(1) Existing law authorizes a person who was born in this state and who has undergone clinically appropriate treatment for the purpose of gender transition to obtain a new birth certificate from the State Registrar. This bill would enact the Gender Recognition Act. For purposes of obtaining a new birth certificate under the provisions above, the bill would delete the requirement that an applicant have undergone any treatment, and instead would authorize a person to submit to the State Registrar an application to change gender on the birth certificate and an affidavit attesting, under penalty of perjury, that the request for a change of gender is to conform the person's legal gender to the person's gender identity and not for any fraudulent purpose. By requiring the affidavit to be attested to under penalty of perjury, the bill would create a crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize the change of gender on a new birth certificate to be female, male, or nonbinary. (2) Existing law authorizes a person who has undergone clinically appropriate treatment for the purpose of gender transition to petition for a court judgment recognizing the change of gender, and to petition for a court order conforming the person's name to the person's gender identity. Existing law provides specific procedures to seek these orders and judgments, either separately or in combination. This bill, commencing on September 1, 2018, would delete the requirement that a person have undergone any treatment to seek a court judgment to recognize a change of gender and instead would authorize the petitioner to attest, under penalty of perjury, that the request is to conform the person's legal gender to the person's gender identity and not for any fraudulent purpose. By requiring the affidavit to be attested to under penalty of perjury, the bill would create a crime, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a change of gender in the court judgment to female, male, or nonbinary. The bill would provide modified procedures to obtain a court order for a change of name to conform to the petitioner's gender identity and a court judgment to recognize a change in the petitioner's gender. The bill would provide a separate procedure for a person under 18 years of age to petition for a court judgment to recognize a change of gender to female, male, or nonbinary. (3) Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue a driver's license to an applicant when the department determines that the applicant is lawfully entitled to a license, and requires the license to contain, among other things, a brief description and engraved picture or photograph of the licensee for the purpose of identification. Existing law requires the application for an original driver's license or renewal of a driver's license to contain specified information, as provided by the applicant. Existing law also authorizes the department to issue identification cards and requires an identification card to adequately describe the applicant. Existing law requires the department, upon issuance of a new identification card or renewal of an identification card, to provide information regarding organ and tissue donation, including an enrollment form for the California Organ and Tissue Donor Registry that requires an applicant to mark his or her sex. This bill, on January 1, 2019, would require an applicant for an original driver's license or renewal of a driver's license to choose a gender category of female, male, or nonbinary, as specified, and would require the department to adopt regulations to provide a process for an amendment to a gender category under these provisions. The bill would also require the enrollment form for the California Organ and Tissue Donor Registry to instead require an applicant to mark his or her gender. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations in support of its provisions. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Sponsored bills
Under existing law, programs have been established pursuant to bond acts for, among other things, the development and enhancement of state and local parks and recreational facilities. Existing law, the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, approved by the voters as Proposition 1 at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $7,545,000,000 to finance a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. Existing law, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 84 at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,388,000,000 for the purposes of financing safe drinking water, water quality and supply, flood control, natural resource protection, and park improvements. Existing law, the California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks, and Coastal Protection Act of 2002, approved by the voters as Proposition 40 at the March 5, 2002, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $2,600,000,000, for the purpose of financing a program for the acquisition, development, restoration, protection, rehabilitation, stabilization, reconstruction, preservation, and interpretation of park, coastal, agricultural land, air, and historical resources. This bill would enact the California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in an amount of $4,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program. The bill, upon voter approval, would reallocate $100,000,000 of the unissued bonds authorized for the purposes of Propositions 1, 40, and 84 to finance the purposes of a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program. The bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the June 5, 2018, statewide primary direct election. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law creates the California Transportation Commission, with various powers and duties relative to the programming of transportation capital projects and allocation of funds to those projects pursuant to the state transportation improvement program and various other transportation funding programs. Under existing law, the commission consists of 13 members, 9 of whom are to be appointed by the Governor in consultation with the Senate. Existing law requires the Governor, in appointing members, to use every effort to ensure geographic balance of representation. This bill would additionally require the Governor, in appointing members, to use every effort to ensure that the commission has a diverse membership with expertise in transportation issues, taking into consideration factors including, but not limited to, socioeconomic background and professional experience, which may include experience working in, or representing, disadvantaged communities. This bill would require the commission and the State Air Resources Board to hold at least 2 joint meetings per calendar year to coordinate their implementation of transportation policies.
