Existing law, the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA) , prohibits the use of an at-large election in a political subdivision if it would impair the ability of a protected class, as defined, to elect candidates of its choice or otherwise influence the outcome of an election. The CVRA provides that a voter who is a member of a protected class and who resides in a political subdivision where a violation of the act occurs may bring an action in superior court to enforce its provisions. The CVRA requires a court to implement appropriate remedies, including the imposition of district-based elections, that are tailored to remedy a violation of the act. The CVRA defines "political subdivision" to mean a geographic area of representation created for the provision of government services, including, but not limited to, a city, a school district, a community college district, or other district organized pursuant to state law. The state courts have determined that the provisions of the CVRA apply to a charter city. This bill would amend the CVRA's definition of "political subdivision" to expressly include a charter city, charter county, or charter city and county. The bill would also state that it is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this bill to codify the holding of the state courts regarding the applicability of the CVRA to charter cities.
Sponsored bills
Existing law provides for the protection, enhancement, and restoration of rivers in this state. Existing law establishes the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy for the purpose of, among others, providing for the public's enjoyment and enhancement of recreational and education experiences on public lands in the San Gabriel Watershed and Lower Los Angeles River. This bill would require the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to appoint, in consultation with the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to the extent the board wishes to consult, a local working group to develop a revitalization plan for the Lower Los Angeles River watershed, called the Lower Los Angeles River Working Group. The bill would require the secretary to consider requests from local agency representatives to participate in the working group and would authorize the working group to include specified representatives. The bill would require, by March 1, 2017, the working group to develop, through watershed-based planning methods, a revitalization plan that addresses the unique and diverse needs of the Lower Los Angeles River, that is consistent with, enhances, and is authorized to be incorporated into the County of Los Angeles's Master Plan, and that includes watershed education programs. The bill would require the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy to provide any necessary staffing to assist the working group. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Lower Los Angeles River.
The federal E-Verify system, administered by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the United States Department of Homeland Security, and the United States Social Security Administration, enables participating employers to use the system, on a voluntary basis, to verify that the employees they hire are authorized to work in the United States. Existing law prohibits the state, or a city, county, city and county, or special district, from requiring an employer, other than one of those government entities, to use an electronic employment verification system, including E-Verify, except when required by federal law or as a condition of receiving federal funds. Existing law prohibits an employer or any other person or entity from engaging in unfair immigration-related practices, as defined, against any person for the purpose of retaliating against the person for exercising specified rights. This bill would expand the definition of an unlawful employment practice to prohibit an employer or any other person or entity from using the E-Verify system at a time or in a manner not required by a specified federal law or not authorized by a federal agency memorandum of understanding to check the employment authorization status of an existing employee or an applicant who has not received an offer of employment, except as required by federal law or as a condition of receiving federal funds. The bill would also require an employer that uses the E-Verify system to provide to the affected employee any notification issued by the Social Security Administration or the United States Department of Homeland Security containing information specific to the employee's E-Verify case or any tentative nonconfirmation notice. The bill would provide for a civil penalty of $10,000 for an employer for each violation of these provisions. The bill would include a statement of intent.
Existing law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) , enacts various health care coverage market reforms that take effect January 1, 2014, and exempts health insurance coverage that provides excepted benefits from those reforms. PPACA requires each state to establish an American Health Benefits Exchange and allows qualified individuals to obtain premium assistance for coverage purchased through the Exchange. PPACA specifies that this premium assistance is not available if the individual is eligible for affordable employer-sponsored coverage that provides minimum value, as specified. 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 Insurance Commissioner. Existing law requires that health benefit plans issued by health insurers and health care service plans in the small group market and the individual market comply with specified requirements. Existing law defines a health benefit plan for the purpose of health benefit plans issued by health insurers to exclude a policy or certificate of specified disease or hospital confinement indemnity if the insurer certifies to the commissioner that the policy is being offered as supplemental health insurance and not as a substitute for essential health benefits. Existing law requires an insurer issuing these policies in the small group market or the individual market to require that the persons to be covered are covered by coverage that is not designed to serve as supplemental coverage. This bill would extend that requirement to a nongrandfathered health care service plan that offers, amends, or renews a group health plan contract and an insurer issuing a policy, except a health care service plan or insurer issuing a specialized health care service plan or policy, that provides less than 60% minimum value in the large group market and would require that the persons to be covered are also covered by a contract or plan that provides at least 60% minimum value. The bill would not apply to limited wraparound coverage, as described in a specified federal regulation, or a policy that provides coverage for Medicare services pursuant to federal government contracts. This bill would exempt an insurer that is subject to specified disclosure requirements from these provisions. The bill also would not apply to certain grandfathered health insurance policies that provide basic health care services without annual or lifetime limits, as specified. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, with respect to the regulation of health care service plans, 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.
