Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, establishes the Medical Board of California for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons. Existing law requires the Governor to appoint members to the board, as provided. Existing law authorizes the board to employ an executive director, investigators, legal counsel, medical consultants, and other assistance as specified. Existing law requires the Attorney General to act as legal counsel for the board, as specified. Existing law provides that those provisions will be repealed on January 1, 2018. This bill would instead repeal those provisions on January 1, 2022. Existing law requires all moneys paid to and received by the Medical Board of California to be paid into the State Treasury and credited to the Contingent Fund of the Medical Board of California, which, except for fine and penalty money, is a continuously appropriated fund. This bill would make the moneys in the fund available upon appropriation by the Legislature. Existing law establishes a peer review process for certain healing arts licensees and requires peer review bodies to review licensee conduct under specified circumstances. Existing law makes the willful failure of a peer review body to make specified reports a crime. Existing law provides that there shall be no monetary liability on the part of, and no cause of action for damages shall arise against, certain health related professional societies or its members for acts performed within the scope of the functions of peer review, as provided. This bill would apply these provisions to licensed midwives. Because the willful failure of such a peer review body to make specified reports would be punishable as a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law prohibits the proceedings and records of organized committees of healing arts professions or of a peer review body from being subject to discovery, except as specified. This bill would apply these provisions to the proceedings and records of committees or peer review bodies of licensed midwives, except as specified. The Moscone-Knox Professional Corporation Act provides for the organization of a corporation under certain existing law for the purposes of qualifying as a professional corporation under that act and rendering professional services. The act authorizes specified healing arts practitioners to be shareholders, officers, directors, or professional employees of a designated professional corporation, subject to certain limitations relating to ownership of shares. This bill would add licensed midwives to the lists of healing arts practitioners who may be shareholders, officers, directors, or professional employees of a medical corporation, a psychological corporation, a nursing corporation, a marriage and family therapist corporation, a licensed clinical social worker corporation, a physician assistants corporation, a chiropractic corporation, an acupuncture corporation, a naturopathic doctor corporation, a professional clinical counselor corporation, a physical therapy corporation, and a registered dental hygienist in alternative practice corporation. The bill would also add a licensed midwives corporation to the list of professional corporations, and would authorize licensed physicians and surgeons, licensed psychologists, registered nurses, licensed marriage and family therapists, licensed clinical social workers, licensed physician assistants, licensed chiropractors, licensed acupuncturists, licensed naturopathic doctors, licensed professional clinical counselors, and licensed physical therapists to be shareholders, officers, directors, or professional employees, subject to those limitations relating to ownership of shares. Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, creates, within the Department of Consumer Affairs, the Medical Board of California consisting of 15 members. The act requires the board to elect a president from its members, and authorizes the board to appoint panels from its members for the purpose of fulfilling specified obligations. The act prohibits the president of the board from being a member of any panel unless there is a vacancy in the membership of the board. This bill would discontinue that prohibition on the president being a member of a panel. Existing law requires the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development to establish a nonprofit public benefit corporation known as the Health Professions Education Foundation to perform various duties with respect to implementing health professions scholarship and loan programs. Existing law requires the foundation to be governed by a board consisting of 9 members appointed by the Governor, one member appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly, and one member appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules. Existing law requires the Governor to appoint the president of the board of trustees from among those members appointed by the Governor, the Speaker of the Assembly, and the Senate Committee on Rules. Existing law requires the members of the board to serve without compensation but requires that they be reimbursed for any actual and necessary expenses incurred in connection with their duties as members of the board. This bill would add to that governing board of the foundation 2 members appointed by the Medical Board of California. The bill would include these members in the list of members from which the Governor is required to appoint the president of the board. The bill would require the Medical Board of California to reimburse its 2 appointed members for any actual and necessary expenses incurred in connection with their duties as members of the board. The bill would require the Medical Board of California to reimburse its 2 appointed foundation board members for any actual and necessary expenses incurred in connection with their duties as members of the foundation board. Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, requires the Medical Board of California to post on the Internet certain information regarding licensed physicians and surgeons. This bill would require the board to initiate the process of adopting regulations on or before January 1, 2019, to require its licentiates and registrants to provide notice to their clients or patients that the practitioner is licensed or registered in this state by the board, that the practitioner's license can be checked, and that complaints against the practitioner can be made through the board's Internet Web site or by contacting the board. Existing law makes it unlawful for a healing arts practitioner to disseminate or cause to be disseminated any form of public communication containing a false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement, claim, or image for the purpose of or likely to induce, directly or indirectly, the rendering of professional services or furnishing of products in connection with the professional practice or business for which he or she is licensed. Existing law prohibits a physician and surgeon from including a statement that he or she is certified or eligible for certification by a private or public board or parent association, including a multidisciplinary board or association, as defined, unless that board or association is one of a specified list of boards and associations, including a board or association with equivalent requirements approved by that physician and surgeon's licensing board. Existing law requires the Medical Board of California to adopt regulations to establish and collect a reasonable fee from each board or association applying for recognition. This bill would discontinue the Medical Board of California approval of a board or association. The bill would continue to authorize a physician and surgeon to make a statement that he or she is certified or eligible for certification by a board or association with equivalent requirements approved by that physician's and surgeon's licensing board prior to January 1, 2019. Existing law requires each applicant for a physician's and surgeon's certificate to show by official transcript or other official evidence that he or she has successfully completed a medical curriculum meeting specified requirements. This bill would remove these medical curriculum requirements on January 1, 2020. Existing law, until January 1, 2020, requires an applicant to show by evidence satisfactory to the board that he or she has satisfactorily completed at least one year of postgraduate training. Existing law requires the postgraduate training to be obtained in a postgraduate training program approved by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education or the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. This bill, beginning January 1, 2020, would instead require an applicant to show by evidence successfully to the board that he or she has satisfactorily completed at least 36 months of board-approved postgraduate training. The bill would authorize an applicant to obtain postgraduate training in a postgraduate training program approved by the College of Family Physicians of Canada. The bill would make eligible for licensure an applicant who has completed at least 36 months of board-approved postgraduate training, not less than 24 months of which was completed as a resident after receiving a medical degree from a combined dental and medical degree program accredited by the Commission on Dental Accreditation or approved by the board. Existing law authorizes a graduate of an approved medical school who is enrolled in a postgraduate training program approved by the board to engage in the practice of medicine whenever and wherever required as part of the program under specified conditions. This bill, beginning January 1, 2020, would add to these conditions a requirement that the medical school graduate obtain a postgraduate training license, as specified. The bill would authorize the board to deny a post graduate training license, as specified. Existing law requires an applicant who is a graduate of a medical school located outside of the United States or Canada to make an application to the board prior to commencing any postgraduate training in this state. Existing law authorizes the board to deny a postgraduate training authorization letter to an applicant who is guilty of unprofessional conduct or of any cause for revocation or suspension of a license. This bill would remove the authorization of the board to deny a postgraduate training authorization letter to an applicant for those reasons. Existing law requires an applicant for a physician's and surgeon's certificate whose professional instruction was acquired in a country other than the United States or Canada to provide evidence satisfactory to the board of satisfactory completion of various requirements, including showing by evidence satisfactory to the board that he or she has satisfactorily completed at least 2 years of postgraduate training. This bill would recast some of those provisions and make conforming changes to other provisions. The bill would require those applicants to show by evidence satisfactory to the board that he or she has satisfactorily completed at least 36 months of board-approved postgraduate training. Under existing law, specified licenses, certificates, registrations, and permits issued by or under the Medical Board of California expire and become invalid at midnight on the last day of February of each even numbered year, if not renewed, as specified. This bill would repeal this provision. Existing law authorizes the holder of a special faculty permit to practice medicine, without a physician's and surgeon's certificate, within a medical school and certain affiliated institutions. Under existing law, a special faculty permit expires and becomes invalid at midnight on the last day of the permitholder's birth month during the 2nd year of a 2-year term, if not renewed. The bill would instead specify that a special faculty permit expires and becomes invalid at midnight on the last day of the month in which the permit was issued during the 2nd year of a 2-year term commencing from the date of issuance, if not renewed. The Medical Practice Act creates, within the jurisdiction of the Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine. Under the act, certificates to practice podiatric medicine expire on a certain date during the 2nd year of a 2-year term if not renewed. The act authorizes a doctor of podiatric medicine who is ankle certified, as specified, to perform certain services and procedures. This bill would instead create the California Board of Podiatric Medicine in the Department of Consumer Affairs, and would make conforming and related changes. The bill would prohibit construing the amendments made by the bill relating to podiatrists to change any rights