Asm. Jesse Gabriel

Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of tenancies and defines the term "persons who hire" for the purpose of regulating residential tenancies. Existing law excludes from these provisions, among other things, occupancy at a hotel or motel if certain conditions are met. This bill would provide that the continued occupancy of a shelter program participant, as defined, in a motel or hotel does not constitute a new tenancy and is not considered a "person who hires" for purposes of an unlawful detainer action if the shelter program meets the core components of Housing First, as defined, and specified requirements related to termination policies and grievance processes. The bill would define "shelter program participant" as an occupant of a motel or hotel, as defined, who participates in specified city-, county-, continuum of care-, state-, or federally funded shelter, interim housing, motel voucher, or emergency shelter programs. Existing law prohibits a person from requiring an occupant of a residential hotel, as defined, to move or check out and reregister before the expiration of 30 days' occupancy if a purpose is to have that occupant maintain transient occupancy status, as described. Existing law, the California Building Standards Law, establishes the California Building Standards Commission within the Department of General Services and requires the commission to approve and adopt building standards and to codify those standards in the California Building Standards Code. This bill would prohibit specified provisions of the California Building Standards Code from causing a motel or hotel to be designated as nontransient solely as a result of a shelter program participant's occupancy in the motel or hotel beyond a 30-day period, or from being interpreted to restrict the duration of occupancy for shelter program participants. This bill would prohibit a hotel or motel from adopting termination policies, restricting access rights, or imposing charges or fees specifically for shelter program participants that do not apply to other occupants, and would also prohibit a motel or hotel from requiring those shelter program participants to check out and reregister, move out of rooms or between rooms, or from the hotel or motel while actively enrolled in the shelter for purposes of preventing occupants from establishing rights of tenancy. This bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2025.

Existing law establishes the Department of Technology within the Government Operations Agency, which is supervised by the Director of Technology. Existing law charges the director and the department with various duties in creating and managing the information technology policy of the state. This bill would require the department, by January 1, 2024, in consultation with the public, the Public Utilities Commission, and the California Broadband Council, to develop a state digital equity plan. The bill would require the plan to include, among other things, the identification of barriers to digital equity faced by specified populations, including, among other barriers, the availability and affordability of access to fixed and wireless broadband technology. The bill would additionally require the plan to include measurable objectives for documenting and promoting digital equity among those populations and an assessment of existing digital navigator programs, as specified. The bill would require the department, to the extent practicable, to obtain all available federal funding for purposes of developing and implementing the plan.

(1) Existing law authorizes a judge to enter an ex parte order authorizing interception of wire or electronic communications within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. Existing law also authorizes a peace officer to apply for, and a magistrate to issue, an order, or extension of an order, authorizing or approving the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device. This bill would prohibit the issuance of an ex parte order authorizing interception of wire or other electronic communication or an order, or extension of an order, authorizing or approving the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device for the purpose of investigating or recovering evidence of a prohibited violation. The bill would define "prohibited violation" for this purpose as a violation of a law that creates liability for, or arising out of, either providing, facilitating, or obtaining an abortion or intending or attempting to provide, facilitate, or obtain an abortion that is lawful under California law. Existing law provides for the issuance of a search warrant upon specified grounds. This bill would prohibit the issuance of a search warrant for any item or items that pertain to an investigation into a prohibited violation. Existing law requires a California corporation that provides electronic communication services or remote computing services to the general public to comply with a warrant issued by another state to produce records that would reveal the identity of the customers using those services, data stored by, or on behalf of, the customer, the customer's usage of those services, the recipient or destination of communications sent to or from those customers, or the content of those communications as if that warrant had been issued by a California court. This bill would require an out-of-state warrant for the records listed above to include an attestation that the evidence sought is not related to an investigation into, or enforcement of, a prohibited violation. The bill would prohibit the production of records by a California corporation when the corporation knows or should know that the warrant relates to an investigation into, or enforcement of, a prohibited violation. (2) Existing law includes a declaration of the Legislature that every individual possesses a fundamental right of privacy with respect to reproductive decisions, including the fundamental right to choose to bear a child or obtain an abortion. Existing law prohibits the state from denying or interfering with a woman's fundamental right to choose to bear a child or obtain an abortion prior to viability of the fetus, as defined, or when necessary