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. Under existing law, a health care service plan is prohibited from expending for administrative costs, as defined, an excessive amount of the payments it receives for providing health care services to its subscribers and enrollees. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Under existing law, the Insurance Commissioner is required to withdraw approval of an individual or mass-marketed policy of disability insurance if the commissioner finds that the benefits provided under the policy are unreasonable in relation to the premium charged, as specified. This bill would require a health care service plan or health insurer to annually report to the Director of the Department of Managed Health Care or the Insurance Commissioner the medical loss ratio of each health care service plan product or health insurance policy form issued, amended, or renewed by the plan or insurer in California. The bill would require the director or commissioner to make the information reported available to the public and would require the departments to jointly adopt and amend regulations to implement these provisions in order to establish uniform medical loss ratio reporting. Because a willful violation of the bill's requirements with respect 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.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law authorizes the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to furnish information and technical and professional advice on the preparation, adoption, amendment, and implementation of specified plans, including general plans, when requested by a local or regional agency. This bill would require OPR, on or before January 1, 2011, to update its "Fire Hazard Planning" document prepared as part of the General Plan Technical Advice Series and issued in November of 2003. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law requires that a city or county general plan consist of various elements, including, among other things, land use, circulation, housing, open space, conservation, and safety elements, which are required to meet specified requirements. The safety element is for the protection of the community from unreasonable risks associated with, among other things, the effects of seismically induced surface rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, tsunami, seiche, dam failure, and wild land and urban fires. The safety element includes requirements for state responsibility areas and very high fire hazard severity zones. This bill would revise the safety element requirements for state responsibility areas and very high fire hazard severity zones, as specified, and require the safety element, prior to January 1, 2015, and thereafter upon each revision of the housing element, to be reviewed and updated as necessary to address the risk of fire for land classified as state responsibility areas and very high fire hazard severity zones. The bill would require the review to include consideration of the advice contained within the most recent publication of the OPR's "Fire Hazard Planning" document and other specified information. The bill would also require the city or county to establish a set of goals, policies, and objectives based upon specified information regarding fire hazards, and to establish a set of feasible implementation measures designed to carry out those goals, policies, and objectives. By imposing new duties on local officials for the adoption of a general plan, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (3) The Planning and Zoning Law requires the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and the local agency to review the draft or existing safety element and to report its written recommendations to the planning agency within 60 days of its receipt of the draft or existing safety element. The State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and the local agency are authorized to offer written recommendations for changes to the draft or existing safety element regarding uses of land, policies, and methods for wildland fire risk reduction and prevention in state responsibility areas and very high fire hazard severity zones. This bill would instead require the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, and authorize the local agency, to review the draft or existing safety element and recommend changes to the planning agency regarding uses of land, policies, and methods for wildland fire risk reduction and prevention in state responsibility areas and very high fire hazard severity zones within 60 days of the receipt of the draft or existing safety element. (4) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA requires OPR to prepare and develop proposed guidelines for the implementation of CEQA by public agencies. This bill would require OPR, on or after January 1, 2010, at the time of the next update of guidelines implementing CEQA, in cooperation with the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency recommended proposed changes or amendments to the initial study for the inclusion of questions related to fire hazard impacts for projects located on lands in state responsibility areas, as defined, and on lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, as defined. The Natural Resources Agency would be required to certify and adopt the recommended proposed changes or amendments prepared and developed by the OPR in accordance with these provisions. (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.
Existing law provides for the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program, under which qualified aged, blind, and disabled persons receive services enabling them to remain in their own homes and avoid institutionalization. Existing law permits services to be provided under the IHSS program either through the employment of individual providers, a contract between the county and an entity for the provision of services, the creation by the county of a public authority, or a contract between the county and a nonprofit consortium. Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which health care services are provided to qualified low-income persons. Under existing law, IHSS recipients who are eligible for the Medi-Cal program are provided with personal care option services, as defined, in lieu of receiving these services under the IHSS program. Existing law, enacted in 2009, makes various statutory changes with respect to the provision of in-home supportive services, relating to matters, including, but not limited to, provider enrollment procedures, criminal background checks, orientation, and duties, as well as eligibility standards for recipients, unannounced home visits, and program integrity and fraud prevention. This bill would make the operation of the statutory changes described above subject to a stakeholder process, to be conducted, as specified, by the State Department of Social Services, prior to the implementation of those changes. The bill would require implementation of any of the statutory changes described in the bill to occur either on the date specified in an applicable statute, or 60 days after the department notifies the Joint Legislative Budget Committee that the changes may be implemented, whichever is later. This bill would prohibit information notices relating to the implementation of these statutory changes from being sent to recipients or providers until the stakeholder process is completed. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law prohibits a health insurer from engaging in the practice of postclaims underwriting, which is defined to mean the rescinding, canceling, or limiting of a health insurance policy or certificate due to the insurer's failure to complete medical underwriting and resolve all reasonable questions arising from written information submitted on or with an insurance application. Existing law provides that any person willfully violating various provisions governing disability insurance policies, including health insurance policies, or orders of the commissioner in that regard, shall forfeit to the state a sum not to exceed $118 for each violation. Existing law requires these sums to be paid to the Insurance Commissioner and transmitted to the State Treasury for deposit in the General Fund. This bill would provide that a health insurer that unlawfully engages in the postclaims underwriting of a health insurance policy shall be liable to the state for a civil penalty to be fixed by the commissioner in an amount not to exceed $5,000, except that if the insurer knew, or had reason to know, that the act of postclaims underwriting was unlawful, the civil penalty shall be fixed by the commissioner in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for each act or violation. The bill would require the first $118 of these penalties to be deposited in the General Fund and the balance to be deposited in the Major Risk Medical Insurance Fund, to be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the Major Risk Medical Insurance Program. The bill would make other related changes.
Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Under existing law, a health insurer that provides maternity coverage may not restrict inpatient hospital benefits, as specified, and is required to provide notice of the maternity services coverage. This bill would require new forms for health insurance policies submitted to the department after January 1, 2010, to provide coverage for maternity services, as defined. With respect to policy forms on file with the department as of January 1, 2010, the bill would require health insurers to submit to the department, on or before March 1, 2010, revised policy forms that provide coverage for maternity services and would require insurers to include that coverage in the corresponding policies that are issued, amended, or renewed following the department's approval of the revised forms, 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 its provisions a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law prohibits the Director of the Department of Managed Health Care and the Insurance Commissioner from approving a plan contract or health insurance policy without a finding that the application conforms to specified requirements. Existing law prohibits the cancellation or nonrenewal of an enrollment or subscription by a health care service plan except in specified circumstances, including for nonpayment, fraud or deception in the use of services or facilities, or for good cause as agreed upon in the contract. Existing law prohibits the nonrenewal of individual health benefit plans by a health insurer except in specified circumstances, including for nonpayment or for fraud or intentional misrepresentation of material fact. Existing law subjects health care service plans to various fines and administrative penalties for failing to comply with specified provisions of the act and requires that certain fines and administrative penalties be deposited in the Managed Care Administrative Fines and Penalties Fund. Under existing law, the Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board manages the California Major Risk Medical Insurance Program (MRMIP) to provide major risk medical insurance coverage to eligible persons who have been rejected for health care coverage by at least one private health plan. Existing law creates the Major Risk Medical Insurance Fund, and continuously appropriates the fund to the board for purposes of the program. This bill would require the director and the commissioner to jointly, by regulation, establish standard information and health history questions to be used by health care service plans and health insurers for their individual health care coverage application forms, as specified, and, on and after January 1, 2011, would require all individual health care service plan and health insurance applications to be reviewed and approved by the director or the commissioner, respectively, before use by a health care service plan or health insurer. This bill would require all plans and insurers to complete medical underwriting prior to issuing a health care service plan contract or health insurance policy, and to meet certain requirements with regard to medical underwriting, including a requirement that the plan or insurer review each application for accuracy and completeness, review specified claims information, make prescription drug database inquiries, and identify and inquire of the applicant about any omissions, ambiguities, or inconsistencies. The bill would prohibit a plan or insurer from canceling or rescinding an individual health care service plan contract or individual health insurance policy unless specified conditions are met with regard to whether an applicant intentionally misrepresented or intentionally omitted material information in the plan or policy application, as specified, and would provide for cancellation or nonrenewal for nonpayment. The bill would also require a plan or insurer to annually report to the department the total number of individual health care service plan contracts or individual health insurance policies issued, canceled, or rescinded pursuant to these provisions during the preceding calendar year. The bill would require a health care service plan or health insurer to provide specified notices to subscribers and enrollees and insureds and policyholders. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2011, establish in the Department of Managed Health Care and the Department of Insurance an independent review process for the review of health care service plans' and health insurers' decisions to cancel or rescind individual health care service plan contracts and health insurance policies, and would impose administrative penalties upon a plan or insurer that engages in any conduct that has the effect of prolonging an independent review process or that fails to implement an independent review process decision. The bill would require that penalties collected from plans be deposited into the Managed Care Administrative Fines and Penalties Fund, and that penalties collected from insurers be deposited into the Major Risk Medical Insurance Fund for purposes of MRMIP, subject to appropriation by the Legislature. The bill would exempt certain types of plans and policies from the bill's requirements and would enact related provisions. Because this bill would impose additional requirements on health care service plans, the willful violation of which would be a crime, it 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.
