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 provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law authorizes an individual to add a dependent to their health care service plan contract or health insurance policy, including adding a dependent outside of an initial enrollment period if certain criteria are met. Existing law defines "dependent" for the purpose of an individual contract or policy to mean the spouse, registered domestic partner, or child of an individual. Existing law establishes the Health Insurance Counseling and Advocacy Program (HICAP) in the California Department of Aging to provide Medicare beneficiaries and those imminently eligible for Medicare with counseling and advocacy regarding health care coverage options. This bill would require an individual health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2023, that provides dependent coverage to make dependent coverage available to a qualified dependent parent or stepparent. The bill would require a plan, an insurer, or the California Health Benefit Exchange to provide an applicant seeking to add a dependent parent or stepparent with written notice about HICAP and would require a solicitor or agent to provide specified HICAP contact information, as specified. The bill would expand the definition of "dependent" for an individual health care service plan contract or health insurance policy to include a qualified dependent parent or stepparent. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Sponsored bills
Existing law provides that a cause of action that survives the death of the person entitled to commence an action or proceeding passes to the decedent's successor in interest and an action may be commenced by the decedent's personal representative or, if none, by the decedent's successor in interest. Existing law limits the damages recoverable in that action or proceeding to the loss or damage that the decedent sustained or incurred before death, including any penalties or punitive or exemplary damages that the decedent would have been entitled to recover had the decedent lived. Existing law prohibits the recovery of damages for the decedent's pain, suffering, or disfigurement in that action or proceeding. This bill would permit damages for a decedent's pain, suffering, or disfigurement to be recovered in an action brought by the decedent's personal representative or successor in interest if the action or proceeding was granted a specified preference before January 1, 2022, or was filed on or after January 1, 2022, and before January 1, 2026. The bill would require a plaintiff who recovers damages for pain, suffering, or disfigurement between specified dates to submit to the Judicial Council a copy of the judgment, consent judgment, or court-approved settlement agreement entitling the plaintiff to the damages and a cover sheet containing certain information. The bill would require the Judicial Council to transmit to the Legislature a report detailing this information, as specified.
Existing law requires the Director of Parks and Recreation, upon the adoption of a specified resolution by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles, to grant to the County of Los Angeles, in trust for the people of California, all of the rights, title, and interest of the State of California in specified state beach property, including a portion of Manhattan State Beach. Existing law requires the grant to be made upon the express condition that the County of Los Angeles use, operate, and maintain the granted lands and improvements only for public recreation and beach purposes in perpetuity. Existing law subjects the transfer of those rights, title, and interest in the granted lands to specified restrictions, including prohibitions on new or expanded commercial development on those granted lands and on the sale, transfer, or encumbrance of those granted lands. This bill would exclude specified property located in Manhattan State Beach, commonly known as Bruce's Beach, from the requirement that the property be used only for public recreation and beach purposes in perpetuity and from those specified restrictions. The bill would authorize the property to be sold, transferred, or encumbered upon terms and conditions determined by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles to be in the best interest of the county and the general public. The bill would require the Director of Parks and Recreation, on or before December 31, 2021, to execute an amendment to a specified deed that incorporates the exclusion of that property from that requirement and those restrictions. Under the California Constitution, all property is taxable and must be assessed at the same percentage of fair market value, unless otherwise provided in the California Constitution or federal law. The California Constitution limits the maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property to 1% of its full cash value and defines "full cash value" for these purposes. Existing property tax law, in accordance with these provisions, defines "full cash value" of real property to mean the fair market value of the property as of the 1975 lien date or, for property which is purchased, is newly constructed, or changes ownership after the 1975 lien date, the date on which the purchase or change in