Asm. Chris Ward

Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, provides for the involuntary commitment and treatment of a person who is a danger to themselves or others or who is gravely disabled, as defined. Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Pursuant to a schedule of covered benefits, existing law requires Medi-Cal coverage for inpatient hospital services, subject to utilization controls, and with respect to fee-for service beneficiaries, coverage for emergency services and care necessary for the treatment of an emergency medical condition and medical care directly related to the emergency medical condition, as specified. Existing law provides for the licensing and regulation of health facilities by the State Department of Public Health and makes a violation of those provisions a crime. Existing law defines "psychiatric emergency medical condition," for purposes of providing treatment for emergency conditions, as a mental disorder that manifests itself by acute symptoms of sufficient severity that it renders the patient as being either an immediate danger to the patient or to others, or immediately unable to provide for, or utilize, food, shelter, or clothing, due to the mental disorder. Existing law includes various circumstances under which a patient is required to be treated by, or may be transferred to, specified health facilities for treatment that is solely necessary to relieve or eliminate a psychiatric emergency medical condition. This bill would revise the definition of "psychiatric emergency medical condition" to make that definition applicable regardless of whether the patient is voluntary, or is involuntarily detained for assessment, evaluation, and crisis intervention, or placement for evaluation and treatment, under prescribed circumstances. The bill would make conforming and clarifying changes to provisions requiring facilities to provide that treatment. By expanding the definition of a crime with respect to those facilities, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Medi-Cal program to cover emergency services and care necessary to treat an emergency medical condition, as defined, including poststabilization care services required under specified federal law, emergency room professional services, and facility charges for emergency room visits. The bill would require coverage for emergency services necessary to relieve or eliminate a psychiatric emergency medical condition, regardless of whether the beneficiary is voluntary, or involuntarily detained for assessment, evaluation, and crisis intervention, or placement for evaluation and treatment, as specified. The bill would require a Medi-Cal managed care plan, as defined, to be responsible for covering, and reimbursing providers for furnishing, those emergency services and care. The bill would specify that those requirements do not limit or reduce the scope of covered emergency services and care for fee-for-service beneficiaries, as described in the bill. 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 governs various interactions between the state and federally recognized Native American tribes within the state. Existing law encourages and authorizes all state agencies, as defined, to cooperate with federally recognized California Indian tribes on matters of economic development and improvement for the tribes. Existing law provides that the Legislature encourages the State of California and its agencies to consult on a government-to-government basis with federally recognized tribes and to consult with nonfederally recognized tribes and tribal organizations, as appropriate, in order to allow tribal officials the opportunity to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of policies, processes, programs, and projects that have tribal implications. Existing law provides that the Legislature encourages the state and its agencies to consult with a federally recognized tribe, at the tribe's request for a government-to-government consultation on a specified agency action, within 60 days of the request. This bill would provide that the Legislature encourages the Natural Resources Agency, and its departments, boards, conservancies, and commissions, to enter into cogovernance and comanagement agreements with federally recognized tribes. The bill would authorize the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency or a delegate to enter into cogovernance and comanagement agreements with federally recognized tribes for the purposes of shared responsibility, decisionmaking, and partnership in resource management and conservation within a tribe's ancestral lands and waters, and would require the secretary or a delegate to be the signatory for these agreements. The bill would authorize the secretary or a delegate, as provided, and within 90 days of a federally recognized tribe's request, to begin government-to-government negotiations on cogovernance and comanagement agreements with the tribe. (2) Existing law provides that 2 or more public agencies, by agreement, may form a joint powers authority to exercise any power common to the contracting parties, as specified. For purposes of cogovernance and comanagement agreements entered into pursuant to the provisions described in paragraph (1) , this bill would deem powers exercisable by any public agency that is not a federally recognized tribe to be common to a contracting federally recognized tribe.

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. Existing law authorizes the Governor to certify projects meeting certain requirements as infrastructure projects and provides those certified projects with certain streamlining benefits, including requiring the lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings concurrently with the environmental review process and requiring the resolution of an action or proceeding challenging the certification of an EIR for certified projects or the granting of any project approvals, to the extent feasible, within 270 days of the filing of the record of proceedings with the court, as specified. Existing law requires the lead agency, within 10 days of the certification of an infrastructure project, to provide a public notice of the certification, as provided. If a lead agency fails to approve a project certified as an infrastructure project before January 1, 2033, existing law specifies that the certification is no longer valid. This bill would include the San Vicente Energy Storage Facility project proposed by the San Diego County Water Authority and a project for the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of the South Bay Sewage Treatment Plant in the County of San Diego, operated by the International Boundary and Water Commission, as infrastructure projects, thereby providing the above-described streamlining benefits to those 2 projects. To the extent the bill would increase the duties of a lead agency regarding projects proposed by a third party, 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. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of San Diego.

