Existing federal law provides for allocation of federal funds through the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant program to eligible states. Existing law provides for the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which, through a combination of state and county funds and federal funds received through the TANF program, each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families. Under existing law, certain types of payments received by recipients of aid under the CalWORKs program, including, among others, an award or scholarship provided by a public or private entity to, or on behalf of, a dependent child based on the child's academic or extracurricular achievement or participation in a scholastic, educational, or extracurricular competition, are exempt from consideration as income for purposes of determining eligibility and aid amount. This bill would delete the condition that an award or scholarship be based on a child's academic or extracurricular achievement or participation in a scholastic, educational, or extracurricular competition, in order to be exempt as income for purposes of the CalWORKs program. The bill would also exempt any income or stipend paid by the United States Census Bureau, a governmental entity, or a nonprofit organization for temporary work related to improving participation in the decennial census that is earned during the year preceding a decennial census and during the year of the decennial census from being included as income for these purposes. By expanding the scope of eligibility for CalWORKs, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the State Department of Social Services to adopt regulations on or before October 1, 2022, and would authorize the department to implement the bill through an all-county letter or similar instruction until the regulations are adopted. 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 continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of implementing the bill. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Sponsored bills
Existing law authorizes an individual to contribute amounts in excess of their personal income tax liability for the support of specified funds. Existing law sets forth general administrative provisions applicable to voluntary contributions, which, among other things, repeal funds that fail to meet a minimum contribution amount of $250,000 in a given taxable year. This bill would allow a taxpayer to designate an amount in excess of personal income tax liability to be transferred into the Suicide Prevention Voluntary Contribution Fund, which the bill would create. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to revise the tax return to include a space for this fund when another voluntary contribution designation is removed or space becomes available. The bill would require the fund to meet an annual minimum contribution amount of $250,000, as specified. The bill would require moneys transferred to the Suicide Prevention Voluntary Contribution Fund to be continuously appropriated and allocated to the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission to award grants and provide disbursements to crisis centers located in the state that are active members of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline for the purpose of providing suicide prevention services and to reimburse the commission, the Franchise Tax Board, and the Controller for related administrative costs, as provided. The bill would provide that these provisions shall remain in effect only until January 1 of the 7th calendar year following the first appearance of the fund on the personal income tax return, and would repeal these provisions on December 1 of that year. The bill would provide for an earlier repeal if the Franchise Tax Board determines that the amount of contributions estimated to be received during the 2nd and later calendar years after its first appearance on a return will not at least equal the minimum contribution amount, in which case these provisions would be repealed on December 1 of that year. By continuously appropriating these funds, the bill would make an appropriation.
Existing law, the Financial Institutions Law, regulates the activities of various financial entities, including commercial banks, industrial banks, trust companies, credit unions, and savings associations. The Banking Law defines and regulates state banks and commits the enforcement of banking laws to the Commissioner of Business Oversight. Existing law prohibits a county from giving or loaning its credit to, or in aid of, any person or corporation. Existing law requires a local agency, as defined, to deposit all money belonging to, or in the custody of, that local agency into specified state or national banks, as defined. Existing law regulates the investment of public funds by local agencies. Existing law, the Nonprofit Corporation Law, regulates the formation and conduct of a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation and a nonprofit public benefit corporation. This bill would define the term "bank" for purposes of the Financial Institutions Law and the Banking Law to include a public bank. The bill would define the term "public bank" to mean a corporation, organized as either a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation or a nonprofit public benefit corporation for the purpose of engaging in the commercial banking business or industrial banking business, that is wholly owned by a local agency, as specified, local agencies, or a joint powers authority. The bill would require a public bank to obtain a certificate of authorization to transact business as a bank from the commissioner and to obtain and maintain insurance, subject to specified requirements. The bill would prohibit the commissioner from issuing more than 2 public bank licenses, as defined, in a calendar year and would prohibit the commissioner from authorizing more than 10 public banks at one time. The bill would require a public bank to include a specified purpose statement in its articles of incorporation and make conforming changes. The bill would require