Asm. Blanca Rubio

The California Prompt Payment Act requires a state agency that awards a grant or that acquires property or services pursuant to a contract to make timely payments pursuant to the grant or contract. If a state agency or the Controller fails to take certain timely actions and payment is not issued within 45 calendar days from the state agency receipt of an undisputed invoice, the act requires the state agency or the Controller, as applicable, to pay certain penalties. The act provides an exception to certain penalty provisions applicable to services or equipment under the Medi-Cal program if the grant or contract was awarded to a nonprofit organization in an amount less than $500,000. The act defines the term "grant" to mean a signed final agreement between any state agency and a local government agency or organization authorized to accept grant funding for victim services or prevention programs administered by any state agency or restoration activities performed by a resource conservation district. The act also defines "nonprofit service organization" to mean a nonprofit entity that is organized to provide services to the public, but the act does not use that term in its provisions. This bill would revise the definition of "grant" to also mean a signed final agreement between a state agency and a nonprofit organization and would delete the $500,000 exception described above. The bill would remove the definition of "nonprofit service organization," and instead would define "nonprofit organization" to mean an organization that qualifies as an exempt organization under Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The act authorizes a state agency to dispute for reasonable cause an invoice, refund request, or claim for Medi-Cal reimbursement, as specified, and defines "reasonable cause" to mean a determination by a state agency that any of certain conditions exist, including that there is a discrepancy between the invoice or claimed amount and either the claimant's actual delivery of property or services to the state or the state's acceptance of those deliveries. This bill would revise the condition described above to require the discrepancy to be of an amount greater than $250 or 5% of the invoice or claimed amount, whichever is less, in order to qualify as a reasonable cause for the state agency to dispute it. Existing law establishes the Department of General Services in the Government Operations Agency for purposes of providing centralized services of state government. Existing law establishes various state grant programs. Existing federal law provides uniform administrative requirements, cost principles, and audit requirements for federal grant awards to nonfederal entities and provides guidelines for determining direct and indirect costs, as defined, charged to federal awards. This bill would require a state agency administering a grant program to reimburse a grantee's indirect costs, as defined, at one of specified rates as requested by the grantee in their grant program application, not to exceed 35% of the total grant award, unless prohibited by any other state or federal law. The bill would authorize the establishment of indirect cost pools, as specified. The bill would make these provisions applicable to a grant program administered by a state agency, regardless of whether the funding source is state funds, federal funds, or a combination thereof.

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's requirements a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law sets forth specified coverage requirements for health care service plan contracts and health insurance policies. Existing law requires an individual or small group health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2017, to include, at a minimum, coverage for essential health benefits pursuant to the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Existing law requires an essential health benefit to be provided only to the extent that federal law does not require the state to defray the costs of the benefit. This bill would require a health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, that provides coverage for the application of fluoride varnish as a pediatric oral care benefit to provide coverage without cost sharing for the application of fluoride varnish as medically necessary regardless of whether the service is billed as a dental benefit or as a medical benefit, except as specified. If this coverage requirement creates an obligation for the state to defray costs for an individual, the bill would not require coverage unless there is an appropriation for this purpose, as specified. Because a willful violation of this provision by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which health care services are provided to low-income individuals. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law establishes a schedule of benefits under the Medi-Cal program and provides for various services, including certain dental services, that are rendered by Medi-Cal enrolled providers. Under existing law, silver diamine fluoride treatments are a covered benefit for eligible children 0 to 6 years of age, inclusive, as specified, and application of fluoride or other appropriate fluoride treatment is covered for children 17 years of age and under. This bill would make the application of fluoride or other appropriate fluoride treatment, as defined by the department, a covered benefit under the Medi-Cal program for children under 21 years of age. The bill would require the State Department of Health Care Services, no later than July 1, 2027, to issue billing guidance and make any necessary updates to ensure the coverage policy for Medi-Cal beneficiaries under 21 years of age is consistent with certain federal benefits and would require that policy to allow the application of fluoride varnish, as specified. 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. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 14132 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 1949 and SB 944 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 1949 and SB 944 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

The California Constitution confers the right to vote on a United States citizen who is 18 years of age and a resident of this state, except as specified. The California Constitution requires candidates for congressional and state elective offices in California to be selected via a voter-nominated primary election at which all voters may vote for any candidate without regard to the political party preference disclosed by the candidate or the voter. The top two vote-getters at a voter-nominated primary election for a congressional or state elective office, regardless of party preference, are nominated to compete in the ensuing general election. The California Constitution requires the Legislature to provide for partisan elections for presidential candidates, and political party and party central committees, including an open presidential primary whereby the candidates on the ballot are those found by the Secretary of State to be recognized candidates throughout the nation or throughout California for the office of President of the United States. This measure would prohibit an eligible voter from being excluded from meaningful participation at any integral stage of any publicly funded election, including a primary election, on any basis, including political party preference.

