Existing law makes garment manufacturers liable for guaranteeing payment of wages to employees of their contractors. This bill would expand the definition of garment manufacturing to include dyeing, altering a garment's design, and affixing a label to a garment. The bill would prohibit any employee engaged in the performance of garment manufacturing to be paid by the piece or unit, or by the piece rate, except as specified. The bill would impose a statutory penalty of $200 against a garment manufacturer or contractor, payable to the employee, for each pay period in which the employee is paid by the piece rate. This bill would define "brand guarantor" for purposes of these provisions as a person contracting for the performance of garment manufacturing, as specified, regardless of whether the person with whom they contract performs manufacturing operations or hires a contractor or subcontractor to perform manufacturing operations. This bill would specify that a garment manufacturer or brand guarantor who contracts with another person for the performance of garment manufacturing operations shares joint and several liability with any manufacturer and contractor for the full amount of unpaid wages, any other compensation, damages, and penalties to any and all employees who performed manufacturing operations for any violation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, and civil penalties, as specified. This bill would create a rebuttable presumption in a claim filed with the Labor Commissioner to recover unpaid wages, if an employee has provided the Labor Commissioner with labels or other information that the commissioner finds credible relating to the identity of any brand guarantor or garment manufacturer that the brand guarantor or garment manufacturer is liable with the contractor for any amounts found to be due to the employee. The bill would also give the Labor Commissioner authority to enforce these provisions by issuing a stop order or a citation. Existing law requires every employer engaged in the business of garment manufacturing to keep certain records for three years, including, among other things, contract worksheets indicating the price per unit agreed to between the contractor and manufacturer. This bill would also require every employer engaged in the business of garment manufacturing and brand guarantors to keep all contracts, invoices, purchase orders, work orders, style or cut sheets, and any other documentation pursuant to which garment manufacturing work was, or is being, performed for 4 years. Existing law requires the commissioner to deposit $75 of each garment manufacturer's registration fee into a separate account to be disbursed by the commissioner only to persons determined by the commissioner to have been damaged by the failure to pay wages and benefits by a garment manufacturer, contractor, or subcontractor. Existing law requires the commissioner to promulgate all regulations and rules necessary to carry out the provisions of this part. The commissioner, upon good cause, may impose, in their discretion, the terms of penalties, the revocation of registrations, and the confiscation or disposal of goods in accordance with those rules and regulations. This bill would name the separate account into which a portion of a garment manufacturer's registration fee is deposited the Garment Manufacturers Special Account. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to determine which claims for payment from the Garment Manufacturer's Special Account are accepted, and the amount of money, if any, that is to be disbursed from the account on an accepted claim.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 2001, requires all agencies and museums that receive state funding and have possession or control over collections of California Native American human remains and associated funerary objects to inventory those remains and objects for repatriation to the appropriate tribes, as specified. This bill would authorize the owner or operator of any public school, state or local park, library, or museum, or other state or local government building in this state to adopt a land acknowledgment process by which Native American tribes are properly recognized as traditional stewards of the land on which the public school, state or local park, library, or museum, or other state or local government building is located, as specified.
(1) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project 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 also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA exempts from its requirements certain residential, employment center, and mixed-use development projects meeting specified criteria, including that the project is located in a transit priority area and that the project is undertaken and is consistent with a specific plan for which an environmental impact report has been certified. This bill would additionally exempt those projects located in a very low vehicle travel area, as defined. The bill would require that the project is undertaken and is consistent with either a specific plan prepared pursuant to specific provisions of law or a community plan, as defined, for which an EIR has been certified within the preceding 15 years in order to be exempt. The bill would additionally require the project site to have been previously developed or to be a vacant site meeting certain requirements. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of this exemption, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) CEQA exempts from its requirements agricultural employee housing projects, affordable housing projects, and housing projects on infill sites that meet certain requirements, including, among others, the site is not located within the boundaries of a state conservancy. CEQA prohibits those exempt projects from being located in certain areas. This bill would allow the location of agricultural employee housing projects, affordable housing projects, and housing projects on infill sites to be located within the boundaries of a state conservancy in order to be exempt. The bill would revise and recast the areas in which those exempt projects cannot be located, as provided. (3) CEQA exempts from its requirements residential projects on infill sites that meet certain requirements, including, among others, that the location of the residential project on an infill site is no more than 4 acres and that the project is located within 12 mile of a major transit stop. This bill instead would require that the location of a residential project on an infill site be no more than 5 acres. The bill would additionally exempt those residential projects located in a very low vehicle travel area, as defined. (4) CEQA exempts from its requirements a transit priority project meeting certain requirements