a local agency to conduct and approve, as specified, a study of the viability of a public bank containing specified elements before submitting an application to the commissioner to organize and establish a public bank and would require the local agency to include a copy of that study in the application submitted to the commissioner. The bill would require a local agency that is not a charter city to obtain voter approval of a motion to submit an application to the commissioner, as specified. The bill would authorize a county to lend its available funds to a public bank. The bill also would authorize a local agency to deposit funds in a public bank, and to invest in a public bank, subject to certain requirements. The bill would authorize a public bank to make distributions to its members. The bill would require, as specified, a public bank to conduct retail activities in partnership with local financial institutions and would prohibit a public bank from competing with local financial institutions. The Corporation Tax Law imposes a franchise tax on financial corporations, but provides that the tax is in lieu of all other state and local taxes and licenses, with certain exceptions. That law also exempts specified classes of entities from the franchise and income taxes imposed by that law, including state-chartered credit unions. This bill would additionally exempt from those franchise and income taxes any public bank. This bill would also exempt a public bank from all other state and local taxes and licenses, with certain exceptions. Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, requires that all meetings of the legislative body, as defined, of a local agency be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend unless a closed session is authorized. This bill would authorize the governing board of a public bank or a committee of that governing board to meet in a closed session to consider and take action on matters pertaining to a loan or investment decision, a decision of the internal audit committee, the compliance committee, or the governance committee, and a meeting with a state or federal regulator. The bill would authorize a public bank to make all information received by a shareholder, member, or owner of a public bank confidential, as specified. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires that public records, as defined, be available to the public for inspection and made promptly available to any person. This bill would exempt specified information and records of a public bank, and related decisions of the directors, officers, and managers of the public bank, from the disclosure requirements of the act, including, among others, records related to alternative investments of the bank, as specified, meeting materials of any closed session, a record containing information regarding a portfolio position in which the public bank invests, information related to a specific account in the bank, and specified correspondence related to meetings with, or a memorandum or letter received from, state and federal banking regulators. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires 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.
Existing law authorizes a person who has been convicted of a felony, imprisoned or incarcerated, and granted a pardon because either the crime was not committed or the person was innocent of the crime to present a claim against the state to the board for the pecuniary injury sustained by the person through the erroneous conviction and imprisonment or incarceration. Under existing law, if a court grants a writ of habeas corpus but does not find the person factually innocent or if the court vacates a judgment due to new evidence of innocence, the person may move for a finding of factual innocence by a preponderance of the evidence. Existing law requires the board, under any of those circumstances, if the court makes a finding that the petitioner has proven their factual innocence, upon application by the person, and without a hearing, to recommend to the Legislature that an appropriation be made and the claim paid, as specified. This bill would make those provisions applicable to cases in which newly discovered evidence of actual innocence exists that requires vacation of a conviction. Existing law requires the claim for compensation for wrongful convictions to be presented to the board within 2 years after the judgment of acquittal, pardon granted, or release from custody. This bill would instead require the claim for compensation to be presented to the board within a period of 10 years after judgment of acquittal, dismissal of charges, pardon granted, or release from custody, whichever is later.
(1) Existing law authorizes the Judicial Council to provide by rule of court for racial, ethnic, and gender bias, and sexual harassment training and training for any other bias based on sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, ethnic group identification, age, mental disability, physical disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, or sexual orientation for judges, commissioners, and referees. This bill would authorize the Judicial Council to develop training on implicit bias with respect to these characteristics. The bill would require all court staff who interact with the public to complete 2 hours of any training developed by the Judicial Council pursuant to this authorization every 2 years. The bill would authorize the Judicial Council to adopt a rule of court, effective January 1, 2021, to implement these requirements. (2) Existing law requires the State Bar to request the California Supreme Court to adopt a rule of court authorizing the State Bar to establish and administer a mandatory continuing legal education (MCLE) program. This bill would require the State Bar to adopt regulations to require the mandatory continuing legal education curriculum to include training on implicit bias and the promotion of bias-reducing strategies, as specified. The bill would require a licensee of the State Bar to meet the requirements for each MCLE compliance period ending after January 31, 2023.
