
Existing law defines a "hate crime" as a criminal act committed, in whole or in part, because of actual or perceived characteristics of the victim, including, among other things, race, religion, disability, and sexual orientation. Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to develop guidelines and a course of instruction and training for law enforcement officers addressing hate crimes. Existing law requires state law enforcement agencies to adopt a framework or other formal policy created by POST regarding hate crimes. Existing law requires any local law enforcement agency that adopts or updates a hate crime policy to include specified information in that policy, including information on bias motivation. This bill would include a statement of legislative findings and declarations and require the basic course curriculum on the topic of hate crimes to be developed in consultation with subject matter experts, as specified. The bill would, subject to an appropriation of funds for this purpose in the annual Budget Act or other statute, require POST to update the basic course to include the viewing of a specified video course developed by POST. The bill would also require POST to make the video available via the online learning portal, and would require all peace officers to complete specified training materials no later than one year after the commission makes the updated course available. The bill would require POST to develop and periodically update an interactive course on hate crimes for in-service peace officers, and require officers to take the course every 6 years. This bill would also require any local law enforcement agency that adopts or updates a hate crime policy to include specified information on recognizing religion-bias hate crimes, and would require those policies to include the discriminatory selection of victims as a form of bias motivation.
Existing law, the California Community Care Facilities Act, requires the State Department of Social Services to license and regulate transitional housing placement providers pursuant to the act. Under existing law, a transitional housing placement provider is an organization licensed by the department to provide transitional housing to foster children at least 16 years of age and to nonminor dependents to promote their transition to adulthood. Existing law requires a transitional housing unit to meet certain housing and supervision requirements, which may include a host family certified by a transitional housing placement provider with whom a participant lives in an apartment, single-family dwelling, or condominium. Under existing law, a violation of the act is a misdemeanor. This bill would require a transitional housing unit with a host family to include supervised transitional housing services provided by the licensed transitional housing placement provider. With respect to a transitional housing placement program serving nonminor dependents, the bill would additionally authorize certain entities, including a resource family approved by a foster family agency or a county, a licensed foster family home, a certified family home, an approved relative caregiver, or a nonrelative extended family member of a participant to operate as a host family. The bill would authorize a transitional housing placement provider to provide supportive services to a nonminor dependent placed in a certified family home or resource family of a foster family agency if that provider signs a memorandum of understanding with the foster family agency. Because a violation of the act is a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law establishes the supervised independent living placement as an independent supervised setting that is specified in a nonminor dependent's transitional independent living case plan and in which the nonminor dependent is living independently. Existing law defines a supervised independent living setting to include a supervised independent living placement, a residential housing unit certified by a transitional housing placement provider, and a transitional living setting approved by the county, as specified. This bill would expand the definition of a supervised independent living setting to include a transitional housing unit in which a host family lives with a nonminor dependent who is a participant of a transitional housing placement program, including an apartment, single-family dwelling, or condominium owned, rented, or leased by the host family, with supervised transitional housing services provided by the licensed transitional housing placement provider. The bill would authorize a county to allow a licensed transitional housing placement provider to provide supportive services to assist a nonminor dependent in their supervised independent living setting. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 11400 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 640 to be operative only if this bill and AB 640 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) Existing law defines rape as an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person not the spouse of the perpetrator under certain circumstances, including where the victim is incapable of giving legal consent because of a mental disorder or developmental or physical disability, where the victim is not aware of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator's fraudulent representation that the act serves a professional purpose, and where the victim submits to the act under the belief that the perpetrator is someone known to the victim other than the perpetrator, and the perpetrator intentionally and fraudulently induces that belief. Existing law separately defines rape of a spouse as an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with the spouse of the perpetrator under similar circumstances as nonspousal rape, except that spousal rape does not include acts of sexual intercourse accomplished under the specific circumstances described above. This bill would repeal the provisions relating to spousal rape and make conforming changes, thereby making an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a spouse punishable as rape if the act otherwise meets the definition of rape, except that sexual intercourse with a person who is incapable of giving legal consent because of mental disorder or developmental