and that is declared by a legislative body to be a sustainable communities project. CEQA prohibits a transit priority project declared to be a sustainable communities project from being located in certain areas and requires the project to be within 12 mile of a rail transit station or a ferry terminal included in a regional transportation plan or within 14 mile of a high-quality transit corridor included in a regional transportation plan. This bill would revise and recast the areas in which the transit priority project declared to be a sustainable communities project cannot be located, as provided. The bill would additionally authorize the transit priority project declared to be a sustainable community project if the project is located within a very low vehicle travel area, as defined. The bill would additionally require the site for the transit priority project to have been previously developed or to be a vacant lot meeting certain requirements. (5) This bill would require a lead agency approving a project that is exempt from CEQA under the provisions described in paragraphs (1) , (3) , and (4) above to file with the Office of Planning and Research a notice of exemption. By imposing additional duties on the lead agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (6) 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 provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant be served a 3 days' notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified. Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prohibits a tenancy from being terminated unless specified conditions are met, including that the tenant fails to pay rent, utility charges, or reasonable incidental service charges and 3 days' notice in writing is provided to the tenant, as specified. This bill would enact the COVID-19 Tenant Relief Act of 2020. This bill would require that any 3 days' notice that demands payment of COVID-19 rental debt that is served on a tenant during the covered time period meet specified criteria, including that the notice include an unsigned copy of an attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress and that the notice advise the tenant that the tenant will not be evicted for failure to comply with the notice if the tenant delivers a signed attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress to the landlord, as specified. The bill would define "covered time period" for purposes of these provisions as the time between March 4, 2020, and either 90 days after the termination of the COVID-19 state of emergency or April 1, 2021, whichever occurs earlier. The bill would provide that a tenant is not guilty of an unlawful detainer if the tenant makes the demanded payment, vacates the property, or delivers a signed attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress within 15 days of the service of the notice. The bill would deem a 3 days' notice that fails to comply with this criteria void and insufficient to support a judgment for unlawful detainer or to terminate a tenancy under the Mobilehome Residency Law. The bill would prohibit a tenant that delivers an attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress pursuant to these provisions from being deemed in default with regard to the COVID-19 rental debt. Existing law regulates specified terms and conditions of tenancies. Existing law authorizes a landlord to demand security at the beginning of a tenancy for residential property and specifies the purposes for which the security may be used, including, among others, compensating the landlord for the tenant's default in payment of rent. The bill would prohibit a landlord from applying a security deposit to satisfy COVID-19 rental debt or applying a monthly rental payment to any COVID-19 rental debt, unless the tenant agrees in writing. The bill would define "COVID-19 rental debt" as unpaid rent or any other unpaid financial obligation under the tenancy that accrued during the covered time period. The bill would prohibit a landlord from charging a tenant, or attempting to collect from a tenant, fees for a late payment of COVID-19 rental debt. The bill would prohibit a landlord from terminating a tenancy or threatening to terminate a tenancy, in retaliation against a tenant for having COVID-19 rental debt. This bill would prohibit a housing provider, credit reporting agency, tenant screening company, or other specified entities from using an alleged COVID-19 rental debt as a negative factor in evaluating creditworthiness, as specified. The bill would prohibit a cause of action to recover COVID-19 rental debt until 15 months after the date the COVID-19 state of emergency terminates or April 1, 2022, whichever is earlier. This bill would provide that any provision of a stipulation settlement agreement, or other agreement that conflicts with or purports to waive these provisions is prohibited and void as contrary to public policy. The bill would provide that if a local initiative, ordinance, regulation, or other policy conflicts with these provisions, the provision that provides the greater protection to tenants controls. (2) Existing law prescribes various requirements to be satisfied before the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust. In this regard, existing law requires that a notice of default and a notice of sale be recorded and that specified periods of time elapse between the recording and the sale. Existing law establishes certain requirements in connection with foreclosures on mortgages and deeds of trust, including restrictions on the actions mortgage servicers may take while a borrower is attempting to secure a loan modification or has submitted a loan modification application. This bill would enact the Small Landlord and Homeowner Relief Act of 2020. The bill would authorize a borrower to request forbearance during the effective time period from any mortgage obligation by submitting a request to the borrower's mortgage servicer, either orally or in writing, affirming that the borrower is experiencing a financial hardship that prevents the borrower from making timely payments on the mortgage obligation due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 emergency. The bill would define "borrower" for these purposes as a natural person who is a mortgagor, trustor, or confirmed successor in interest; an entity other than a natural person provided that the secured property is currently occupied by one or more residential tenants; or a mobilehome owner who is the borrower on a security agreement relating to a loan or conditional sale contract that gives the secured party the right to foreclose its security interest in a manufactured home or mobilehome, except as specified. The bill would define "effective time period" as the time period between the operational date of these provisions and