Existing law authorizes the removal of a child from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian with whom the child resides at the time the dependency petition was initiated if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that one of several circumstances is present, including, among others, that there is or would be a substantial danger to the physical health, safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being of the minor if the minor were returned home, and there are no reasonable means by which the minor's physical health can be protected without removing the minor from the minor's parent's or guardian's physical custody. This bill would prohibit the removal of a child from the physical custody of his or her parent with whom the child did not reside at the time the petition was initiated, unless the juvenile court finds clear and convincing evidence that there would be a substantial danger to the physical health, safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being of the child for the parent to live with the child or otherwise exercise the parent's right to physical custody, and there are no reasonable means available by which the child's physical and emotional health can be protected without removing the child from the child's parent's physical custody. By increasing the number of children who may be removed from their parents and subsequently placed in out-of-home care under the supervision of the county, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 361 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by SB 233 to be operative only if this bill and SB 233 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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 federal law authorizes, until September 30, 2019, a state to allow low emission and energy-efficient vehicles, as specified, to use lanes designated for high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs) . Existing federal law also authorizes, until September 30, 2025, a state to allow alternative fuel vehicles, as defined, and new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles, as defined, to use those HOV lanes. Existing state law authorizes the Department of Transportation to designate certain lanes for the exclusive use of HOVs. Existing law also authorizes super ultra-low emission vehicles (SULEV) , ultra-low emission vehicles (ULEV) , advanced technology partial zero-emission vehicles (AT PZEV) , or transitional zero-emission vehicles (TZEV) , as specified, that display a valid identifier issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles to use these HOV lanes until January 1, 2019, or until the date federal authorization expires, or until the Secretary of State receives a specified notice, whichever occurs first. Existing law makes the use by a driver of an HOV lane without those identifiers a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to remove individual HOV lanes, or portions of those lanes, during peak periods of congestion from access by vehicles displaying the identifiers if the department makes specified findings. This bill would extend the authority of drivers of specified vehicles to use HOV lanes until the date federal authorization expires, or until the Secretary of State receives a specified notice, whichever occurs first. The bill would authorize the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue identifiers until the date federal authorization expires, or until the Secretary of State receives a certain notice, whichever occurs first. The bill would make certain existing identifiers valid until January 1, 2019, would make certain identifiers issued on or after January 1, 2019, valid until January 1, 2022, and would make other identifiers issued on or after January 1, 2019, valid until January 1 of the 4th year after the year in which they were issued, as specified. The bill would provide, subject to exception, that a vehicle may not be issued an identifier more than once. The bill would additionally condition eligibility for the identifiers on the applicant not having received a rebate pursuant to the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project for a vehicle purchased on or after January 1, 2018, unless the applicant meets certain income restrictions. The bill would provide that if these provisions become inoperative, the driver of a vehicle with an otherwise valid decal, label, or other identifier would not be cited for a violation of the HOV lane provisions within 60 days of the date that those provisions became inoperative. The bill would make additional conforming changes. The bill would repeal these provisions on September 30, 2025. By extending the operation of an existing 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 Planning and Zoning Law authorizes a local agency to provide by ordinance for the creation of accessory dwelling units in single-family and multifamily residential zones, as specified. That law requires the ordinance to require the accessory dwelling unit to comply with certain conditions, including, but not limited to, that the accessory dwelling unit is not intended for sale separate from the primary residence and may be rented. This bill would revise that condition to provide that the accessory dwelling unit may be rented separately from the primary residence. Existing law provides that no setback be required for an existing garage that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit, as specified. This bill also would provide that no setback be required for an existing garage that is converted to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit. Existing law requires that parking requirements for accessory dwelling units not exceed one parking space per unit or per bedroom and allows required parking spaces to be provided as tandem parking on an existing driveway. Existing law also requires specified offstreet parking to be permitted for an accessory dwelling unit unless, among other things, that specified offstreet parking is not allowed anywhere else in the jurisdiction. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit, and the local agency requires that those offÂstreet parking spaces be replaced, existing law allows, with specified exceptions, the replacement spaces to be located in any configuration, including as tandem parking, on the same lot as the accessory dwelling unit. This bill instead would require that parking requirements for accessory dwelling units not exceed one parking space per unit or per bedroom, whichever is less. The bill would define tandem parking for these purposes and would also allow replacement parking spaces to be located in any configuration if a local agency requires replacement of offstreet parking spaces when a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is converted to an accessory dwelling unit. This bill would remove the prohibition on specified offstreet parking where that parking is not allowed anywhere else in the jurisdiction. Existing law requires ministerial, nondiscretionary approval of an application for a building permit to create within a single-family residential zone one accessory dwelling unit per single-family lot if the unit is contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure and specified other conditions are met. This bill would provide that for these purposes, an accessory structure includes a studio, pool house, or other similar structure. The bill would also authorize a city to require owner occupancy for either the primary or the accessory unit created through this process. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65852.2 of the Government Code proposed by SB 229 to be operative only if this bill and SB 229 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. By increasing the duties of local officials with respect to land use regulations, 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 requires local educational agencies to provide certain documents to parents and post certain documents on an Internet Web site. This bill would require a local educational agency, as specified, or a person, firm, association, partnership, or corporation offering or conducting private school instruction at the elementary or high school level, as specified, that maintains a section on employee interactions with pupils in its employee code of conduct to, commencing July 1, 2018, provide a written copy of the section on employee interactions with pupils in its code of conduct to the parent or guardian of each enrolled pupil at the beginning of each school year and, commencing January 1, 2018, to post the section on employee interactions with pupils in its code of conduct, or provide a link to it, on each of its schools' Internet Web sites, or, if a school of a local educational agency does not have its own Internet Web site, on the local educational agency's Internet Web site, in a publicly accessible manner. The bill would also provide that a local educational agency may satisfy the individual parent or guardian notification requirement by including a copy of the section on employee interactions with pupils in its code of conduct with other specified notifications that are required at the beginning of the first semester or quarter of the regular school term.