or privileges held by podiatrists prior to enactment of the bill. The bill would discontinue the ankle certification requirement for a doctor of podiatric medicine to perform those services and procedures. Under the act, certificates to practice podiatric medicine and registrations of spectacle lens dispensers and contact lens dispensers, among others, expire on a certain date during the 2nd year of a 2-year term if not renewed. This bill would discontinue the requirement for the expiration of the registrations of spectacle lens dispensers and contact lens dispensers. Existing law requires the chief of staff of a medical or professional staff or other chief executive officer, medical director, or administrator of a peer review body, as defined, and the chief executive officer or administrator of a licensed health care facility or clinic to file reports with the applicable state licensing agency of specified health care practitioners upon the occurrence of specified events. This bill would impose a $100,000 fine for a willful failure to file a specified report and a $50,000 fine for all other failures to file the report. Existing law requires an accredited outpatient setting to report an adverse event, as defined, to the Medical Board of California no later than 5 days after the adverse event has been detected, or, if that event is an ongoing urgent or emergent threat to the welfare, health, or safety of patients, personnel, or visitors, not later than 24 hours after the adverse event has been detected. This bill would redefine adverse event for those purposes and would require the outpatient setting to inform the patient or the party responsible for the patient of the adverse event by the time the report is made. Existing law requires the board to promptly revoke the license of any person who has been required to register as a sex offender. Existing law authorizes certain individuals whose license was revoked under this provision to petition a specified superior court to hold a hearing within one year of the date of the petition, in order for the court to determine whether the individual no longer poses a possible risk to patients. Existing law authorizes the Attorney General and the board to present written and oral argument to the court on the merits of the petition. This bill would instead require the board to make the revocation automatically, regardless of whether the related conviction has been appealed. The bill would require the board to notify the licensee of the license revocation and of his or her right to elect to have a hearing. The bill would authorize the holder of the physician's and surgeon's certificate to request a hearing, as specified, within 30 days of the revocation. The bill would require the revocation to cease automatically if the conviction is overturned on appeal. The bill would require the Attorney General and the board to present written and oral argument to the court on the merits of a petition to determine whether an individual who was required to register as a sex offender no longer poses a possible risk to patients. Existing law authorizes the administrative law judge of the Medical Quality Hearing Panel to issue an interim order suspending a license or imposing license restrictions, as specified. Existing law requires the order to be dissolved if an accusation is not filed and served, as specified, within 30 days of the date on which the parties to the hearing on the order have submitted the matter. This bill would also require the order to be dissolved if a petition to revoke probation is not filed and served, as specified, within 30 days of the date on which the parties to the hearing on the order have submitted the matter. Existing law prohibits a party's use of expert testimony in matters brought by the Medical Board of California unless specified information, including a brief narrative statement of the general substance of the testimony that the expert is expected to give, is exchanged in written form with the counsel for the other party. Existing law requires the exchange of information to be completed at least 30 days prior to the commencement date of the hearing. This bill would instead require the exchange of information to be completed 30 calendar days prior to the originally scheduled commencement date of the hearing, or as determined by an administrative law judge, as specified. The bill would replace the requirement that a brief narrative statement be exchanged with the requirement that a complete expert witness report, as specified, be exchanged. Existing law establishes the Health Quality Enforcement Section within the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute proceedings against licensees and applicants within the jurisdiction of the Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Board of Psychology, or any committee under the jurisdiction of the Medical Board of California. Existing law requires each complaint that is referred to a district office of one of these boards for investigation to be jointly assigned to an investigator and to the deputy attorney general in the Health Quality Enforcement Section of the Department of Justice responsible for prosecuting the case if the investigation results in the filing of an accusation. This bill, on January 1, 2019, would repeal the provision pertaining to joint assignment for investigation and prosecution. Existing law establishes the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, the Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine within the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the Naturopathic Medicine Committee, and the Acupuncture Board for the licensure and regulation of chiropractors, physicians and surgeons, podiatrists, osteopathic physicians and surgeons, naturopathic doctors, and acupuncturists, respectively. Existing law authorizes each of those regulatory entities to discipline its licensee by placing that licensee on probation, as specified. Existing law also requires 3 of those regulatory entities, the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, and the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, to disclose to an inquiring member of the public and to post on their Internet Web sites specified information concerning licensees including revocations, suspensions, probations, and limitations on practice. This bill would require the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, on