Existing law, after a tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied a residential real property for 12 months, prohibits the owner of the residential real property from terminating the tenancy without just cause and requires that just cause to be stated in the written notice to terminate tenancy. Existing law distinguishes between at-fault just cause and no-fault just cause and defines no-fault just cause to mean intent to occupy the residential real property by the owner or the owner's spouse, domestic partner, children, grandchildren, parents, or grandparents, withdrawal of the residential real property from the rental market, the owner complying with specified government orders that necessitate vacating the real property, and intent to demolish or to substantially remodel the residential real property. This bill would, with respect to the no-fault just cause related to an eviction based on an intent to occupy the residential real property, require, among other things, that the owner, as defined, or the owner's spouse, domestic partner, children, grandchildren, parents, or grandparents occupy the residential real property for a minimum of 12 continuous months as the person's primary residence, as provided. The bill would also, with respect to the no-fault just cause related to withdrawal of the residential real property from the rental market, require the rental units at the rental property be withdrawn from the rental market, as prescribed. The bill would require an owner who displaces a tenant to substantially remodel or demolish a unit to provide the tenant with written notice providing the tenant with specified information, including a description of the substantial remodel to be completed and the expected duration of the repairs, or the expected date by which the property will be demolished, and a copy of permits required to undertake the substantial remodel or demolition, as specified. This bill would also prescribe new enforcement mechanisms with respect to the provisions described above, including by making an owner who attempts to recover possession of a rental unit in material violation of those provisions liable to the tenant in a civil action for damages of up to 3 times the actual damages, in addition to punitive damages. The bill would authorize the Attorney General and the city attorney or county counsel, within whose jurisdiction the rental unit is located, to bring actions for injunctive relief against the owner, as specified. Existing law, until January 1, 2030, prohibits an owner of residential real property from, over the course of any 12-month period, increasing the gross rental rate for a dwelling or a unit more than 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, or 10%, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for that dwelling or unit at any time during the 12 months before the effective date of the increase, subject to specified conditions. This bill would make an owner who demands, accepts, receives, or retains any payment of rent in excess of the maximum rent increase allowed, as prescribed, liable in a civil action to the tenant from whom those payments are demanded, accepted, received, or retained for certain relief, including, upon a showing that the owner has acted willfully or with oppression, fraud, or malice, damages up to 3 times the amount by which any payment demanded, accepted, received, or retained exceeds the maximum allowable rent. This bill would authorize the Attorney General and the city attorney or county counsel, within whose jurisdiction the residential property is located, to enforce the bill's provisions and bring an action for injunctive relief, as specified. This bill would also make a technical, nonsubstantive change to those provisions. The bill would provide that its provisions become effective on April 1, 2024.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various categories of medical professionals by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs, including, among others, the Medical Board of California and the Dental Board of California. Existing law makes specified actions by licensed health care providers unprofessional conduct and, in certain cases, a criminal offense. This bill would prohibit a healing arts board, as defined, from denying an application for a license or imposing discipline upon a licensee or health care practitioner on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or disciplinary action in another state if that judgment, conviction, or disciplinary action is based solely on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive sensitive services, as defined, that would be lawful if provided in this state, regardless of the patient's location. The bill would further provide that the performance, recommendation, or provision of a legally protected health care activity by a licensee or health care practitioner acting within their scope of practice for a patient who resides in a state in which the performance, recommendation, or provision of that legally protected health care activity is illegal, does not, by itself, constitute professional misconduct, upon which discipline or other penalty may be taken. In this connection, the bill would define a "legally protected health care activity" to mean specified acts, including, among others, the exercise and enjoyment, or attempted exercise and enjoyment, by a person of rights related to reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services secured by the Constitution or laws of this state or the provision of by a health care service plan contract or a policy, or a certificate of health insurance, that provides for those services. (2) Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, generally prohibits a health care provider, health care service plan, contractor, or corporation from sharing, selling, using for marketing, or otherwise using medical information for a purpose not necessary to provide health care services to the patient. This bill would prohibit a person or business from collecting, using, disclosing, or retaining the personal information of a person who is physically located at, or within a precise geolocation of, a family planning center, as defined, except as necessary to perform the services or provide the goods requested. The bill would prohibit the sale or sharing of this information. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person or entity to institute and prosecute a civil action for a violation of these provisions and specify damages and costs authorized to be recovered. The bill would specify these provisions do not apply to a provider of health care, a health care service plan, or a contractor, as defined. (3) Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, declares as contrary to the public policy of this state a law of another state that authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person or entity that engages in certain activities relating to obtaining or performing an abortion. Existing law prohibits the state from applying an out-of-state law described above to a case or controversy in state court or enforcing or satisfying a civil judgment under the out-of-state law. This bill would state that California law governs in any action against a person who provides or receives by any means, including telehealth, reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services, as specified, if the care was legal in the state in which it was provided at the time of the challenged conduct. The bill would state that interference with the right to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirming mental health care services, as those terms are defined, is against the public policy of California. The bill would declare as a violation of public policy a public act or record of a foreign jurisdiction that, among other things, authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person, provider, or other entity in California for, among other acts, seeking or providing reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirmative mental health care services. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that nothing in the bill be interpreted to undermine or decrease any existing protections under California law. The bill would authorize a person to institute a civil action against a person who engages in abusive litigation, as defined, that infringes on or interferes with a legally protected health care activity, among other things. The bill would specify damages and costs authorized to be recovered and would specify circumstances under which a court may exercise jurisdiction over a person in such a civil action. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person, provider, or other entity, as defined, to move to modify or quash a subpoena issued in connection with abusive litigation. The bill would specify the laws of California govern in a case or controversy heard in California related to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirming mental health care services, except as required by federal law. (4) Existing law permits a judgment creditor to apply for the entry of a judgment based on a sister state judgment by filing an application with a superior court and requires the court clerk to enter a judgment based on the application. Existing law also requires courts to grant a stay enforcement of such a judgment under specified circumstances. This bill would additionally require a court to grant a stay of enforcement of a sister state judgment if a money judgment or lien on real property was obtained for the exercise of a right guaranteed by the United States Constitution, a right guaranteed by the California Constitution, or against a person or entity for aiding and abetting the exercise of those rights, as specified. (5) Existing law prohibits an abortion from being performed upon an unemancipated minor unless she first has given her written consent to the abortion and also has obtained the written consent of one of her parents or legal guardian. Existing law provides specified judicial procedures to be followed if one or both of the unemancipated pregnant minor's or her guardian refuse to consent or if the minor elects not to seek their consent. This bill would repeal these provisions. (6) Existing law defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Existing law creates an exemption for a person who commits an act that results in the death of a fetus under specific circumstances, including if the act is solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the person pregnant with the fetus. This bill would expand that exemption to include a person pregnant with a fetus who committed the act that resulted in the death of the fetus. (7) Existing law prohibits a state or local law enforcement agency or officer from knowingly arresting or knowingly participating in the arrest of any person for performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of an abortion or for obtaining an abortion, if the abortion is lawful in this state. Existing law prohibits a state or local public agency from cooperating with or providing information to an individual or agency from another state or a federal law enforcement agency, as specified, regarding a lawful abortion. This bill would additionally prohibit a state or local government employee or a person acting on behalf of the local or state government, among others, from providing information or expending resources in furtherance of an investigation that seeks to impose civil or criminal liability or professional sanctions on an individual for a legally protected health care activity that occurred in this state or that would be legal if it occurred in this state. The bill would require any out-of-state subpoena, warrant, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, or other legal process to include an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury that the discovery request is not in connection with an out-of-state proceeding relating to a legally protected health care activity, except as specified. By requiring an individual seeking to discovery under these provisions to declare certain conditions are present under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a state-mandated local program. (8) Existing law authorizes a magistrate to issue a warrant, upon application by a bail bondsman, as described, for an individual fleeing bail in another state and found in this state upon a finding of probable cause for believing that the person is a fugitive. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to take a person who is a fugitive admitted to bail in another state into custody, except pursuant to a magistrate's order. This bill would prohibit a magistrate from issuing a warrant for the arrest of an individual whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of the laws of another state that authorize a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, an abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the recipient's location. The bill would make a bail bondsman who takes such an individual into custody without a warrant guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of $5,000 and ineligible for and subject to forfeiture of specified licenses. The bill would create a civil cause of action for an individual taken into custody in violation of this provision. By creating a new crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (9) Existing law, the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act, prohibits a person, other than a certified law enforcement officer, from apprehending, detaining, or arresting a bail fugitive unless the person is a licensed bail fugitive recovery agent, or both a bail licensee and private investigator who are also bail fugitive recovery agents. Existing law makes a violation of the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act a misdemeanor. This bill would prohibit a person authorized under the act from apprehending, detaining, or arresting a bail fugitive who has been admitted to bail in another state and whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of a law of another state that authorizes a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care, if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the recipient's location. The bill would make a violation of this provision an infraction punishable by a fine of $5,000 and make the authorized individual ineligible for and subject to forfeiture of specified licenses. The bill would create a civil cause of action for an individual taken into custody in violation of this provision. By expanding the application of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (10) Existing law establishes a process by which a material witness in this state may be ordered to attend and testify in a pending prosecution or grand jury in another state. This bill would prohibit a judge from ordering a witness to appear pursuant to these provisions if the criminal prosecution is based on the laws of another state that authorizes a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, an abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state. (11) Existing law provides for the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families and individuals. Existing federal law establishes the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , known in California as CalFresh, under which supplemental nutrition assistance benefits allocated to the state by the federal government are distributed to eligible individuals by each county. Existing federal regulations disqualify a fleeing felon, as defined, from receiving benefits under the CalFresh