Existing law requires a city or county to administratively approve applications to install solar energy systems through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit. Existing law requires every city, county, or city and county, to develop a streamlined permitting process for the installation of small residential rooftop solar energy systems, as that term is defined. Existing law prescribes and limits permit fees that a city or county may charge for a residential and commercial solar energy system. Existing law grants the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations, as defined. Decisions of the PUC adopted the California Solar Initiative, which is administered by electrical corporations and subject to the PUC's supervision. Existing law requires the PUC and the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) to undertake certain steps in implementing the California Solar Initiative. A violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. This bill would require every city and county to implement an online, automated permitting platform that verifies code compliance and instantaneously issues permits for a solar energy system that is no larger than 38.4 kilowatts alternating current nameplate rating and an energy storage system paired with a solar energy system that is no larger than 38.4 kilowatts alternating current nameplate rating, as specified. The bill would require a city or county to amend a certain ordinance to authorize a residential solar energy system and an energy storage system to use the online, automated permitting platform. The bill would prescribe a compliance schedule for satisfying these requirements, which would exempt a county with a population of less than 150,000 and all cities within a county with a population of less than 150,000. The bill would require a city with a population of 50,000 or less that is not otherwise exempt to satisfy these requirements by September 30, 2023, while cities and counties with populations greater than 50,000 that are not otherwise exempt would be required to satisfy the requirements by September 30, 2022. The bill would require a city, county, or a fire department, district, or authority to report to the Energy Commission when it is in compliance with specified requirements, in addition to other information. By increasing the duties of local officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would prohibit the provision of specified funding sources to cities and counties not in compliance with certain provisions relating to solar energy systems and fees charged for their installation or if they are not in compliance with provisions of the bill. The bill would require the Energy Commission, upon provision of sufficient funding, to provide technical assistance and grant funding to cities and counties in order to support the above-described requirements. The bill would require the commission to develop grant guidelines and other requirements, as specified, by May 1, 2022, and make applications available no later than July 1, 2022. Because this requirement would expand the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Energy Commission to set guidelines for cities and counties to report to the commission on the number of permits issued for solar energy systems and an energy storage system paired with a solar energy system and the relevant characteristics of those systems. 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law allows a person who is unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of their liberty to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of their imprisonment or restraint. Existing law allows a writ of habeas corpus to be prosecuted on the basis of false evidence that is substantially material or probative to the issue of guilt or punishment that was introduced at trial. Existing law defines false evidence for these purposes as including the opinions of experts that have been repudiated by the expert or that have been undermined by later scientific research or technological advances. This bill would expand the definition of false evidence to include the opinions of experts that are undermined by scientific research that existed at the time of the expert's testimony and opinions for which a reasonable dispute has emerged within the expert's relevant scientific community as to the validity of the methods or theories upon which the expert based their opinion. (2) Existing law limits the testimony of a witness who is testifying as an expert to matter that is of a type that reasonably may be relied upon by an expert in forming an opinion upon the subject to which the expert's testimony relates. Existing law allows a witness testifying in the form of an opinion to state on direct examination the reasons for their opinion and the matter upon which it is based. This bill would require a court in any criminal proceeding, when considering whether expert testimony is based on matter that is of a type that reasonably may be relied upon by an expert in forming an opinion, to determine whether the expert's opinion and any supporting literature, studies, research, or other bases on which the expert relies in forming their opinion are based on a reliable foundation, properly tested methodology, and sound logic, as specified. The bill would specify that an opinion or any supporting literature, studies, research, or other bases that lack a reliable foundation, properly tested methodology, and sound logic are not matter that may reasonably be relied upon. The bill would specify that if a portion of the expert's testimony extends beyond the underlying support, the court may allow the portions of the testimony that do not extend beyond the underlying support if they are otherwise admissible.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law authorize various credits against the tax imposed by those laws. This bill would allow a credit under the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2022, and before January 1, 2027, to a qualified taxpayer that employs an eligible individual during the taxable year, in an amount between $2,500 and $10,000 per eligible individual, not to exceed $30,000 per taxable year, depending on the amount of hours worked by the eligible individual, and subject to specified conditions and limitations. The bill would require the qualified taxpayer to request a credit reservation from the Franchise Tax Board, as provided, to be eligible for the credit. The bill would limit the total aggregate amount of the credit that may be allowed to all qualified taxpayers under both the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law to $30,000,000, plus the unallocated credit amount, if any, from the preceding calendar year. The bill would define various terms for purposes of the credit, including defining "eligible individual" as a person who is homeless. The bill would require an eligible employer to obtain an eligible employer certification from the Employment Development Department to receive the credit, and would require the Employment Development Department to issue a certification to eligible employers, as specified. The bill would require each continuum of care to issue certifications to eligible individuals that are homeless, as specified. By increasing the duties of local continuum of care, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would also include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. 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 bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Under existing law, there are programs providing assistance for, among other things, emergency housing, multifamily housing, farmworker housing, home ownership for very low and low-income households, and downpayment assistance for first-time homebuyers. Existing law also authorizes the issuance of bonds in specified amounts pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires that proceeds from the sale of these bonds be used to finance various existing housing programs, capital outlay related to infill development, brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development, and housing-related parks. This bill would enact the Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2022, which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $6,500,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. Proceeds from the sale of these bonds would be used to fund affordable rental housing and homeownership programs. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to determine the allocation of those funds to specific programs. This bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 8, 2022, statewide general election in accordance with specified law.
