Existing law provides for the establishment of various special districts that may support and finance housing development, including affordable housing special beneficiary districts that are authorized to promote affordable housing development with certain property tax revenues that a city or county would otherwise be entitled to receive. This bill, the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Housing Finance Act, would establish the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (hereafter the authority) and would state that the authority's purpose is to raise, administer, and allocate funding for affordable housing in the San Francisco Bay area, as defined, and provide technical assistance at a regional level for tenant protection, affordable housing preservation, and new affordable housing production. The bill would provide that the governing board of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission serve as the governing board of the authority. The bill would require the authority board to provide for regular audits of the authority, including an independent financial and performance audit for bonds secured by ad valorem property taxes, and financial reports, as provided. The bill would 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 within the San Francisco Bay area, including charter cities. The bill would authorize the authority to, among other things, raise and allocate new revenue, incur and issue bonds and other indebtedness, and allocate funds to the various cities, counties, and other public agencies and affordable housing projects within its jurisdiction to finance affordable housing development projects, preserve and enhance existing affordable housing, and fund tenant protection programs, as specified, in accordance with applicable constitutional requirements. In this regard, the bill would authorize the entity to impose various special taxes, including a parcel tax, and certain business taxes, within its jurisdiction and to issue general obligation bonds secured by the levy of ad valorem property taxes, in accordance with applicable constitutional requirements, and revenue bonds payable from the revenues of the authority, other than revenues generated from ad valorem property taxes. The bill would also authorize the executive board of the Association of Bay Area Governments to impose a commercial linkage fee, as defined, in an amount not to exceed the equivalent of $10, and require a city or county in the San Francisco Bay area that has jurisdiction over the approval of a commercial development project, as defined, to collect that fee as a condition of that approval and remit the amount of fee to the authority, as provided. The bill would require the authority to ratify the commercial linkage fee adopted by the executive board of the Association of Bay Area Governments. The bill would require that revenue generated by the authority pursuant to these provisions be used for specified housing purposes and require the authority to distribute those funds in accordance with specified requirements, including the adoption of a regional expenditure plan. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the San Francisco Bay area. By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to (1) providing staff for the authority and (2) elections procedures for revenue measures on behalf of the authority, 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, 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law authorizes a person who was arrested and has successfully completed a prefiling diversion program, a person who has successfully completed a specified drug diversion program, a person who has successfully completed a specified deferred entry of judgment program, and a person who has suffered an arrest that did not result in a conviction, under certain conditions, to petition the court to seal the person's arrest record. Under existing law, if a defendant successfully completes certain diversion programs, the arrest for the crime for which the defendant was diverted is deemed to have never occurred. Existing law authorizes a defendant to petition to withdraw the defendant's plea of guilty or nolo contendere and enter a plea of not guilty, if the defendant has fulfilled the conditions of probation, or if other specified circumstances are met, and the defendant is not then serving a sentence for any offense, on probation for any offense, or charged with the commission of any offense. If relief is granted, existing law requires the court to dismiss the accusation or information against the defendant and release the defendant from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense, with exceptions. Existing law also authorizes a defendant to file a similar petition if the defendant was convicted of a misdemeanor and not granted probation, was convicted of an infraction, or completed a sentence for certain felonies, and the defendant met specified conditions. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2021, and subject to an appropriation in the annual Budget Act, require the Department of Justice, on a monthly basis, to review the records in the statewide criminal justice databases and to identify persons who are eligible for relief by having their arrest records, or their criminal conviction records, withheld from disclosure, as specified. The bill would require the department to grant relief to an eligible person, without requiring a petition or motion. The bill would not limit petitions, motions, or orders for relief, as required or authorized by any other law. The bill would require an update to the state summary criminal history information to document the relief granted. The bill would require the department, on a monthly basis, to electronically submit a notice to the superior court having jurisdiction over the criminal case, informing the court of all cases for which relief was granted. The bill would prohibit the court from disclosing information concerning an arrest or conviction granted relief, with exceptions. The bill would authorize the prosecuting attorney or probation department, no later than 90 calendar days before the date of a person's eligibility for relief, to file a petition to prohibit the department from granting automatic relief for criminal conviction records as described above. If the court grants that petition, the bill would prohibit the department from granting relief, but the person would continue to be eligible for relief through other existing procedures, including petitions to the court. The bill would require the Department of Justice to annually publish statistics regarding relief granted pursuant to the provisions of this bill, as specified. The bill would require a court, at the time of sentencing, to advise each defendant of their right to conviction relief pursuant to the provisions of this bill, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 480 of the Business and Professions Code, as added by Section 4 of Chapter 995 of the Statutes of 2018, proposed by AB 1521 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1521 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to charge a $5 fee for each inmate-initiated medical visit of an inmate confined in the state prison, except under specified circumstances, and requires that the moneys received be expended to reimburse the department for direct provision of inmate health care services. Existing law also authorizes a sheriff, chief or director of corrections, or chief of police to charge a $3 fee for each inmate-initiated medical visit of an inmate confined in a county or city jail, except as specified, and requires that the moneys received be transferred to the county or city general fund. Existing law also authorizes a county or city to recover from an inmate or a person legally responsible for the inmate's care the costs of necessary medical care rendered to the inmate, under certain conditions. This bill would instead prohibit the secretary or a sheriff, chief or director of corrections, or chief of police from charging a fee for an inmate-initiated medical visit of an inmate of the state prison or a county or city jail, and would make a conforming change. The bill would also prohibit those officials from charging an inmate of the state prison or a city or county jail a fee for durable medical equipment or medical supplies, as defined.