and after July 1, 2018, to provide certain information regarding licensees on probation and licensees practicing under probationary licenses to an inquiring member of the public, on any of the regulatory entity's documents informing the public of individual probation orders and probationary licenses, and in plain view on the licensee's profile page on the regulatory entity's online license information Internet Web site. Existing law, the Osteopathic Act, establishes the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, which issues certificates to, and regulates, osteopathic physicians and surgeons and requires that the powers and duties of the board in that regard be subject to review by the appropriate committees of the Legislature. Existing law requires that review to be performed as if those provisions were scheduled to be repealed as of January 1, 2018. This bill would instead require that review to be performed as if those provisions were scheduled to be repealed as of January 1, 2022. Existing law requires the Osteopathic Medical Board of California to require each licensed osteopathic physician and surgeon to demonstrate satisfaction of continuing education requirements as a condition for the renewal of a license at intervals of not less than one year nor more than 3 years. Existing law requires the board to require each licensed osteopathic physician and surgeon to complete a minimum of 150 hours of American Osteopathic Association continuing education hours during each 3-year cycle, of which 60 hours must be completed in American Osteopathic Association Category 1 continuing education hours as a condition for renewal of an active license. This bill would instead require the board to require satisfaction of the continuing education requirements not less than one year nor more than 2 years. The bill would require each licensed osteopathic physician and surgeon to complete a minimum of 100 hours of American Osteopathic Association continuing education hours during each 2-year cycle, of which 40 hours must be completed in American Osteopathic Association Category 1 continuing education hours and the remaining 60 hours shall be either American Osteopathic Association or American Medical Association accredited. Existing law authorizes a list of specified boards to request and receive from a local or state agency certified records of all arrests and convictions, certified records regarding probation, and any and all other documentation needed to complete an applicant or licensee investigation. This bill would add the California Board of Podiatric Medicine and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California to that list of specified boards. This bill would also make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions. This bill would make findings and declarations regarding the authority of healing arts boards to adopt regulations, as specified, and would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would prioritize patients and protection of the public from harm by authorizing the Medical Board of California to take swift and necessary action for a physician and surgeon's continued failure to comply with a specified order. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 146 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 1706 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1706 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2472 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 1153 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1153 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Sponsored bills
Existing law authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated if specified requirements are satisfied. Existing law prohibits the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads until the manufacturer submits an application to the Department of Motor Vehicles, as specified, and that application is approved. Existing law requires the department to notify the Legislature if it receives an application from a manufacturer seeking approval to operate an autonomous vehicle capable of operating without the presence of a driver inside the vehicle. Existing law prohibits such an application from becoming effective any sooner than 180 days after that application is submitted. Existing law requires the department to adopt regulations no later than January 1, 2015, setting forth requirements for submitting evidence of insurance, surety bond, or self-insurance, and for submitting and approving an application to operate an autonomous vehicle. Existing law requires the department to approve an application submitted by a manufacturer if it finds, among other information, that the applicant has completing testing necessary to satisfy the department that the autonomous vehicles are safe to operate on the public roads. Existing law prohibits the limitation or expansion of existing authority to operate autonomous vehicles on public roads, until 120 days after the department adopts those regulations. This bill would repeal the requirement that the department notify the Legislature of receipt of an application seeking approval to operate an autonomous vehicle capable of operating without the presence of a driver inside the vehicle. The bill would also repeal the requirement that the approval of such an application not be effective any sooner that 180 days after the date the application is submitted. The bill would require the department to provide public notice when it adopts the autonomous vehicle regulations, would repeal the 120 day prohibition against limiting or expanding the authority to operate autonomous vehicles, and instead would prohibit the department from approving an application submitted pursuant to the regulations until 30 days after public notice of the adopted regulations is provided. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes the Sexual Assault Victims' DNA Bill of Rights, which, among other things, encourages a law enforcement agency assigned to investigate specified sexual assault offenses to perform DNA testing of rape kit evidence or other crime scene evidence in a timely manner to ensure the longest possible statute of limitations. Existing law also requires a law enforcement agency to inform victims of certain unsolved sexual assault offenses if the law enforcement agency elects not to analyze DNA evidence within certain time limits. This bill would require law enforcement agencies to report information regarding rape kit evidence, within 120 days of the collection of the kit, to the Department of Justice through a database established by the department. The bill would require that information to include, among other things, whether biological evidence samples were submitted to a DNA laboratory for analysis and if a probative DNA profile was generated. The bill would additionally require a public DNA laboratory, or a law enforcement agency contracting with a private laboratory, to provide a reason for not testing a sample every 120 days the sample is untested, except as specified. The bill would only impose these requirements for a kit collected on or after January 1, 2018. By imposing additional duties on local law enforcement, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would require that money received by the Office of Emergency Services from the federal Office on Violence Against Women be used before appropriating money from the General Fund for purposes of reimbursing any costs determined by the Commission on State Mandates to be mandated by the state to a local law enforcement agency by the bill. This bill would require the department to file a report to the Legislature on an annual basis summarizing the information in its database. The bill would prohibit law enforcement agencies or laboratories from being compelled to provide any contents of the database in a civil or criminal case, except as required by a law enforcement agency's duty to produce exculpatory evidence to a defendant in a criminal case. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Existing law, unless the school district is granted an exemption, limits the amount of the combined assigned or unassigned ending fund balance contained in a school district's annual budget in any fiscal year immediately after a fiscal year in which a transfer is made into the Public School System Stabilization Account. Existing law establishes formulas for calculating the maximum amount allowable for school districts with less than 400,000 units of average daily attendance and for school districts with more than 400,000 units of average daily attendance, as specified. This bill would instead make that limitation applicable in a fiscal year immediately after a fiscal year in which the amount of moneys in the Public School System Stabilization Account is equal to or exceeds 3% of the combined total of General Fund revenues appropriated for school districts and allocated local proceeds of taxes, as specified, for that fiscal year. The bill would instead provide that the school district's budget shall not contain a combined assigned or unassigned ending general fund balance, as defined, in excess of 10% of those funds. The bill would exclude from the requirements of those provisions basic aid school districts, as defined, and small school districts, as defined. To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on school districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to notify school districts and county offices of education whenever the conditions specified above are met. The bill would also require the Superintendent to notify school districts and county offices of education when those conditions no longer exist. 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 authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy transactions and use taxes for general purposes in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in the county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, by a resolution approved by 23 of the board and with the approval of specified entities, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 0.125%, with net revenues from the tax to be used by the board for operating and capital purposes of the Caltrain rail service, subject to 23 voter approval of a regional measure submitted by the board to voters of the Counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara. The bill would authorize the board to exceed the 2% limit described above to impose the retail transactions and use tax. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara.
(1) Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as a regional agency in the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) as a separate entity governed by the same governing board as MTC and makes BATA responsible for the programming, administration, and allocation of toll revenues from the state-owned toll bridges in the San Francisco Bay area. Existing law authorizes BATA to increase the toll rates for certain purposes, including to meet its bond obligations, provide funding for certain costs associated with the bay area state-owned toll bridges, including for the seismic retrofit of those bridges, and provide funding to meet the requirements of certain voter-approved regional measures. Existing law provided for submission of 2 regional measures to the voters of 7 bay area counties in 1988 and 2004 relative to specified increases in bridge auto tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges, subject to approval by a majority of the voters. This bill would require the City and County of San Francisco and the other 8 counties in the San Francisco Bay area to conduct a special election, to be known as Regional Measure 3, on a proposed increase in the amount of the toll rate charged on the state-owned toll bridges in that area to be used for specified projects and programs. The bill would require BATA to select the amount of the proposed increase, not to exceed $3, to be placed on the ballot for voter approval. If approved by the voters, the bill would authorize BATA, beginning 6 months after the election approving the toll increase, to phase in the toll increase over a period of time and to adjust the toll increase for inflation after the toll increase is phased in completely. The bill would specify that, except for the inflation adjustment, providing funding to meet the requirements of voter approved regional measures, and as otherwise specified in statute, the toll increase adopted pursuant to the results of this election may not be changed without the statutory authorization of the Legislature. By requiring this election, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require BATA to reimburse from toll revenues, as specified, the counties and the City