Existing law establishes the Office of Small Business Advocate within the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development for the purpose of advocating for the causes of small business and to provide small businesses with the information they need to survive in the marketplace. This bill, the Keep California Working Act, would establish the Keep California Working Grant Program. The act would require the Small Business Advocate to administer the program and award grants, as specified, to small businesses and nonprofit entities that meet specified criteria, including that the entity has experienced economic hardship resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. The act would specify that grant money awarded pursuant to the program may be used only for specified purposes, including payroll costs, health care benefits, paid sick, medical, or family leave, and insurance premiums. The act would appropriate $2.6 billion dollars to the Office of Small Business Advocate for those purposes. The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, in conformity with federal income tax law, generally define "gross income" as income from whatever source derived, except as specifically excluded, and provide various exclusions from gross income. This bill would exclude from gross income, for state income tax purposes, the amount of a grant awarded pursuant to the Keep California Working Grant Program. Existing law requires a bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. The bill also would include additional information required for a bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Sponsored bills
Existing law imposes various taxes, including personal income and excise taxes. The California Constitution requires a 23 vote of both houses of the Legislature for the passage of any change in statute that results in any taxpayer paying a higher tax. The California Constitution generally prohibits the total annual appropriations subject to limitation of the state and each local government from exceeding the appropriations limit of the entity of government for the prior fiscal year, adjusted for the change in the cost of living and the change in population, and prescribes procedures for making adjustments to the appropriations limit. This measure would impose an excise tax, payroll taxes, and a State Personal Income CalCare Tax at specified rates to fund comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage and a health care cost control system for the benefit of every resident of the state, as well as reserves deemed necessary to ensure payment, to be established in statute. The measure would authorize the Legislature, upon an economic analysis determining insufficient amounts to fund these purposes, to increase any or all of these tax rates by a statute passed by majority vote of both houses of the Legislature. This measure would establish the CalCare Trust Fund in the State Treasury and would deposit these tax revenues in the fund for the purpose of funding this health care coverage, cost control system, and reserves, and would authorize the Legislature to appropriate these funds by a statute passed by a majority vote of the membership of both houses. The measure would exclude appropriations of revenues from the CalCare Trust Fund from the limitation on appropriations and from consideration for purposes of educational funding mandated by the California Constitution. This measure would prohibit the above-described provisions from becoming operative until the later operative date of a statute that establishes comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage, a health care cost control system, and necessary reserves, and a statute that establishes the administration, collection, and enforcement of the excise tax, payroll taxes, and a State Personal Income CalCare Tax imposed by the measure.
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 (Knox-Keene) , 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 authorizes a health insurer to require step therapy if there is more than one drug that is appropriate for the treatment of a medical condition, and authorizes a health care service plan to utilize step therapy consistent with Knox-Keene. Under existing law, if a health care service plan, health insurer, or contracted physician group fails to respond to a completed prior authorization request from a prescribing provider within a specified timeframe, the prior authorization request is deemed to have been granted. This bill would clarify that a health care service plan that provides coverage for prescription drugs may require step therapy, as defined, if there is more than one drug that is clinically appropriate for the treatment of a medical condition. The bill would require a health care service plan or health insurer to expeditiously grant a step therapy exception request if the health care provider submits justification and supporting clinical documentation, as specified, supporting the provider's determination that the required prescription drug is inconsistent with good professional practice for provision of medically necessary covered services to the enrollee or insured, based on specified criteria. The bill would authorize a health care provider or prescribing provider to appeal a denial of an exception request for coverage of a nonformulary drug, prior authorization request, or step therapy exception request consistent with the health care service plan's or health insurer's current utilization management processes. The bill would authorize an enrollee or insured, or their designee or guardian, to appeal a denial of an exception request for coverage of a nonformulary drug, prior authorization request, or step therapy exception request, as specified. The bill would require a prior authorization or step therapy exception request to be deemed approved for the duration of the prescription, including refills, if a health care service plan, health insurer, or contracted physician group fails to send an approval or denial within a specified timeframe. Commencing January 1, 2022, the bill would require a contract between a health care service plan or health insurer and a utilization review organization that performs utilization review or utilization management functions on behalf of health care service plans or health insurers, or between a health care service plan and another contracted entity, to include terms that require the utilization review organization or other contracted entity to comply with specified provisions relating to step therapy determinations and procedures. Because a willful violation of the bill's requirements relative to health care service plans 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 Unruh Civil Rights Act, specifies that all persons within the jurisdiction of the state are free and equal. Existing law entitles people regardless of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind. This bill would establish the Commission on the State of Hate in the state government. The bill would provide for the appointment of 9 members, appointed by the Governor, the Speaker of the Assembly, and the Senate Committee on Rules, as provided. The bill would prescribe the goals of the commission, which would include, among other things, providing resources to various state agencies and the public to inform them on the state of hate and advising the Legislature, the Governor, and state agencies on policy recommendations to promote intersocial education designed to foster mutual respect and understanding among California's diverse population. The bill would require the commission to host and coordinate a minimum of 4 in-person or virtual community forums, open to the public, on the state of hate per year. The bill would require the commission to seek to protect civil liberties in accordance with applicable law. The bill would authorize the commission to seek, apply for, or accept funding from sources other than the General Fund, as provided. Starting July 1, 2023, the bill would require the commission to make publically available and issue to the Governor and the Legislature an Annual State of Hate Commission Report that describes its activities for the previous year and its recommendations for the following year. The bill would require this report, among other things, to provide a comprehensive accounting of hate crime activity statewide and report on relevant national hate crime trends and statistics. The bill would require the commission to report to the Legislature through the Joint Committee on Rules annually, as provided. This bill would make the operation of these provisions contingent on funding appropriated by the Legislature for these purposes, and would require the commission to post notice of the appropriation on the homepage of its internet website and send notice of the funding to the Secretary of State and the Legislative Counsel. This bill would be repealed by its own provisions on January 1, 2027.
