This measure would urge the Congress of the United States to acknowledge the problem of a labor shortage in the agricultural industry in California and to work together with California to solve the issue.
Existing law provides for the procedure of approving and accepting bail, and issuing an order for the appearance and release of an arrested person. Existing law requires that bail be set in a fixed amount and requires, in setting, reducing, or denying bail, a judge or magistrate to take into consideration the protection of the public, the seriousness of the offense charged, the previous criminal record of the defendant, and the probability of his or her appearing at trial or at a hearing of the case. Under existing law, the magistrate or commissioner to whom the application is made is authorized to set bail in an amount that he or she deems sufficient to ensure the defendant's appearance or to ensure the protection of a victim, or family member of a victim, of domestic violence, and to set bail on the terms and conditions that he or she, in his or her discretion, deems appropriate, or he or she may authorize the defendant's release on his or her own recognizance. Existing law provides that a defendant being held for a misdemeanor offense is entitled to be released on his or her own recognizance, unless the court makes a finding on the record that an own recognizance release would compromise public safety or would not reasonably ensure the appearance of the defendant as required. This bill would, as of October 1, 2019, repeal existing laws regarding bail and require that any remaining references to bail refer to the procedures specified in the bill. This bill would require, commencing October 1, 2019, persons arrested and detained to be subject to a pretrial risk assessment conducted by Pretrial Assessment Services, which the bill would define as an entity, division, or program that is assigned the responsibility to assess the risk level of persons charged with the commission of a crime, report the results of the risk determination to the court, and make recommendations for conditions of release of individuals pending adjudication of their criminal case. The bill would require the courts to establish pretrial assessment services, and would authorize the services to be performed by court employees or through a contract with a local public agency, as specified. The bill would require, if no local agency will agree to perform the pretrial assessments, and if the court elects not to perform the assessments, that the court may contract with a new local pretrial assessment services agency established specifically to perform the role. The bill would require a person arrested or detained for a misdemeanor, except as specified, to be booked and released without being required to submit to a risk assessment by Pretrial Assessment Services. The bill would authorize Pretrial Assessment Services to release a person assessed as being a low risk, as defined, on his or her own recognizance, as specified. The bill would additionally require a superior court to adopt a rule authorizing Pretrial Assessment Services to release persons assessed as being a medium risk, as defined, on his or her own recognizance. The bill would prohibit Pretrial Assessment Services from releasing persons who meet specified conditions. If a person is not released, the bill would authorize the court to conduct a prearraignment review and release the person. The bill would allow the court to detain the person pending arraignment if there is a substantial likelihood that no condition or combination of conditions of pretrial supervision will reasonably assure public safety or the appearance of the person in court. The bill would require the victim of the crime to be given notice of the arraignment by the prosecution and a chance to be heard on the matter of the defendant's custody status. By imposing additional duties on local prosecutors, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would create a presumption that the court will release the defendant on his or her own recognizance at arraignment with the least restrictive nonmonetary conditions that will reasonably assure public safety and the defendant's return to court. The bill would allow the prosecutor to file a motion seeking detention of the defendant pending trial under specified circumstances. If the court determines that there is a substantial likelihood that no conditions of pretrial supervision will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant in court or reasonably assure public safety, the bill would authorize the court to detain the defendant pending a preventive detention hearing and require the court to state the reasons for the detention on the record. The bill would prohibit the court from imposing a financial condition. In cases in which the defendant is detained in custody, the bill would require a preventive detention hearing to be held no later than 3 court days after the motion for preventive detention is filed. The bill would grant the defendant the right to be represented by counsel at the preventive detention hearing and would require the court to appoint counsel if the defendant is financially unable to obtain representation. By imposing additional duties on county public defenders, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the prosecutor to give the victim notice of the preventive detention hearing. By imposing new duties on local prosecutors, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would create a rebuttable presumption that no condition of pretrial supervision will reasonably assure public safety if, among other things, the crime was a violent felony or the defendant was convicted of a violent felony within the past 5 years. The bill would allow the court to order preventive detention of the defendant pending trial if the court determines by clear and convincing evidence that no condition or combination of conditions of pretrial supervision will reasonably assure public safety or the appearance of the defendant in court. If the court determines there is not a sufficient basis for detaining the defendant, the bill would require the court to release the defendant on his or her own recognizance or supervised own recognizance and impose the least restrictive nonmonetary conditions of pretrial release to reasonably assure public safety and the appearance of the defendant. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt Rules of Court and forms to implement these provisions as specified, and to identify specified data to be reported by each court. The bill would require the Judicial Council to, on or before January 1, 2021, and every other year thereafter, to submit a report to the Governor and the Legislature. The bill would provide that upon appropriation by the Legislature, the Judicial Council would allocate funds to local courts for pretrial assessment services and the Department of Finance would allocate funds to local probation departments for pretrial supervision services, as specified. 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.
This measure would declare October 23 to 31, 2018, inclusive, as Red Ribbon Week, and would encourage all Californians to help build drug-free communities and to participate in drug prevention activities.
This measure would declare July 27, 2018, as California Bullying Prevention Day, also to be known as Rosie's Day.
This measure would urge the United States Department of Justice not to direct its enforcement priorities towards California's lawfully and closely regulated cannabis industry, among other things.
(1) The Political Reform Act of 1974 provides for the comprehensive regulation of campaign financing. The act requires elected officers, candidates, and committees, including political party committees, to file various reports at specified periods, including semiannual reports, preelection statements, and supplemental preelection statements. The act defines a "political party committee" as the state central committee or county central committee of an organization that meets the requirements for recognition as a political party under law. This bill would additionally require political party committees that received or contributed $50,000 or more in the current or previous two-year election cycle to file monthly reports, as specified. (2) The act generally limits contributions made or received by elected officers, candidates, and committees. The act does not limit the contributions of a political party committee to a candidate for elective state office. The act also authorizes a political party committee to receive higher levels of contributions than other committees. In addition, political party committees are not controlled committees for purposes of the act. This bill would expand the definition of "political party committee" to include a legislative caucus committee. The bill would authorize the caucus of each political party of each house of the Legislature to create a legislative caucus committee directed by the caucus leader, as specified. The bill would provide that funds received by a legislative caucus committee shall be held in trust to advance the interests of the caucus and may be used to make expenditures associated with the election of members to the Legislature and for caucus expenses. The bill would also provide that a legislative caucus committee is not a controlled committee and that a bank account established for a legislative caucus committee is not a campaign contribution account of any candidate. (3) The act prohibits a lobbyist from making a contribution to an elected state officer or candidate for elected state office if the lobbyist is registered to lobby the governmental agency of the officer or for which the candidate is seeking election. This bill would similarly prohibit a lobbyist from making a contribution to a legislative caucus committee if the lobbyist is registered to lobby the Legislature. (4) Because a violation of the act is punishable as a misdemeanor, 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. (5) The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act. (6) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute, but would become operative 14 days after its effective date.
This measure would encourage the federal government to maintain or restore full funding to integral international exchange programs, such as the Fulbright U.S. Student Program.
This measure would recognize the month of June 2018 as California's Alzheimer's and Brain Awareness Month and Thursday, June 21, 2018, as The Longest Day in California, and would urge all Californians to wear purple on this day to help spread global awareness of the Alzheimer's Association's vision of a world without Alzheimer's disease.
