Asm. Freddie Rodriguez

Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, establishes, within the office of the Governor, the Office of Emergency Services (OES) under the supervision of the Director of Emergency Services. Existing law makes OES responsible for addressing natural, technological, or manmade disasters and emergencies, including activities necessary to prevent, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of emergencies and disasters to people and property. Existing law requires OES to establish a standardized emergency management system for use by all emergency response agencies. Existing law requires the director to appoint representatives of the disabled community to serve on pertinent committees related to that system, and to ensure that the needs of the disabled community are met within that system by ensuring certain committee recommendations include the needs of people with disabilities. This bill instead would require the director to appoint representatives of the access and functional needs population, provided a majority of appointees are from specified groups, to serve on those committees and to ensure the needs of that population are met within that system. Under existing law, political subdivisions, as defined, have full power during a local emergency to provide mutual aid to any affected area in accordance with local ordinances, resolutions, emergency plans, or agreements. Existing law defines "emergency plan" for these purposes to mean official and approved documents that describe the principles and methods to be applied in carrying out emergency operations or rendering mutual aid during emergencies. Existing law requires a county, upon the next update to its emergency plan, to integrate access and functional needs into its emergency plan and to include representatives from the access and functional needs population, as defined, regarding that integration. This bill would require a county to send a copy of its emergency plan to OES on or before March 1, 2022, and upon any update to the plan after that date. By creating a new duty for counties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require OES, if requested, in consultation with representatives of people with a variety of access and functional needs, to review the emergency plan of each county to determine whether the plans are consistent with certain best practices and guidance, as specified. The bill would require counties to develop and revise emergency plans to address the issues identified by OES in OES's review. The bill would require OES, if requested, to provide technical assistance to a county in developing and revising its emergency plan to address the issues that the office identified in its review. Existing law, on or before July 1, 2019, requires OES, in consultation with specified groups and entities, including the disability community, to develop guidelines for alerting and warning the public of an emergency, as specified, and to provide each city and county with a copy of the guidelines. Existing law requires OES, within 6 months of making those guidelines available and at least annually, to develop an alert and warning training that includes information regarding certain emergency alert systems and the alert and warning guidelines. This bill, instead, would require OES to develop those guidelines on or before July 1, 2022, would include the access and functional needs community, as provided, instead of the disability community in the list of groups that OES is required to consult, and would require OES to develop the alert and warning training with involvement of representatives of the access and functional needs community. Existing law requires OES, in cooperation with involved state and local agencies, to complete an after-action report within 180 days after each declared disaster that reviews public safety response and disaster recovery activities. This bill would require OES to include conclusions and recommendations based on findings in the report. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires, during the next revision of the publication "Health Framework for California Public Schools," the Instructional Quality Commission to consider developing, and recommending for adoption by the State Board of Education, a distinct category on mental health instruction to educate pupils about all aspects of mental health. Existing law requires mental health instruction for these purposes to include, but not be limited to, specified elements, including reasonably designed and age-appropriate instruction on the overarching themes and core principles of mental health. This bill would require each school district, county office of education, state special school, and charter school that offers one or more courses in health education to pupils in middle school or high school to include in those courses instruction in mental health that meets the requirements of the bill, as specified. The bill would require that instruction to include, among other things, reasonably designed instruction on the overarching themes and core principles of mental health. The bill would require that instruction and related materials to, among other things, be appropriate for use with pupils of all races, genders, sexual orientations, and ethnic and cultural backgrounds, pupils with disabilities, and English learners. The bill would require the State Department of Education to develop a plan to expand mental health instruction in California public schools on or before January 1, 2024.

Existing law, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, grants a consumer various rights with regard to personal information relating to that consumer that is held by a business, including the right to direct a business not to sell, as defined, personal information about the consumer to third parties, as defined. This right is known as the right to opt out. The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, approved by the voters as Proposition 24 at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election, amended, added to, and reenacted the CCPA. This bill would exempt from the right to opt out vessel information or ownership information retained or shared between a vessel dealer and the vessel's manufacturer, if the information is shared for the purpose of effectuating or in anticipation of effectuating a vessel repair covered by a vessel warranty or a recall, as specified. The bill would define terms for that purpose. The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 authorizes the Legislature to amend the act to further the purposes and intent of the act by a majority vote of both houses of the Legislature, as specified. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1798.145 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 694 to be operative only if this bill and AB 694 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Under existing law, classified employees of school districts and community college districts subject to layoff as a result of the expiration of a specially funded program at the end of a school year are required to be given written notice on or before April 29 informing them of certain rights. Existing law also requires that notice be given not less than 60 days before the effective layoff date if the termination date of a specially funded program is other than June 30, or if classified employees are subject to layoff as a result of a bona fide reduction or elimination of a service performed by a department. This bill instead would revise and recast provisions relating to the layoff of classified employees of school districts and community college districts to require certain notices and opportunities for a hearing when a permanent classified employee's services will not be required for the ensuing year due to lack of work or lack of funds. The bill would, for the purposes of specified notice and hearing rights, define "permanent classified employee" to include both an employee who was permanent at the time the notice or right to a hearing was required and an employee who became permanent after the date of the required notice. The bill would express the intent of the Legislature in enacting the bill to provide permanent classified school employees and those who become permanent classified school employees with the same rights to notice and hearing with respect to layoffs as are provided to certificated employees of school districts, including teachers and administrators, and academic employees of community college districts. If classified positions must be eliminated as a result of the expiration of a specially funded program, the bill would require written notice of the layoff date and certain rights be given to the classified employees not less than 60 days before the effective layoff date. If, after January 1, 2021, the Legislature provides certificated or academic employees with any additional rights to notice or hearing as to layoffs, the bill would require the respective permanent classified employees, as described, to be afforded the same rights by the school district or community college district, as applicable. To the extent school districts and community college districts are required to perform additional duties, 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires the governing board of a school district to give diligent care to the health and physical development of pupils and authorizes the governing board of a school district to employ properly certified persons for this purpose. Existing law requires a school of a school district or county office of education and a charter school to notify pupils and parents or guardians of pupils no less than twice during the school year on how to initiate access to available pupil mental health services on campus or in the community, or both, as provided. This bill would require the State Department of Education to develop model referral protocols, as provided, for addressing pupil mental health concerns. The bill would require the department to consult with various entities in developing the protocols, including current classroom teachers, administrators, pupils, and parents. The bill would require the department to post the model referral protocols on its internet website. The bill would make these provisions contingent upon funds being appropriated for its purpose in the annual Budget Act or other legislation, or state, federal, or private funds being allocated for this purpose.