(1) Existing law prohibits discrimination in housing through restrictive covenants based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, national origin, source of income, or ancestry and provides that discrimination in housing through a restrictive covenant includes the existence of a restrictive covenant regardless of whether accompanied by a statement that the covenant is repealed or void. Existing law similarly declares that any provision in any deed of real property in California that purports to restrict the right of any person to sell, lease, rent, use, or occupy the property to persons having any specified characteristic, including, but not limited to, race, color, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, disability, source of income, or sexual orientation, by providing for payment of a penalty, forfeiture, reverter, or otherwise, is void, except as specified. Existing law provides that any deed or other written instrument that relates to title to real property, or any written covenant, condition, or restriction annexed or made a part of, by reference or otherwise, any deed or instrument, that contains any provision that purports to forbid, restrict, or condition the right of any person or persons to sell, buy, lease, rent, use, or occupy the property on account of any of the above-specified characteristics, shall be deemed to be revised to omit that provision. Existing law also authorizes a person who holds an ownership interest of record in property that he or she believes is the subject of an unlawfully restrictive covenant based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, national origin, source of income, or ancestry, to record a Restrictive Covenant Modification, which would include a copy of the original document with the illegal language stricken. Before recording the modification document, the county recorder is required to submit the modification document and the original document to the county counsel who is required to determine whether the original document contains an unlawful restriction based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, national origin, source of income, or ancestry. The county recorder is required to make Restrictive Covenant Modification forms available to the public. Under existing law, a county recorder, title insurance company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent, or association that provides a copy of a declaration, governing document, or deed to any person is required to place a cover page or stamp on the previously recorded document stating that if the document contains an unlawful restriction, that restriction is void and may be removed by recording a Restrictive Covenant Modification. This bill would require a county recorder, title insurance company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent, or association that provides a copy of a declaration, governing document, or deed to a person who holds an ownership interest of record in property to also provide a Restrictive Covenant Modification form with specified procedural information to that person. The bill would authorize a title insurance company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent, or other person to record a Restrictive Covenant Modification, in addition to the owner of record, and would require the requester to provide a return address in order for the county recorder to notify the interested party of the action taken by county counsel on the respective property. The bill would require the county counsel to make a determination whether the language identified by the requester in the original document contains an unlawful restriction within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 3 months, as specified, and would authorize the county counsel to compile a list of phrases identified as unlawfully restrictive language for the purpose of expediting that determination. The bill would require the county recorder to make Restrictive Covenant Modification forms available to the public onsite in an appropriately designated area, and would permit multiple submissions on behalf of different homes and for processing homes in batches with respect to a modification document that affects multiple homes or lots. These new duties would impose a state‑mandated local program on the county recorder and county counsel. (2) Existing law requires the recorder of each county to establish a social security number truncation program in order to create a public record version of each official record so that the public record is in an electronic format and is an exact copy of the official record, except that any social security number contained in the official record shall be truncated by redacting the first 5 digits of that number. These provisions apply to any document recorded since January 1, 1980, as specified. If a public record version of an official record exists, and upon a request of any person to inspect, copy, or to otherwise publicly disclose that record, the recorder shall make available only the public record version of that record, and publicly disclose the official record only in response to a subpoena or court order. The county recorder may, upon authorization of the board of supervisors, charge an additional fee of $1 for recording the first page of each document to be used to implement a social security number truncation program pursuant to these provisions. The county auditor is required, at the request of the county board of supervisors, to verify that these fees are used only for the purpose of the program. This bill would require the recorder of each county to create a public record version of each official record for which a Restrictive Covenant Modification is recorded on or after January 1, 2010, so that the public record is in an electronic format and is an exact copy of the official record, except that any unlawfully restrictive covenant contained in the official record shall be redacted. The bill would specify that an electronic version of the unredacted record, for which a Restrictive Covenant Modification is recorded, would become the official record for the purposes of these provisions. If a public record version of an official record exists, and upon request of any person to inspect, copy, or to otherwise publicly disclose that record, the recorder shall make available only the public record version of that record, and publicly disclose the official record only in response to a subpoena or court order. The bill would provide that the county recorder shall not incur any liability for a procedural, clerical, or administrative error in the recording of a modification document or any other activity related to the redaction of an unlawfully restrictive covenant pursuant to these provisions. The bill would also exempt the county counsel from liability, as specified. The bill would require the county recorder to charge an initial fee of not more than $2, as specified, for recording the first page of each property-related document to be used by the county for the sole purpose of performing activities related to the redaction of an unlawfully restrictive covenant pursuant to these provisions or those described in (1) above. The bill would require the board of supervisors to adjust the fee to a whole dollar amount reasonably sufficient to recover costs. By creating new duties for county recorders, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) This bill would make legislative findings that any limitation on the public's right of access to the writings of public officials and agencies made by its provisions is necessary to protect against the risk of discrimination. (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 the Legislature finds there is no mandate contained in the bill that will result in costs incurred by a local agency or school district for a new program or higher level of service which require reimbursement pursuant to these constitutional and statutory provisions.