either 90 days after the termination of the COVID-19 state of emergency or April 1, 2021, whichever occurs first. This bill would also authorize a mobilehome owner who is the borrower on any security agreement relating to a loan or conditional sale contract which, according to its terms, gives the secured party the right to foreclose its security interest in a manufactured home or mobilehome to request forbearance during the effective time period, as specified. This bill would require a mortgage servicer or lienholder to, if certain requirements are met, offer the forbearance requested for an initial period of up to 180 days, which may be extended at the request of the borrower or mobilehome borrower, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer or lienholder to limit the total forbearance provided to 360 days and authorize the mortgage servicer or lienholder to count any forbearance already provided to the borrower between March 4, 2020, and the date of the mobilehome borrower's initial request against that 360 days. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer or lienholder from assessing, accruing, or applying any fees, penalties, or additional interest during the forbearance period, as specified. The bill would require a mortgage servicer or lienholder to attempt to contact the borrower, including a mobilehome borrower, with diligent effort at least 30 days before the end of any forbearance period granted pursuant to these provisions to inquire whether the borrower is able to resume making preforbearance mortgage or loan payments. The bill would, if the borrower indicates that they will not be able to resume preforbearance payments, require the mortgage servicer or lien holder to evaluate the borrower for loss mitigation and foreclosure prevention, as specified. Alternatively, if the borrower affirms they are able to resume preforbearance payments or fails to respond to the mortgage servicer, the bill would require the mortgage servicer or lienholder to reinstate the preforbearance payments and provide a specified notice to the borrower that includes, among other things, a description of any options available to the borrower to address the amount unpaid during the forbearance. This bill would authorize a multifamily borrower that was current on its payments as of February 1, 2020, to submit a written request for forbearance to the mortgage servicer affirming that the multifamily borrower is experiencing a financial hardship during the COVID-19 emergency. The bill would define "multifamily borrower" for purposes of these provisions as a borrower of a residential mortgage loan that is secured by a lien against a property comprising 5 or more dwelling units. The bill would require a mortgage servicer to provide an initial forbearance period of 30 days and grant additional 30-day extension periods upon the request of the borrower, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to limit the total forbearance provided to 180 days and authorize the mortgage servicer to count any forbearance already provided to the borrower between March 4, 2020, and the date of the mobilehome borrower's initial request against that 180 days. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to condition forbearance on the receipt of reasonable documentation from the borrower that demonstrates a decrease of at least 10% or more of the multifamily borrower's gross rental revenue, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to condition any extension of the forbearance period on the receipt of payment equal to the net operating income derived from the property and the borrower keeping all property tax and insurance payments current. This bill would authorize a borrower, including a mobilehome borrower and multifamily borrower, who is likely to suffer material harm from a violation of these provisions to bring an action to obtain injunctive relief, damages, and restitution, as specified. The bill would require a court to award a prevailing borrower reasonable attorney's fees and costs in any action based on a violation of these provisions. This bill would provide that any waiver by a borrower of these provisions is contrary to public policy and void.
(1) The Child Care and Development Services Act establishes a system of childcare and development services for children up to 13 years of age. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to implement a plan that establishes reasonable standards and assigned reimbursement rates, which vary with the length of the program year and the hours of service. Existing law requires the reimbursement system to be submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. This bill would require the Superintendent to implement a reimbursement system plan that establishes reasonable standards and assigned reimbursement rates that would vary with additional factors, including a quality adjustment factor to address the cost of staffing ratios, as provided. The bill would require the reimbursement system plan, including methodology, standards, county rate targets as provided, and the total statewide funding amount necessary to reach annual rate targets for all agencies to be annually submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, on or before November 10. The bill would require the plan to include a formula for annually adjusting reimbursement rates, as provided. The bill would require the department, by July 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, as provided, to establish a reimbursement rate target for each contracting agency that meets specific quality standards based on specified elements, including quality adjustment factors for the age range of children proposed to be served by the contracting agency, as a multiplier, which the bill would also require the department to establish. (2) Existing law establishes adjustment factors for a provider agency's reported child days of enrollment in order to reflect the additional expense of serving specified children, including an adjustment factor for infants and toddlers who are 0 to 36 months and are served in a child daycare center or family childcare home, as provided. This bill would, as of July 1, 2020, delete the above adjustment factors and would make conforming changes. (3) Existing law requires reimbursement rates to be adjusted by specified adjustment factors for childcare and development programs and, for childcare and development providers serving children for less than 4 hours per day, requires the reimbursement factor to be 55% of the standard reimbursement rate. This bill would instead require the above-described reimbursement factor to be 50% of the standard reimbursement rate. (4) The bill would make its operation contingent on the enactment of SB 174 of the 2019–20 Regular Session on or before January 1, 2020.
Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, establishes the Medical Board of California for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons. Existing law establishes the University of California at Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine's International Medical Graduate Program to allow selected international medical graduates in a preresidency training program at the University of California, Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Family Medicine to receive hands-on clinical instruction, as prescribed. This bill would require the board to conduct a study by January 1, 2022, on achieving specified goals relating to expanding the existing pool of international medical graduates. The bill would require the board, on or before January 1, 2022, to prepare and submit to the Legislature a report with recommendations to achieve those goals.
(1) The Child Care and Development Services Act, administered by the State Department of Education, requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to administer childcare and development programs that offer a full range of services to eligible children from infancy to 13 years of age, inclusive. The act requires that families meet specified requirements to be eligible for federal- and state-subsidized childcare and development services. This bill would extend eligibility to a family in which a member of that family has been certified as fully eligible to receive CalFresh or Medi-Cal benefits. The bill would require a parent to provide documentation of current enrollment in CalFresh or Medi-Cal, unless the contractor providing childcare and development services has, and elects to use, other means of obtaining verification of that enrollment. The bill would authorize a family to submit a self-certification of income that is signed by the parent for the purpose of prioritizing enrollment and calculating family fees. (2) Existing law requires the department to arrange intraagency adjustments between California state preschool contracts and general childcare contracts for the same agency and funding allocation, and to establish timelines for intraagency contract fund transfers. This bill would additionally require the department to allow and arrange for interagency adjustments between those contracts for the same agency or different agencies and the same funding allocation, and to establish timelines for those interagency contract fund transfers. (3) Existing law requires the Superintendent to implement a plan establishing assigned reimbursement rates, per unit of average daily enrollment, to be paid by the state to provider agencies for the provision of childcare and development services. Existing law provides for an adjustment factor to be applied to units of average daily enrollment if a provider agency serves children who meet specified criteria. Existing law sets the adjustment factor based on the age of the child served, among other criteria. This bill would require those adjustment factors to continue to apply irrespective of whether a child is served in a commingled classroom that serves children from 0 to 12 years of age. The bill, during the 2020–21 fiscal year, would authorize a contractor providing childcare and development services under the act to provide those services to children from 0 to 12 years of age in classrooms with children of varying ages. (4) Existing law requires the Superintendent to establish a fee schedule for families using preschool and childcare and development services, as specified, and requires family fees to be assessed at initial enrollment and reassessed at the update of certification or recertification. Existing law encourages child development contractors to develop and maintain a reserve within the child development fund in the county treasury, derived from earned but unexpended funds. Existing law authorizes reserve funds to be expended for specified purposes. Existing law requires that 10% of specified reserve funds to be used solely for the purpose of professional development for California state preschool program instructional staff. This bill would authorize a contractor to waive family fees for families who are enrolled but who receive services only through distance learning. The bill would provide that the cost of waiving family fees under the above-described provision is an allowable use of contract funds received for providing childcare and development services, and would authorize a contractor to use reserve funds to cover the costs of a waiver. The bill would also delete the requirement that 10% of the specified reserve funds be used for that professional development purpose.
