(1) The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes a local agency, by ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, to provide for the creation of accessory dwelling units in single-family and multifamily residential zones in accordance with specified standards and conditions. Existing law requires any ordinance adopted by a local agency to comply with certain criteria, including that it require accessory dwelling units to be either attached to, or located within, the proposed or existing primary dwelling or detached if located within the same lot, and that it does not exceed a specified amount of total area of floor space. This bill would, instead, authorize the creation of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned to allow single-family or multifamily dwelling residential use. The bill would also revise the requirements for an accessory dwelling unit by providing that the accessory dwelling unit may be attached to, or located within, an attached garage, storage area, or other structure, and that it does not exceed a specified amount of total floor area. (2) Existing law generally authorizes a local agency to include in the ordinance parking standards for accessory dwelling units, including authorizing a local agency to require the replacement of parking spaces if a garage, carport, or covered parking is demolished to construct an accessory dwelling unit. Existing law also prohibits a local agency from imposing parking standards on an accessory dwelling unit if it is located within one-half mile of public transit. This bill would, instead, prohibit a local agency from requiring the replacement of parking spaces if a garage, carport, or covered parking is demolished to construct an accessory dwelling unit. The bill would also prohibit a local agency from imposing parking standards on an accessory dwelling unit that is located within one-half mile walking distance of public transit, and would define the term "public transit" for those purposes. (3) Existing law authorizes a local agency to establish minimum and maximum unit size limitations on accessory dwelling units, provided that the ordinance permits an efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance with local development standards. This bill would prohibit a local agency from establishing a minimum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that prohibits an efficiency unit, as defined. The bill would also prohibit a local agency from establishing a maximum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that is less than 850 square feet, and 1,000 square feet if the accessory dwelling unit contains more than one bedroom. The bill would also instead prohibit a local agency from establishing any other minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, or limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, and minimum lot size for either attached or detached dwelling units that prohibit at least an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit that is at least 16 feet in height and with a 4-foot side and rear yard setbacks. (4) Existing law prohibits a local agency from utilizing standards to evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot that is zoned for residential use that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling other than the criteria described above, except that, among one other exception, a local agency may require an applicant for a permit to be an owner-occupant of either the primary or accessory dwelling unit as a condition of issuing a permit. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would instead prohibit a local agency from imposing an owner-occupant requirement as described above. (5) Existing law requires a local agency that has not adopted an ordinance governing accessory dwelling units to approve or disapprove the application ministerially and without discretionary review within 120 days after receiving the application. The bill would require a local agency, whether or not it has adopted an ordinance, to consider and approve an application, ministerially and without discretionary review, within 60 days after receiving a completed application. The bill would also provide that, if a local agency does not act on the application within that time period, the application shall be deemed approved. (6) Existing law requires fees for an accessory dwelling unit to be determined in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act. Existing law also requires the connection fee or capacity charge for an accessory dwelling unit requiring a new or separate utility connection to be based on either the accessory dwelling unit's size or the number of its plumbing fixtures. This bill would prohibit a local agency, special district, or water corporation from imposing any impact fee, as specified, upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than 750 square feet, and would require any impact fees to be charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more to be proportional to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. The bill would revise the basis for calculating the connection fee or capacity charge specified above to either the accessory dwelling unit's square feet or the number of its drainage fixture unit values, as specified. (7) Existing law, for purposes of these provisions, defines "living area" as the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit including basements and attics, but not a garage or accessory structure. This bill would define "accessory structure" to mean a structure that is accessory and incidental to a dwelling located on the same lot. (8) Existing law requires a local agency to submit a copy of the adopted ordinance to the Department of Housing and Community Development and authorizes the department to review and comment on the ordinance. This bill would instead authorize the department to submit written findings to the local agency as to whether the ordinance complies with the statute authorizing