Sen. Scott Wiener

Existing law requires an act or omission that is punishable in different ways by different laws to be punished under the law that provides for the longest possible term of imprisonment. This bill, instead, would authorize an act or omission that is punishable in different ways by different laws to be punished under either of those provisions.

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 and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires individual and group health care service plan contracts and health insurance policies to provide coverage for all generally medically accepted cancer screening tests and requires those contracts and policies to also provide coverage for the treatment of breast cancer. Existing law requires an individual or small group health care service plan contract or health insurance policy to, at a minimum, include coverage for essential health benefits, which include preventive services, pursuant to the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This bill would require a health care service plan contract or a health insurance policy, except as specified, that is issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2022, to provide coverage for a colorectal cancer screening test, and would require the required colonoscopy for a positive result on a test or procedure to be provided without cost sharing, unless the underlying test or procedure was a colonoscopy. The bill would provide that it does not preclude a health care service plan or health insurer from imposing cost-sharing requirements for items or services that are delivered by an out-of-network provider. Because a willful violation of the bill's requirements relative to health care service plans would be a crime, 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.

(1) Under existing law, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act, if a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes or attempts to interfere, by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, is authorized to bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. Existing law also authorizes an action brought by the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, to seek a civil penalty of $25,000. Existing law also allows an individual whose exercise or enjoyment of rights has been interfered with to prosecute a civil action for damages on their own behalf. The bill would eliminate certain immunity provisions for peace officers and custodial officers, or public entities employing peace officers or custodial officers sued under the act. (2) Existing laws defines persons who are peace officers and the entities authorized to appoint them. Existing law requires certain minimum training requirements for peace officers including the completion of a basic training course, as specified. Existing law prescribes certain minimum standards for a person to be appointed as a peace officer, including moral character and physical and mental condition, and certain disqualifying factors for a person to be employed as a peace officer, including a felony conviction. This bill would prohibit a person who has been convicted of a felony, as specified, from regaining eligibility for peace officer employment based upon any later order of the court setting aside, vacating, withdrawing, expunging or otherwise dismissing or reversing the conviction, unless the court finds the person to be factually innocent of the crime for which they were convicted at the time of entry of the order. The bill would disqualify a person from being employed as a peace officer if that person has been convicted of, or has been adjudicated in an administrative, military, or civil judicial process as having committed, a violation of certain specified crimes against public justice, including the falsification of records, bribery, or perjury. The bill would also disqualify any person who has been certified as a peace officer by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training and has surrendered that certification or had that certification revoked by the commission, or has been denied certification. The bill would disqualify any person previously employed in law enforcement in any state or United States territory or by the federal government, whose name is listed in the national decertification index, or any other database designated by the federal government, or who engaged in serious misconduct that would have resulted in their certification being revoked in this state. The bill would require a law enforcement agency employing certain peace officers to employ only individuals with a current, valid certification or pending certification. (3) Existing law establishes the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to set minimum standards for the recruitment and training of peace officers and to develop training courses and curriculum. Existing law authorizes the commission to establish a professional certificate program that awards basic, intermediate, advanced, supervisory, management, and executive certificates on the basis of a combination of training, education, experience, and other prerequisites, for the purpose of fostering the professionalization, education, and experience necessary to adequately accomplish the general police service duties performed by peace officers. Existing law authorizes the commission to cancel a certificate that was awarded in error or obtained through misrepresentation or fraud, but otherwise prohibits the commission from canceling a certificate that has properly been issued. This bill would require the Department of Justice to provide the commission with necessary disqualifying felony and misdemeanor conviction data for all persons known by the department to be current or former peace officers, as specified. The bill would grant the commission the power to investigate and determine the fitness of any person to serve as a peace officer in the state. The bill would direct the commission