Sen. Caroline Menjivar

(1) Existing law requires a landlord of a residential dwelling to give notice to the tenant a certain number of days before the effective date of a rent increase depending on the amount of the increase, as specified. This bill would apply this requirement to leases of commercial real property by a qualified commercial tenant, as defined. The bill would specify, in all leases for commercial real property by a qualified commercial tenant, that a rent increase would not be effective until the notice period required by these provisions has expired. The bill would also specify that a violation of these provisions would not entitle a qualified commercial tenant to civil penalties. The bill would require a landlord of a commercial real property to include information on these provisions in the notice. (2) Existing law requires a person engaged in a trade or business who negotiates primarily in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, or Korean, in the course of entering into specified agreements, to deliver to the other party a translation of the agreement in the language in which it was negotiated, as specified. Existing law authorizes a person to rescind an agreement if the agreement does not comply with that translation requirement, as specified. Existing law creates an exemption from the translation requirement for specified agreements if the other party negotiates the terms through the other party's own interpreter. Under existing law, both the translation requirement and the interpreter exemption apply to a tenancy agreement covering a dwelling unit normally occupied as a residence. This bill would apply the translation requirement, but not the interpreter exemption, to a tenancy agreement covering a nonresidential-zoned commercial space entered into between a landlord and a qualified commercial tenant, as defined, on or after January 1, 2025. The bill would only authorize the tenant to rescind the agreement for noncompliance with the translation requirement. (3) 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 the tenancy. 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 a tenant or resident has resided in the dwelling for less than one year, as specified. This bill would generally apply these provisions to a hiring of commercial real property hired by a qualified commercial tenant, as defined. The bill would require a landlord of a commercial real property to include information on these provisions in the notice. (4) Existing law applicable to commercial leases and nonresidential tenancies of real property prohibits a landlord from demanding a payment as a condition of initiating, continuing, or renewing a lease or rental agreement, unless the amount of the payment is stated in a written lease or rental agreement. Existing law specifies that these provisions do not prohibit a landlord from increasing a tenant's rent for nonresidential real property in order to recover building operating costs incurred on behalf of the tenant, if the right to rent, the method of calculating the increase, and the period of time covered by the increase is stated in the lease or rental agreement. This bill would prohibit a landlord of a commercial real property from charging a qualified commercial tenant, as defined, a fee to recover building operating costs, as defined, unless specified conditions are met, including, among other things, that the costs are allocated proportionately per tenant and the qualified commercial tenant is provided supporting documentation, as specified. The bill would allow a qualified commercial tenant to raise a violation of this provision as an affirmative defense in an action to recover possession based on a failure to pay the fee. The bill would make a landlord of a commercial real property who violates this provision liable to a qualified commercial tenant for specified damages, and would authorize the district attorney, city attorney, or county counsel, as specified, to seek injunctive relief. The bill would apply these provisions to specified leases and tenancies, but not to assessments levied pursuant to the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1632 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 3281 to be operative only if this bill and AB 3281 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1946.1 of the Civil Code proposed by SB 611 to be operative only if this bill and SB 611 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

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 disability insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law imposes various requirements and restrictions on health care service plans and disability insurers, including, among other things, a requirement that every group health care service plan contract or disability insurance policy that is issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 1990, offer coverage for the treatment of infertility, except in vitro fertilization. This bill would require large and small group health care service plan contracts and disability insurance policies issued, amended, or renewed on or after July 1, 2025, to provide coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of infertility and fertility services. With respect to large group health care service plan contracts and disability insurance policies, the bill would require coverage for a maximum of 3 completed oocyte retrievals, as specified. The bill would revise the definition of infertility, and would remove the exclusion of in vitro fertilization from coverage. The bill would also delete a requirement that a health care service plan contract and disability insurance policy provide infertility treatment under agreed-upon terms that are communicated to all group contractholders and policyholders. The bill would prohibit a health care service plan or disability insurer from placing different conditions or coverage limitations on fertility medications or services, or the diagnosis and treatment of infertility and fertility services, than would apply to other conditions, as specified. The bill would make these requirements inapplicable to a religious employer, as defined, and specified contracts and policies. Because the 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.