ownership occurs, or the date on which new construction is completed, and if uncompleted, on the lien date. Under existing property tax law, the purchase price, as defined, of real property is rebuttably presumed to be the "full cash value" or "fair market value" if the terms of the transaction were negotiated at arms length between a knowledgeable transferor and transferee neither of which could take advantage of the exigencies of the other. This bill, for purposes of determining the full cash value of Bruce's Beach upon its sale, transfer, or encumbrance as authorized by the bill's provisions, would require that the fair market value of that land be its full cash value as of the 1975 lien date, adjusted by an inflation factor determined as provided. The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, in modified conformity with federal law, generally define "gross income" as income from whatever source derived, except as specifically excluded, and provides various exclusions from gross income for purposes of computing tax liability. This bill, subject to certain limitations, would provide that, under both the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, a recipient's gross income does not include any sale, transfer, or encumbrance of Bruce's Beach, or income directly derived from that sale, transfer, or encumbrance, in accordance with the procedures described above for the taxable year in which the land is sold, transferred, or encumbered. Existing law, the Documentary Transfer Tax Act, authorizes the board of supervisors of any county or city and county, and the legislative body of any city within the county, to impose by ordinance a tax, at a specified rate, on each deed, instrument, or writing by which any lands, tenements, or other realty sold within the county is granted, assigned, transferred, or otherwise conveyed to, or vested in, the purchaser or any other person, if the consideration or value of the interest or property conveyed or vested exceeds $100. Existing law provides various exemptions from a tax imposed by a county, city and county, or city under these provisions. This bill would exempt any sale, transfer, or encumbrance of the portion of Bruce's Beach in accordance with the procedures described above from a documentary transfer tax imposed pursuant to the Documentary Transfer Tax Act. This bill would state that its provisions are severable. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for Bruce's Beach. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Guardianship-Conservatorship Law generally establishes the standards and procedures for the appointment and termination of an appointment for a guardian or conservator of a person, an estate, or both. Existing law, the Professional Fiduciaries Act, establishes the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau within the Department of Consumer Affairs, and requires the bureau to license and regulate professional fiduciaries. The act defines a "professional fiduciary" as, among other things, a person who acts as a guardian or conservator of the person, the estate, or the person and estate, for 2 or more individuals at the same time who are not related to the professional fiduciary or to each other. Existing law requires the court to be guided by what appears to be the best interests of the proposed conservatee in selecting a conservator, and sets forth an order of preference for appointment if there are multiple persons equally qualified to be the conservator. This bill would require a professional fiduciary with an internet website to post a schedule of the range of fees on their internet website and would require a professional fiduciary without an internet website to provide that schedule, as specified. The bill would require the bureau to impose specified sanctions on a professional fiduciary's license upon a finding of a violation of applicable statutes or regulations, a breach of fiduciary duty where there is a finding of serious financial or physical harm or mental suffering, or that the professional fiduciary has engaged in defined acts of abuse, as specified. If the court finds that a conservator who is a professional fiduciary has abused a conservatee, the bill would make the conservator liable for a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each separate act of abuse, payable to the estate of the conservatee. The bill would make a conservator who is not a professional fiduciary who abuses a conservatee liable for civil penalties of up to $1,000 for each separate act of abuse, payable to the estate of the conservatee. This bill would require the bureau to investigate specified allegations and would authorize the bureau to impose upon a professional fiduciary, as a sanction for violation of their duties, a restitution order, as specified. The bill would require the bureau to revoke a professional fiduciary's license if the person knowingly, intentionally, or willfully violated a legal duty or breached a fiduciary duty to a client or if the person caused serious physical or financial harm or mental suffering to a client through gross negligence or gross incompetence. Existing law conditioned upon an appropriation by the Legislature a requirement that a court investigator undertake specified actions regarding a proposed conservatee, including