Existing law authorizes the Department of the California Highway Patrol to retain license plate data captured by license plate reader technology, also referred to as an automated license plate recognition (ALPR) system, for not more than 60 days unless the data is being used as evidence or for the investigation of felonies. Existing law authorizes the department to share that data with law enforcement agencies for specified purposes and requires both an ALPR operator and an ALPR end-user, as those terms are defined, to implement a usage and privacy policy regarding that ALPR information, as specified. Existing law requires that the usage and privacy policy implemented by an ALPR operator or an ALPR end-user include the length of time ALPR information will be retained and the process the ALPR operator and ALPR end-user will utilize to determine if and when to destroy retained ALPR information. This bill would include in those usage and privacy policies a requirement that, if the ALPR operator or ALPR end-user is a public agency and not an airport authority, ALPR data that does not match a hot list be destroyed within 24 hours. Existing law requires an ALPR operator and an ALPR end-user to maintain reasonable security procedures and practices. Under existing law, the reasonable security procedures and practices must include operational, administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to protect ALPR information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure. This bill would additionally require those procedures and practices to include an annual audit to review ALPR end-user searches during the previous year and, where the ALPR operator or ALPR end-user is a public agency and not an airport authority, the destruction of all ALPR information that does not match information on a hot list within 24 hours. The bill would also prohibit an ALPR operator or an ALPR end-user that is a public agency and not an airport authority from accessing an ALPR system that retains ALPR information for more than 24 hours that does not match a hot list. Existing law requires an ALPR operator that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to maintain a record of that access and require that ALPR information only be used for the authorized purposes described in the usage and privacy policy. This bill would extend the requirement to keep a record of access to ALPR information to an ALPR end-user. The bill would additionally require an ALPR operator or an ALPR end-user that accesses or provides access to ALPR information to conduct an annual audit to review ALPR end-user searches during the previous year and to confirm that, if the ALPR operator or ALPR end-user is a public agency and not an airport authority, all ALPR information that does not match a hot list is routinely destroyed in 24 hours or less. The bill would require these annual audits be made available to the public in writing, and, if the ALPR operator or ALPR end-user has an internet website, would require the annual audits be posted conspicuously on that internet website. This bill would require the Department of Justice, on or before July 1, 2022, to draft and make available on its internet website a policy template and would permit local law enforcement agencies to use the template as a model for their ALPR policies. The bill would also require the Department of Justice to develop and issue guidance to help local law enforcement agencies identify and evaluate the types of data they are currently storing in their ALPR database systems.