to protect her life or health. Existing law, the Reproductive Rights Law Enforcement Act, requires the Attorney General to carry out certain functions relating to anti-reproductive-rights crimes in consultation with, among others, subject matter experts. Existing law requires all law enforcement agencies to develop, adopt, and implement written policies and standards for responding to anti-reproductive-rights calls by January 1, 2023. This bill would prohibit a state or local law enforcement agency or officer from knowingly arresting or knowingly participating in the arrest of any person for performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of an abortion or for obtaining an abortion, if the abortion is lawful in this state. The bill would prohibit a state or local public agency from cooperating with or providing information to an individual or agency from another state or a federal law enforcement agency, as specified, regarding a lawful abortion. The bill would prohibit specified persons, including a judicial officer, court employee, an authorized attorney, among others, from issuing a subpoena in connection with a proceeding in another state regarding an individual performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of an abortion in this state, or an individual obtaining an abortion in this state, if the abortion is lawful in this state. The bill would not prohibit the investigation of criminal activity that may involve an abortion, provided that no information relating to any medical procedure performed on a specific individual may be shared with an agency or individual from another state for the purpose of enforcing another state's abortion law. (3) Existing law requires superior court judges in each county to prepare, adopt, and annually revise a uniform countywide schedule of bail for all bailable offenses, as specified. Existing law requires a bail schedule to contain a list of the offenses and amounts of bail applicable for each, as well as a general clause for designated amounts of bail for all offenses not specifically listed in the schedule. This bill would require a uniform countywide schedule of bail to set $0 bail for an individual who has been arrested in connection with a proceeding in another state regarding and individual performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of an abortion in this state, or an individual obtaining an abortion in this state, if the abortion is protected, as specified. Existing law requires the Governor to recognize a demand for extradition of a person if the demand meets specified requirements. Existing law requires a magistrate, upon the filing of a verified complaint, to issue a warrant directed to any peace officer commanding the officer to apprehend an individual in this state who is convicted, or has violated the terms of bail, probation, or parole, or who is charged with a crime, in another state and who is believed to be in this state. This bill would require, within 24 hours of the filing of a verified complaint, the filing agency to electronically transmit to the Attorney General a complete copy of the verified complaint, the out-of-state indictment, information, complaint, or judgment, out-of-state warrant, and the affidavit upon which the out-of-state warrant was issued. (4) Existing law, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, determines how governmental entities may access information on electronic devices and from electronic communication service providers, as defined. This bill would prohibit a California corporation or a corporation whose principal executive offices are located in California that provides electronic communication services from providing records, information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a warrant, court order, subpoena, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, or other legal process issued by, or pursuant to, the procedures of another state or a political subdivision thereof that relates to an investigation into, or enforcement of, a prohibited violation. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to commence a civil action to compel compliance with the above provisions, but would only impose civil liability if the corporation knew or should have known that the warrant, court order, subpoena, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, or other legal process relates to an investigation into or enforcement of a prohibited violation. (5) The bill would state that its provisions are severable. (6) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law, the Sargent Shriver Civil Counsel Act, requires legal counsel to be appointed to represent low-income parties in civil matters involving critical issues affecting basic human needs in courts selected by the Judicial Council. The act requires the Judicial Council to develop one or more programs to provide competitive grants to provide legal counsel to low-income persons who require legal services in civil matters involving specific types of civil matters, including, among others, housing-related matters, probate conservatorships, guardianships, and domestic violence and civil harassment restraining orders. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to consider various factors, including, among others, the unmet need for legal services in the geographic area to be served, in selecting and renewing participating programs. Existing law requires program applicants to, among other things, describe how the program would be administered and the means by which the program would serve the particular needs of the community, such as by providing representation to limited-English-speaking clients. This bill would require the programs to provide services without regard to the citizenship or immigration status of the person represented. The bill would additionally require the Judicial Council to consider, among other related factors, the program's plan for providing service to all potential clients regardless of immigration status. The bill would also require program applications to include in that description whether and how the program will ensure that services are available to all eligible individuals seeking services regardless of immigration status.