interviewing the proposed conservatee. Existing law authorizes specified persons to petition the court to take specified actions regarding a conservatorship. This bill would, also contingent upon an appropriation, revise the information that a court investigator is required to gather and review and the determinations the investigator is required to make. The bill would authorize an interested person, as defined, with personal knowledge of a conservatee to petition the court to investigate an allegation of physical abuse or financial abuse of a conservatee by a conservator, and would require the court to investigate those allegations that establish a prima facie case of abuse. Existing law requires the court to appoint the public defender or private counsel to represent interests of a conservatee, proposed conservatee, or person alleged to lack legal capacity who is unable to retain legal counsel and requests the appointment of counsel to assist them in particular proceedings that include, among others, proceedings to establish a conservatorship or to remove the conservator, whether or not that person lacks or appears to lack legal capacity. The law also requires the court to appoint the public defender or private counsel in these proceedings to represent the interests of a conservatee or proposed conservatee who does not plan to retain legal counsel and has not requested the court to appoint legal counsel, if the court determines that the appointment would be helpful to the resolution of the matter or is necessary to protect the interests of the conservatee or proposed conservatee based on information contained in the court investigator's report or obtained from any other source, whether or not that person lacks or appears to lack legal capacity. This bill would, instead, require the court to appoint the public defender or private counsel if the conservatee or proposed conservatee has not retained legal counsel and does not plan to retain legal counsel. The bill would generally require the court to allow representation by an attorney for whom a conservatee, proposed conservatee, or person alleged to lack legal capacity expresses a preference, even if the attorney is not on the court's list of court-appointed attorneys, unless the counsel cannot provide zealous advocacy or has a conflict of interest. The bill would specify that the role of legal counsel for a conservatee, proposed conservatee, or person alleged to lack legal capacity is that of a zealous, independent advocate, observing specified legal requirements. Existing law prescribes the process for petitioning to terminate a conservatorship or limited conservatorship or to appoint a new conservator. Existing law specifies a process for hearings on the termination or revision of conservatorships and the review of conservatorships. This bill would, contingent upon an appropriation by the Legislature in many cases, make various changes to those processes. The bill would require that the court, at specified hearings, consider terminating the conservatorship and would authorize the court in specified circumstances to modify the conservatorship so that the conservatorship is the least restrictive alternative needed for the protection of the conservatee. Existing law prohibits a guardian or trustee who is not a trust company from hiring or referring business to an entity in which the guardian or trustee has a financial interest, except upon authorization of the court. Existing law prohibits compensating a guardian or trustee from the estate for the costs or fees they incurred in unsuccessfully opposing a petition or other action made by or on behalf of a ward or conservatee, unless the court determines the opposition was made in good faith, based on the best interests of the ward or conservatee. If the court removes the guardian or conservatee for cause, existing law requires the court to award the petitioner for that removal the costs of the petition and other expenses and costs of litigation, unless the court determines the guardian or conservator acted in good faith, based on the best interests of the ward or conservatee. This bill would prohibit a guardian or trustee who is not a trust company, or an employee of such a guardian or conservator, to hire or refer business to an entity in which they have a financial interest. The bill would prohibit a guardian or conservator from being compensated from the estate for any costs or fees that they incurred in unsuccessfully defending their fee request petition, opposing a petition, or any other unsuccessful request or action made by, or on behalf of, the ward or conservatee. The bill would authorize the court to reduce the compensation requested in the petition if the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, that the defense was made in good faith, was based on the best interest of the ward or conservatee, and did not harm the ward or conservatee. The bill would require the court to award the costs of the petition and other expenses and costs of litigation to a successful petitioner if a guardian or conservatee is removed for cause. The bill would require the Judicial Council to report to the Legislature, on or before January 1, 2024, regarding specified findings and recommendations on court effectiveness in conservatorship cases.
