(1) Existing law requires, if a person is convicted of a specified driving-under-the-influence (DUI) offense and the offense occurred within 10 years of 2, or 3 or more, prior specified DUI offenses that resulted in a conviction, that the person be punished by enhanced penalties, and that the person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle be revoked by the department for a period of 2, 3, 4, or 5 years, as applicable. Existing law authorizes the court to impose specified additional orders on a person when the person is convicted of a driving-under-the-influence (DUI) offense, depending on the circumstances. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2012, authorize the court to order a 10-year revocation of the driver's license of a person who has been convicted of 3 or more specified DUI offenses if the court considers certain factors, including, but not limited to, the period of time that has elapsed since his or her previous DUI convictions. The bill would also authorize a person who had his or her driver's license revoked for 10 years to apply to the Department of Motor Vehicles, 5 years from the date of the last DUI conviction, to have his or her privilege to operate a motor vehicle reinstated subject to certain conditions, including, among other things, the condition that the person was not convicted of any other drug- or alcohol-related offenses, under state law, during the driver's license revocation period. (2) Existing law requires that a person, convicted of driving under the influence, without bodily injury to another, within 10 years of being convicted of a separate violation of one or more specified DUI offenses, be punished by his or her driving privilege being suspended or revoked for a period of 2 or more years. Existing law requires, among other things, the Department of Motor Vehicles to advise a person, who was only under the influence of an alcoholic beverage at the time of the violation, that he or she may apply for a restricted driver's license after completion of 90 days, 6 months, or 12 months, of the suspension or revocation period, or if the person was under the influence of any drug or the combination of any drug and alcohol, or if the person concurrently did any act forbidden by law or neglected any duty imposed by law that proximately caused bodily injury to another person other than the driver, then after completion of 12 months of the revocation period, which may include credit for a specified concurrent suspension, subject to specified conditions. This bill would revise and recast the above provisions to make technical and nonsubstantive, as well as conforming, changes as a result of the changes made by Chapter 193 of the Statutes of 2009 (SB 598) .
Sponsored bills
The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act provides for specified labeling requirements for containers of alcoholic beverages sold within this state. This bill would require any wine bottled on or after January 1, 2014, labeled with an American Viticultural Area established pursuant to federal law that is located entirely within a county of the 19th class, to bear the designation "Sonoma County" on the label in specified type size as determined by the size of the wine container, as prescribed. The bill would authorize the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to suspend or revoke the license of any person who violates those provisions. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act provides that a violation of its provisions is a misdemeanor, unless otherwise specified. This bill, by creating a new crime, imposes 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 measure would recognize March 31, 2010, as the anniversary of the birth of César Chávez, and would call upon all Californians to participate in appropriate observances to remember César Chávez as a symbol of hope and justice to all persons.
This measure would proclaim April 12 through April 18, 2010, as California Holocaust Memorial Week and would urge Californians to observe these days of remembrance for the victims of the Holocaust in an appropriate manner.
This measure would recognize that Californians would benefit from the immense, positive economic impact of hosting the 34th Defense of the America's Cup in San Francisco, California. The measure would petition the BMW ORACLE Racing Team representing the Golden Gate Yacht Club to designate San Francisco, California, to be the host of the 34th Defense of the America's Cup in 2013 or 2014. The measure would urge the state to support San Francisco's bid to host the 34th Defense of America's Cup and to execute the formation of a single face of state government for securing state permits for the America's cup in San Francisco or other state documents.
This measure would urge the President and Congress of the United States to take the action necessary to support research for mitochondrial disease.
This measure would urge the Congress, the President of the United States, and the Secretary of Commerce to enact legislation or adopt policies to have the 2020 Census and other surveys gather data on sexual orientation and gender identity.
This measure would call upon the Congress and the President of the United States to repeal the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act.