and County of San Francisco for the cost of submitting the measure to the voters. This bill would require BATA to establish an independent oversight committee within 6 months of the effective date of the Regional Measure 3 toll increase with a specified membership, to ensure the toll revenues generated by the toll increase are expended consistent with a specified expenditure plan. The bill would require BATA to submit an annual report to the Legislature on the status of the projects and programs funded by the toll increase. (2) Existing law authorizes BATA to vary the toll structure on each of the bay area state-owned toll bridges and to provide discounts for vehicles classified by BATA as high-occupancy vehicles. This bill would additionally authorize BATA to provide discounts for vehicles that pay for tolls electronically or through other non-cash methods and to charge differential rates based on the chosen method. This bill, with respect to the Regional Measure 3 toll increase, would require BATA to provide a 50% discount on the amount of that toll increase on the 2nd bridge crossing for those commuters using a two-axle vehicle, who pay tolls electronically or through other noncash methods and who cross 2 bridges during commute hours, as specified. Existing law, if BATA establishes high-occupancy vehicle lane fee discounts or access for vehicles classified by BATA as high-occupancy vehicles for any bridge, requires BATA to collaborate with the Department of Transportation to reach agreement on how the occupancy requirements shall apply on each segment of highway that connects with that bridge. This bill would instead require BATA to establish those occupancy requirements in consultation with the department. (3) Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) , governed by a board of directors, with specified powers and duties relative to the construction and operation of a rapid transit system. This bill would create the Independent Office of the BART Inspector General within BART. The bill would provide for the board of directors to nominate 3 persons to the Governor and for the Governor to appoint one of those nominees to serve as the Inspector General for a 4-year term. The bill would require the Inspector General to be removed from office by the board of directors, subject to the approval of the Governor, under certain circumstances. The bill would specify the duties and responsibilities of the Inspector General and would require the Inspector General to submit an annual report to the board of directors and the Legislature. The bill would provide for the office to receive $1,000,000 from an allocation of bridge toll revenue from BATA and, in the second and subsequent years of operation of the office, would authorize BATA to increase that amount, as specified. The bill would make these provisions operative upon an affirmative vote to increase tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges pursuant to Regional Measure 3 or related provisions. (4) Existing law authorizes the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) to conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane program on 2 corridors included in the high-occupancy vehicle lane system in Santa Clara County. Existing law authorizes a HOT lane established as part of this program on State Highway Route 101 to extend into the County of San Mateo as far as the high-occupancy lane in the County of San Mateo existed as of January 1, 2011, subject to agreement of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. This bill would delete the authorization for a HOT lane to extend into the specified portion of San Mateo County as part of a value pricing program established on 2 corridors in Santa Clara County. The bill would instead authorize VTA to specifically conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll lane program on State Highway Route 101 in San Mateo County in coordination with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, as prescribed. (5) 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.
(1) Existing law establishes procedures for the formation of health care districts and regional open-space districts or authorities and prescribes the powers, functions, and duties of those districts or authorities, including competitive bidding requirements relating to the construction of facilities or other buildings. Existing law authorizes certain types of local agencies and other entities to use the design-build process when contracting for the construction of a building or improvements directly related to construction of certain facilities or buildings in those entities' jurisdictions, as specified. Existing law sets forth the procurement process for design-build projects, as specified, and requires specified information submitted by design-build entities to be certified under penalty of perjury. This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2023, the Peninsula Health Care District, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, and the Santa Clara Valley Open-Space Authority to use the design-build process for the construction of facilities or other buildings in those entities, as specified. Because the bill would expand the application of the procurement process to additional design-build entities, the bill would expand the crime of perjury, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law, except as specified, authorizes a local agency, with approval of its governing body, to procure design-build contracts for public works projects in excess of $1,000,000, awarding the contract either the low bid or the best value, provided that those provisions do not apply to any projects on the state highway system. This bill would exempt the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and the Santa Clara Valley Open-Space Authority from the minimum project limitation of $1,000,000. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Peninsula Health Care District, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, and the Santa Clara Valley Open-Space Authority. (3) Existing law authorizes, until January 1, 2020, the Counties of Alameda, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Solano, and Yuba to select a bidder on the basis of best value, as defined, for construction projects in excess of $1,000,000. Existing law requires that bidders verify specified information under oath. This bill would expand this authorization to include the County of San Mateo. By expanding the bidders required to verify specified information under oath, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. The bill would additionally authorize these counties to use a best value construction contracting method to award individual annual contracts, not to exceed three $3,000,000, adjusted annually to reflect the percentage change in the California Consumer Price Index, for repair, remodeling, or other repetitive work to be done according to unit prices, as defined. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for County of San Mateo. (4) 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 allows the Office of Child Abuse Prevention to fund, through allocations provided to local counties, child abuse and neglect prevention and intervention programs. Existing law provides the criteria under which a county selects agency projects and services to be funded under these provisions, including giving priority to private, nonprofit agencies. Existing law authorizes a county to establish a computerized database system within the county to allow designated provider agencies, which include schools, among other entities, to share identifying information regarding families at risk for child abuse or neglect for the purpose of forming multidisciplinary personnel teams for the prevention, identification, management, or treatment of child abuse or neglect or to provide child welfare services. Existing law makes this information confidential and accessible only to authorized persons. This bill would authorize the Counties of Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and San Mateo to jointly establish a computerized database system to be used between and among those counties, and would authorize that system to also share specified identifying information regarding families at risk for child abuse or neglect for research purposes. The bill would authorize the sharing of personal identifying information for research purposes only upon approval by an institutional review board. The bill would set forth various conditions for the review and approval of a research project for the purpose of protecting personal identifying information. The bill would provide that, for purposes of this jointly established system, a provider agency also includes local educational agencies. The bill would require the counties to decommission the computerized database system if the ability to share identifying information regarding families at risk for child abuse or neglect between and among the counties and for research purposes becomes available within the statewide child welfare information system. The bill would require any county that establishes a computerized database system under the provisions described above to decommission any duplicative functionality within its computerized database system if any functionality of the county's computerized database system becomes fully available and deployed within the statewide child welfare information system.
Existing law prohibits a person from operating a motor vehicle on a highway unless that person and all passengers 16 years of age or over are properly restrained by a safety belt. Existing law makes the violation of this provision an infraction. This bill would also require a passenger who is 16 years of age or older in a bus that is equipped with safety belts to be properly restrained by a safety belt and would require a motor carrier to maintain those safety belts in good working order for the use of the passengers. The bill would prohibit a parent, legal guardian, or chartering party from transporting on a bus that is equipped with safety belts, or permitting to be transported on a bus that is equipped with safety belts, a child, ward, or passenger who is 8 years of age or older, but under 16 years of age, unless he or she is properly restrained by a safety belt. The bill would also prohibit a parent, legal guardian, or chartering party from transporting on a bus that is equipped with safety belts, or permitting to be transported on a bus that is equipped with safety belts, a child, ward, or passenger who is under 8 years of age and under 4 feet 9 inches in height, unless he or she is acceptably restrained by a safety belt, except as specified. The bill would exempt a passenger leaving his or her seat to use an onboard bathroom from the seatbelt requirement. The bill would also require a motor carrier operating a bus equipped with safety belts to either: (1) require the bus driver to inform passengers of the requirement to wear a seatbelt or (2) post, or allow to be posted, signs or placards informing passengers of the requirement to wear a seatbelt, as specified. The bill would make a violation of the provisions requiring a passenger to wear a safety belt, an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than $20 for a first offense and a fine of not more than $50 for each subsequent offense. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to a schoolbus or a school pupil activity bus, as defined. This bill, if the bus is equipped with a driver safety belt, would require the driver to be properly restrained by the safety belt and would require the motor carrier to maintain the driver safety belt. The bill would make violation of these provisions an infraction punishable by a fine of up to $20 for the first violation and of up to $50 for subsequent violations. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a charter-party carrier of passengers engaged in charter bus transportation to ensure that drivers of certain vehicles provide each passenger with written or video instructions that include, among other things, the importance of wearing a seatbelt, if available. A violation of this provision is an infraction. This bill would instead require those written or video instructions to include, among other things, instructions on the requirement to wear a seatbelt, if available, and the penalties for violating that requirement. By changing the definition of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would also make a technical correction and other conforming changes. The provisions of this bill would become operative on July 1, 2018. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 12810.2 of the Vehicle Code proposed by SB 810 and would make these changes operative only if this bill and SB 810 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1) The Department of Consumer Affairs is comprised of healing arts boards that are responsible for the licensure and regulation of healing arts licensees. Under existing law, the Substance Abuse Coordination Committee is created within the department and the committee is required to formulate uniform and specific standards in specified areas that each healing arts board is required to use in dealing with substance-abusing licensees. Existing law, by January 1, 2010, requires the committee to formulate uniform and specific standards in specified areas, including standards governing all aspects of required testing, that each healing arts board is required to use in dealing with substance-abusing licensees, whether or not a board chooses to have a formal diversion program. This bill, by January 1, 2019, would require the committee to review the existing criteria for those standards governing all aspects of required testing to determine whether the existing criteria should be updated to reflect recent developments in testing research and technology. (2) Existing law, the Naturopathic Doctors Act, establishes the Naturopathic Medicine Committee within the Osteopathic Medical Board of California for the licensure and regulation of naturopathic doctors. Existing law requires the committee to consist of 9 members appointed by the Governor, including 2 public members. Existing law requires a public member to be a citizen of the state for at least 5 years preceding his or her appointment. This bill would instead require 7 professional members to be appointed by the Governor, one public member to be appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules, and one public member to be appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly. The bill would instead require a public member to be a resident of the state for at least 5 years preceding his or her appointment. Existing law repeals the act on January 1, 2018. Existing law also specifies that the committee is subject to review by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature on January 1, 2018. This bill would instead repeal the act and subject the committee to legislative review on January 1, 2022. Existing law requires an applicant for a license as a naturopathic doctor to file a written application with the committee, as specified. Existing law requires the committee to establish the amount of the fee assessed to conduct activities of the committee, including the amount of fees for applicant licensure, licensure renewal, late renewal, and childbirth certification. Existing law requires the committee to require the satisfactory completion of 60 hours of approved continuing education biennially, as specified, for licensure renewal. This bill would remove the requirement that an application be written. The bill would specify the amount or maximum amount for each of the fees. The bill would require a licensee to retain certificates of continuing education course completion for 6 years. The bill would authorize the committee to audit licensees' continuing education records to ensure that continuing education requirements are met. The bill would specify that furnishing false or misleading information to the committee regarding continuing education constitutes unprofessional conduct. Existing law requires the committee to approve a specified naturopathic medical education program. Existing law requires boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs to adopt rules and regulations to provide for methods of evaluating education, training, and experience obtained in the armed services, if applicable to the requirements of the business, occupation, or profession regulated, and to specify how this education, training, and experience may be used to meet the licensure requirements for the particular business, occupation, or profession regulated. Existing law also requires these boards to consult with the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Military Department before adopting these rules and regulations. This bill would require that the naturopathic medical program, pursuant to those provisions, evaluate an applicant's education, training, and experience obtained in the armed services, and provide course credit where applicable. Existing law requires the satisfactory completion of specified hours of approved continuing education biennially in order to renew a license. Existing law requires the continuing education to meet certain requirements and to be provided by an approved continuing education provider. This bill would additionally require the course content to pertain to the practice of naturopathic, osteopathic, or allopathic medicine. The bill would require continuing education providers to comply with certain conflict-of-interest requirements. The bill would also require these providers to submit a related annual declaration to the committee. The bill would require the committee to maintain a list of these providers meeting those requirements on its Internet Web site. Existing law does not prevent or restrict the practice, services, or activities of a person who makes recommendations regarding or is engaged in the sale of, among other things, food or vitamins. This bill would authorize an unlicensed person to represent that he or she "practices naturopathy" if certain requirements related to restrictions on services provided and specified disclosures and acknowledgments are met. (3) Existing law, the Respiratory Care Practice Act, establishes the Respiratory Care Board of California for the licensure and regulation of respiratory care practitioners. Existing law specifies that the board is subject to review by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature upon repeal of the provision establishing the board. Existing law also authorizes the board to employ an executive officer. Existing law repeals these provisions on January 1, 2018. This bill would instead repeal those provisions on January 1, 2022. Existing law establishes the Respiratory Care Fund in the State Treasury to carry out the purposes of the act, and requires all collections from persons licensed or seeking to be licensed under the Respiratory Care Practice Act to be paid into the fund, as specified. This bill would make the availability of the moneys in the fund contingent upon appropriation by the Legislature.