to issue or deny certification, which includes a basic certificate or proof of eligibility, to a peace officer in accordance with specified criteria. The bill would require the commission to issue a proof of eligibility or basic certificate, as specified, to certain persons employed as a peace officer on January 1, 2022, who do not otherwise possess a certificate. The bill would declare certificates or proof of eligibility awarded by the commission to be property of the commission and would authorize the commission to suspend or revoke a proof of eligibility or certificate on specified grounds, including the use of excessive force, sexual assault, making a false arrest, or participating in a law enforcement gang, as defined. The bill would create the Peace Officer Standards Accountability Division within the commission to review investigations conducted by law enforcement agencies and to conduct additional investigations into serious misconduct that may provide grounds for suspension or revocation of a peace officer's certification, as specified. The bill would require the division to review grounds for decertification and make findings as to whether grounds for action against an officer's certification exist. The bill would require the division to notify the officer subject to decertification of their findings and allow the officer to request review. The bill would also create the Peace Officer Standards Accountability Advisory Board with 9 members to be appointed as specified. The bill would require the board to hold public meetings to review the findings after an investigation made by the division and to make a recommendation to the commission. The bill would require the commission to review the recommendation made by the board based on whether there is evidence that reasonably supports the board's conclusion that misconduct has been established and, if action is to be taken against an officer's certification, return the determination to the division to commence formal proceedings consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act. The bill would require the commission to notify the employing agency and the district attorney of the county in which the officer is employed of this determination, as specified. The bill would make all records related to the revocation of a peace officer's certification public and would require that records of an investigation be retained for 30 years. The bill would require an agency employing peace officers to report to the commission the employment, appointment, or separation from employment of a peace officer, any complaint, charge, allegation, or investigation into the conduct of a peace officer that could render the officer subject to suspension or revocation, findings by civil oversight entities, and civil judgements that could affect the officer's certification. In case of a separation from employment or appointment, the bill would require each agency to execute an affidavit-of-separation form adopted by the commission describing the reason for separation. The bill would require the affidavit to be signed under penalty of perjury. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the board to report annually on the activities of the division, board, and commission, relating to the certification program, including the number of applications for certification, the events reported, the number of investigations conducted, and the number of certificates surrendered or revoked. By imposing new requirements on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 832.7 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 16 to be operative only if this bill and SB 16 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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.

(1) Existing law authorizes a peace officer to use reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance. Existing law requires law enforcement agencies to maintain a policy on the use of force, as specified. Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to implement courses of instruction for the regular and periodic training of law enforcement officers in the use of force. This bill would prohibit the use of kinetic energy projectiles or chemical agents by any law enforcement agency to disperse any assembly, protest, or demonstration, except in compliance with specified standards set by the bill, and would prohibit their use solely due to a violation of an imposed curfew, verbal threat, or noncompliance with a law enforcement directive. The bill would include in the standards for the use of kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents to disperse gatherings the requirement that, among other things, those weapons only be used to defend against a threat to life or serious bodily injury to any individual, including a peace officer, or to bring an objectively dangerous and unlawful situation safely and effectively under control. The bill would define chemical agents to include, among other substances, chloroacetophenone tear gas or 2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile gas. The bill would make these provisions inapplicable within a county jail or state prison facility. This bill would also require each law enforcement agency, within a specified timeframe, to post on their internet website a summary, as described, of any incident in which a kinetic energy projectile or chemical agent is deployed by that agency for the purpose of crowd control. The bill would require the Department of Justice to provide a compiled list of links to these reports on its internet website. (2) Existing law requires each law enforcement agency to annually report specified use of force incidents to the Department of Justice and requires the Department of Justice to annually publish a summary of those incidents, as specified. This bill would require these reports to be made monthly. By imposing new duties on law enforcement agencies, 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.