program. This bill would require a determination that a person is fleeing to avoid prosecution for purposes of eligibility in the CalWORKs program if a federal, state, or local law enforcement officer in their official capacity presents an outstanding felony arrest warrant containing specified National Crime Information Center Uniform Offense Classification Codes. (12) Existing law refers to "unborn children" and "unborn persons" in various contexts, including, among others, defining low-risk pregnancy conditions for determining the scope of authorization of a certificate to practice nurse-midwifery, defining active labor for health facility licensing provisions, and defining spouse for California State Teachers' Retirement System benefits. This bill would replace "unborn child" and "unborn person" with "fetus" in those provisions. (13) Existing law also refers to "unborn persons" in various contexts, including naming unknown defendants in real property actions, allowing a court to appoint a guardian ad litem to advocate for inadequately represented interests in probate proceedings, allowing a guardian ad litem to give consent on behalf of a beneficiary who lacks legal capacity, and providing an exception for requiring a personal representative to file an account of the distributions of a decedent's estate. This bill would replace "unborn person" with "unborn beneficiary" in those provisions. (14) 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. (15) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2746.5 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by SB 667 to be operative only if this bill and SB 667 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law defines the term "serious felony" for various purposes, including, among others, enhancing the punishment for felonies pursuant to existing sentencing provisions commonly known as the Three Strikes Law. This bill would include human trafficking of a minor within the definition of a serious felony for all purposes, including for purposes of the Three Strikes Law, except as specified. By expanding the scope of an enhancement, 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.
The measure would apply to the United States Congress to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the Constitution of the United States for the purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment relating to firearms, as specified.
(1) The California Constitution prohibits the ad valorem tax rate on real property from exceeding 1% of the full cash value of the property, subject to certain exceptions. This measure would create an additional exception to the 1% limit that would authorize a city, county, city and county, or special district to levy an ad valorem tax to service bonded indebtedness incurred to fund the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, including downpayment assistance, or permanent supportive housing, or the acquisition or lease of real property for those purposes, if the proposition proposing that tax is approved by 55% of the voters of the city, county, city and county, or special district, as applicable, and the proposition includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would prohibit a city, county, city and county, or special district from placing a proposition on the ballot pursuant to these provisions if the voters have previously approved a proposition pursuant to these provisions or the below special tax provisions until all funds from the previous proposition are committed to programs and projects listed in the specific local program or ordinance, as described. The measure, subject to certain vote thresholds, would authorize the Legislature to enact laws establishing additional accountability measures and laws for the downpayment assistance programs authorized by the measure, as specified. The measure would specify that these provisions apply to any city, county, city and county, or special district measure imposing an ad valorem tax to pay the interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (2) The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax by a local government upon the approval of 23 of the voters of the local government voting on that tax. This measure would authorize a local government to impose, extend, or increase a sales and use tax or transactions and use tax imposed in accordance with specified law or a parcel tax for the purposes of funding the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, including downpayment assistance, or permanent supportive housing, or the acquisition or lease of real property for those purposes, if the proposition proposing that tax is approved by a majority vote of the membership of the governing board of the local government and by 55% of its voters voting on the proposition and the proposition includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would prohibit a local government from placing a proposition on the ballot pursuant to these provisions if the voters have previously approved a proposition pursuant to these provisions or the above ad valorem tax provisions until all funds from the previous proposition are committed to programs and projects listed in the specific local program or ordinance, as described. The measure, subject to certain vote thresholds, would authorize the Legislature to enact laws establishing additional accountability measures and laws for the downpayment assistance programs authorized by the measure, as specified. This measure would also make conforming changes to related provisions. The measure would specify that these provisions apply to any local measure imposing, extending, or increasing a sales and use tax, transactions and use tax, or parcel tax for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (3) The California Constitution prohibits specified local government agencies from incurring any indebtedness exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided in that year, without the assent of 23 of the voters and subject to other conditions. In the case of a school district, community college district, or county office of education, the California Constitution permits a proposition for the incurrence of indebtedness in the form of general obligation bonds for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of school facilities, or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities, to be adopted upon the approval of 55% of the voters of the district or county, as appropriate, voting on the proposition at an election. This measure would expressly prohibit a special district, other than a board of education or school district, from incurring any indebtedness or liability exceeding any applicable statutory limit, as prescribed by the statutes governing the special district. The measure would also similarly require the approval of 55% of the voters of the city, county, city and county, or special district, as applicable, to incur bonded indebtedness, exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided in that year, that is in the form of general obligation bonds issued to fund the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, or permanent supportive housing projects, if the proposition proposing that bond includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would specify that this 55% threshold applies to any proposition for the incurrence of indebtedness by a city, county, city and county, or special district for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (4) This measure would deem another measure on the same statewide election ballot relating to state or local requirements for the imposition, adoption, creation, or establishment of taxes, charges, and other revenue measures in conflict with it and would make the other measure null and void if this measure receives more affirmative votes.