Existing federal law, the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) , requires each state to establish an American Health Benefit Exchange to facilitate the purchase of qualified health benefit plans by qualified individuals and qualified small employers. PPACA defines a "qualified health plan" as a plan that, among other requirements, provides an essential health benefits package. Existing state law creates the California Health Benefit Exchange, also known as Covered California, to facilitate the enrollment of qualified individuals and qualified small employers in qualified health plans as required under PPACA. Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. 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. This bill, the California Guaranteed Health Care for All Act, would create the California Guaranteed Health Care for All program, or CalCare, to provide comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage and a health care cost control system for the benefit of all residents of the state. The bill, among other things, would provide that CalCare cover a wide range of medical benefits and other services and would incorporate the health care benefits and standards of other existing federal and state provisions, including the federal Children's Health Insurance Program, Medi-Cal, ancillary health care or social services covered by regional centers for persons with developmental disabilities, Knox-Keene, and the federal Medicare program. The bill would require the board to seek all necessary waivers, approvals, and agreements to allow various existing federal health care payments to be paid to CalCare, which would then assume responsibility for all benefits and services previously paid for with those funds. This bill would create the CalCare Board to govern CalCare, made up of 9 voting members with demonstrated and acknowledged expertise in health care, and appointed as provided, plus the Secretary of California Health and Human Services or their designee as a nonvoting, ex officio member. The bill would provide the board with all the powers and duties necessary to establish CalCare, including determining when individuals may start enrolling into CalCare, employing necessary staff, negotiating pricing for covered pharmaceuticals and medical supplies, establishing a prescription drug formulary, and negotiating and entering into necessary contracts. The bill would require the board, on or before July 1, 2024, to conduct and deliver a fiscal analysis to determine whether or not CalCare may be implemented and whether revenue is more likely than not to pay for program costs, as specified. The bill would require the board to convene a CalCare Public Advisory Committee with specified members to advise the board on all matters of policy for CalCare. The bill would establish an 11-member Advisory Commission on Long-Term Services and Supports to advise the board on matters of policy related to long-term services and supports. This bill would provide for the participation of health care providers in CalCare, including the requirements of a participation agreement between a health care provider and the board, provide for payment for health care items and services, and specify program participation standards. The bill would prohibit a participating provider from discriminating against a person by, among other things, reducing or denying a person's benefits under CalCare because of a specified characteristic, status, or condition of the person. This bill would prohibit a participating provider from billing or entering into a private contract with an individual eligible for CalCare benefits regarding a covered benefit, but would authorize contracting for a health care item or service that is not a covered benefit if specified criteria are met. The bill would authorize health care providers to collectively negotiate fee-for-service rates of payment for health care items and services using a 3rd-party representative, as provided. The bill would require the board to annually determine an institutional provider's global budget, to be used to cover operating expenses related to covered health care items and services for that fiscal year, and would authorize payments under the global budget. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would develop a revenue plan, taking into consideration anticipated federal revenue available for CalCare. The bill would create the CalCare Trust Fund in the State Treasury, as a continuously appropriated fund, consisting of any federal and state moneys received for the purposes of the act. Because the bill would create a continuously appropriated fund, it would make an appropriation. This bill would prohibit specified provisions of this act from becoming operative until the Secretary of California Health and Human Services gives written notice to the Secretary of the Senate and the Chief Clerk of the Assembly that the CalCare Trust Fund has the revenues to fund the costs of implementing the act, the people of California have approved the necessary revenue mechanisms, and the Legislature has approved implementation of the CalCare by statute. The California Health and Human Services Agency would be required to publish a copy of the notice on its internet website. 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.
Existing law requires the rules and regulations promulgated by the Board of Juvenile Hearings to be promulgated and filed pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act and, to the extent practical, be stated in language that is easily understood by the general public. Existing law requires the board to maintain, publish, and make available to the general public a compendium of its rules and regulations. This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to those provisions.
Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which health care services are provided to qualified low-income persons pursuant to a schedule of benefits, which includes pharmacy benefits, through various health care delivery systems, including fee-for-service and managed care. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law authorizes the department to contract with a vendor for the purposes of surveying drug price information, collecting data from providers, wholesalers, or drug manufacturers, and calculating a proposed actual acquisition cost. Existing law authorizes the department to establish a list of maximum allowable ingredient cost for generically equivalent drugs, and to establish the actual acquisition cost based on 3 specified factors, including the volume weighted actual acquisition cost adjusted by the department to verify that the actual acquisition cost represents the average purchase price paid by retail pharmacies in California, or the proposed actual acquisition cost as calculated by a vendor, as specified. Existing law requires the department to establish a fee schedule for the list of pharmacist services. Existing law specifies the pharmacist services that may be provided to a Medi-Cal beneficiary. This bill would require the department to provide a disease management or similar payment to a pharmacy that the department has contracted with to dispense a specialty drug to Medi-Cal beneficiaries in an amount necessary to ensure beneficiary access, as determined by the department based on the results of the survey completed during the 2020 calendar year.