(1) Existing law requires an operator of a store, as defined, to establish an at-store recycling program that provides to customers the opportunity to return clean plastic carryout bags to that store. This requirement is repealed on January 1, 2013. Existing law prohibits a city, county, or other local public agency from taking specified regulatory actions with regard to the recycling of plastic carryout bags. This bill would repeal those at-store recycling program requirements on January 1, 2012, and would repeal, on January 1, 2011, the provision preempting local regulatory action. The bill would, as of January 1, 2012, prohibit stores that have a specified amount of sales or retail floor space from providing a single-use carryout bag to a customer. The bill would require these stores, from January 1, 2012, until June 30, 2013, to provide a specified type of reusable bag and after July 1, 2013, to only provide reusable bags that meet certain criteria. The bill would require these stores to make reusable bags available for purchase. The bill would allow a store, on and after January 1, 2013, to provide reusable bags to customers at no cost only when combined with a time limited store promotional program. The bill also would authorize a store, as of January 1, 2011, to provide recycled paper bags, but would require the store to charge the consumer, on and after January 1, 2012, the actual average cost of the recycled paper bag. The bill would require these stores, on and after January 1, 2012, to provide a plastic collection bin for its customers, for the purpose of collecting and recycling single-use plastic bags and reusable bags. The bill would, on and after July 1, 2013, additionally impose these prohibitions and requirements on convenience food stores, foodmarts, and certain other specified stores. The bill would, beginning January 1, 2013, require a reusable grocery bag producer to submit to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery a biennial certification, including a certification fee established by the department, that certifies that each type of reusable grocery bag that is imported, manufactured, sold or distributed in the state and provided to a store for sale or distribution meets specified requirements. The bill would require the department to deposit the certification fees into the Reusable Bag Account, which would be established by the bill in the Integrated Waste Management Fund. The bill would require that moneys in the account be expended by the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement the certification requirements. A violation of these certification requirements would be subject to an administrative civil penalty assessed by the department. The department would be required to deposit these penalties into the Penalty Subaccount, which the bill would create in the Reusable Bag Account, for expenditure by the department, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement the certification requirements. The bill would require the department, by January 1, 2015, to submit a report to the Legislature regarding the implementation of the bill's provisions. The bill would repeal this report requirement on January 1, 2016. This bill would, as of January 1, 2011, preempt local regulations on the use and sales of reusable bags, single-use carryout bags, recycled paper bags, or other specified bags at stores, as defined. The bill would allow a city, county, city and county or the state to impose civil penalties for a violation of the bill's requirements, except for the certification requirements. The bill would require these civil penalties to be paid to the office of the city attorney, city prosecutor, district attorney, or Attorney General, whichever office brought the action, and would allow the penalties collected by the Attorney General to be expended by the Attorney General, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to enforce the bill's provisions. (2) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 creates the Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan Subaccount in the Integrated Waste Management Account and continuously appropriates the funds deposited in the subaccount to the department for making loans for the purposes of the Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan Program. Existing law makes the provisions regarding the loan program, the creation of the subaccount, and expenditures therefrom inoperative on July 1, 2011, and repeals them as of January 1, 2012. This bill would appropriate $2,000,000 from the Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan Subaccount in the Integrated Waste Management Account to the department for the purposes of providing loans and grants for the creation and retention of jobs and economic activity in the manufacture and recycling of plastic bags that use recycled content.
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 (Knox-Keene Act) , provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of insurers by the Department of Insurance, including health insurers. Existing law makes the violation of a final order by the Insurance Commissioner relating to rates imposed by certain insurers, other than health insurers, subject to assessment of a civil penalty and makes the willful violation by those insurers of specified rate provisions a misdemeanor. Under existing law, no change in premium rates or coverage in a health care service plan or a health insurance policy may become effective without prior written notification of the change to the contractholder or policyholder. Existing law prohibits a plan and insurer during the term of a group plan contract or policy from changing the rate of the premium, copayment, coinsurance, or deductible during specified time periods. This bill would require approval by the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance of an increase in the amount of the premium, copayment, coinsurance obligation, deductible, and other charges under health care service plan contracts or health insurance policies, other than Medicare supplement, dental-only, or vision-only contracts or policies. The bill would require a plan or insurer to submit to the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance, respectively, an application for a rate increase that would be effective on or after January 1, 2012, and would require review of the application in accordance with regulations that each department would be required to adopt no later than January 1, 2012. The bill would subject a rate increase that became effective January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2011, inclusive, to review by the appropriate department. The bill would require each department to notify the public of a rate application and would deem the application approved within 60 days of the date of that notice unless the department holds a hearing on the application, as specified. The bill would authorize the initiation of, and intervention in, proceedings relating to rate approvals and the award of advocacy fees and costs in those proceedings in specified circumstances. The bill would require the departments to work together in implementation of these provisions and to take specified actions in order to ensure coordination and consistency in implementation. The bill would authorize each department to assess a charge in connection with its costs associated with a rate application. The bill would direct the deposit of these fees into the respective department's Health Rate Approval Fund, which would be created by the bill, and would make those funds available to each department for those purposes, upon appropriation. The bill would specify that a violation of its provisions is punishable by criminal sanctions under the Knox-Keene Act and under provisions applicable to insurers and, therefore, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.