(1) Existing law requires a pupil to complete designated coursework while in grades 9 to 12, inclusive, in order to receive a diploma of graduation from high school. These graduation requirements include, among others, the completion of 3 years of courses in English and 3 years of courses in social studies, including one-year courses in United States history and geography and world history, culture, and geography, a one-semester course in American government and civics, and a one-semester course in economics. Existing law requires the Instructional Quality Commission to develop, and the State Board of Education to adopt, modify, or revise, a model curriculum in ethnic studies. Existing law also encourages each school district and charter school that maintains any of grades 9 to 12, inclusive, and that does not otherwise offer a standards-based ethnic studies curriculum to offer, beginning in the school year following the adoption of the model curriculum, a course of study in ethnic studies based on the model curriculum. This bill would add the completion of a one-semester course in ethnic studies, meeting specified requirements, to the graduation requirements commencing with pupils graduating in the 2029–30 school year, including for pupils enrolled in a charter school. The bill would expressly authorize local educational agencies, including charter schools, to require a full-year course in ethnic studies at their discretion. The bill would require local educational agencies, including charter schools, to offer an ethnic studies course commencing with the 2025–26 school year, as specified. The bill would authorize, subject to the course offerings of a local educational agency, including a charter school, a pupil to satisfy the ethnic studies course requirement by completing either (A) a course based on the model curriculum in ethnic studies developed by the commission, (B) an existing ethnic studies course, (C) an ethnic studies course taught as part of a course that has been approved as meeting the A–G requirements of the University of California and the California State University, or (D) a locally developed ethnic studies course approved by the governing board of the school district or the governing body of the charter school. The bill would prohibit a course that does not use ethnic studies content as the primary content through which the subject is taught from being used to satisfy the ethnic studies course requirement. The bill would require a pupil who completes a course described above to also accrue credit for coursework in the subject that the course is offered, including, if applicable, credit towards satisfying a course required for a diploma of graduation from high school. These provisions would become operative only upon an appropriation of funds by the Legislature for these purposes in the annual Budget Act or another statute. Because the bill would add new duties to local educational agencies, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. (2) 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

The Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act provides for negotiations concerning wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment between a higher education employer, defined as the Regents of the University of California, the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law, and the Trustees of the California State University, and representatives of recognized employee organizations. This bill would require a higher education employer to provide a procedure for all medical and dental interns and residents, persons in accredited resident physician subspecialty programs, and other postgraduate medical and dental trainees in unaccredited programs to challenge a termination of employment or a disciplinary action, as defined, by the employer, after the employee has exhausted available administrative or academic grievance processes, as provided. The bill would prohibit applying that procedure to a termination of employment or disciplinary action based on certain academic or clinical matters.

(1) Existing law prohibits the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law, the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the Trustees of the California State University, and, if they adopt an appropriate resolution, the Regents of the University of California from collecting mandatory systemwide tuition and fees from any surviving spouse or surviving child of a deceased person who was a resident of the state and employed by or contracting with a public agency whose principal duties consisted of active law enforcement service or active fire suppression and prevention, and who died as a result of their duties, as specified. This bill would additionally prohibit the Board of Directors of the Hastings College of the Law, the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the Trustees of the California State University, and, if they adopt an appropriate resolution, the Regents of the University of California from collecting mandatory systemwide tuition and fees from any qualifying surviving spouse or surviving child of a deceased person who was a resident of this state, who was a licensed physician or a licensed nurse employed by or under contract with a health facility regulated and licensed by the State Department of Public Health to provide medical services or a first responder, as specified, and who died of COVID-19 during the COVID-19 pandemic state of emergency in California. The bill would also make conforming changes to related code sections. To the extent that this bill would impose new duties on community college districts, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. (2) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 76300 of the Education Code proposed by AB 1456 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1456 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (3) 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law creates, in the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, the Employment Development Department, which is vested with the duties, purposes, responsibilities, and jurisdiction with respect to job creation activities. The department is authorized to study and make recommendations as to actions that might tend to do several things, including, but not limited to, promoting the prevention of unemployment and the stabilization of employment, reducing and preventing unemployment, and establishing the most effective methods of providing economic security through all forms of social insurance. This bill would require the department to develop and, upon appropriation by the Legislature, implement a recession plan to prepare for an increase in unemployment insurance compensation benefits claims due to an economic recession. The bill would require the plan to detail how to respond to economic downturns with a predetermined strategy that has considered the full effect on the department's operations, and include, but not be limited to, identifying the lessons learned from previous economic downturns, identifying ways to improve self-serve services to avoid long wait times to speak to staff, and enhancing claims processing tools to ensure that the department's identity verification processes are as robust as possible. The bill would require the department to provide a copy of the recession plan to specified legislative committees and the Department of Finance by March 1, 2022, and to update the recession plan and provide a copy to specified legislative committees and the Department of Finance every 2nd year thereafter.