the creation of an accessory dwelling unit, and, if the department finds that the local agency's ordinance does not comply with those provisions, would require the department to notify the local agency within a reasonable time. The bill would require the local agency to consider the department's findings and either amend its ordinance to comply with those provisions or adopt it without changes and include specified findings. If the local agency does not amend it ordinance or does not adopt those findings, the bill would require the department to notify the local agency and authorize it to notify the Attorney General that the local agency is in violation of state law, as provided. The bill would authorize the department to adopt guidelines to implement uniform standards or criteria to supplement or clarify the provisions authorizing accessory dwelling units. (9) Existing law requires the planning agency of each city and county to adopt a general plan that includes a housing element that identifies adequate sites for housing. Existing law authorizes the department to allow a city or county to do so by a variety of methods and also authorizes the department to allow a city or county to identify sites for accessory dwelling units, as specified. This bill would state that a local agency may count an accessory dwelling unit for purposes of identifying adequate sites for housing in accordance with those provisions. (10) Existing law, the State Housing Law, a violation of which is a crime, establishes statewide construction and occupancy standards for buildings used for human habitation. Existing law requires, for those purposes, that any building, including any dwelling unit, be deemed to be a substandard building when a health officer determines that any one of specified listed conditions exists to the extent that it endangers the life, limb, health, property, safety, or welfare of the public or its occupants. This bill would authorize the owner of an accessory dwelling unit built before January 1, 2020, or built on or after January 1, 2020, under specified circumstances, that receives a notice to correct violations or abate nuisances to request that the enforcement of the violation be delayed for 5 years if correcting the violation is not necessary to protect health and safety, as determined by the enforcement agency, subject to specified requirements. The bill would make conforming and other changes relating to the creation of accessory dwelling units. By increasing the duties of local agencies with respect to land use regulations, and because the bill would expand the scope of a crime under the State Housing Law, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (11) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65852.2 of the Government Code proposed by AB 68 and AB 881 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 68 and AB 881 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (12) 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 an elector who is otherwise qualified to register to vote to complete a conditional voter registration and cast a provisional ballot during the 14 days immediately preceding an election or on election day, as prescribed. A county elections official is required to offer conditional voter registration and provisional voting at all permanent offices of the county elections official in the county in accordance with specified procedures. Existing law also permits the county elections official to offer conditional voter registration and provisional voting at satellite offices of the county elections office. This bill would specifically require, rather than permit, the county elections official to offer conditional voter registration and provisional voting at all satellite offices of the county elections official and all polling places in the county. If the elections official is able to determine a conditionally registered voter's precinct, and the ballot for that precinct is available, the bill would require the elections official to provide the voter with a ballot for the voter's precinct. If the elections official is unable to determine the conditionally registered voter's precinct, or a ballot for the precinct is unavailable, the bill would require the elections official to provide the voter with a ballot and inform the voter that only the votes for the candidates and measures on which the voter would be entitled to vote in the voter's assigned precinct may be counted. By requiring county elections officials to offer conditional voter registration and provisional voting at all satellite offices and all polling places, and by imposing additional duties on elections officials with respect to provisional ballots, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2170 of the Elections Code proposed by AB 693 to be operative only if this bill and AB 693 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law, beginning October 1, 2019, and stayed pending voter approval under the powers of referendum pursuant to the California Constitution, requires Pretrial Assessment Services, as defined, to assess a person arrested or detained, as specified, according to a risk assessment instrument, as defined. Existing law requires Pretrial Assessment Services to release from confinement specified individuals based on that risk assessment, and, if the person is not released, to submit that assessment to the court for use in its pretrial release or detention decision. This bill would require each pretrial services agency that uses a pretrial risk assessment tool to validate the tool by January 1, 2021, and on a regular basis thereafter, but no less frequently than once every 3 years, and to make specified information regarding the tool, including validation studies, publicly available. The bill would require the Judicial Council to maintain a list of pretrial services agencies that have satisfied those validation requirements and complied with those transparency requirements. The bill would require the Judicial Council, beginning on December 31, 2020, and on or before December 31 of each year thereafter, to publish a report on its internet website with data related to outcomes and potential biases in pretrial release. The bill would require specified pretrial services agencies, the Department of Justice, courts, and local governments that elect to use risk assessment tools to work with the Judicial Council to provide the data necessary for this report. The bill would also require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2022, to provide a report to the courts and the Legislature containing recommendations to mitigate bias and disparate effect in pretrial decisionmaking.
