Existing law authorizes individuals to contribute amounts in excess of their personal income tax liability for the support of specified funds, including the Emergency Food Assistance Program Fund. Existing law also has general administrative provisions applicable to voluntary contributions. Existing law provides for any new or extended voluntary contribution fund, to include the words "voluntary tax contribution" in the name of the fund, require the administering agency to include specified information about the fund on its Internet Web site, continuously appropriate from the fund the contributions made to the administering agency, and set a minimum contribution amount for the continuation of any voluntary tax contribution on the tax return form and include a generally applicable repeal date for a voluntary tax contribution. Existing law requires that the Emergency Food Assistance Program Fund equal or exceed a minimum contribution amount, which initially was $250,000 and which was required to be and has been adjusted for inflation. This bill would change the name of the Emergency Food Assistance Program Fund to the Emergency Food for Families Voluntary Tax Contribution Fund, would provide that the required calendar year minimum contribution amount for the fund to continue appearing on the return is an unadjusted $250,000, and would extend the provisions that apply to that voluntary contribution fund to January 1, 2026. The bill would make a continuous appropriation from the Emergency Food for Families Voluntary Tax Contribution Fund to the Franchise Tax Board and the Controller for reimbursement of all costs incurred in the administration of these provisions and to the State Department of Social Services for allocation to the Emergency Food Assistance Program. The bill would also make additional changes to conform to the provisions described above.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, with certain exceptions, requires every public and private school, as provided, to have restroom facilities that are open as prescribed during school hours, and at all times to keep every restroom maintained and cleaned regularly, fully operational, and stocked with soap and paper supplies. This bill would require a public school maintaining any combination of classes from grade 6 to grade 12, inclusive, that meets a 40% pupil poverty threshold specified in federal law to stock 50% of the school's restrooms with feminine hygiene products, as defined. The bill would prohibit a public school from charging for any menstrual products, including feminine hygiene products, provided to pupils. By imposing additional duties on public schools, 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.
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 law generally requires a recipient of CalWORKs benefits to participate in welfare-to-work activities as a condition of eligibility for aid. Existing law requires that necessary supportive services be available to participants in welfare-to-work activities, including child care, personal counseling, transportation costs, and ancillary expenses. This bill would, on and after April 1, 2018, require the above-described supportive services to additionally include the costs of diapers. The bill would make a participant who is participating in a welfare-to-work plan eligible for $30 per month to assist with diaper costs for each child who is under 36 months of age. The bill would require the State Department of Social Services to implement this provision through all-county letters until regulations are adopted by January 1, 2020. By increasing the duties of counties administering the CalWORKs program, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would instead provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of implementing 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, 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.
Existing law establishes the Sexual Assault Victims' DNA Bill of Rights, which, among other things, encourages a law enforcement agency assigned to investigate specified sexual assault offenses to perform DNA testing of rape kit evidence or other crime scene evidence in a timely manner to ensure the longest possible statute of limitations. Existing law also requires a law enforcement agency to inform victims of certain unsolved sexual assault offenses if the law enforcement agency elects not to analyze DNA evidence within certain time limits. This bill would require law enforcement agencies to report information regarding rape kit evidence, within 120 days of the collection of the kit, to the Department of Justice through a database established by the department. The bill would require that information to include, among other things, whether biological evidence samples were submitted to a DNA laboratory for analysis and if a probative DNA profile was generated. The bill would additionally require a public DNA laboratory, or a law enforcement agency contracting with a private laboratory, to provide a reason for not testing a sample every 120 days the sample is untested, except as specified. The bill would only impose these requirements for a kit collected on or after January 1, 2018. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would require that money received by the Office of Emergency Services from the federal Office on Violence Against Women be used before appropriating money from the General Fund for purposes of reimbursing any costs determined by the Commission on State Mandates to be mandated by the state to a local law enforcement agency by the bill. This bill would require the department to file a report to the Legislature on an annual basis summarizing the information in its database. The bill would prohibit law enforcement agencies or laboratories from being compelled to provide any contents of the database in a civil or criminal case, except as required by a law enforcement agency's duty to produce exculpatory evidence to a defendant in a criminal case. 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. 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 these statutory provisions.