Existing law designates the Department of General Services as the agency for the State of California responsible for distribution of federal surplus personal property, excepting food commodities, and requires the department to, among other things, do all things necessary to the execution of its powers and duties as the state agency for the distribution of federal personal surplus property, excepting food commodities, in accordance with specified federal law. Existing law, the Federal Surplus Property Acquisition Law of 1945, authorizes a local agency, as defined, to acquire surplus federal property without regard to any law which requires posting of notices or advertising for bids, inviting or receiving bids, or delivery of purchases before payment, or which prevents the local agency from bidding on federal surplus property. Existing federal law authorizes the Department of Defense to transfer surplus personal property, including arms and ammunition, to federal or state agencies for use in law enforcement activities, subject to specified conditions, at no cost to the acquiring agency. This bill would require a law enforcement agency, defined to include specified entities, to obtain approval of the applicable governing body, by adoption of a military equipment use policy, as specified, by ordinance at a regular meeting held pursuant to specified open meeting laws, prior to taking certain actions relating to the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment, as defined. The bill would also require similar approval for the continued use of military equipment acquired prior to January 1, 2022. The bill would allow the governing body to approve the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment within its jurisdiction only if it determines that the military equipment meets specified standards. The bill would require the governing body to annually review the ordinance and to either disapprove a renewal of the authorization for a type, as defined, of military equipment or amend the military equipment use policy if it determines, based on an annual military equipment report prepared by the law enforcement agency, as provided, that the military equipment does not comply with the above-described standards for approval. The bill would specify these provisions do not preclude a county or local municipality from implementing additional requirements and standards related to the purchase, use, and reporting of military equipment by local law enforcement agencies. This bill would also require a state agency, as defined, to create a military equipment use policy before engaging in certain activities, publish the policy on the agency's internet website, and provide a copy of the policy to the Governor or the Governor's designee, as specified. The bill would also require a state agency that seeks to continue use of military equipment acquired prior to January 1, 2022, to create a military equipment use policy. This bill would also include findings that the changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to the funding, acquisition, and use of military equipment, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to establish a certification program for specified peace officers, including officers of the Department of the California Highway Patrol. Existing law requires the commission to establish basic, intermediate, advanced, supervisory, management, and executive certificates for the purpose of fostering the education and experience necessary to perform general police service duties. Existing law requires certificates to be awarded on the basis of a combination of training, education, experience, and other prerequisites, as determined by the commission. This bill would require the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to develop a modern policing degree program, with the commission and other stakeholders to serve as advisors, as specified, and to submit a report on recommendations to the Legislature outlining a plan to implement the program on or before June 1, 2023. The bill would require the report to include, among other things, recommendations to adopt financial assistance for students of historically underserved and disadvantaged communities with barriers to higher education access, as specified. The bill would require the commission to adopt the recommended criteria within 2 years of when the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges submits its report to the Legislature. Existing law requires peace officers in this state to meet specified minimum standards, including age and education requirements. This bill would increase the minimum qualifying age from 18 to 21 years of age for specified peace officers.

The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development within its boundaries that includes, among other things, a housing element. The law also requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to notify the city, county, or city and county, and authorizes the department to notify the Attorney General, that the city, county, or city and county is in violation of state law if the department finds that the housing element or an amendment to that element, or any specified action or failure to act, does not substantially comply with the law as it pertains to housing elements or that any local government has taken an action in violation of certain housing laws. Existing law, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, governs the management and operation of common interest developments. Existing law makes void and unenforceable any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in a planned development, and any provision of a governing document, that effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts the construction or use of an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit on a lot zoned for single-family residential use that meets specified standards. This bill would prohibit a local agency, as defined, from imposing a floor area ratio standard that is less than 1.0 on a housing development project that consists of 3 to 7 units, or less than 1.25 on a housing development project that consists of 8 to 10 units. The bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing a lot coverage requirement that would physically preclude a housing development project from achieving the floor area ratios described above. The bill