Existing law establishes the California Conservation Corps and requires that young people participating in the corps program generally be engaged in projects that, among other things, preserve, maintain, and enhance environmentally important lands and waters. Existing law requires the director of the corps to establish a forestry corps program to accomplish certain objectives, including developing and implementing forest health projects, as provided, and establishing forestry corps crews. Existing law establishes the California Conservation Camp program to provide for the training and use of inmates and wards assigned to conservation camps to perform public conservation projects, including, but not limited to, forest fire prevention and control, forest and watershed management, recreation, fish and game management, soil conservation, and forest and watershed revegetation. This bill would authorize the director of the corps to establish the Education and Employment Reentry Program within the corps and to enroll in the program formerly incarcerated individuals who successfully served on a California Conservation Camp program crew and were recommended for participation as a program member by the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The bill would prescribe program enrollment terms, and would require the director of the corps, in conjunction with the Employment Development Department, to prioritize developing and executing plans to assist program members in obtaining continued employment following participation in the program. The bill would also establish program activities and objectives, including, among others, assisting with the forestry corps program objectives. The bill would authorize the corps, subject to the discretion and approval of the director of the corps, to enter into a planning agreement with certain entities to develop reentry and job training opportunities for the formerly incarcerated individuals described above who do not otherwise qualify for corps enrollment under corps policies. The bill would make implementation of the program contingent upon an appropriation being made in the annual Budget Act or another statute for its purposes.
Existing law specifies that a hiring of residential real property, for a term not specified by the parties, is deemed to be renewed at the end of the term implied by law unless one of the parties gives written notice to the other of that party's intention to terminate. Existing law requires an owner of a residential dwelling to give notice at least 60 days prior to the proposed date of termination, or at least 30 days prior to the proposed date of termination if any tenant or resident has resided in the dwelling for less than one year, as specified. Existing law requires any notice given by an owner to be given in a prescribed manner, to contain certain information, and to be formatted, as specified. This bill would, with certain exceptions, prohibit an owner, as defined, of residential real property from terminating a tenancy without just cause, as defined, which the bill would require to be stated in the written notice to terminate tenancy when the tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied the residential real property for 12 months, except as provided. The bill would require, for certain just cause terminations that are curable, that the owner give a notice of violation and an opportunity to cure the violation prior to issuing the notice of termination. The bill, if the violation is not cured within the time period set forth in the notice, would authorize a 3-day notice to quit without an opportunity to cure to be served to terminate the tenancy. The bill would require, for no-fault just cause terminations, as specified, that the owner, at the owner's option, either assist certain tenants to relocate, regardless of the tenant's income, by providing a direct payment of one month's rent to the tenant, as specified, or waive in writing the payment of rent for the final month of the tenancy, prior to the rent becoming due. The bill would require the actual amount of relocation assistance or rent waiver provided to a tenant that fails to vacate after the expiration of the notice to terminate the tenancy to be recoverable as damages in an action to recover possession. The bill would provide that if the owner does not provide relocation assistance, the notice of termination is void. The bill would except certain properties and circumstances from the application of its provisions. The bill would require an owner of residential property to provide prescribed notice to a tenant of the tenant's rights under these provisions. The bill would not apply to residential real property subject to a local ordinance requiring just cause for termination adopted on or before September 1, 2019, or to residential real property subject to a local ordinance requiring just cause for termination adopted or amended after September 1, 2019, that is more protective than these provisions, as defined. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2030. Existing law governs the hiring of residential dwelling units and requires a landlord to provide specified notice to tenants prior to an increase in rent. Existing law, the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, prescribes statewide limits on the application of local rent control with regard to certain properties. That act, among other things, authorizes an owner of residential real property to establish the initial and all subsequent rental rates for a dwelling or unit that meets specified criteria, subject to certain limitations. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property from, over the course of any 12-month period, increasing the gross rental rate for a dwelling or unit more than 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, as defined, or 10%, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for the immediately preceding 12 months, subject to specified conditions. The bill would prohibit an owner of a unit of residential real property from increasing the gross rental rate for the unit in more than 2 increments over a 12-month period, after the tenant remains in occupancy of the unit over a 12-month period. The bill would exempt certain properties from these provisions. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to submit a report, on or before January 1, 2030, to the Legislature regarding the effectiveness of these provisions. The bill would provide that these provisions apply to all rent increases occurring on or after March 15, 2019. The bill would provide that in the event that an owner increased the rent by more than the amount specified above between March 15, 2019, and January 1, 2020, the applicable rent on January 1, 2020, shall be the rent as of March 15, 2019, plus the maximum permissible increase, and the owner shall not be liable to the tenant for any corresponding rent overpayment. The bill would authorize an owner who increased the rent by less than the amount specified above between March 15, 2019, and January 1, 2020, to increase the rent twice within 12 months of March 15, 2019, but not by more than the amount specified above. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. The Planning and Zoning Law requires the owner of an assisted housing development in which there will be an expiration of rental restrictions to, among other things, provide notice of the proposed change to each affected tenant household residing in the assisted housing development subject to specified procedures and requirements, and to also provide specified entities notice and an opportunity to submit an offer to purchase the development prior to the expiration of the rental restrictions. This bill would authorize an owner of an assisted housing development, who demonstrates, under penalty of perjury, compliance with the provisions described above with regard to the expiration of rental restrictions, to establish the initial unassisted rental rate for units without regard to the cap on rent increases discussed above, but would require the owner to comply with the above cap on rent increases for subsequent rent increases in the development. The bill would authorize an owner of a deed-restricted affordable housing unit or an affordable housing unit subject to a regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a government agency limiting rental rates that is not within an assisted housing development to establish the initial rental rate for the unit upon the expiration of the restriction, but would require the owner to comply with the above cap on rent increases for subsequent rent increases for the unit. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. By requiring an owner of an assisted housing development to demonstrate compliance with specified provisions under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the existing crime of perjury and thus would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes criteria and procedures pursuant to which cities and counties adjust or adopt council and supervisorial district area boundaries, as applicable, for the purpose of electing members of the governing body of each of those local jurisdictions. This bill would revise and recast these provisions. The bill would require the governing body of each local jurisdiction described above to adopt new district boundaries after each federal decennial census, except as specified. The bill would specify redistricting criteria and deadlines for the adoption of new boundaries by the governing body. The bill would specify hearing procedures that would allow the public to provide input on the placement of boundaries and on proposed boundary maps. The bill would require the governing body to take specified steps to encourage the residents of the local jurisdiction to participate in the redistricting process. By increasing the duties of these local jurisdictions, 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, 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 authorizes a judgment creditor to levy upon the property of a judgment debtor to satisfy a judgment, and authorizes the judgment debtor to claim that certain property is exempt from the levy by following a specified procedure. Existing law authorizes a claimant to assert an exemption by filing a claim of exemption with the levying officer within 10 days after the date the notice of levy on the property claimed to be exempt is served on the judgment debtor. Existing law authorizes a judgment creditor who opposes a claim of exemption to file a notice of opposition to the claim and a notice of motion for an order determining the claim within 10 days after service of the notice of claim of exemption. This bill would authorize a claimant to file a claim of exemption with the levying officer either in person or by mail and would specify that the period for filing the claim is 15 days if the judgment debtor is personally served with a notice of levy on the property claimed to be exempt, and 20 days if the claimant is served with notice by mail. The bill would deem the filing by mail complete on the date the claim is postmarked if the mailing is assigned a tracking number. If the mailing is not assigned a tracking number, the bill would deem the filing by mail complete on the date the