Existing law provides for the out-of-home placement, including foster care placement, of children who are unable to remain in the custody and care of their parents, and imposes various requirements on the county child welfare agency in regard to arranging and overseeing the foster care placement. Existing law provides that it is the policy of the state that all minors and nonminors in foster care have specified rights, including, among others, the right to receive medical, dental, vision, and mental health services, the right to be placed in out-of-home care according to their gender identity, regardless of the gender or sex listed in their court or child welfare records, the right to review their own case plan and plan for permanent placement if the child is 12 years of age or older and in a permanent placement, and the right to attend Independent Living Program classes and activities if the child meets applicable age requirements. This bill would instead require all children and nonminor dependents in foster care to have these rights and would revise various rights, including providing the right to review their own case plan and plan for permanent placement to children 10 years of age or older regardless of whether they are in a permanent placement and the right to not be prevented from attending Independent Living Program classes by the caregiver as a punishment. The bill would include additional rights, including, among others, the right to be referred to by the child's preferred name and gender pronoun, the right to maintain the privacy of the child's sexual orientation and gender identity and expression, except as provided, and the right to have reasonable access to computer technology and the internet. To the extent that the bill would impose additional duties on counties, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law establishes the Office of the State Foster Care Ombudsperson within the State Department of Social Services and sets forth the duties of the office, including disseminating information on the services provided by the office and rights of children and youth in foster care, developing standardized information explaining those rights, and compiling and making available to the Legislature all data collected by the office, including specified data regarding complaints made to the office and investigations conducted by the office. This bill would additionally require the office to provide training and technical assistance to foster youth, social workers, and child welfare organizations, among others, on the rights of children and youth in foster care, reasonable and prudent parent standards, and services provided by the office. The bill would require the office to review amendments to laws applicable to foster youth at the end of every two-year legislative session and determine whether updates to the foster care rights should be recommended in the compilation of data prepared by the office and made available to the Legislature. Existing law, the California Community Care Facilities Act, provides for the licensing and regulation of community care facilities, including foster family homes and group homes, by the State Department of Social Services. Existing law requires certain community care facilities that provide care to foster children to either provide each schooolage child and the child's authorized representative with an orientation that includes an explanation of the rights of the child or post a listing of the above-described rights. This bill would require the department to ensure that those facilities accord children and nonminor dependents in foster care with their personal rights, including the above-described rights. The bill would require the department to adopt regulations to implement these provisions, and would authorize the department to implement these provisions by written directives until regulations are adopted. 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 establishes a procedure, until January 1, 2024, for the County of Los Angeles, the County of San Diego, and the City and County of San Francisco, if the board of supervisors authorizes the appointment of a conservator for a person who is incapable of caring for the person's own health and well-being due to a serious mental illness and substance use disorder, as evidenced by frequent detention for evaluation and treatment, which is 8 or more detentions for evaluation and treatment in the preceding 12 months. Existing law automatically terminates a conservatorship initiated pursuant to these provisions one year after the appointment of the conservator unless the court specifies a shorter period. Existing law authorizes the person for whom conservatorship is sought to demand a court or jury trial on the issue of whether the person meets the criteria for the appointment of a conservator pursuant to these provisions. Existing law authorizes the Judicial Council to adopt rules, forms, and standards necessary to implement these provisions. This bill would additionally authorize the court to establish a temporary conservatorship for a period of 28 days or less if the court is satisfied that the person is presently incapable of caring for the person's own health and well-being due to a serious mental illness and substance use disorder, as those terms are defined by the bill, the person has been detained 8 times for evaluation and treatment in a 12-month period pursuant to existing law authorizing the detention of mentally disordered persons who are a danger to self or others or gravely disabled, without reference to evidence of frequent detention for evaluation and treatment, the temporary conservatorship is necessary, and the county health director, or their designee, has met specified requirements relating to those previous detentions. The bill would also change the definition of "frequent detention for evaluation and treatment" for purposes of these conservatorship provisions to mean 8 or more detentions in a 12-month period. The bill would require that a petition seeking to establish the above-described conservatorship be filed with the court no later than 28 days following the 8th detention in a 12-month period, and would provide that the petition may be filed only in conjunction with a petition to establish a temporary conservatorship. The bill would require a supplement to the petition, which includes a detailed description of the comprehensive clinical evaluation of the person conducted during the temporary conservatorship, to be filed within 14 days after the initial petition. The bill would require a court making the determination of whether a person meets the criteria for appointment of a conservator to make that determination by clear and convincing evidence based on comprehensive clinical evaluations conducted under temporary conservatorship. This bill would require that the person for whom the conservatorship is sought have the right to demand a court or jury trial to determine whether the person meets the criteria for appointment of a conservator beyond a reasonable doubt. The bill would provide that the conservatorship would automatically terminate 6 months, rather than one year, after the appointment of the conservator by the superior court, or a shorter period if ordered by the court. The bill would require the