The Outdoor Advertising Act regulates placement of advertising displays adjacent to and within specified distances of highways that are part of the national system of interstate and defense highways and federal-aid highways. The act prohibits a person, as defined, from placing an advertising display within the areas affected by the act without a permit. The act prohibits the Department of Transportation from denying or delaying the acceptance of a permit application for a new advertising display along a portion of a new alignment of an interstate or primary highway on the basis that the highway project has not been accepted as complete if the section of highway is open to the use of the public for vehicular travel within 1,000 feet of the location specified in the permit application. This bill would also prohibit the department from denying or delaying the review, processing, or determination of a permit application described above. The act prohibits, except as provided, placing or maintaining an advertising display on property adjacent to a portion of a freeway that has a specified coverage area of landscaping or trees at the same or elevated grade of the main-traveled way, as provided. The act authorizes removal of an advertising display that violates that prohibition, as provided. This bill would instead authorize the removal with payment of compensation, or relocation without payment of compensation, of an advertising display that violates that prohibition, as specified. The act does not prohibit a local governmental entity from entering into an agreement to relocate an advertising display for any purpose. The act requires the department to issue a permit without any additional consideration for a display that is being placed pursuant to a relocation agreement with another governmental entity, as provided. This bill would instead not prohibit any governmental entity from entering into a relocation agreement and would require the department to issue a permit, without any additional consideration and without requiring a local entity or state agency to pay compensation, for a display that is being placed pursuant to a relocation agreement with another governmental entity, as specified.

Existing law establishes the Instructional Quality Commission and requires the commission to, among other things, recommend curriculum frameworks to the State Board of Education. This bill would require the commission, during the next revision of the publication "Health Framework for California Public Schools," to consider including, and recommending for adoption by the state board, specific content related to sexual health instruction to educate pupils about dating abuse and digital violence, as described.

Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, declares as contrary to the public policy of this state a law of another state that authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person or entity that engages in certain activities relating to obtaining or performing an abortion. Existing law prohibits the state from applying an out-of-state law to a case or controversy in state court or enforcing or satisfying a civil judgment under the out-of-state law. This bill would specify that the protections applicable to persons who engage in legally protected health care activity, as defined, apply to a person who previously has undertaken one or more acts or omissions while in another United States jurisdiction to aid or encourage, or attempt to aid or encourage, any person in the exercise and enjoyment, or attempted exercise and enjoyment, of rights to reproductive health care services or gender affirming health care services if the acts or omissions were permissible under the laws of the jurisdiction in which the person was located at the time of the acts or omissions. Existing law prohibits 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 legally protected health care activity, if the health care activity is lawful in this state. Existing law prohibits 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 legally protected health care activity that is lawful in this state. Under existing law, the Governor may surrender, on demand of executive authority of any other state, any person in this state charged in the other state, as specified, with committing an act in this state, or in a 3rd state, intentionally resulting in a crime in the state whose executive authority is making the demand. This bill would prohibit the Governor from recognizing a request for extradition of a person subject to criminal liability based on the alleged provision or receipt of, assistance in the provision or receipt of, material support for, or in any theory of vicarious, joint, several, or conspiracy liability for any legally protected health care activity, except as specified.

Existing law makes a person who is a dealer in or collector of junk, metals, or secondhand materials, or their agent, employee, or representative, who buys or receives any wire, cable, copper, lead, solder, mercury, iron, or brass that the person knows or reasonably should know is used by or belongs to specified entities, including a railroad, certain utility companies, or a public entity engaged in furnishing public utility service, without using due diligence to ascertain that the person selling or delivering that material has a legal right to do so, guilty of criminally receiving that property and, in addition to imprisonment, makes that act punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000. This bill would prohibit organized metal theft, described as acting in concert with one or more persons to steal metal materials from one or more of specified materials and items with the intent to sell, exchange, or return those metal materials for value, acting in concert with 2 or more persons to receive, purchase, or possess those metal materials knowing or believing it to have been stolen, acting as an agent of another to steal those metal materials as part of an organized plan to commit theft, or recruiting, coordinating, organizing, supervising, directing, managing, or financing another to undertake acts of theft of metal. The bill would make a violation of organized metal theft punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony. The bill would make related findings and declarations and state the intent of the Legislature. By creating new crimes, 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 prohibits the consideration of a person as a candidate for, and provides that the person is not eligible to be elected to, any state or local elective office if the person has been convicted of a felony involving accepting or giving, or offering to give, any bribe, the embezzlement of public money, extortion or theft of public money, perjury, or conspiracy to commit any of those crimes. This bill would additionally prohibit the consideration of a person as a candidate for, and provide that the person is not eligible to be elected to, any state or local elective office if they have been convicted of a felony involving sexual assault or human trafficking, as defined.

Existing law governs the dissolution of marriage and legal separation. Existing law prohibits a judgment of dissolution of marriage from being made final until 6 months have expired from the date of service of a copy of the summons and petition or the date of appearance of the respondent, whichever occurs first. Existing law authorizes a court to extend the 6-month period for good cause shown. Existing law also requires a court to enter a judgment dissolving a marriage when 6 months have expired from the date of the filing of a joint petition for summary dissolution, unless a revocation has been filed. This bill would additionally authorize the court to reduce or waive the 6-month period described above for good cause shown, as specified, provided that the parties have resolved all material issues related to the dissolution.

Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including automobile liability insurance. Existing law prohibits classifying a private passenger motor vehicle as a commercial vehicle, for-hire vehicle, permissive use vehicle, or livery solely because its owner allows it to be shared, if specified criteria are met. In the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person other than the vehicle owner, existing law requires the personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner and is considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes. Existing law requires a personal vehicle sharing program to provide insurance coverages for the vehicle and operator at a minimum of $45,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $90,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $15,000 for property damage, and, on and after January 1, 2031, to provide liability coverage at least 3 times the minimum insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles. This bill would, instead of requiring a personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner, require the program to assume liability of the owner for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in amounts stated in the personal vehicle sharing program agreement, and not less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage. The bill would make these provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the personal vehicle sharing program agreement.