or physical disability would not be rape if the 2 people are married. By changing the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes an employer to request from the Department of Justice records of all convictions or any arrest pending adjudication for specified offenses for a person who applies for a license, employment, or volunteer position, in which the person would have supervisory or disciplinary power over a minor and requires the employer to notify the parent or guardian of a child if a person with specified convictions will have supervisory or disciplinary power over that child. Existing law exempts certain convictions, including spousal rape, from that notification requirement. This bill would remove the exemption for spousal rape or any other felony conviction and would instead exempt only misdemeanor convictions from that notification. The bill would make numerous conforming changes. (3) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1103 of the Evidence Code proposed by AB 939 to be operative only if this bill and AB 939 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 3044 of the Family Code proposed by SB 320 and AB 1579 to be operative only if this bill and SB 320, AB 1579, or both, are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 13956 of the Government Code proposed by SB 299 to be operative only if this bill and SB 299 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) 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 prohibits a person from engaging in a motor vehicle exhibition of speed on a highway or aiding or abetting in a motor vehicle exhibition of speed on any highway. Upon conviction, existing law punishes a person by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than 90 days, by a fine of not more than $500, or by both that fine and imprisonment. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2025, additionally authorize the court to order the privilege to operate a motor vehicle suspended for 90 days to 6 months and restrict the person's operation of a motor vehicle for the purposes of their employment, as specified. The bill would require the court to consider a person's hardships, as specified, when deciding to either suspend or restrict a driver's license. The bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles to suspend or restrict a driver's license as ordered by the court.
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires an individual or group health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, delivered, or renewed on or after July 1, 2000, to provide coverage for all generally medically accepted cancer screening tests. This bill would delete the references to individual or group health care service plan contracts and health insurance policies in those provisions. The bill would prohibit a health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, delivered, or renewed on or after July 1, 2022, from requiring prior authorization for biomarker testing for an enrollee or insured with advanced or metastatic stage 3 or 4 cancer. The bill would also prohibit those health care service plans or health insurance policies from requiring prior authorization for biomarker testing for cancer progression or recurrence in the enrollee or insured with advanced or metastatic stage 3 or 4 cancer. The bill would provide that its provisions do not limit, prohibit, or modify an enrollee's or insured's rights to biomarker testing as part of an approved clinical trial, as specified. With respect to health care service plans, the bill would specifically apply the provisions relating to biomarker testing to Medi-Cal managed care plans, as specified. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan 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.
Existing law, the Student Loan Servicing Act, provides for the licensure, regulation, and oversight of student loan servicers by the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation, who is the head of the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation. The act prohibits a person from engaging in the business of servicing a student loan in this state without a license, unless the person falls within certain exceptions. Existing law, the Student Borrower Bill of Rights, imposes requirements on a student loan servicer, including, among others, the timely posting, processing, and crediting of student loan payments, and applying overpayments consistent with the best financial interest of a student loan borrower. Existing law also prohibits a student loan servicer from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices, or abusive acts or practices in connection with the servicing of a student loan, and authorizes a person to bring an action for actual damages, injunctive relief, restitution, punitive damages, attorney's fees, and other relief, including treble damages in certain circumstances. This bill would enact the Private Student Loan Collections Reform Act, which would become operative July 1, 2022. The act would prohibit a private education lender or a private education loan collector, as defined, from making any written statement to a debtor in an attempt to collect a private education loan unless the private education lender or private education loan collector possesses certain information regarding the loan and provides this information to the debtor, as specified. The act would require all settlement agreements between a private education lender or private education loan collector and a debtor to be documented in open court or otherwise reduced to writing, as specified. The act would also require a private education lender or private education loan collector that accepts a payment as payment in full or as a full and final compromise of a private education loan, within 30 calendar days, to provide specified information to the debtor regarding the loan. The act would also prohibit a private education lender or private education loan collector from bringing suit or initiating an arbitration or other legal proceeding to collect a private education loan if the applicable statute of limitations on the claim has expired. The act would require a complaint, with respect to an action brought by a private education lender or private education loan collector to collect a private education loan, to contain specified information and would prohibit a default or other judgment from being entered against a defendant unless documents submitted to the court establish the facts alleged. The act would require a plaintiff seeking an exemption, as an exempt entity, from those requirements to attach to the complaint a declaration or affidavit, signed under penalty of perjury, stating certain information. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The act would also authorize a person to bring a cause of action against a creditor, private education lender, or private education loan collector for violating the act for actual damages, statutory damages, restitution, and other specified relief. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) Existing law declares that it is the public policy of the state that environmental marketing claims, whether explicit or implied, should be substantiated by competent and reliable evidence to prevent deceiving or misleading consumers about the environmental impact of plastic products and that, for consumers to have accurate and useful information about the environmental impact of plastic products, environmental marketing claims should adhere to uniform and recognized standards. This bill would further declare that it is the public policy of the state that claims related to the recyclability of a product or packaging be truthful and that consumers deserve accurate and useful information related to how to properly handle the end of life of a product or packaging. This bill would require the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, on or before January 1, 2024, in order to provide information to the public to evaluate whether a product or packaging is recyclable in the state and is of a material type and form that routinely become feedstock used in the production of new products and packaging, to update specified regulations to require disposal facility operators, among other operations and facilities, to provide information to the department regarding how material collected or processed by the operations and facilities was collected and what material types and forms are actively recovered, and not considered contaminants, by the operation or facility. The bill would require the department to conduct, publish on its internet website, and update as provided, a characterization study of material types and forms that are collected, sorted, sold, or transferred by solid waste facilities identified by the department for inclusion in the study. The bill would provide that, except as specified, a product or packaging is considered recyclable in the state if, based on the information published by the department, the product or packaging is of a material type and form collected for recycling by recycling programs for jurisdictions that collectively encompass at least 60% of the population of the state, among other statewide recyclability criteria. (2) Under existing law, it is unlawful for any person to make any untruthful, deceptive, or misleading environmental marketing claim, whether explicit or implied. A violation of this requirement is a misdemeanor. This bill would prohibit a person from offering for sale, selling, distributing, or importing into the state any product or packaging for which a deceptive or misleading claim about the recyclability of the product or packaging is made. The bill would provide that, except as specified, a product or packaging that displays a chasing arrows symbol, among other symbols, statements, or directions, is deemed to be a deceptive or misleading claim unless the product or packaging is considered recyclable pursuant to statewide recyclability criteria and is of a material type and form that routinely becomes feedstock used in the production of new products or packaging, as provided. The bill would therefore expand the scope of an existing crime and impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Under existing law, a person who represents in advertising or on the label or container of a consumer good that the consumer good that it manufactures or distributes is not harmful to, or is beneficial to, the natural environment, through the use of environmental terms, is required to maintain in its records specified information and documentation supporting the validity of the representation, including, if applicable, whether the consumer good conforms with the uniform standards contained in the Federal Trade Commission Guidelines for Environmental Marketing Claims for the use of the term "recyclable," among other terms. A violation of this requirement is a misdemeanor. This bill would apply that recordkeeping requirement to a person who makes those representations through the use of a chasing arrows symbol, as defined, or by otherwise directing a consumer to recycle a consumer good. The bill would add to the required information and documentation for the use of the term "recyclable," the use of a chasing arrows symbol, or other representation that advises consumers to recycle a consumer good, whether the consumer good meets the criteria for statewide recyclability. The bill would provide that a direction to a consumer that accurately instructs the consumer to properly dispose of or otherwise properly handle a consumer good at the end of its useful life shall not be considered "otherwise directing a consumer to recycle a consumer good" if the consumer good is subject to one of several enumerated programs. The bill would provide that directing a consumer to compost or properly dispose of a consumer good through an organics recycling program is also not considered "otherwise directing a consumer to recycle a consumer good." A violation of these provisions would be a misdemeanor. The bill would therefore create a new crime and impose a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law requires all rigid plastic bottles and rigid plastic containers sold in the state to be labeled with a code that indicates the resin used to produce the bottles or containers, with specified numbers and letters placed in relation to a triangle. This bill would prohibit the resin identification code from being placed inside a chasing arrows symbol, unless the rigid plastic bottle or rigid plastic container meets the requirements for statewide recyclability. (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.