conservator to file a report with the court every 60 days regarding the conservatee's progress and engagement with treatment and, if the court is not satisfied that the conservatorship continues to be justified, the bill would require the court to terminate the conservatorship. Existing law makes the establishment of a conservatorship pursuant to these provisions subject to, among other things, a finding by the court that the behavioral health director of the county or the city and county has previously attempted by petition to obtain a court order authorizing assisted outpatient treatment pursuant to the Assisted Outpatient Treatment Demonstration Project Act of 2002, known as Laura's Law, for the person for whom conservatorship is sought, that the petition was denied or the assisted outpatient treatment was insufficient to treat the person's mental illness, and that assisted outpatient treatment would be insufficient to treat the person in the instant matter in lieu of a conservatorship. This bill would instead make the establishment of the above-described conservatorship subject to a finding by the court that the health director, or the director's designee, has fulfilled specified requirements and (1) has previously attempted to obtain the above-described court order and that the petition was denied or the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that assisted outpatient treatment was insufficient to treat the person's mental illness, or (2) recommends, and the court finds by clear and convincing evidence, that the person, as a matter of law, does not meet the criteria described for assisted outpatient treatment or determines that assisted outpatient treatment would be insufficient to treat the person in lieu of a conservatorship, as specified. The bill would authorize assisted outpatient treatment to be ordered at that hearing if the behavioral health director, or the director's designee, fails to demonstrate that assisted outpatient treatment would be insufficient to treat the person, and the person qualifies for that treatment. Existing law requires the County of Los Angeles, the County of San Diego, and the City and County of San Francisco to establish a working group to conduct an evaluation of the effectiveness of the implementation of the above-mentioned provisions in addressing the needs of persons with serious mental illness and substance use disorders in the county or the city and county, and requires the evaluation to include an assessment of the number and status of persons who have been conserved under those provisions, among other things. This bill would additionally require the evaluation to include, among other things, the service planning and delivery process for those conserved persons, an analysis of demographic data of those conserved persons, and the number of those conserved persons who successfully complete substance use disorder treatment programs. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, known as the Student Athlete Bill of Rights, requires intercollegiate athletic programs at 4-year private universities or campuses of the University of California or the California State University that receive, as an average, $10,000,000 or more in annual revenue derived from media rights for intercollegiate athletics to comply with prescribed requirements relating to student athlete rights. This bill would prohibit California postsecondary educational institutions except community colleges, and every athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics, from providing a prospective intercollegiate student athlete with compensation in relation to the athlete's name, image, or likeness, or preventing a student participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student's name, image, or likeness or obtaining professional representation relating to the student's participation in intercollegiate athletics. The bill also would prohibit an athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics from preventing a postsecondary educational institution other than a community college from participating in intercollegiate athletics as a result of the compensation of a student athlete for the use of the student's name, image, or likeness. The bill would require professional representation obtained by student athletes to be from persons licensed by the state. The bill would specify that athlete agents shall comply with federal law in their relationships with student athletes. The bill would prohibit the revocation of a student's scholarship as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation as authorized under these provisions. The bill would prohibit a student athlete from entering into a contract providing compensation to the athlete for use of the athlete's name, image, or likeness if a provision of the contract is in conflict with a provision of the athlete's team contract. The bill would prohibit a team contract from preventing a student athlete from using the athlete's name, image, or likeness for a commercial purpose when the athlete is not engaged in official team activities, as specified. These provisions would become operative on January 1, 2023. This bill would require the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to convene a community college athlete name, image, and likeness working group composed of individuals appointed on or before July 1, 2020, as specified. The bill would require the working group to review various athletic association bylaws and state and federal laws regarding a college athlete's use of the athlete's name, image, and likeness for compensation and, on or before July 1, 2021, submit to the Legislature and the California Community College Athletic Association a report containing its findings and policy recommendations in connection with this review.
The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, administered by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, regulates the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages and the granting of licenses for the manufacture, distribution, and sale of alcoholic beverages within the state. The act also provides for a limitation on the amount of on-sale general licenses that may be issued by the department based on the population of the county in which the licensed premises are located, as provided. Existing law provides an exception to the license limitation for a county of the 6th class, as specified, for 5 new original neighborhood-restricted special on-sale general licenses for premises located within specified census tracts in that county, subject to specified requirements, including that licenses issued pursuant to this exception not be transferred between premises, except where the licensed premises have been destroyed, as provided. This bill would authorize the department to allow for the transfer of a license issued pursuant to the above-described exception if the premises are within the same neighborhood, as described.
This measure would condemn regulations recently adopted by the Department of Homeland Security to prescribe how a determination of inadmissibility for a person who is not a citizen or national is made based on the likelihood that the person will become a public charge. This measure would also urge the federal government to repeal the new regulations.