Existing law establishes the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families using federal, state, and county funds. Under the CalWORKs program, recipients are required to participate in specified welfare-to-work activities, except for specified persons. Existing law requires that specified CalWORKs eligible individuals who are participating either full time in an educational activity or part time in an educational activity and meeting the hourly participation rates based on the number of academic units, as specified, at a publicly funded postsecondary educational institution and making satisfactory progress, as specified, receive a standard payment of $175 to $500 per semester or quarter, which may be provided, in whole or in part, in the form of a book voucher, or reimbursement for verified actual expenses for the purpose of paying costs associated with attending the postsecondary educational institution. Existing law prohibits those participants from being required to participate in job club, a required welfare-to-work activity. Existing law requires an individual who meets certain requirements and who wishes to receive supportive services to sign a welfare-to-work plan, as specified. This bill would prohibit those educational activity participants from being required to participate in orientation and appraisal more than once, except as specified, or to participate in welfare-to-work activities to satisfy instructional hours during semester or quarter breaks. The bill would also additionally authorize the CalWORKs eligible individuals who participate in a full-time or part-time educational activity at a nonprofit postsecondary educational institution to receive those standard payments. The bill would include summer session as a quarter for these purposes. The bill would instead base the hourly participation rates described above on instructional hours, as defined. The bill would also make other changes to provisions relating to an individual who wishes to receive supportive services and signs a welfare-to-work plan. By imposing a higher level of service on county employees, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a recipient of CalWORKs to participate in welfare-to-work activities as a condition of eligibility, but permits a student who is enrolled in an undergraduate degree or certificate program that leads to employment to continue in that program under specified conditions. This bill would specify that this provision does not apply to students who are receiving the standard payments described above. The bill would authorize the State Department of Social Services to implement these provisions by means of all-county letters or similar written instructions until regulations are adopted. 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. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would instead provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of implementing the bill.

Existing law, the Information Practices Act of 1977, prescribes a set of requirements, prohibitions, and remedies applicable to agencies, as defined, with regard to their collection, storage, and disclosure of personal information, as defined. Existing law exempts from the provisions of the act counties, cities, any city and county, school districts, municipal corporations, districts, political subdivisions, and other local public agencies, as specified. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2025, recast those provisions to include, among other things, genetic information, IP address, online browsing history, and location information, if reasonably capable of identifying or describing an individual, within the definition of "personal information," and revise the definition of "regulatory agency" to include the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, for the act's purposes. The bill would make other technical, nonsubstantive, and conforming changes. Existing law requires an agency to establish rules of conduct for persons involved in the design, development, operation, disclosure, or maintenance of records containing personal information and instruct those persons with respect to specified rules relevant to the act. This bill would require that those rules established by the agency be consistent with applicable provisions of the State Administrative Manual and the State Information Management Manual. The bill would prohibit an agency from using records containing personal information for any purpose or purposes other than the purpose or purposes for which that personal information was collected or generated, except as required by state or federal law. Existing law prohibits an agency from disclosing any personal information in a manner that would link the information disclosed to the individual to whom it pertains, except under specified circumstances. Existing law requires an agency, for disclosures of specified records, to keep an accurate accounting of the date, nature, and purpose of the disclosure, and the name, title, and business address of the person or agency to whom the disclosure was made. This bill would revise the circumstances that may allow the disclosure of personal information in a manner that links or reasonably could link the information disclosed to the individual to whom it pertains, define "privacy board" for these purposes, and would make conforming changes. The bill would also revise the circumstances and types of records that would require agencies to keep an accurate accounting of the disclosure of that record. Existing law makes an intentional violation of any provision of the act, or of any rules or regulations adopted under the act, by an officer or employee of any agency a cause for discipline, including termination of employment. This bill would also make a negligent violation of the act a cause for discipline, and would specify that the relevant discipline may be up to and including termination. Existing law provides that the intentional disclosure of medical, psychiatric, or psychological information in violation of the disclosure provisions of the act, that is not otherwise permitted by