would prohibit a local agency from denying a housing development project located on an existing legal parcel solely on the basis that the lot area of the proposed lot does not meet the local agency's requirements for minimum lot size. The bill would only apply to housing development projects that meet specified requirements, including, among other things, that the project be located in a multifamily residential zone or a mixed-use zone, as specified. The bill would additionally require the department to identify violations by a local government of these provisions, as described above. This bill would add the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 to the specified provisions of law for which the department is required to give notice of a violation. This bill would make void and unenforceable any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in a planned development, and any provision of a governing document, that effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts a housing development project from using the floor area ratio standards authorized under the provisions described above. The bill would provide that it does not apply to provisions that impose reasonable restrictions, as defined, that do not make the implementation of a project subject to the above-described provisions infeasible. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65585 of the Government Code proposed by AB 215 to be operative only if this bill and AB 215 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law generally requires the licensure and regulation of various health care facilities, including, among others, a hospice facility. The Compassionate Use Act of 1996, an initiative measure enacted by the approval of Proposition 215 at the November 5, 1996, statewide general election, prohibits specified criminal penalties from being imposed on a patient or a patient's primary caregiver who possesses or cultivates cannabis for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician. Existing law, known as the Medical Marijuana Program, requires counties to administer an identification card program for qualified patients and provides immunity from arrest to qualified patients with a valid identification card or designated primary caregivers, within prescribed limits. This bill, the Compassionate Access to Medical Cannabis Act or Ryan's Law, would require specified types of health care facilities to allow a terminally ill patient's use of medicinal cannabis within the health care facility, subject to certain restrictions. The bill would require a patient to provide the health care facility with a copy of their medical marijuana card or written documentation that the use of medicinal cannabis is recommended by a physician. The bill would require a health care facility to reasonably restrict the manner in which a patient stores and uses medicinal cannabis to ensure the safety of other patients, guests, and employees of the health care facility, compliance with other state laws, and the safe operations of the health care facility. The bill would provide that compliance with the bill would not be a condition for obtaining, retaining, or renewing a license as a health care facility. The bill would require that health care facilities permitting patient use of medical cannabis comply with other drug and medication requirements, as specified, and would make those facilities subject to enforcement actions by the State Department of Public Health. The bill would authorize a health care facility to suspend compliance with these provisions if a regulatory agency, the United States Department of Justice, or the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services takes specified actions, including initiating an enforcement action against a health care facility related to the facility's compliance with a state-regulated medical marijuana program.

Existing law establishes the Marine Managed Areas Improvement Act (MMAIA) , which, among other things, prescribes 6 classifications for designating managed areas in the marine and estuarine environments to ensure the long-term ecological viability and biological productivity of marine and estuarine ecosystems and to preserve cultural resources in the coastal sea. Under the MMAIA, in a state marine conservation area, it is unlawful to injure, damage, take, or possess any living, geological, or cultural marine resource for commercial or recreational purposes, or a combination of commercial and recreational purposes, that the designating entity or managing agency determines would compromise protection of the species of interest, natural community, habitat, or geological features. The MMAIA authorizes the designating entity or managing agency to permit, among other things, research, education, and recreational activities. This bill would authorize the designating entity or managing agency to also permit restoration and monitoring activities.

Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, prohibits discrimination in housing based on race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, veteran or military status, or genetic information, and provides that discrimination in housing through a restrictive covenant includes the existence of a restrictive covenant, regardless of whether accompanied by a statement that the covenant is repealed or void. Existing law also provides that a provision in any deed of real property in California that purports to restrict the right of any person to sell, lease, rent, use, or occupy the property to persons having the characteristics specified above by providing for payment of a penalty, forfeiture, reverter, or otherwise, is void, except as specified. Additionally, existing law provides that any deed or other written instrument that relates to title to real property, or any written covenant, condition, or restriction annexed or made a part of, by reference or otherwise, any deed or instrument, that contains any provision that purports to forbid, restrict, or condition the right of any person or persons to sell, buy, lease, rent, use, or occupy the property on account of any of characteristics specified above, is deemed to be revised to omit that provision. Existing law requires a county recorder, title insurance company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent, or association that delivers a copy of a declaration, governing