Existing law prohibits an urban and community water system, defined as a public water system that supplies water to more than 200 service connections, from discontinuing residential water service for nonpayment until a payment by a customer has been delinquent for at least 60 days. Existing law requires an urban and community water system to have a written policy on discontinuation of residential service for nonpayment, including, among other things, specified options for addressing the nonpayment. Existing law requires an urban and community water system to provide notice of that policy to customers, as provided. This bill would apply those provisions, on and after July 1, 2022, to a very small community water system, defined as a public water system that supplies water to 200 or fewer service connections used by year long residents. The bill would require the written policy on discontinuation of residential service for nonpayment to include an arrearage management plan, as specified, and, for those systems that provide water use audits or have the capacity to do so, to include a water use audit offered at no additional charge to low-income households. The bill would require the State Water Resources Control Board to provide technical assistance to very small community water systems, as appropriate, to assist with compliance with these requirements and to establish a bridge loan program to assist very small community water systems that may suffer revenue loss or delayed collection while complying with these requirements. The bill would also require the board to develop a template for a written policy on discontinuation of residential service for nonpayment, on or before September 1, 2022, to aid very small community water systems in complying with the requirement to have a written policy on discontinuation of residential service for nonpayment. Existing law prohibits an urban and community water system from discontinuing residential service for nonpayment if certain conditions are met, including that the customer or a tenant submits certification that discontinuation of residential service will be life-threatening to, or pose a serious threat to the health and safety of, a resident of the premises. This bill would revise the conditions under which urban and community water systems and very small community water systems are prohibited from discontinuing residential service for nonpayment. The bill would prohibit these systems from discontinuing residential service for nonpayment during a state or local emergency when the area of the declared state or local emergency encompasses the customer's residence, unless the entity declaring the emergency finds that the emergency will not impact the customers' ability to pay for residential service. The bill would authorize a customer, or tenant of the customer, to submit in writing, under penalty of perjury, specified information that would prevent the discontinuation of water services. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would prohibit these systems from discontinuing residential water service for nonpayment until a payment by a customer has been delinquent for at least 90, rather than 60, days or the total amount of the delinquency, exclusive of late charges and interest, is at least $250. The bill would also prohibit these systems from discontinuing residential water service for nonpayment to a master-metered multifamily residence with at least 4 units or to a master-metered mobilehome park. Existing law requires an urban and community water system to impose specified fees for reconnection of service for customers with a household income below 200% of the federal poverty line. This bill would instead require an urban and community water system and very small community water system to waive fees for disconnection and reconnection of service for those customers, as specified. The bill would require the Public Utilities Commission, by January 1, 2023, to consider whether to establish a pilot program for an arrearage management plan program to be offered by urban and community water systems regulated by the commission to eligible low-income customers who have been with the water system for at least 6 months and who have an arrearage of payment of their water service bill meeting a specified threshold. The bill would require that if the commission establishes a pilot program for an arrearage management plan, the commission provide an evaluation of the program by no later than 3 years after the commencement of the program and post that evaluation on its internet website. The bill would require the commission to terminate the pilot program by no later than 4 years after the commencement of the program if the evaluation of the program determines it is not in the interest of all ratepayers. The bill would require an urban and community water system not regulated by the commission to, by January 1, 2023, or during its next rate study, whichever comes first, determine whether it may offer an arrearage management plan to aid low-income residential customers with household income below 200% of the federal poverty line with high arrearages for water or wastewater service without using ratepayer funds from customers who are not enrolled in the arrearage management plan, and would authorize the urban and community water system to consider specified criteria in evaluating whether it may offer an arrearage management plan. The bill would also require the consideration of specified actions if an urban and community water system determines that it may not offer an arrearage management plan. Existing law authorizes the Attorney General to enforce the requirements imposed on urban and community water systems in connection with discontinuing residential service for nonpayment by seeking an injunction, as specified. This bill would additionally authorize the board to issue an order to an urban and community water system or very small community water system to enforce these requirements, or to seek an injunction, as specified. Existing law requires an urban and community water system or very small community water system to report annually the number of discontinuations of residential service for inability to pay, as specified, on the water system's internet website, if an internet website exists, and to the State Water Resources Control Board. This bill would require an urban and community water system to report certain information to the board during the reporting year that it completes a specified evaluation. The bill would require, by January 1, 2024, the board to complete a report to the Legislature on arrearage management plans that includes whether and to what extent urban and community water systems have offered arrearage management plans, any identified barriers, any identified alternatives, and all available information regarding reduction in shutoffs and revenue impacts. 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 vests the Department of Transportation with full possession and control of all state highways. Existing law vests the board of supervisors of a county with general supervision, management, and control of county highways. Existing law grants the legislative body of a city certain powers with respect to city streets and roads. This bill would require a person who sells or provides for compensation a trash receptacle or storage container that is longer than 3 feet and taller than 4 feet and that is designed to be placed on a roadway or the curb of a roadway in order to be emptied or picked up to mark the receptacle or container with a reflector on each side. The bill would authorize a civil penalty against a person who violates this prohibition pursuant to an action brought by the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a city attorney. The bill would specify how these civil penalty moneys would be deposited depending on which entity brings the civil penalty action, including requiring the deposit of the moneys collected by the Attorney General into the General Fund for the purpose of offsetting the Attorney General's cost of enforcement of this prohibition.