claim is received by the levying officer. The bill would extend the period of time in which a judgment creditor may give notice of opposition to a claim of exemption to 15 days after service of the notice of claim of exemption. These provisions of the bill would become operative on September 1, 2020. (2) Existing law authorizes a judgment creditor to levy upon the earnings of a judgment debtor through specified wage garnishment procedures, and specifies the maximum amount of a judgment debtor's disposable earnings, as defined, that are subject to that garnishment. Existing law specifies certain property of a judgment debtor as exempt, including 75% of paid earnings of an employee that can be traced into deposit accounts or in the form of cash or its equivalent if prior to payment to the employee those earnings were not subject to an earnings withholding order or an earnings assignment order for support. This bill would instead, in the case of paid earnings that were not subject to an earnings withholding order or an earnings assignment order for support prior to payment to the employee, specify that disposable earnings that would otherwise not be subject to levy under the wage garnishment procedures described above are exempt. The bill would exempt from levy money provided to the judgment debtor by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. With certain enumerated exceptions, the bill would exempt from a levy money in a judgment debtor's deposit account in an amount equal to or less than the minimum basic standard of adequate care for a family of four, as specified. The bill would require a levy against a judgment debtor's deposit account to include a description of these requirements. The bill would also exempt from a levy money in a judgment debtor's deposit account that is not otherwise exempt under these provisions to the extent that money is necessary for the support of the judgment debtor and the spouse and dependents of the judgment debtor. This bill would require the Judicial Council to amend or adopt necessary forms. These provisions of the bill would become operative on September 1, 2020.
(1) Existing law authorizes the governing board of any school district or community college district to order an election and submit to the electors of the district the question of whether the bonds of the district shall be issued and sold to raise money for specified purposes. Existing law generally requires, to pass a school bond measure, that either at least 23 of the votes cast on the proposition of issuing bonds be in favor of issuing the bonds to pass the measure, or, if certain conditions are met, at least 55% of the votes cast on the proposition of issuing bonds be in favor of issuing the bonds. Existing law prohibits the total amount of bonds issued by a school district or community college district from exceeding 1.25% of the taxable property of the district, as provided. This bill would raise that limit to 2%. (2) Existing law also authorizes a unified school district to issue bonds receiving at least 55% of the votes cast on the proposition of issuing the bonds that, in aggregation with bonds issued with a 23 favorable vote, do not exceed 2.5% of the taxable property of the district, as provided. This bill would raise that limit to 4%. The bill would make a similar percentage increase for community college districts. (3) The Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 provides for the adoption of rules, regulations, and procedures, under the administration of the Director of General Services, for the allocation of state funds by the State Allocation Board for the construction and modernization of public school facilities. This bill would, among other things, require a school district to submit to the Department of General Services a 5-year school facilities master plan or updated 5-year school facilities master plan, as provided, as a condition of participating in the school facilities program under the act, would require the school district to submit specified information in the school district's application for an apportionment of state funds, and would make other changes to requirements a school district is required to comply with before participating in programs under the act. The bill would require the department to process applications to participate in the program, as specified, and would make other changes to the method by which the board makes apportionments of moneys under the act. This bill would establish the 2020 State School Facilities Fund, and authorize the board to apportion, and make disbursements of, moneys in the fund, as provided. The bill would require, for bonds approved by voters in 2020 or thereafter, the board to adjust a school district's required local and state contribution, as specified. The bill would authorize new construction and modernization grants to be used for seismic mitigation purposes and, among other things, to establish schoolsite-based infrastructure to provide broadband internet access. The bill would also authorize modernization grants to be used, among other things, for the control, management, or abatement of lead and for the demolishment and construction of a building on an existing schoolsite that meets specified conditions. The bill would prohibit the use of new construction and modernization grants for the purchase of portable electronic devices with a useful life of less than 3 years. This bill would authorize funding for health and safety projects by a school district, as provided. This bill would authorize the board to provide a grant to test for lead in water outlets used for drinking or preparing food on schoolsites serving kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, as provided. The bill would specify procedures that small school districts, as defined, may use to obtain project and construction management, new construction grants, and modernization grants. The bill would also make conforming changes in, and remove inoperative provisions from, the