The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act contains various provisions regulating the application for, the issuance of, the suspension of, and the conditions imposed upon, alcoholic beverage licenses by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Existing law provides for various annual fees for the issuance of alcoholic beverage licenses, depending upon the type of license issued. This bill, the Craft Distillers Act of 2015, would authorize the department to issue a craft distiller's license to manufacture distilled spirits, subject to specified conditions, including that the licensee manufacture no more than 100,000 gallons of distilled spirits per fiscal year, excluding brandy the craft distiller manufactures or has manufactured for them. The bill would allow the craft distiller's licensee to sell distilled spirits to specified consumers, to own interests in on-sale retail licenses, and to sell beer, wines, brandies, and distilled spirits to consumers for consumption on the premises of a bona fide eating place, as provided. The bill would impose an original fee and an annual renewal fee for the license, which would be deposited in the Alcohol Beverage Control Fund. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act authorizes a licensed distilled spirits manufacturer to conduct tastings of distilled spirits produced or bottled by, or produced or bottled for, the licensee, on the licensed premises, under specified conditions, including that tasting not be given in the form of a cocktail or mixed drink. This bill would extend that authorization to a licensed craft distiller and would revise the tasting conditions by allowing a tasting to be given in the form of a cocktail or mixed drink. Existing law prohibits a distilled spirits manufacturer's or distilled spirits manufacturer's agent's license from being held by a person that holds any ownership or interest in any distilled spirits wholesaler's, rectifier's, or retailer's license, as specified. This bill would additionally prohibit a distilled spirits manufacturer's or distilled spirits manufacturer's agent's license from being held by a person that holds any ownership or interest in a craft distiller's license.
Existing law regulates the payment of compensation to employees by employers and prohibits an employer from conditioning employment on requiring an employee to refrain from disclosing the amount of his or her wages, signing a waiver of the right to disclose the amount of those wages, or discriminating against an employee for making such a disclosure. Existing law generally prohibits an employer from paying an employee at wage rates less than the rates paid to employees of the opposite sex in the same establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions. Existing law establishes exceptions to that prohibition where the payment is made pursuant to a seniority system, a merit system, a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production, or a differential based on any bona fide factor other than sex. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for an employer or other person acting either individually or as an officer, agent, or employee of another person to pay or cause to be paid to any employee a wage less than the rate paid to an employee of the opposite sex as required by these provisions, or who reduces the wages of any employee in order to comply with these provisions. This bill would revise that prohibition to eliminate the requirement that the wage differential be within the same establishment, and instead would prohibit an employer from paying any of its employees at wage rates less than those paid to employees of the opposite sex for substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility, as specified. The bill would revise and recast the exceptions to require the employer to affirmatively demonstrate that a wage differential is based upon one or more specified factors, including a seniority system, a merit system, a system that measures earnings by quantity or quality of production, or a bona fide factor other than sex, as specified. The bill would also require the employer to demonstrate that each factor relied upon is applied reasonably, and that the one or more factors relied upon account for the entire differential. The bill would prohibit an employer from discharging, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against, any employee by reason of any action taken by the employee to invoke or assist in any manner the enforcement of these provisions. The bill would authorize an employee who has been discharged or discriminated or retaliated against, in the terms and conditions of his or her employment because the employee engaged in any conduct delineated in these provisions, to recover in a civil action reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages and work benefits caused by the acts of the employer, including interest thereon, as well as appropriate equitable relief. The bill would prohibit an employer from prohibiting an employee from disclosing the employee's own wages, discussing the wages of others, inquiring about another employee's wages, or aiding or encouraging any other employee to exercise his or her rights under these provisions. The bill would also increase the duration of employer recordkeeping requirements from 2 years to 3 years. By changing the definition of a 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.
The Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 authorizes an aggrieved employee to bring a civil action to recover specified civil penalties, that would otherwise be assessed and collected by the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, on behalf of the employee and other current or former employees for the violation of certain provisions affecting employees. The act provides the employer with the right to cure certain violations before the employee may bring a civil action, as specified. For other violations, the act requires the employee to follow specified procedures before bringing an action. Existing law requires an employer to provide its employees with specified information regarding their wages, including, among others, the inclusive dates of the period for which the employee is paid and the name and address of the legal entity that is the employer, either semimonthly or at the time of each wage payment and provides that the employer does not have the right to cure a violation of that requirement before an employee may bring a civil action under the act. This bill would provide an employer with the right to cure a violation of the requirement that an employer provide its employees with the inclusive dates of the pay period and the name and address of the legal entity that is the employer before an employee may bring a civil action under the act. The bill would provide that a violation of that requirement shall only be considered cured upon a showing that the employer has provided a fully compliant, itemized wage statement to each aggrieved employee, as specified. The bill would limit the employer's right to cure with respect to alleged violations of these provisions to once in a 12-month period, as specified. The bill would also delete references to obsolete provisions of law. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires, until January 1, 2016, the State Department of Education or any other state agency that administers a grant or allocation of federal or state funds to a school district to allow an indirect cost rate that is not less than the indirect cost rate established by the department, unless a lower rate is required by law. This bill would delete the January 1, 2016, repeal date for those provisions, thus extending their operation indefinitely.
This measure would proclaim April 12 through April 19, 2015, as California Holocaust Memorial Week and would urge Californians to observe these days of remembrance for the victims of the Holocaust in an appropriate manner.
This measure would designate November 2015 as Court Adoption and Permanency Month and would encourage the courts and their local communities to join in activities to expedite permanency for children.