Existing law establishes the State Department of Social Services in the Health and Welfare Agency and sets forth its powers and duties relating to the administration of various programs relating to public social services. This bill would enact the Community Response Initiative to Strengthen Emergency Systems Act, or the C.R.I.S.E.S. Act, for purposes of creating, implementing, and evaluating the C.R.I.S.E.S. Grant Pilot Program, which the act would establish. The bill would require the department to administer the program if appropriate funding is made available to the department. The bill would require the department to award grants to qualified grantees, which include city, county, and tribal departments of social services, disability services, health services, public health, or behavioral health, based on grant eligibility criteria developed in partnership with a stakeholder workgroup. This bill would require each grantee to receive a minimum award of $250,000 per year under the program. The bill would require a grantee to award at least 90% of grant funds received to one or more qualifying community-based organizations, as defined. The bill would require funds awarded under the program to be utilized to create and strengthen community-based alternatives to law enforcement to lessen the reliance on law enforcement agencies as first responders to crisis situations unrelated to a fire department or emergency medical service response. This bill would require a grantee to report at least annually to the department on the use of funding awarded under the program. The bill would require the department to convene a stakeholder workgroup consisting of specified individuals to make recommendations to the department regarding the implementation of the program, as specified. This bill would establish the Community Response Initiative to Strengthen Emergency Systems Program Fund within the State Treasury, and would provide that, upon appropriation by the Legislature, the moneys may be expended by the department for purposes of the program. The bill would prohibit the department from expending more than 5% of appropriated funds on administrative costs, as specified. The bill would require the department to award all grants by January 1, 2023. This bill would authorize the department to implement, interpret, or make specific the provisions of the program without taking regulatory action, as specified. The bill would grant immunity to the state from liability resulting from the activities of a grantee or community-based organization under the program. This bill would repeal these provisions on June 30, 2026.
(1) Existing law, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, is administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and regulates the granting of licenses for the manufacture, distribution, and sale of alcoholic beverages within the state. The act requires the department to make and prescribe rules to carry out the purposes and intent of existing state constitutional provisions on the regulation of alcoholic beverages, and to enable the department to exercise the powers and perform the duties conferred upon it by the state constitution and the act, not inconsistent with any statute of this state. The act makes it unlawful for any person other than a licensee of the department to sell, manufacture, or import alcoholic beverages in this state, with exceptions. The department, pursuant to its powers and in furtherance of emergency declarations and orders of the Governor under the California Emergency Services Act regarding the spread of the COVID-19 virus, has established prescribed temporary relief measures to suspend certain legal restrictions relating to, among other things, the expansion of a licensed footprint, sales of alcoholic beverages to-go, and delivery privileges. This bill would authorize the department, for a period of 365 days following the end of the state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor on March 4, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, to permit licensees to exercise license privileges in an expanded license area authorized pursuant to a COVID-19 Temporary Catering Authorization approved in accordance with the Fourth Notice of Regulatory Relief issued by the department, as specified. The bill would also authorize the department to extend the period of time during which the COVID-19 Temporary Catering Authorization is valid beyond 365 days if the licensee has filed a pending application with the department for the permanent expansion of their premises before the 365-day time period expires. The bill would make these provisions effective only until July 1, 2024, and repeal them as of that date. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes the legislative body of any city or county to adopt ordinances that regulate zoning within its jurisdiction, as specified. Under that law, variances and conditional use permits may be granted if provided for by the zoning ordinance. This bill would, to the extent that an outdoor expansion of a business to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on indoor dining interferes with, reduces, eliminates, or impacts required parking for existing uses, require a local jurisdiction that has not adopted an ordinance that provides relief from parking restrictions for expanded outdoor dining areas to reduce the number of required parking spaces for existing uses by the number of spaces that the local jurisdiction determines are needed to accommodate an expanded outdoor dining area. Because the bill would require local officials to perform additional duties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make these provisions operative on January 1, 2022, and repeal them on July 1, 2024. (3) Existing law, the California Retail Food Code, establishes uniform health and sanitation standards for, and provides for regulation by the State Department of Public Health of, retail food facilities. Existing law restricts satellite food service to limited food preparation in a fully enclosed permanent food facility that meets specified requirements. Existing law requires a permanent food facility, prior to conducting satellite food service, to submit to the enforcement agency written operating standards. This bill would, for a period of one year after the end of the state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor on March 4, 2020, related to the COVID-19 pandemic, or until January 1, 2024, whichever occurs first, authorize a permitted food facility within any local jurisdiction that is subject to retail food operation restrictions related to a COVID-19 public health response to prepare and serve food as a temporary satellite food service without obtaining a separate satellite food service permit or submitting written operating procedures. This bill would require the written operating procedures to be maintained onsite for review, upon request, by the local jurisdiction. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(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 requires the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to, among other duties, establish standards for the issuance and renewal of credentials, certificates, and permits. Existing law sets forth the minimum requirements for a services credential with a specialization in health for a school nurse, which include, among other requirements, a baccalaureate or higher degree from an accredited institution for a preliminary credential and, for a professional credential, an additional year of coursework beyond a baccalaureate degree in a program approved by the commission. This bill would instead require the baccalaureate or higher degree to be from a regionally accredited institution of higher education. The bill would authorize the commission to approve a program offered by a local educational agency for one year of coursework beyond the baccalaureate degree, as provided.