document, or deed, to place a cover page or stamp on the first page of the previously recorded document stating that if the document contains any restriction that unlawfully discriminates based on any of the characteristics specified above, that document is void. This bill would require a title company, escrow company, real estate broker, real estate agent, or association that delivers a copy of a declaration, governing document, or deed to a person who holds an ownership interest of record in property to also provide a Restrictive Covenant Modification form with specified procedural information. Existing law authorizes a person who holds an ownership interest of record in property that they believe is the subject of an unlawfully restrictive covenant, as specified, to record a Restrictive Covenant Modification, which is required to include a copy of the original document with the illegal language stricken. Existing law requires the county recorder, before recording the modification document, to submit the modification document and the original document to the county counsel who is required to determine whether the original document contains an unlawful restriction based on any of the characteristics specified above. Existing law requires the county counsel to return these documents and inform the county recorder of their determination, and requires the county recorder to refuse to record the modification document if the county counsel finds that the original document does not contain an unlawful restriction. Existing law requires the county recorder to make Restrictive Covenant Modification forms available to the public. This bill would additionally authorize a title company, escrow company, county recorder, real estate broker, real estate agent, or other person to record a Restrictive Covenant Modification. The bill, beginning July 1, 2022, would require a title company, escrow company, real estate broker, or real estate agent that has actual knowledge of a declaration, governing document, or deed that is being directly delivered to a person who holds or is acquiring an ownership interest in property and includes a possible unlawfully restrictive covenant to notify the person of the existence of that covenant and their ability to have it removed through the restrictive covenant modification process. The bill would, beginning July 1, 2022, and upon request before the close of escrow, require the title company or escrow company that is directly involved in the pending transaction to assist in the preparation of a Restrictive Covenant Modification, as specified. This bill would require the county counsel, after their review, to return the documents to the county recorder and inform the county recorder of their determination within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 3 months, as provided. The bill would require a person who requests to record a modification document to provide a return address in order for the county recorder to notify this person of the action taken by the county counsel. The bill would require the county recorder to make Restrictive Covenant Modification forms available to the public onsite or online, as provided, and require the forms to permit the submission of a form that will correct unlawfully restrictive covenants for multiple dwellings within a subdivision, as specified. This bill would require the county recorder of each county to establish a restrictive covenant program to assist in the redaction of unlawfully restrictive covenants. In this regard, the bill would require each county recorder to prepare an implementation plan by July 1, 2022, as specified, identify unlawfully restrictive covenants in the records of their office, and to redact unlawfully restrictive covenants, as specified. The bill would require the County Recorders Association of California to submit reports to the Legislature by January 1, 2023, and January 1, 2025, of the progress of each county's restrictive covenant program and to annually convene a best practices meeting to share concepts on the implementation of restrictive covenant programs, as specified. Existing law imposes a fee, except as provided, of $75 to be paid at the time of the recording of every real estate instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to be recorded, per each single transaction per single parcel of real property, not to exceed $225. Existing law exempts from this fee any real estate instrument, paper, or notice recorded in connection with a transfer subject to the imposition of a documentary transfer tax, as provided, or with a transfer of real property that is a residential dwelling to an owner-occupier. This bill would additionally exempt from this fee any real estate instrument, paper, or notice executed or recorded to remove a restrictive covenant that is in violation of specified provisions of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. This bill, subject to authorization from the county's board of supervisors and in accordance with applicable constitutional requirements, would authorize a county recorder to impose a fee of $2 to be paid at the time of the recording of every real estate instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to be recorded for the purpose of funding the restrictive covenant programs established under these provisions. The bill would exempt certain documents from a fee established pursuant to these provisions. The bill would prohibit a county recorder to charge the $2 fee after December 31, 2027, unless the fee is reauthorized, as specified. Existing law authorizes recordation of certain documents, including a release, discharge, or subordination of a lien for postponed property taxes, without acknowledgment, certificate of acknowledgment, or further proof. This bill would authorize the recordation of any modification document, instrument, paper, or notice to remove a restrictive covenant that is in violation of specified provisions of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act without acknowledgment, certificate of acknowledgment, or further proof. By imposing new duties upon counties with respect to the imposition of the recording fee and new duties upon local county officials with respect to the redaction of unlawfully restrictive covenants, 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 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.