Existing law establishes procedures for the formation of infrastructure financing districts, enhanced infrastructure financing districts, infrastructure and revitalization financing districts, and community revitalization and investment authorities, as specified, to undertake various economic development projects, including financing public facilities and infrastructure, affordable housing, and economic revitalization. Existing law authorizes an infrastructure financing plan or a community revitalization and investment plan to provide for the division of taxes levied upon taxable property, if any, between the affected taxing entities, as defined, and the district or authority. This bill would enact the Neighborhood Infill Finance and Transit Improvements Act, which would authorize a city, county, or city and county to adopt a resolution, at any time before or after the adoption of the infrastructure refinancing plan, to allocate specified tax revenues to the district under specified circumstances. This bill would require the legislative body of a city or county establishing an enhanced infrastructure financing district that will allocate those revenues, as described, to adopt an ordinance to establish the procedure by which the city or county will calculate the amount of revenues that will be dedicated to the proposed district.
(1) Existing law, the State Bar Act, makes it a cause for suspension, disbarment, or other discipline for any member of the State Bar to report suspected immigration status or threaten to report suspected immigration status of a witness or party to a civil or administrative action or his or her family member, as defined, to a federal, state, or local agency because the witness or party exercises or has exercised a right related to his or her employment. This bill would expand that provision to make it a cause for suspension, disbarment, or other discipline for a member of the State Bar to report suspected immigration status or threaten to report suspected immigration status of a witness or party to a civil or administrative action or his or her family member, as defined, to a federal, state, or local agency because the witness or party exercises or has exercised a right related to the hiring of residential real property. (2) Existing law provides that a tenant of real property, property for a term less than life, or the executor of his or her estate, is guilty of unlawful detainer if, among other things, he or she continues in possession, in person or by subtenant, of the property or any part of the property, after the expiration of the term for which it is let to him or her, except as specified. Existing law authorizes a tenant of residential real property to assert as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action based upon a default in the payment of rent that the lessor failed to comply with certain requirements relating to the safety and habitability of the dwelling. This bill would prohibit a lessor from causing a tenant or occupant to quit involuntarily or bring an action to recover possession because of the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant, occupant, or other person known to the lessor to be associated with a tenant or occupant, unless the lessor is complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. The bill would authorize a tenant or occupant to assert as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action that a lessor violated this provision. The bill would also establish a rebuttable presumption that an affirmative defense is successful if the lessor approved the tenant or occupant to take possession of the unit before filing the unlawful detainer action and included in the unlawful detainer action specified claims. (3) Existing law makes it unlawful for a lessor to engage in specified activities for the purpose of influencing a lessee to vacate a dwelling, including using, or threatening to use, force, willful threats, or menacing conduct that interferes with the tenant's quiet enjoyment of the premises and that would create an apprehension of harm in a reasonable person. This bill would also prohibit a lessor from threatening to disclose information regarding or relating to the immigration status or citizenship status of a tenant, occupant, or other person associated with a tenant or occupant for the purpose of influencing a tenant to vacate a dwelling. (4) Existing law prohibits a lessor, or an agent of a lessor, from making any inquiry regarding or based on the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of residential real property, or from requiring a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of the rental property make any statement, representation, or certification concerning his or her immigration or citizenship status. Existing law provides that the prohibitions described above do not prohibit a lessor from complying with any legal obligation under federal law. This bill would also prohibit a lessor, or an agent of a lessor, from disclosing to any person or entity information regarding or relating to the immigration or citizenship status of any tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant of the rental property for the purpose of, or with the intent of, harassing or intimidating a tenant, prospective tenant, occupant, or prospective occupant, retaliating against a tenant or occupant for the exercise of his or her rights, influencing a tenant or occupant to vacate a dwelling, or recovering possession of the dwelling. The bill would clarify that the term "federal law" in the provision described above includes any legal obligation of a lessor under a federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant, and would broaden that provision to include any legal obligation of a lessor under a subpoena, warrant, or other order issued by a court. This bill would make it unlawful for a lessor to disclose to any immigration authority, law enforcement agency, or local, state, or federal agency information regarding or relating to the immigration or citizenship status of any tenant, occupant, or other person known to the lessor to be associated with