Existing law authorizes a peace officer to make an arrest pursuant to a warrant or without a warrant if, among other circumstances, the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed a public offense in the officer's presence. Under existing law, it is unlawful to disobey the lawful order, signal, or direction of a uniformed peace officer performing any duties pursuant to the Vehicle Code or to refuse to submit to any lawful vehicular inspection authorized by the Vehicle Code. Existing case law deems a temporary detention of a person during an automobile stop by the police, even if only for a brief period and for a limited purpose, a seizure, under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and as such, requires the actions to be reasonable. Under existing case law, the decision to stop an automobile is reasonable if the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. Existing case law holds that constitutional reasonableness of traffic stops does not depend on the actual motivations of the individual officers involved and that ulterior motives do not invalidate police conduct that is justifiable on the basis of probable cause to believe that a violation of law has occurred. This bill would prohibit a peace officer from stopping or detaining the operator of a motor vehicle or bicycle for a low-level infraction, as defined, unless a separate, independent basis for a stop exists or more than one low-level infraction is observed. The bill would state that a violation of these provisions is not grounds for a defendant to move for return of property or to suppress evidence. The bill would authorize a peace officer who does not have grounds to stop a vehicle or bicycle, but can determine the identity of the owner, to send a citation or warning letter to the owner. The bill would authorize local authorities to enforce a nonmoving or equipment violation of the Vehicle Code through government employees who are not peace officers. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 21100 of the Vehicle Code proposed by AB 436 and AB 825 to be operative only if this bill and AB 436, this bill and AB 825, or this bill, AB 436, and AB 825 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
This measure would commemorate the 70th anniversary of the alliance between the United States and the Republic of Korea.
Existing law establishes the state prisons under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Existing law places county jails under the jurisdiction of the sheriff for the confinement of persons sentenced to imprisonment for the conviction of a crime. This bill would require every jail, prison, public or privately operated detention facility, and a facility in which individuals are subject to confinement or involuntary detention to develop and follow written procedures governing the management of segregated confinement, as specified, and to make those written procedures publicly available. The bill would require those facilities to document the use of segregated confinement by, among other things, providing written orders of that confinement to the individual confined, as specified. The bill would prohibit those facilities from involuntarily placing an individual in segregated confinement if the individual belongs to a designated population, including, among others, that the individual has a mental or physical disability or that the individual is under 26 years of age or over 59 years of age. The bill would require the facility to periodically check on the individual and have a medical or mental health professional periodically assess the individual. This bill would require a facility to offer out-of-cell programming to individuals in segregated confinement for at least 4 hours per day, not including time spent on an unpaid work assignment or in paid employment. The bill would require a facility to maximize the amount of time that an incarcerated person held in segregated confinement spends outside of their cell by providing outdoor and indoor recreation, education, clinically appropriate treatment therapies, and skill-building activities, as specified, and would require facilities to develop and provide appropriate programming to individuals that pose a significant safety risk to themselves or others, as specified. The bill would also authorize a facility to use segregated confinement to help treat and protect against the spread of communicable disease, under certain circumstances. This bill would prohibit a facility from holding an individual in segregated confinement for more than 15 consecutive days and no more than 45 days in a 180-day period, as specified. This bill would also prohibit a facility from imposing limitations on services, treatment, or basic needs; conducting out-of-cell programming opportunities in a smaller cage or therapy module; placing an individual in segregated confinement on the basis of confidential information, as specified; using specified restraints when an individual is in segregated confinement; and using segregated confinement as a means of protecting an individual. This bill would require a facility administrator or chief physician to conduct a secondary review of a person in segregated confinement's dispute regarding qualification in the designated populations category. This bill would require facilities to create and publish monthly, semiannual, and annual reports, as specified. The bill would require the Office of the Inspector General and the Board of State and Community Corrections to assess each facility's compliance with the act, as specified. This bill would require local and state authorities to promulgate regulations or directives to implement the act, where applicable. The bill would declare these provisions to be severable. By imposing additional duties on county jails, this bill would create 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.
This measure would proclaim the month of September 2023 as Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month.
This measure would proclaim the month of October 2023 as California Firefighter Appreciation Month and October 14, 2023, as California Firefighters Memorial Day.