Existing law, the Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act, or California Family Rights Act (CFRA) , makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer, as defined, to refuse to grant a request by an eligible employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period (1) for reason of a child born to, adopted by, or placed for foster care with, the employee, (2) to care for the employee's parent or spouse who has a serious health condition, as defined, or (3) because the employee is suffering from a serious health condition rendering him or her unable to perform the functions of the job. Existing law prohibits an employer from refusing to allow a female employee disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition to take a leave for a reasonable time of up to 4 months before returning to work. Existing law also prohibits an employer from refusing to maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for an employee who takes that leave, as specified. This bill would prohibit an employer, as defined, from refusing to allow an employee with more than 12 months of service with the employer, who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, and who works at a worksite in which the employer employs at least 20 employees within 75 miles, to take up to 12 weeks of parental leave to bond with a new child within one year of the child's birth, adoption, or foster care placement. The bill would also prohibit an employer from refusing to maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for an employee who takes this leave. The bill would allow the employer to recover coverage costs under specific circumstances. The bill would provide that it would not apply to an employee who is subject to both specified state law regarding family care and medical leave, and the federal Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. Under the bill, if the employer employs both parents and they are entitled to leave pursuant to this bill for the same birth, adoption, or foster care placement, the parents' mandated parental leave would be capped at the amount granted to an employee by the bill. The bill would authorize the employer to grant simultaneous leave to these parents. This bill would also prohibit an employer from refusing to hire, or from discharging, fining, suspending, expelling, or discriminating against, an individual for exercising the right to parental leave provided by this bill or giving information or testimony as to his or her own parental leave, or another person's parental leave, in an inquiry or proceeding related to rights guaranteed under this bill. The bill would additionally prohibit an employer from interfering with, restraining, or denying the exercise of, or the attempt to exercise, any right provided under this bill. The bill would require the Fair Employment and Housing Council, to the extent that state regulations interpreting CFRA are within the scope of, and not inconsistent with the bill or with other state law, to incorporate those regulations by reference to govern leave under the bill. Under existing law, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing is authorized to provide mediation services to parties involved in actions under its jurisdiction. This bill, until January 1, 2020, would require the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, upon receiving funding from the Legislature, to create a parental leave mediation pilot program, as specified. Under the pilot program, within 60 days of receipt of a right-to-sue notice, an employer may request all parties to participate in the department's Mediation Division Program. If the employer makes such a request, the bill would prohibit an employee from pursuing any civil action under these provisions until the mediation is complete, as defined, which would include an employee's election not to participate in mediation. The bill would provide that the employee's statute of limitations would be tolled during the course of the mediation, as specified.
Existing law requires the Board of Parole Hearings to conduct a youth offender parole hearing for offenders sentenced to state prison who committed specified crimes when they were under 23 years of age. Existing law, as added by initiative statute, imposes a term of confinement in the state prison for life without the possibility of parole or, at the discretion of the court, 25 years to life, on a defendant who was 16 years of age or older and under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime for which he or she was found guilty of murder in the first degree, if specified special circumstances have been found true. Existing case law prohibits a juvenile convicted of a homicide offense from being sentenced to life in prison without parole absent consideration of the juvenile's special circumstances in light of the principles and purposes of juvenile sentencing. This bill would make a person who was convicted of a controlling offense that was committed before the person had attained 18 years of age and for which a life sentence without the possibility of parole has been imposed eligible for release on parole by the board during his or her 25th year of incarceration at a youth offender parole hearing. The bill would require the board to complete, by July 1, 2020, all hearings for individuals who are or will be entitled to have their parole suitability considered at a youth offender parole hearing by these provisions before July 1, 2020. The bill would make other technical, nonsubstantive changes. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 3051 and 4801 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1308 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1308 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law imposes on a person convicted of a violation of, or of conspiracy to violate, specified crimes relating to controlled substances a sentence enhancement to include a full, separate, and consecutive 3-year term for each prior conviction of, or for each prior conviction of conspiracy to violate, specified controlled substances crimes, including possession for sale and purchase for sale of opiates, opium derivatives, and hallucinogenic substances. This bill would instead limit the above sentence enhancement to only be based on each prior conviction of, or on each prior conviction of conspiracy to violate, the crime of using a minor in the commission of offenses involving specified controlled substances.
(1) Existing law provides that the board of supervisors of any county may authorize the correctional administrator to offer a program under which inmates committed to a county jail or other county correctional facility or granted probation, or inmates participating in a work furlough program, may voluntarily participate or involuntarily be placed in a home detention program during their sentence in lieu of confinement in a county jail or other county correctional facility or program. Existing law authorizes the board of supervisors to prescribe a program administrative fee and an application fee for this program. This bill would make those fees payable only by adult participants of that home detention program who are over 21 years of age and under the jurisdiction of the criminal court. (2) Existing law provides that upon conviction of certain offenses involving controlled substances, or upon a finding that a minor is subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court by reason of committing one of those certain offenses, the court, when recommended by the probation officer, shall require, as a condition of probation, that the defendant or the minor not use or be under the influence of any controlled substance and submit to drug and substance abuse testing as directed by the probation officer, unless the court makes a finding that this condition would not serve the interests of justice. Existing law requires the court to order the defendant or the minor to pay a reasonable fee, not to exceed the actual cost of the testing, if the defendant or the minor is required to submit to testing and has the financial ability to pay all or part of those costs. This bill