Under existing law, the chief and assistant chief of museum security at the California Science Center are peace officers whose primary duties are to provide police and security services, to keep order, and to preserve the peace and safety of persons and property at the California Science Center and at Exposition Park on a year-round basis, and whose authority extends to any place in the state for the purpose of performing their primary duty or when making an arrest as to any public offense with respect to which there is immediate danger to person or property, or of the escape of the perpetrator of that offense. Under existing law, security officers of the California Science Center are also responsible for providing police and security services, keeping order, and preserving the peace and safety of persons and property at the California Science Center and at Exposition Park on a year-round basis. Under existing law, they are not peace officers but may exercise the powers of arrest of a peace officer during the course and within the scope of their employment, as specified. This bill would grant peace officer status to security officers of the California Science Center, and would clarify the training requirements for those peace officers. The bill would make other nonsubstantive conforming changes.
Sponsored bills
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.
Existing law authorizes a peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense to use objectively reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance. Existing law specifies that a peace officer who is making an arrest need not retreat or desist from their efforts by reason of resistance or threatened resistance of the person being arrested. Existing law, except as specified, makes a public entity liable for injury proximately caused by an act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the scope of employment if the act or omission would, apart from this provision, have given rise to a cause of action against that employee or their personal representative. This bill would remove the specification that a peace officer making an arrest need not desist in their efforts because of resistance or threatened resistance from the person being arrested. The bill would also require a peace officer to attempt to control an incident through deescalation tactics, as defined, in an effort to reduce or avoid the need to use force, to render medical aid immediately or as soon as feasible, and to intervene to stop a violation of law or an excessive use of force by another peace officer. Under existing law, a peace officer is justified in using deadly force only when the officer reasonably believes, based on the totality of the circumstances, that such force is necessary to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person, or to apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended. This bill would define "necessary" to mean that, as specified, there was no reasonable alternative to the use of deadly force that would prevent imminent death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or to another person.
Existing law makes certain publications and communications privileged and therefore protected from civil action, including certain communications in a legislative proceeding, judicial proceeding, any other official proceeding authorized by law, or in the initiation or course of any other proceeding authorized by law and reviewable pursuant to a writ of mandate, subject to certain exceptions. These exceptions include any communication made in a judicial proceeding knowingly concealing the existence of an insurance policy or policies. This bill would create an additional exception to the privilege provisions for any communication between a person and a law enforcement agency in which the person knowingly or recklessly makes a false report that another person has committed, or is in the act of committing, a criminal act or is engaged in an activity requiring law enforcement intervention. Existing law, the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976, provides that all persons within the jurisdiction of this state have the right to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of political affiliation, or on account of position in a labor dispute, or sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of those characteristics. Existing law provides civil remedies for violations of those provisions. This bill would specify that intimidation by threat of violence includes knowingly or recklessly making or threatening to make a false claim or report to a peace officer or law enforcement agency alleging that another person has engaged in unlawful activity or in an activity that requires law enforcement intervention.
Under existing law, there is established in each county treasury a Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Account (SLESA) to receive all amounts allocated to a county for specified purposes. In any fiscal year for which a county receives moneys to be expended for implementation, existing law requires the county auditor to allocate the moneys in the county's SLESA within 30 days of the deposit of those moneys into the fund. Existing law requires the moneys to be allocated in specified amounts, including, but not limited to, 50% to a county or city and county to implement a comprehensive multiagency juvenile justice plan, as specified. Existing law requires the juvenile justice plan to be developed by the local juvenile justice coordinating council in each county and city and county. Existing law requires the plan to be annually reviewed and updated by the council and submitted to the Board of State and Community Corrections. Existing law requires the multiagency juvenile justice plan to include certain components, including, but not limited to, a local juvenile justice action strategy that provides for a continuum of responses to juvenile crime and delinquency. Existing law also requires each council to annually report to their board of supervisors and the board information on the effectiveness of the programs and strategies funded under these provisions, and requires the board to annually report this information to the Governor and the Legislature and post it on its internet website. This bill would revise and recast required components of the multiagency juvenile justice plan to, among other things, additionally require a plan to include an assessment of existing community-based youth development services, identification and prioritization of areas of the community that face significant public safety risk from violence and crime, documentation of the effectiveness of the programs funded under these provisions, and a description of the target population funded under these provisions. The bill would require programs and strategies funded under these provisions to, among other things, be modeled on trauma-informed and youth development approaches and in collaboration with community-based organizations. The bill would require that at least 95% of the funds allocated under these provisions be distributed to community-based organizations and other public agencies or departments that are not law enforcement entities, as specified. The bill would require a council to include additional information in its annual report to the board of supervisors and the board relating to their programs, including data on participants, and would impose additional requirements on the board with respect to those annual reports, including, but not limited to, providing a statewide analysis of county spending. Existing law requires a juvenile justice coordinating council to consist of certain members, including, but not limited to, the chief probation officer, as chair, and a representative from the district attorney's office, the public defender's office, and the sheriff's department, among others. This bill would revise and recast those membership provisions, and instead require each Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council to, at a minimum, include 7 members and consist of at least 50% community representatives with the remainder of the seats allocated to government agencies. The bill would require a council to select 2 cochairs from amongst its members, as specified. The bill would require a council to meet no less than 3 times per year and announce its meetings at least 10 days in advance of a meeting.
The California Constitution, pursuant to provisions enacted by the initiative Proposition 209 in 1996, prohibits the state from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting. The California Constitution defines the state for these purposes to include the state, any city, county, public university system, community college district, school district, special district, or any other political subdivision or governmental instrumentality of, or within, the state. This measure would repeal these provisions. The measure would also make a statement of legislative findings in this regard.
This measure would proclaim March 2, 2020, to March 6, 2020, inclusive, as School Breakfast Week.
This measure would recognize June 19, 2020, as Juneteenth and would urge the people of California to join in celebrating Juneteenth as a day to honor and reflect on the significant role that African Americans have played in the history of the United States and how they have enriched society through their steadfast commitment to promoting unity and equality.