Existing law authorizes a court to issue an ex parte order enjoining a party from engaging in specified acts against another party, including threatening or harassing that party, and, in the discretion of the court, against other named family or household members. A violation of this court order constitutes contempt of court, which is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would additionally authorize a court to issue an ex parte order enjoining a party from remotely controlling any connected devices, in the home of the other party. The bill would require the Judicial Council to develop or update any other forms or rules of court that are necessary to implement these provisions. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that satisfies specified planning objective standards to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. This bill would authorize a development proponent of a neighborhood multifamily project located on an eligible parcel to submit an application for a streamlined, ministerial approval process that is not subject to a conditional use permit. The bill would define a "neighborhood multifamily project" to mean a project to construct a multifamily structure on vacant land, or to convert an existing structure that does not require substantial exterior alteration into a multifamily structure, consisting of up to 4 residential dwelling units and that meets local height, setback, and lot coverage zoning requirements as they existed on July 1, 2019. The bill would also define "eligible parcel" to mean a parcel that meets specified requirements, including requirements relating to the location of the parcel and restricting the demolition of certain housing development that may already exist on the site. This bill would require a local agency to notify the development proponent in writing if the local agency determines that the development conflicts with any of the requirements provided for streamlined ministerial approval within 60 days of the submission of the development to the local agency. If the local agency does not notify the development proponent within this time period, the development would be deemed to comply with those requirements. The bill would limit the authority of a local agency to impose parking standards or requirements on a streamlined development approved pursuant to these provisions, as provided. The bill would provide that the approval of a project under these provisions expires automatically after 3 years, unless that project qualifies for a one-time, one-year extension of that approval. The bill would provide that approval pursuant to its provisions would remain valid for 3 years and remain valid thereafter, so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress, and would authorize a discretionary one-year extension, as provided. The bill would prohibit a local agency from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project receives ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. This bill would allow a local agency to exempt a project from the streamlined ministerial approval process described above by finding that the project will cause a specific adverse impact to public health and safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. 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. 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 does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill would establish a streamlined ministerial approval process for neighborhood multifamily projects, thereby exempting these projects from the CEQA approval process. (2) Existing law, known as the density bonus law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. This bill, on or after January 1, 2023, would require a specified city, county, or city and county to grant upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things, that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with specified law within specified time periods; and the residential development complies with specified additional requirements under existing law. The bill would impose additional requirements on a residential development located within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000. The bill would require that a residential development within a county with a population greater than 600,000 that is eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive, upon request, waivers from maximum controls on density; minimum automobile parking requirements greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit; and specified additional waivers if the residential development is located within a 12-mile or 14-mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined. For a residential development within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000, the bill would instead require that the incentive provide waivers from maximum controls on density, subject to certain limitations; maximum height limitations less than or equal to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height for mixed use or residential use; certain requirements governing the size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy; and minimum automobile parking requirements, as provided. The bill would require a local government to grant an equitable communities incentive unless it makes a specified finding regarding the effects of the incentive on any real property or historic district that is listed on a federal or state register of historical resources. The bill would authorize a local government to modify or expand the terms of an equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable communities incentive is consistent with these provisions. The bill would delay implementation of these provisions in potentially sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2023. The bill would further delay implementation of these provisions in sensitive communities, determined as provided, until January 1, 2026, unless the city or county in which the area is located votes to make these provisions applicable after a specified petition and public hearing process. On and after January 1, 2026, the bill would apply these provisions to a sensitive community unless the city or county adopts a community plan for the area that meets certain requirements. The bill would also exempt from these provisions a local government that has a local flexibility plan that has been reviewed and certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified. The bill, on or before July 1, 2021, would require the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, to develop and publish on its internet website rules, regulations, or guidelines for the submission and approval of a local flexibility plan, as specified. The bill, on or after July 1, 2021, would authorize a local government to submit a local flexibility plan for review and approval by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to those rules, regulations, or guidelines. The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by these provisions address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project that complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That law provides that the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. This bill would additionally provide that the receipt of an equitable communities incentive is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. (3) By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (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.
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations. Existing law establishes the California High-Cost Fund-A Administrative Committee Fund, the California High-Cost Fund-B Administrative Committee Fund, the Universal Lifeline Telephone Service Trust Administrative Committee Fund, the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program Administrative Committee Fund, the Payphone Service Providers Committee Fund, the California Teleconnect Fund Administrative Committee Fund, and the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) in the State Treasury and provides that moneys in the funds are held in trust and may be expended only to accomplish specified telecommunications universal service programs, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act or upon supplemental appropriation. This bill would prohibit the commission from collecting, for deposit into any universal service fund, any revenues derived from charges upon the provision of a communications service that the Federal Communications Commission has determined is an information service, as specified. Existing law establishes the Public Utilities Commission Utilities Reimbursement Account and authorizes the commission to annually determine a utility reimbursement fee to be paid by every public utility providing service directly to customers or subscribers and subject to the jurisdiction of the commission, except for a railroad corporation. The commission is required to establish the fee, with the approval of the Department of Finance, to produce a total amount equal to that amount established in the authorized commission budget for the same year, and an appropriate reserve to regulate public utilities, less specified sources of funding. This bill would prohibit the commission from imposing a utility reimbursement fee that is applicable to the provision of a communications service that the Federal Communications Commission has determined is an information service, as specified.
This measure would name the public street, circle, and plaza at 914 and 915 Capitol Mall in the City of Sacramento as the Willie L. Brown, Jr. Circle and Plaza. The measure would request the Department of General Services to determine the cost of erecting the appropriate signage commemorating this special designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources, to cover that cost to erect that signage.
Existing law establishes the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and charges it with certain duties and powers, including, among other things, the operation of prisons and other specified institutions. This bill would require the department to establish a Peace Officer Peer Support Labor Management Committee tasked with crafting, updating, and monitoring the implementation of a standardized statewide peace officer policy for the department's peer support program to provide substantive assistance to the peace officers employed by the department. The bill would require the committee to be composed of an equal number of representatives of the employer and peace officer employees, and would require the members of the committee to be selected and hold their first meeting on or before July 1, 2020. The bill would require the policy to address, among other things, the selection process and training for peer support team members, and guidelines for the types of communication that would remain confidential within the peer support program. The bill would require the policy to be fully implemented by January 1, 2022. The bill would require the department to submit, beginning July 1, 2020, an annual report to the Legislature that contains data pertaining to the utilization rates of the peace officer peer support program statewide.
The California Constitution grants many rights to persons, including the right to speak and write freely, as specified, and to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. Existing statutory law requires that a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contractor, for specified purposes, unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed. This measure, "The Right to Earn a Living Act," would require determinations of whether a person is an employee or an independent contractor to be made using a specified multifactor test that differs from the test described above. The measure would also require that any law that limits the entry into or competition in a business or profession to be limited to those that are demonstrably necessary and narrowly tailored to fulfill legitimate public health, safety, or welfare objectives. The measure would also prohibit a law from preventing an employer from agreeing to an employee's request for a flexible work schedule, as specified.
This measure would recognize September 2020 as Sickle Cell Disease Awareness Month and encourage the Legislature to appropriate funds for research, treatment, and monitoring of sickle cell disease, and for related education and outreach.
This measure would designate October 23, 2020, as Chinese American Day in California to highlight the important historical contributions of Chinese Americans to California and to the United States of America.