a tenant or occupant, as provided, for the purpose of, or with the intent of, harassing or intimidating a tenant or occupant, retaliating against a tenant or occupant for the exercise of his or her rights, influencing a tenant or occupant to vacate a dwelling, or recovering possession of the dwelling, unless the lessor is complying with any legal obligation under federal law, or a subpoena, warrant, or order issued by a court. The bill would require a court to order a lessor to pay specified civil penalties in the event of a violation of these provisions to the tenant, and to issue injunctive relief to prevent the lessor from engaging in similar conduct in the future, and would require the court to notify the district attorney of the county in which the real property for hire at issue was located of a potential violation of specified laws relating to extortion. The bill would also require a court to award attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party in an action under these provisions. The bill would prohibit a tenant, occupant, or person known to the landlord to be associated with a tenant or occupant, from waiving his or her rights under these provisions. The bill would authorize a nonprofit organization exempt from federal income taxation to bring an action for injunctive relief under these provisions. (5) Existing law provides that, if a lessor retaliates against a lessee of a dwelling for exercising his or her rights or because of a complaint to an appropriate agency as to tenantability and if the lessee is not in default as to the payment of rent, the lessor may not recover possession, cause the lessee to quit involuntarily, increase the rent, or decrease any services within 180 days of the occurrence of specified events. This bill would provide that a lessor would violate that prohibition if the lessor reported, or threatened to report, the lessee, or individuals known to the lessor to be associated with the lessee, to immigration authorities, but would provide that a lessor would not violate that prohibition if the lessor was complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. (6) Existing law prohibits a lessor from retaliating against a lessee because he or she has lawfully organized or participated in a lessees' association or an organization advocating lessees' rights or has lawfully and peaceably exercised any rights under the law by increasing rent, decreasing services, causing a lessee to quit involuntarily, bringing an action to recover possession, or from threatening to do any of those acts. This bill would provide that a lessor would violate that prohibition if the lessor reported, or threatened to report, the lessee, or individuals known to the lessor to be associated with the lessee, to immigration authorities, but would provide that a lessor would not violate that prohibition if the lessor was complying with any legal obligation under any federal government program that provides for rent limitations or rental assistance to a qualified tenant. (7) Existing law declares that all protections, rights, and remedies available under state law are available to all individuals in the state who have applied for employment or are employed, regardless of immigration status, as specified. Existing law also declares, for the purposes of enforcing state labor, employment, civil rights, and employee housing laws, that a person's immigration status is irrelevant to the issue of liability and that discovery into a person's immigration status is prohibited unless the person seeking to make the inquiry has shown by clear and convincing evidence that the inquiry is necessary to comply with federal immigration law. Existing law also provides that the immigration status of a minor child seeking recovery under any applicable law is irrelevant to the issues of liability or remedy and would prohibit discovery or other inquiry in a civil action or proceeding into a minor child's immigration status, with specified exceptions. This bill would declare that the immigration or citizenship status of any person is irrelevant to any issue of liability or remedy under specified provisions of law relating to the rights of tenants, and would prohibit inquiry being made in a civil action initiated to enforce those laws into a person's immigration or citizenship status unless 2 exceptions to that prohibition apply. (8) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1940.3 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 299 to be operative only if this bill and AB 299 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law creates the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, to which is committed the authority for the administration and enforcement of alcoholic beverage laws in the state in a strict and impartial manner. Existing law, commonly referred to as tied-house restrictions, generally prohibits a licensed manufacturer, winegrower, manufacturer's agent, California winegrower's agent, rectifier, distiller, bottler, importer, or wholesaler from having an ownership interest in an on-sale license, among other things, subject to a variety of exceptions. Existing law excepts from tied-house restrictions the issuance or transfer of a retail on-sale or off-sale license with respect to premises that are an integral part of the operations of a hotel or motel, notwithstanding that a manufacturer, winegrower, manufacturer's agent, California winegrower's agent, rectifier, distiller, bottler, importer, or wholesaler has an interest in the premises, the retail license, or the retail licensee, provided certain conditions are met. In this regard, in the case of a hotel or motel, the hotel or motel must have not less than 100 guestrooms. This bill, for the purpose of excepting a transfer of a retail on-sale or off-sale license from the tied-house restriction described above, would reduce the necessary number of guestrooms in a hotel or motel to 25. The bill would also specify that this exception applies notwithstanding the fact that an out-of-state distilled spirits shipper has an interest in the premises, the retail license, or the retail licensee.