Existing law provides for the licensure of health facilities, including general acute care hospitals, acute psychiatric hospitals, and special hospitals, as defined, by the State Department of Public Health. Violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. Existing law requires that, upon the issuance or renewal of a general acute care, acute psychiatric, or special hospital license, the department separately identify on the license each supplemental service, including the address of where each outpatient service is provided and the type of services provided at each outpatient location. Existing law authorizes licensed general acute care hospitals and acute psychiatric hospitals to provide in any alternative setting health care services and programs that may be provided by any other provider of health care outside of a hospital building or which are not otherwise specifically prohibited by provisions of existing law regulating these facilities. It also requires the state department and the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development to adopt and enforce standards which permit these health facilities to use its space for alternative purposes. This bill would, among other things, require the department to approve a completed application by a licensed general acute care hospital that meets specified requirements to add or modify an outpatient clinic service as a supplemental service, add the outpatient service to the hospital license, and issue a new license, within 100 days of receipt of the completed application, unless the applicant does not meet specified requirements. The bill would limit the outpatient clinic service that is the subject of the application to providing only nonemergency primary health care services in a clinical environment to patients who remain in the outpatient clinic for less than 24 hours. The bill would define "outpatient clinic services" for purposes of the bill. 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.
(1) Existing law requires all manufacturers of ignition interlock devices that meet specified requirements and are certified in a manner approved by the Department of Motor Vehicles, that intend to market the devices in this state, to first apply to the department on forms provided by the department and to pay an accompanying fee in an amount not to exceed the amount necessary to cover the costs incurred by the department in carrying out those provisions. This bill would require a manufacturer and a manufacturer's agent, certified by the department to provide ignition interlock devices, to provide each year to the department information on the number of false positives and the time to reset the device. The bill would also require the department to use this information in evaluating the continued certification of an ignition interlock device. (2) Existing law requires a person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle to be suspended or revoked for a specified period of time if the person has been convicted of violating specified provisions prohibiting driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or drug or the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and drug, or with 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood or while addicted to the use of any drug, with or without bodily injury to another. Existing law also authorizes a person whose privilege is suspended or revoked in that manner to receive a restricted driver's license if specified requirements are met, including, in some instances, the installation of an ignition interlock device on the person's vehicle. This bill would require the department to establish a pilot program from July 1, 2010, to January 1, 2016, in the Counties of Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Tulare that requires, as a condition of being issued a restricted driver's license, being reissued a driver's license, or having the privilege to operate a motor vehicle reinstated subsequent to a conviction for a violation of the above offenses, a person to install for a specified period of time an ignition interlock device on all vehicles he or she owns or operates, except as provided. The amount of time the ignition interlock device would be required to be installed would be based upon the number of convictions, as prescribed. The bill would prohibit the implementation of the pilot program if the department fails to obtain, by January 31, 2010, nonstate funds for the programming costs of the pilot program. The bill would set up a statutory scheme under which the department would, with regard to the installation of an ignition interlock device described above, notify the person of the ignition interlock device installation requirements established under the bill, accept notification from the installer of the ignition interlock device of attempts to remove, bypass, or tamper with the ignition interlock device or if the person fails 3 or more times to comply with the maintenance requirements, monitor the installation and maintenance of the ignition interlock device, and keep specified records. The bill would also require that manufacturers and manufacturer's agents, certified by the department to provide ignition interlock devices, adopt a fee schedule for payment of the costs of the ignition interlock device based on the offender's ability to pay, and would require the court to adopt a similar fee schedule with regard to the fees for the county alcohol and drug problem assessment program. On or before January 1, 2015, the department would be required to report to the Legislature regarding the effectiveness of the pilot program in reducing the number of first-time driving under the influence violations and repeat offenses in those counties. (3) This bill would require that it become operative only if SB 598 of the 2009–10 Regular Session becomes operative on or before January 1, 2010. (4) Because it is a crime to operate a vehicle that is not equipped with a functioning, certified ignition interlock device by a person whose driving privilege is so restricted, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the scope of that crime. (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.
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities. Under the existing Public Utilities Act, a public utility is required to seek commission approval prior to selling, leasing, assigning, mortgaging, or otherwise disposing of or encumbering any property necessary or useful in the performance of its duties to the public. This bill would authorize a public utility that owns real property acquired for purposes of obtaining a utility right-of-way, to lease that property to a governmental entity for purposes of a public park, if the utility will retain the use of the right-of-way for public utility purposes. The bill would require the commission, in determining whether the lease is for fair value, to include the community benefits, as defined, of parks and open space as a benefit to ratepayers.