Existing law imposes taxes upon income and real property, as well as taxes upon certain transactions and excise taxes. This bill would impose an annual tax at a rate of 0.4% of a resident of this state's worldwide net worth in excess of $30,000,000, or in excess of $15,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately. The bill would describe worldwide net worth with reference to specific federal provisions and would provide that worldwide net worth does not include specific assets, including directly held real property or liabilities related to directly held real property. The bill would also authorize the Franchise Tax Board to adopt regulations to carry out these provisions, including regulations regarding the valuation of certain assets that are not publicly traded. Existing law requires the Franchise Tax Board to administer the Personal Income Tax Law. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to amend or create returns with regard to the Wealth Tax. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law establishes the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program for the purpose of providing jurisdictions with one-time grant funds to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate homelessness challenges informed by a best-practices framework focused on moving homeless individuals and families into permanent housing and supporting the efforts of those individuals and families to maintain their permanent housing. Upon appropriation, existing law requires the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency to distribute $650,000,000 among continuums of care, cities, and counties pursuant to the program. By executive order, the Governor required the Department of Finance to establish the California Access to Housing and Services Fund, administered by the State Department of Social Services, to provide funding for additional affordable housing units, providing rental and operating subsidies, and stabilizing board and care homes. This bill, the California Access to Housing and Services Act, would establish the California Access to Housing and Services Fund in the State Treasury and continuously appropriate moneys in the fund solely for the purpose of implementing and administering the bill's provisions. The bill, for the 2020–21 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, would require, upon appropriation by the Legislature, the Controller to transfer up to $2,000,000,000 from the General Fund to the fund and require the Department of Housing and Community Development and the State Department of Social Services to jointly administer the fund pursuant to a memorandum of understanding, as provided. The bill would provide that deposits into the fund may also include, but are not limited to, other state funds; private, nonprofit, or philanthropic donations; local government contributions; and any recoveries or reversions resulting from activities pursuant to the act. The bill would require the departments, in collaboration with the California Health and Human Services Agency and after deduction for administrative costs and certain allocations to the Governor's Office to End Homelessness, if the bill establishing that office is enacted, to allocate 55% of the moneys in the fund to counties and continuums of care that apply jointly, 45% to large cities, and 5% to developers operating in unincorporated areas and cities that are not eligible for an allocation. The bill would define various terms for these purposes. The bill would require that recipients and subrecipients ensure that any expenditure of moneys allocated to them serve the eligible population, as defined, unless otherwise expressly provided in the bill. The bill would require eligible recipients to apply for allocations and require the departments to evaluate those applications based on specified criteria and make annual allocations, as provided. The bill would require recipients to contractually obligate 100% of the amount allocated to them under the bill within 4 years, and expend the entirety of that amount within 5 years, of entering into a grant agreement with the departments, except for moneys used to provide a capitalized operating subsidy reserve, which the bill would require to be expended over a period of at least 17 years. If a developer awarded moneys under the bill does not comply with these time periods, the bill would require that the allocation revert to the fund. If a county and continuum of care or a large city does not comply with these time periods, is otherwise not in compliance with specified requirements under the bill, or does not apply for an allocation, the bill would require the departments to designate an alternate entity to administer the allocation until the departments approve a compliance plan submitted by the recipient, as provided. The bill would require the departments to evaluate the outcomes of the program and submit a report to specified committees of the Legislature every 5 years, beginning on January 1, 2023, as provided. The bill would specify various requirements for counties and continuums of care to jointly apply, and for a large city to apply, for allocations from the fund. The bill would also specify various eligible activities for which moneys allocated to counties and continuums of care that apply jointly or to large cities may be expended, which generally include services offered in connection with providing permanent housing and supportive housing, in the case of joint allocations to counties and continuums of care, and capital expenditures to fund the creation of affordable housing and supportive housing, in the case of allocations to large cities. The bill would require recipients under these provisions to comply with specified requirements, including a requirement that the recipient match 25% of the amount allocated to it, and quality standards for housing units assisted under the bill. The bill would require the departments to establish a process for awarding grants to these recipients in subsequent years. The bill would also require the Department of Housing and Community Development to provide grants to eligible developers based on a competitive application process and require the recipient to use that grant for development, acquisition, rehabilitation, preservation, motel conversion, and capitalized operating subsidy reserves in accordance with specified requirements. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project 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. If a local agency determines that a project is not subject to CEQA and approves or determines to carry out the project, CEQA authorizes the local agency to file a notice of exemption with the county clerk of each county in which the project will be located in a specified manner. This bill would exempt from CEQA specified actions taken by a large city in connection with making land available or approving the development of low barrier interim interventions, affordable housing, or supportive housing funded under the bill. The bill would require the large city to file a notice of exemption with the clerk of the county in which the large city is located and the Office of Planning and Research in the manner specified above.
The Personal Income Tax Law and California Constitution imposes taxes based upon taxable income of individuals, estates, and trusts at specified rates. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2020, in addition to those taxes, would impose an additional tax of at the rates of 1%, 3%, and 3.5% on that portion of a taxpayer's taxable income over specified thresholds, as provided. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.