Existing law authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated if specified requirements are satisfied. Existing law prohibits the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads until the manufacturer submits an application to the Department of Motor Vehicles, as specified, and that application is approved. This bill would require a manufacturer of an autonomous vehicle to report to the department a collision on a public road that involved one of its autonomous vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of 10,001 pounds or more that is operating under a testing or deployment permit that resulted in damage of property, bodily injury, or death within 10 days of the collision. The bill would require a manufacturer of an autonomous vehicle to annually submit to the department specified information regarding the deactivation of the autonomous mode for its autonomous vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of 10,001 pounds or more that were operating under a testing or deployment permit that authorized the vehicle to operate on public roads. The bill would prohibit the operation of an autonomous vehicle with a gross vehicle weight of 10,001 pounds or more on public roads for testing purposes, transporting goods, or transporting passengers without a human safety operator physically present in the autonomous vehicle at the time of operation. The bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles, by January 1, 2030, or 5 years after commencement of testing, whichever occurs later, and upon appropriation by the Legislature, to submit a report to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature evaluating the performance of autonomous vehicle technology and its impact on public safety and employment in the transportation sector for autonomous vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of 10,001 pounds or more. The bill would require the Department of the California Highway Patrol, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, the Department of Transportation, the State Air Resources Board, and other relevant state agencies to provide additional information needed to research the report.

Existing law establishes a low-income housing tax credit program pursuant to which the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee provides procedures and requirements for the allocation, in modified conformity with federal law, of state insurance, personal income, and corporation tax credit amounts to qualified low-income housing projects that have been allocated, or qualify for, a federal low-income housing tax credit, and farmworker housing. Existing law limits the total annual amount of the state low-income housing credit for which a federal low-income housing credit is required to the sum of $70,000,000, as increased by any percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for the preceding calendar year, any unused credit for the preceding calendar years, and the amount of housing credit ceiling returned in the calendar year. Existing law provides for an additional allocation of $500,000,000 in low-income housing tax credits for the 2020 calendar year and up to $500,000,000 for the 2021 calendar year and thereafter. Existing law provides that the additional amount for the 2021 calendar year and thereafter is available only if the Budget Act or related legislation specifies an amount available for allocation. This bill would instead require that this additional allocation of low-income housing tax credits be $500,000,000 for the 2020 calendar year through the 2030 calendar year, and up to $500,000,000 for the 2031 calendar year and every year thereafter. The bill would limit the requirement that this additional allocation is subject to the Budget Act or related legislation to allocations for the 2021 through the 2025 calendar years, and the 2031 calendar year and every year thereafter, thereby eliminating this requirement for the 2026 calendar year through the 2030 calendar year. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would provide that its provisions would become operative only if AB 3190 is enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 2025. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 12206, 17058, and 23610.5 of the Revenue and Taxation Code proposed by AB 3035 to be operative only if this bill and AB 3035 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.

Existing law, the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976, affords all persons within the jurisdiction of this state the right to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of political affiliation, any specified personal characteristic, or position in a labor dispute, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of those characteristics. Existing law specifies that whoever denies this right, or aids, incites, or conspires in that denial, is liable for each and every offense for the actual damages suffered by any person denied that right and, in addition, exemplary damages, a civil penalty of $25,000, and attorney's fees. Existing law authorizes a person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful practice in violation of this right to also file a verified complaint with the Civil Rights Department. Existing law defines the phrase "intimidation by threat of violence" for purposes of this provision. This bill would expand the definition of "intimidation by threat of violence" for purposes of these provisions to also include terrorizing the owner or occupant of private property with the distribution of materials on the private property, without authorization, with the purpose of terrorizing, as defined, the owner or occupant of that private property. The bill would prohibit speech alone from supporting an action brought pursuant to the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976 unless there is a showing that the speech itself threatens violence against a specific person or group of persons, the person or group of persons against whom the threat is directed reasonably fears that, because of the speech, violence will be committed against them or their property, and the person threatening violence is acting in reckless disregard for the threatening nature of their speech and has the apparent ability to carry out the threat. The bill would prohibit that restriction on speech alone supporting an action from being construed to negate or otherwise abrogate the requirements set forth in other specified provisions of the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976 to bring an action pursuant to that act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