law, is punishable as a misdemeanor if the wrongful disclosure results in economic loss or personal injury to the individual to whom the information pertains. This bill would, for a violation to be punishable as a misdemeanor, require that the disclosure be known or should be known to be in violation of the disclosure provisions, and remove the requirement that the wrongful disclosure result in economic loss or personal injury. Because the bill would expand the scope of an existing crime by deleting this condition, 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 makes it a crime for a person to engage in a motor vehicle speed contest on a highway or an exhibition of speed on a highway, or to aid or abet therein. This bill would also make it a crime for a person to engage in a motor vehicle speed contest in an offstreet parking facility or an exhibition of speed in an offstreet parking facility, or to aid or abet therein. By expanding the definition of an existing 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, until January 1, 2025, establishes the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program under the administration of the Director of the Office of Emergency Services to improve the physical security of nonprofit organizations that are at high risk of violent attacks or hate crimes due to ideology, beliefs, or mission, and repeals these provisions on that date. Existing law authorizes award recipients to use grant funds for various security enhancements, as specified. Under existing law, the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program limits the amount of any award to $200,000. This bill would additionally include as eligible security training. The bill would increase the amount an award recipient may be awarded from $200,000 to $500,000 and would authorize an award recipient to use up to 5% of grant funds towards management and administration, as described. The bill would limit the amount an award recipient may use on construction and renovation to $100,000 of the funds awarded. The bill would require the Office of Emergency Services to provide ongoing assistance to applicants that require a vulnerability or threat assessment, as specified. This bill would delete the above-described January 1, 2025, repeal date, thereby extending the operation of the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program indefinitely.

Existing law establishes various offenses for a person who places or displays certain symbols, marks, signs, emblems, and other physical impressions, including, but not limited to, a Nazi swastika, hangs nooses, or burns or desecrates crosses or other religious symbols on private and nonprivate property, as specified, with the intent to terrorize a person, as specified. Existing law, for the first conviction, punishes a person who hangs a noose or places or displays a sign, mark, symbol, emblem, or other physical impression with the intent to terrorize a person, as specified, with imprisonment in county jail not to exceed one year, a fine not more than $5,000, or both the fine and imprisonment, and with imprisonment in county jail not to exceed one year, a fine not to exceed $15,000, or both the fine and imprisonment for a subsequent conviction. Existing law, for a person who engages in a pattern of conduct by placing or displaying certain symbols, as specified, allows a person's punishment to be increased to imprisonment of 16 months or 2 or 3 years, a fine not more than $10,000, or both. Existing law punishes a person convicted of burning or desecrating a religious symbol with imprisonment for 16 months or 2 or 3 years, by a fine of not more than $10,000, or by both the fine and imprisonment, or imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, by a fine not to exceed $5,000, or both the fine and imprisonment for the first conviction, and the same punishment for a subsequent conviction except the misdemeanor fine increases to $15,000. This bill would expand these offenses to include hanging a noose, placing or displaying a sign, mark, symbol, emblem, or other physical impression, including, but not limited to, a Nazi swastika, and burning, desecrating, or destroying a religious symbol, such as a cross, at schools and public places, generally, as specified, for the purpose of terrorizing a person, as specified. The bill would, for the first conviction, punish a person who hangs a noose, places or displays certain symbols, or burns or desecrates a religious symbol, as specified, with imprisonment for 16 months or 2 or 3 years, by a fine of not more than $10,000, or both the fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, by a fine not to exceed $5,000, or by both the fine and imprisonment. For a 2nd or subsequent conviction under these provisions, the bill would punish a person with imprisonment for 16 months or 2 or 3 years, by a fine of not more than $15,000, or by both the fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, by a fine not to exceed $10,000, or by both the fine and imprisonment. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature is to criminalize, for the purpose of terrorizing a person, the display or placement of the Nazi swastika and not swastikas associated with Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. By creating a new crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law exempts, except as specified, a vehicle that is owned by a disabled veteran, a former American prisoner of war, or a Congressional Medal of Honor recipient, or the surviving spouse of a former American prisoner of war or Congressional Medal of Honor recipient who has elected to retain special license plates, that is of a type subject to registration under the Vehicle Code, and that is not used for hire, compensation, or profit, from certain fees imposed pursuant to the Vehicle Code and a vehicle license fee imposed for the privilege of operating specified vehicles. Beginning January 1, 2027, this bill would additionally exempt a Purple Heart recipient, and the surviving spouse of a Purple Heart recipient who has elected to retain special license plates, from those fees.