would instead require the court to order a defendant to pay that reasonable fee only if the defendant is an adult who is over 21 years of age and under the jurisdiction of the criminal court. The bill would also delete the provision requiring the court to charge the minor that reasonable fee. (3) Existing law requires specified orders providing for the care and custody of a ward, dependent child, or other minor person, as specified, to direct that the whole expense of support and maintenance of the minor, up to the amount of $20 per month, be paid from the county treasury. Existing law authorizes the board of supervisors of each county to establish a maximum amount that the court may order the county to pay for that support and maintenance and authorizes the court to direct that an amount up to that maximum amount be paid. This bill, for purposes of a ward, a minor person concerning whom a petition has been filed to declare the person a ward of the juvenile court, or a minor who is the subject of a certain program of supervision undertaken by the probation department and who is temporarily placed out of his or her home, as specified, would delete the $20 maximum on support and maintenance payments and delete the authorization of the county board of supervisors to establish a maximum amount that the court may order the county to pay. (4) Existing law generally imposes liability on a parent, spouse, or other person liable for the support of a ward, dependent child, or other minor person, as applicable, for certain costs, including the reasonable costs of transporting the minor to a juvenile facility and for the costs of the minor's food, shelter, and care at the juvenile facility when the minor has been held in temporary custody, as specified, and certain other circumstances are applicable; the reasonable costs of supporting the minor when he or she is placed, detained in, or committed to, any institution or other place pursuant to specified provisions of law or pursuant to an order of the juvenile court; the cost of an alcohol or drug education program as designated by the court; the cost, to the county or the court, of the legal services rendered to the minor by an attorney pursuant to an order of the juvenile court; the cost of probation supervision, home supervision, or electronic surveillance of the minor, pursuant to the order of the juvenile court; the cost of a service program administered by an agency upon delivery or referral of the minor by an officer; the cost of specified services rendered to the minor in lieu of a petition being filed to adjudge the minor a ward of the juvenile court; and other related costs. Existing law authorizes the probation department and the child welfare services department in a county to create a jointly written protocol, as specified, to allow the 2 departments to jointly assess and produce a recommendation that the child be designated as a dual status child, allowing the child to be simultaneously a dependent child and a ward of the court. This bill, for purposes of a minor who is adjudged a ward of the juvenile court, who is placed on probation without being adjudged a ward, who is the subject of a petition that has been filed to adjudge the minor a ward, or who is the subject of a certain program of supervision undertaken by the probation department, as applicable, would repeal the above-described provisions imposing liability for the specified costs and would make other conforming changes. The bill would specify that those provisions apply to a minor who is designated as a dual status child, for purposes of the dependency jurisdiction only and not for purposes of the delinquency jurisdiction. (5) Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for a minor who, while under the supervision of a probation officer, removes his or her electronic monitor without authority and who, for more than 48 hours, violates the terms and conditions of his or her probation relating to the proper use of the electronic monitor. Existing law provides, if an electronic monitor is damaged or discarded while in the possession of the minor, that restitution for the cost of replacing the unit may be ordered as part of the punishment. Existing law requires that this liability be limited by the financial ability of the person or persons ordered to pay the restitution and requires that the person or persons, upon request, be entitled to an evaluation and determination of ability to pay under specified provisions. This bill would remove the requirement that a request be made in order for the person or persons to be entitled to the evaluation and determination described above. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 903.45 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by AB 976 to be operative only if this bill and AB 976 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy transactions and use taxes for general purposes in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in the county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, by a resolution approved by 23 of the board and with the approval of specified entities, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 0.125%, with net revenues from the tax to be used by the board for operating and capital purposes of the Caltrain rail service, subject to 23 voter approval of a regional measure submitted by the board to voters of the Counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara. The bill would authorize the board to exceed the 2% limit described above to impose the retail transactions and use tax. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara.
Existing law, the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act, requires that every beverage container sold or offered for sale in this state have a minimum refund value. A beverage distributor is required to pay a redemption payment to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery for every beverage container sold or offered for sale in the state to a dealer, and the department is required to deposit those amounts in the California Beverage Container Recycling Fund. The money in the fund is continuously appropriated to the department to, among other things, pay handling fees to certified recycling centers. The act requires processors to pay refund values, administrative costs, and processing payments to certified recycling centers, dropoff or collection programs, and curbside programs. The act requires the department to annually designate convenience zones, as defined, statewide and requires at least one certified recycling center or location within every convenience zone that accepts all types of empty beverage containers and pays the refund value, if any, at one location, and that is open for business 30 hours per week. This bill would, until January 1, 2020, authorize up to 5 limited-term recycling pilot projects, subject to department approval, that are designed to improve redemption opportunities in unserved convenience zones. The bill would subject the pilot projects to certain requirements, including, among others, that the pilot project is served by a pilot project recycler meeting certain requirements. The bill would require dealers within the jurisdiction of a pilot project to post certain information relating to pilot project locations, as specified, and a department-established toll-free number for information relating to beverage container recycling opportunities. The bill would authorize the department to issue a probationary certificate of operation to a pilot project recycler, to be valid for no more than 3 years, and would make that pilot project recycler eligible to apply for handling fees from the department and to receive refund values, administrative costs, and processing payments from processors. By authorizing the use of moneys in a continuously appropriated fund for a new purpose, this bill would make an appropriation. The bill would require dealers in a convenience zone served by a pilot project to comply with general act requirements if a pilot project ceases to operate or if the pilot project's certification is revoked. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.