(1) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other specified mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires, for the 4th and subsequent revisions of the housing element, the Department of Housing and Community Development (department) , in consultation with the council of governments, to determine the existing and projected need for housing for each region, as specified. Existing law requires the council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, to adopt a final regional housing needs plan that allocates a share of the regional housing need to each city, county, or city and county. Existing law requires each council of governments and delegate subregion to distribute a draft allocation of regional housing needs to each local government in the region or subregion. Existing law authorizes, within 45 days following receipt of the draft allocation, a local government within the region or the delegate subregion or the department to appeal to the council of governments or the delegate subregion for a revision of the share of the regional housing need proposed to be allocated to one or more local governments, as specified. This bill would reduce the period to appeal from 45 days following receipt of the draft allocation to 30 days. Existing law requires, at the close of the period to appeal, the council of governments or delegate subregion to notify all other local governments within the region or subregion of the appeal and make materials submitted in support of the appeal available on an internet website. Existing law authorizes a local government and the department to comment on one or more appeals. Existing law requires, no later than 30 days after the close of the comment period, and after providing all local governments within the region or subregion, as applicable, at least 21 day prior notice, the council of governments or delegate subregion to conduct one public hearing to consider the appeal and the comments received. This bill would instead require the council of governments or delegate subregion to conduct the above-described public hearing after providing all local governments within the region or subregion at least 10 days prior notice. Existing law requires, no later than 45 days after the above-described public hearing, the council of governments or delegate subregion to make a final determination on the appeal, as specified, and issue a proposed final allocation plan. Existing law requires, within 45 days after the issuance of the proposed final allocation plan by the council of governments or delegate subregion, the council of governments to hold a public hearing to adopt a final allocation plan. Existing law requires, within 30 days after the department's receipt of the final allocation plan, the department to determine if the final allocation plan is consistent with existing and projected housing need for the region. This bill would additionally require the council of governments or the delegate subregion to submit the proposed final allocation plan to the department and set a date for a public hearing to adopt a final allocation plan. The bill would instead require the department to determine if the final allocation plan is consistent with existing and projected housing need for the region, as described above, within 15 days after receipt of the final allocation plan. By imposing additional duties on councils of governments and delegate subregions with respect to the allocation of regional housing need, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law authorizes a council of governments or delegate subregion to extend certain above-described time periods for up to 30 days. This bill would additionally authorize those entities to reduce certain time periods to facilitate earlier adoption of the final allocation plan, notwithstanding that those time periods cannot be reduced to fewer than a minimum of 10 days. (2) Existing law also requires certain transportation planning agencies to prepare and adopt a regional transportation plan directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system, as provided. Existing law requires each local government to review its housing element as frequently as appropriate to evaluate specified conditions and requires each local government to revise its housing element in accordance with a specified schedule. Under these provisions, existing law requires certain local governments to revise their housing elements 18 months after the adoption of every 2nd regional transportation plan update, but no later than 8 years after the deadline for the previous update of the housing element, as specified. This bill would extend the above-described deadline for certain local governments that are within the regional jurisdiction of the Southern California Association of Governments, except the County of Orange and all local governments within the County of Orange, the County of Riverside and all local governments within the County of Riverside, the County of San Bernardino and all local governments within the County of San Bernardino, and the County of Ventura and all local governments within the County of Ventura, to revise their housing elements 24 months after adoption of every 2nd regional transportation plan update for the 7th and subsequent revisions of the housing element. (3) Existing law requires a metropolitan planning organization or a regional transportation planning agency for a region that has an 8-year housing element revision interval to notify the department and the Department of Transportation in writing of the estimated adoption date for its next regional transportation plan update at least 12 months before the estimated adoption date. For purposes of determining the existing and projected need for housing within a region, that law requires the date of the next scheduled revision of the housing element be deemed to be the estimated adoption date of the regional transportation plan update described in the notice provided to the Department of Transportation plus 18 months. This bill would condition the above-described deemed date of the next scheduled revision on that date being no more than 8 years later than the deadline for adoption of the previous 8-year housing element. (4) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Southern California Association of Governments. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 65584.05 of the Government Code proposed by SB 7 to be operative only if this bill and SB 7 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65588 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2023 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2023 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (7) 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.