Existing law establishes in the Natural Resources Agency the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and requires the department to be responsible for, among other things, fire protection and prevention, as provided. The former Governor, Edmund G. Brown Jr., issued an executive order relating to, among other subjects, the streamlining of permitting for landowner-initiated projects for the improvement of forest health and the reduction of forest fire fuels on their properties. Pursuant to this executive order, a Forest Management Task Force involving specified state agencies was convened and an action plan was created. This bill would rename the task force the Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force and require the task force, including the agency and the department, on January 1, 2022, to develop a comprehensive implementation strategy to track and ensure the achievement of the goals and key actions identified in the action plan, as provided. The bill would require the implementation strategy to address specified actions, including increasing the pace and scale of wildfire and forest resilience activities, as provided. The bill would require the task force, on or before January 1, 2023, and annually thereafter until January 1, 2048, to submit a report containing specified information, including progress made in achieving the goals and key actions identified in the action plan, to the appropriate policy and budget committees of the Legislature. The bill would require the task force, on or before January 1, 2026, and every 5 years thereafter, to update the action plan, as provided. The bill would require the task force to invite the participation of specified federal entities in the creation, alignment, and coordination of joint efforts related to the above-described provisions.
Existing law provides for state cooperation with the federal government in the construction of specified flood control projects. For certain flood control projects authorized on or after January 1, 2002, or for which specified findings have been made on or after that date, existing law requires the state to pay 50% of specified nonfederal costs. Existing law authorizes the state to pay up to 70% of those nonfederal costs upon the recommendation of the Department of Water Resources or the Central Valley Flood Protection Board if either entity determines that the project will advance one of several objectives. Existing law authorizes the state to provide the above-described funds to the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz, or to local agencies in those counties, for the project for flood control on the Pajaro River in the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz, as specified. This bill would authorize, upon certain conditions, the state to provide up to 100% of the costs to the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz, or to local agencies in those counties, for the project for flood control on the Pajaro River in the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Monterey and Santa Cruz.
Existing law designates state holidays, including, among others, the 4th Friday in September, known as "Native American Day," and the 2nd Monday in October, known as "Columbus Day." Existing law adopts those state holidays as judicial holidays, with certain exceptions, including Native American Day. This bill would remove Native American Day from the list of holidays that are excluded from designation as a judicial holiday. The bill would add Columbus Day to the list of excluded judicial holidays.
(1) Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976, establishes the California Coastal Commission and provides for planning and regulation of development in the coastal zone, as defined. The act requires the commission, within 90 days after January 1, 1977, to adopt, after public hearing, procedures for the preparation, submission, approval, appeal, certification, and amendment of a local coastal program, including a common methodology for the preparation of, and the determination of the scope of, the local coastal programs, as provided. This bill would also include, as part of the procedures the commission is required to adopt, recommendations and guidelines for the identification, assessment, minimization, and mitigation of sea level rise within each local coastal program, as provided. The bill would delete the timeframe specified above by which the commission is required to adopt these procedures. The bill would require the commission to take into account the effects of sea level rise in coastal resource planning and management policies and activities, as provided. In addition, the bill would require state and regional agencies to identify, assess, and, to the extent feasible and consistent with their statutory authorities, avoid, minimize, and mitigate the impacts of sea level rise. To the extent that a regional agency is a local public agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The act makes legislative findings and declarations relating to the basic goals of the state for the coastal zone. This bill would add, as part of those goals, the goal of anticipating, assessing, planning for, and, to the extent feasible, avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating the adverse environmental and economic effects of sea level rise within the coastal zone. (2) Existing law requires the Natural Resources Agency, in collaboration with the Ocean Protection Council, to create and post on an internet website a Planning for Sea Level Rise Database describing steps being taken throughout the state to prepare for, and adapt to, sea level rise. This bill would create within the council the California Sea Level Rise State and Regional Support Collaborative. The bill would require the collaborative, among other things, to provide state and regional information to the public and support to local, regional, and other state agencies for the identification, assessment, planning, and, where feasible, the mitigation of the adverse environmental, social, and economic effects of sea level rise, as provided. The bill would require, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act, the collaborative to expend no more than $100,000,000 annually from appropriate bond funds and other sources for the purpose of making grants to local and regional governments to update local and regional land use plans to take into account sea level rise and for directly related investments to implement those plans, as provided. The bill would require the Secretary for Environmental Protection and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, as part of the adoption of the annual Budget Act, to annually appear before the budget committees of both houses of the Legislature regarding the implementation of the above provisions. (3) Existing law establishes the Environmental Justice Small Grant Program under the jurisdiction of the California Environmental Protection Agency, with the purpose to provide grants to eligible community groups that are located in areas adversely affected by environmental pollution and hazards and that are involved in work to address environmental justice issues. Existing law authorizes the Secretary for Environmental Protection to expend up to $1,500,000 per year for purposes of this grant program. This bill would instead authorize the secretary to expend up to $2,000,000 per year for purposes of the grant program and would require up to $500,000 of that money to be expended by the secretary for grants to organizations working to address and mitigate the effects of sea level rise in disadvantaged communities, as defined, impacted by sea level rise. (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, 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.