(1) 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 that health care service plan contracts and health insurance policies provide coverage for certain services and treatments, including emergency medical transportation services. This bill would require a health care service plan contract or a health insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2020, to provide that if an enrollee, insured, or subscriber (individual) receives covered services from a noncontracting air ambulance provider, the individual shall pay no more than the same cost sharing that the individual would pay for the same covered services received from a contracting air ambulance provider, referred to as the in-network cost-sharing amount. The bill would provide that an individual would not owe the noncontracting provider more than the in-network cost-sharing amount for services. The bill would authorize a noncontracting provider to advance to collections only the in-network cost-sharing amount that the individual has failed to pay. The bill would authorize a health care service plan, health insurer, or provider to seek relief in any court for the purpose of resolving a payment dispute, and would not prohibit a provider from using a health care service plan's or health insurer's existing dispute resolution processes. 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. (2) Existing law, the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act, effective until January 1, 2022, imposes a penalty of $4 until January 1, 2020, upon every conviction for a violation of the Vehicle Code or a local ordinance adopted pursuant to the Vehicle Code, other than a parking offense. The act requires the county or the court that imposed the fine to transfer the moneys collected pursuant to that act to the Treasurer for deposit into the Emergency Medical Air Transportation and Children's Coverage Fund. Under the act, moneys in the fund are made available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the State Department of Health Care Services for children's health care coverage and administrative costs relating to emergency medical air transportation provider payments. Existing law requires the assessed penalty to continue to be collected, administered, and distributed until exhausted or until June 30, 2021, whichever occurs first, and requires any remaining unexpended and unencumbered moneys in the fund to be transferred to the General Fund, to be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes, including funding children's health care coverage. This bill would impose the penalty until July 1, 2020, and would extend the above-specified dates by six months. (3) 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, the Pharmacy Law, provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists by the California State Board of Pharmacy and makes a violation of these requirements a crime. Existing law generally authorizes a pharmacist to dispense or furnish drugs only pursuant to a valid prescription, except as provided, such as furnishing emergency contraceptives, hormonal contraceptives, and naloxone hydrochloride, pursuant to standardized procedures. This bill would authorize a pharmacist to furnish preexposure prophylaxis and postexposure prophylaxis in specified amounts and would require a pharmacist to furnish those drugs if certain conditions are met, including that the pharmacist determines the patient meets the clinical criteria for preexposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis consistent with federal guidelines. The bill would require a pharmacist, before furnishing preexposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis, to complete a training program approved by the board. Because a violation of these requirements would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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 pursuant to a schedule of benefits, including pharmacist services, which are subject to approval by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. This bill would expand the Medi-Cal schedule of benefits to include preexposure prophylaxis and postexposure prophylaxis as pharmacist services, as specified. 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 authorizes health care service plans and health insurers that cover prescription drugs to utilize reasonable medical management practices, including prior authorization and step therapy, consistent with applicable law. For combination antiretroviral drug treatments medically necessary for the prevention of AIDS/HIV, existing law prohibits plans and insurers, until January 1, 2023, from having utilization management policies or procedures that rely on a multitablet drug regimen instead of a single-tablet drug regimen, except as specified. This bill would additionally prohibit plans and insurers from subjecting antiretroviral drugs, including preexposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis, to prior authorization or step therapy, except that if the United States Food and Drug Administration has approved one or more therapeutic equivalents of a drug, device, or product for the prevention of AIDS/HIV, the bill would instead require the plan or insurer to cover at least one of the therapeutically equivalent versions without prior authorization or step therapy. The bill would also prohibit plans and insurers from prohibiting, or allowing a pharmacy benefit manager to prohibit, a pharmacy provider from providing preexposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis, except as specified. The bill would prohibit plans and insurers from covering preexposure prophylaxis that has been furnished by a pharmacist in excess of specified amounts. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law governs the determination of child custody and visitation in contested proceedings. Existing law requires the court, for purposes of deciding custody, to determine the best interests of the child based on certain factors, including the nature and amount of contact with both parents, and consistent with specified findings, including that the court's primary concern must be to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of the child. Existing law further provides that custody should be granted in a specified order of preference, according to the best interests of the child. Existing law prohibits the court, in granting custody to either parent, from preferring a parent as custodian because of the parent's sex. This bill would prohibit the court from considering the sex, gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation of a parent, legal guardian, or relative in determining the best interests of a child for the purpose of granting custody, and would make related findings.