Existing law, the Teacher Housing Act of 2016, authorizes a school district to establish and implement programs that address the housing needs of teachers and school district employees who face challenges in securing affordable housing, as specified. The act provides that the purpose of the act is to facilitate the acquisition, construction, rehabilitation and preservation of affordable rental housing for teachers and school district employees to allow teachers or school district employees to access and maintain housing stability. The act provides that it specifically creates a state policy supporting housing for teachers and school district employees as described by specified federal law and permits school districts and developers in receipt of local or state funds or tax credits designated for affordable rental housing to restrict occupancy to teachers and school district employees on land owned by school districts, so long as that housing does not violate any other applicable laws. The act defines various terms for these purposes. This bill would authorize the California State University to establish and implement programs that address the housing needs of faculty or California State University employees who face challenges in securing affordable housing, as specified. The bill would provide that the purpose of its provisions are to facilitate the acquisition, construction, rehabilitation and preservation of affordable rental housing for faculty or California State University employees to allow them to access and maintain housing stability. The bill would provide that it specifically creates a state policy supporting housing for faculty or California State University campus employees as described by specified federal law and permits the California State University developers in receipt of local or state funds or tax credits designated for affordable rental housing to restrict occupancy to faculty or California State University employees on land owned by the California State University or a California State University auxiliary organization, as defined, so long as that housing does not violate any other applicable laws. The bill would define various terms for these purposes.

Existing law makes it a crime for a person who, with the intent to place another person in reasonable fear for that other person's safety, or the safety of the other person's immediate family, by means of an electronic communication device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted contact, injury, or harassment by a third party, distributes personal identifying information that would be likely to incite or produce that unlawful action. Existing law makes this a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in a county jail or by a fine of not more than $1,000. This bill would create a private cause of action against a person who doxes, as defined, another person. The bill would entitle a prevailing plaintiff who suffers harm as a result of being doxed to specified damages, and would authorize the court to order equitable relief, as specified, and injunctive relief maintaining the confidentiality of a plaintiff using a pseudonym instead of their true name. The bill would authorize a plaintiff to proceed using a pseudonym and would require the plaintiff to file a confidential information form, as prescribed. The bill would require the court to keep the plaintiff's name and excluded or redacted characteristics confidential, as specified, and, upon request of the plaintiff, limit access to court records filed under these provisions to specified individuals. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before January 1, 2026, to adopt or revise as appropriate rules and forms to implement specified provisions. Existing law requires a court or judge, on granting an injunction, to require an undertaking on the part of the applicant sufficient to cover certain damages the party enjoined may sustain by reason of the injunction, if the court finally decides that the applicant was not entitled to the injunction. Existing law exempts from the undertaking requirement certain persons seeking an injunction, as specified. This bill would additionally exempt from the undertaking requirement an applicant seeking an injunction ordering the defendant to cease doxing activities. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.

Except as provided, the California Constitution requires that all property be taxed in proportion to its full value and assessed at the same percentage of fair market value. The tax imposed pursuant to these provisions is commonly referred to as an ad valorem property tax. Existing property tax law, in accordance with the California Constitution, provides for a "welfare exemption" for property used exclusively for religious, hospital, scientific, or charitable purposes and that is owned or operated by certain types of nonprofit entities, if certain qualifying criteria are met. Under existing property tax law, property that meets these requirements that is used exclusively for rental housing and related facilities is entitled to a partial exemption, equal to that percentage of the value of the property that is equal to the percentage that the number of units serving lower income households represents of the total number of residential units, in any year that any of certain criteria apply. Existing law imposes various penalties and costs for delinquent payment of real property taxes. Existing law, however, requires the cancellation of any delinquent penalty, cost, redemption penalty, interest, or redemption fee upon satisfactory proof, as described, that the penalty, cost, interest, or fee attached due to an error of the tax collector, the auditor, or the assessor or due to their inability to complete valid procedures initiated prior to the delinquency date, as specified. This bill would provide that a property owner is not liable for interest or penalties, and would prohibit the tax collector from taking or continuing any collection action, with respect to ad valorem property taxes levied upon a property if, annually while receiving the benefit, the facilities are in the course of construction, as defined, and the property owner supplies evidence to the tax collector that the property owner has submitted to the county assessor an application for an exemption pursuant to the above-described partial welfare exemption, except as provided, and that the property received a specified reservation of tax credits or award of funds. The bill would require the tax collector to provide the list of eligible properties to the assessor. The bill would require an assessor to provide specified notice to a taxpayer if the assessor deems an application ineligible for exemption. The bill would provide that any bill, notice of deficiency, or other routine communication sent to the taxpayer from the tax collector does not constitute a collection action under the bill's provisions. The bill would make its provisions applicable to property tax installments that are due and payable from December 10, 2025, to April 10, 2031. By imposing additional duties on local tax officials, 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.