The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018 established as a policy of the state that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100% of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2045. The act requires the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) , State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) , and State Air Resources Board to, as part of a public process, issue a joint report to the Legislature by January 1, 2021, and every 4 years thereafter, that includes specified information relating to the implementation of the policy. Existing law requires the PUC and the Energy Commission to undertake various actions in furtherance of meeting the state's clean energy and pollution reduction objectives. This bill would require the Energy Commission, on or before June 1, 2022, to evaluate and quantify the maximum feasible capacity of offshore wind to achieve reliability, ratepayer, employment, and decarbonization benefits and to establish offshore wind planning goals for 2030 and 2045, as specified. The bill would require the Energy Commission, in coordination with specified agencies, to develop a strategic plan for offshore wind energy developments installed off the California coast in federal waters, as specified. The bill would require the Energy Commission to submit the strategic plan to the Natural Resources Agency and the Legislature on or before June 30, 2023. The bill would require the Energy Commission, in coordination with specified agencies, to work with stakeholders, state, local, and federal agencies, and the offshore wind energy industry to identify suitable sea space for wind energy areas in federal waters sufficient to accommodate the offshore wind planning goals for 2030 and 2045. The bill would require the Energy Commission, in coordination with relevant state and local agencies, to develop a plan to improve waterfront facilities that could support a range of floating offshore wind energy development activities. The bill would require the Energy Commission, in consultation with the PUC and Independent System Operator, to assess the transmission investments and upgrades necessary to support the offshore wind planning goals for 2030 and 2045, as specified. The bill would require the Energy Commission to develop and produce a permitting roadmap that describes timeframes and milestones for a permitting process for offshore wind energy facilities and associated electricity and transmission infrastructure off the coast of California. The bill would require the information described in this paragraph and potential impacts on coastal resources, fisheries, Native American and Indigenous peoples, and national defense, and strategies for addressing those potential impacts, to be included in the strategic plan, as specified. The bill would require the Energy Commission, on or before December 31, 2022, to submit to the Natural Resources Agency and the relevant fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature a preliminary assessment of the economic benefits of offshore wind as they relate to seaport investments and workforce development needs and standards. The bill would repeal all of these provisions on January 1, 2027.
Existing law establishes the Sierra Nevada Conservancy and prescribes the functions and duties of the conservancy with regard to the preservation of specified lands in the Sierra Nevada Region, as defined. Existing law requires the conservancy to make an annual report to the Legislature and to the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency regarding expenditures, land management costs, and administrative costs. This bill would modify areas listed under the definitions of the "Sierra Nevada Region" and its "subregions," as specified, for these purposes. The bill would require the conservancy to include, in its report regarding expenditures, land management costs, and administrative costs for the year 2022, recommendations to the Legislature for legislation to change the name of the conservancy and the governing board of the conservancy, and to change the structure of the regions, subregions, and board, to align the conservancy with its recent expansion in the Counties of Shasta, Siskiyou, and Trinity.