Existing law establishes the Student Aid Commission as the state agency primarily responsible for the administration and coordination of student financial aid programs at California postsecondary educational institutions. Existing federal law establishes the Chafee Educational and Training Vouchers Program for purposes of providing financial aid to current and former foster youth who are attending qualifying postsecondary educational institutions. Existing law provides that the Student Aid Commission, through an interagency agreement with the State Department of Social Services, currently operates the program in California. Existing law authorizes the commission or the department, for the fiscal years 2018–19 to 2020–21, inclusive, to expend up to $80,000, of any moneys appropriated by the Legislature to expand the Chafee Educational and Training Vouchers Program age eligibility of former foster youth up to 26 years of age, for outreach to newly eligible former foster youth who are at least 23 years of age, but are not yet 26 years of age. Commencing with the 2021–22 award year, this bill would authorize the commission to make initial award offers of up to 200% of total state and federal program funding available for all awards, with the number of initial award offers and the amount of the award to be determined based on the historical rate of award acceptance. The bill would require the commission to make award offers contingent upon available funding. The bill would authorize the commission to adjust or withdraw offers to ensure that awards do not exceed available program funding. The bill would also require the commission to advise award offer recipients that offers may be withdrawn or adjusted before payment and that awards are payable to eligible students only if funding is available. This bill would impose certain requirements on a student who fails to demonstrate satisfactory academic progress, as defined by the institution where the student is enrolled, to maintain Chafee grant eligibility, and would take away Chafee grant eligibility from a student who fails to demonstrate satisfactory academic progress, as specified. The bill would require that institutions provide an appeal process in writing and reinstate the student's Chafee grant when certain conditions are met. The bill would also provide that a student who loses Chafee eligibility and subsequently is not enrolled for one or more terms shall regain eligibility upon reenrollment. The bill would require the California Community Colleges and the California State University, and would request the University of California, to provide all Chafee grant recipients, upon release of the first payment, with information regarding available support services on campus and the process for completing an educational plan and, in that notification, to strongly encourage Chafee grant recipients to avail themselves of those services if they have not already done so. To the extent that the bill would impose new duties on community college districts, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. This bill would limit the duration of receipt of a Chafee award to 5 years, which would not be required to be consecutive. The bill would prohibit an institution from requiring any other eligibility criteria for a Chafee grant than those described in this bill and in specified federal law. 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, the Seymour-Campbell Student Success Act of 2012, provides that the purpose of the act is to increase California community college student access and success by providing effective core matriculation services of orientation, assessment and placement, counseling, other education planning services, and academic interventions. Existing law establishes the Student Equity and Achievement Program and requires a district, as a condition of the receipt of funds under the program, to comply with specified requirements, including the maintenance of a student equity plan to ensure equal educational opportunities and promote student success for all students, regardless of race, gender, age, disability, or economic circumstances. This bill would authorize the use of funding for the Student Equity and Achievement Program for the provision of emergency student financial assistance to eligible students to overcome unforeseen financial challenges that would directly impact a student's ability to persist in the student's course of study, as specified, if emergency student financial assistance is included in an institution's plan for interventions to students.
Existing law requires that employers pay wages to their employees, twice per calendar month, on days designated in advance as regular paydays. However, employees defined as executive, administrative, or professional may be paid once per month. Existing law provides that a violation of this provision is a misdemeanor. This bill would require that employees of the Regents of the University of California be paid on a regular payday. The bill would require those university employees who are paid on a monthly basis to be paid no later than 5 days after the close of the monthly payroll period and would also provide that those employees who are paid on a more frequent basis be paid in accordance with the pay policies announced in advance by the university. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide legislative findings and declarations in support of these provisions. 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, the Medical Practice Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California. Under the act, a physician and surgeon is required to demonstrate satisfaction of continuing education requirements, including cultural and linguistic competency in the practice of medicine, as specified. This bill, by January 1, 2022, would require all continuing education courses for a physician and surgeon to contain curriculum that includes specified instruction in the understanding of implicit bias in medical treatment. The bill, by January 1, 2022, would require associations that accredit these continuing education courses to develop standards to comply with these provisions. Existing law, the Nursing Practice Act, regulates the practice of nursing by the Board of Registered Nursing. The act requires persons licensed by the board to complete specified courses of instruction, including instruction regarding alcoholism and substance dependency and spousal abuse. This bill would require the Board of Registered Nursing, by January 1, 2022, to adopt regulations requiring all continuing education courses for its licensees to contain curriculum that includes specified instruction in the understanding of implicit bias in treatment. Beginning January 1, 2023, the bill would require continuing education providers to comply with these provisions and would require the board to audit education providers for compliance with these provisions, as specified. Existing law, the Physician Assistant Practice Act, authorizes the Physician Assistant Board to require a licensee to complete not more than 50 hours of continuing education every two years as a condition of license renewal. This bill would require the Physician Assistant Board, by January 1, 2022, to adopt regulations requiring all continuing education courses for its licensees to contain curriculum that includes specified instruction in the understanding of implicit bias in treatment. Beginning January 1, 2023, the bill would require continuing education providers to comply with these provisions and would require the board to audit continuing education providers for compliance with these provisions.