act. (4) The act also requires the board to adopt regulations for determining the amount of funding and the eligibility and prioritization of funding that school districts with a financial hardship may receive from bond acts for construction, modernization, or relocation assistance. The act requires those regulations to include consideration of various factors, including whether the school district's total bonding capacity is $5,000,000 or less, in which case the school district shall be deemed eligible for financial hardship. This bill, for purposes of the regulations related to financial hardship eligibility, would increase the total bonding capacity cap to $15,000,000, to be adjusted as specified. (5) The California Constitution prohibits the Legislature from creating a debt or liability that singly or in the aggregate with any previous debts or liabilities exceeds the sum of $300,000, except by an act that (A) authorizes the debt for a single object or work specified in the act, (B) has been passed by a 23 vote of all the Members elected to each house of the Legislature, (C) has been submitted to the people at a statewide general or primary election, and (D) has received a majority of all the votes cast for and against it at that election. This bill would set forth the Public Preschool, K-12, and College Health and Safety Bond Act of 2020 as a state general obligation bond act that would provide $15,000,000,000 to construct and modernize education facilities, as specified. This bond act would become operative only if approved by the voters at the March 3, 2020, statewide primary election. The bill would also provide for the submission of the bond act to the voters at that election. (6) Existing law establishes the California State University, which is administered by the Board of Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, as segments of public postsecondary education in this state. This bill would require the Board of Trustees and the Regents to comply with certain conditions, as provided, before receiving funds from the 2020 University Capital Outlay Bond Fund established pursuant to the Public Preschool, K-12, and College Health and Safety Bond Act of 2020. (7) Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to impose, as specified, an alternative fee, charge, dedication, or requirement on developers to fund school facilities, until the date new construction bond proceeds authorized by the Preschool-College Public Education Bond Act of 2016 are expended, or December 31, 2020, whichever is earlier. This bill would remove this authority beginning the earlier of January 1, 2021, or the date new construction bond proceeds authorized by the 2016 bond act are expended or apportioned, until January 1, 2028. The bill would also exempt multifamily housing developments that are located no further than 12 mile from a major transit stop, and reduce by 20% from specified amounts for any other multifamily housing developments, as specified, from any fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement for the construction or reconstruction of school facilities, as provided. (8) This bill, except for the provision making the provisions of the bill severable, would become effective upon the adoption of the Public Preschool, K-12, and College Health and Safety Bond Act of 2020 by the voters at the March 3, 2020, statewide primary election.
Existing law authorizes or requires the court to suspend or delay the driving privilege, or to order the Department of Motor Vehicles to suspend or delay the driving privilege, of a person who is convicted of any of certain offenses, including, among others, offenses relating to vandalism, controlled substance or alcohol use, possession, or related conduct, or firearm use. Existing law authorizes the court to suspend the driving privilege of a person, for not more than 30 days, upon conviction of soliciting or engaging in prostitution or specified lewd or dissolute conduct, if the violation was committed within 1,000 feet of a private residence and with the use of a vehicle. Existing law authorizes the court, as an alternative, to order a person's driving privilege restricted, for not more than 6 months, to necessary travel to and from the person's place of employment or education. This bill would repeal the court's authority to suspend or delay the driving privilege, or to order the department to suspend or delay the driving privilege, of a person based on a conviction of one of the above-specified offenses. The bill would make other conforming changes. The bill would state that its provisions are not intended to affect any order issued by the court before January 1, 2020, to suspend, delay, or otherwise restrict the driving privilege of a person, or any action taken by the department, whether before, on, or after January 1, 2020, pursuant to an order issued by the court before January 1, 2020, to suspend, delay, or otherwise restrict the driving privilege of a person. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 647 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1129, to be operative only if this bill and AB 1129 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law prescribes various requirements regarding the formation, content, and enforcement of state and local public contracts. Existing law establishes, until January 1, 2020, for contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2017, a claim resolution process applicable to any claim by a contractor in connection with a public works project against a public entity, as defined. Existing law defines a claim for these purposes as a separate demand by the contractor for one or more of the following: a time extension for relief from damages or penalties for delay, payment of money or damages arising from work done pursuant to the contract for a public work, or payment of an amount disputed by the public entity, as specified. This bill would extend the operation of this claim resolution process until January 1, 2027.