Under existing law, in any civil action that contains allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, or sexual battery, opinion evidence, reputation evidence, and evidence of specific instances of a plaintiff's sexual conduct with someone other than the alleged perpetrator, is not admissible by the defendant in order to prove consent by the plaintiff or the absence of injury to the plaintiff. This bill would also make the specified types of evidence inadmissible in such civil actions when being used to attack the credibility of the plaintiff's testimony on consent or absence of injury. Under existing law, in any sexual battery civil action involving a minor and an adult who is in a position of authority, as specified, evidence of the plaintiff minor's sexual conduct with the defendant adult is not admissible to prove consent by the plaintiff or the absence of injury to the plaintiff. Existing law authorizes evidence of the minor plaintiff's sexual conduct to be introduced only to attack the credibility of the plaintiff or to prove something other than consent by the plaintiff if, upon a hearing of the court out of the presence of the jury, the defendant proves that the probative value of that evidence outweighs the prejudice to the plaintiff, as specified. This bill would remove the requirement, in cases involving a minor and an adult who is in a position of authority, that prior to the introduction of specified types of evidence, a court hold a hearing out of the presence of the jury, where the defendant bears the burden to prove that the probative value of the evidence outweighs the prejudice. The introduction of evidence relating to the sexual conduct of the minor in such cases would be evaluated under procedures already in place under existing law.

Existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (act) , requires the State Department of Developmental Services to contract with regional centers to provide services and supports to individuals with developmental disabilities and their families. Under existing law, the regional centers purchase needed services and supports for individuals with developmental disabilities through approved service providers, or arrange for their provision through other publicly funded agencies. The services and supports to be provided to a regional center consumer are contained in an individual program plan (IPP) , which is developed by the planning team according to specified procedures. Existing law requires the department to establish and implement a statewide Self-Determination Program to provide participants and their families, within an individual budget, increased flexibility and choice, and greater control over decisions, resources, and needed and desired services and supports to implement their IPP, in accordance with prescribed requirements. Existing law declares the intent of the Legislature to provide more statewide uniformity and consistency and promote equity in the administrative practices and services of regional centers, consistent with the act. This bill, the Advancing Equity and Access in the Self-Determination Program Act, would require the department, by January 1, 2026, to establish statewide standardized processes and procedures for the Self-Determination Program, as specified, and to ensure that those processes and procedures are applied consistently by regional centers and that they make measurable improvements towards achieving equitable enrollment by race, ethnicity, and regional center. The bill would require deviation from the standardized processes and procedures to be approved by the department. Existing law provides participants with a choice of financial management services providers who assist the participant to manage and direct the distribution of funds contained in the individual budget, and ensure that the participant has the financial resources to implement their IPP throughout the year. This bill would, subject to eligibility for federal funding, require regional centers to ensure that participant choice of providers is respected and that the full cost of the participant's provider is included in the participant's spending plan, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 4685.8 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by SB 1463 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1463 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law requires, in conformance with federal law, that the Secretary of State and the Department of Motor Vehicles establish and implement the California New Motor Voter Program for the purpose of increasing opportunities for voter registration for qualified voters. Existing law requires the department to transmit to the Secretary of State specified information related to a person's eligibility to vote, which the person provides when applying for a driver's license or identification card or when the person notifies the department of an address change. Existing law requires that if this information transmitted to the Secretary of State constitutes a completed affidavit of registration, the Secretary of State must register or preregister the person to vote, as applicable, unless the person affirmatively declines to register or is ineligible to vote, as specified. This bill would require the Secretary of State and the department to develop a process for the department to use information from the statewide voter registration database to determine whether a person who submits a driver's license application is already registered or preregistered to vote in the state. The bill would require the department, based upon this determination, to transmit specified information provided by the person during their transaction with the department to the Secretary of State for the purpose of registering or preregistering that person to vote or to update their registration information. The bill would prohibit the department from providing a person the opportunity to attest to meeting voter eligibility requirements when they submit a driver's license application, if the person provides a document to the department during the transaction demonstrating that the person is not a United States citizen. The bill would permit the Secretary of State, upon a determination that sufficient technology infrastructure exists, to promulgate regulations concerning the establishment of a list of individuals who are eligible to be preapproved for voter registration, as specified. This bill would make these provisions operative on the earlier of January 1, 2030, or 5 days after the Secretary of State and the department certify that the information technology infrastructure necessary to substantially implement the bill is functional. The bill would permit the Secretary of State and the department, beginning on January 1, 2025, to perform administrative actions necessary to implement these provisions.

Existing law requires the Governor to appoint every officer whose mode of appointment is not prescribed by law. Existing law also prescribes the manner of the Governor's appointment of those officers. This bill would require the office of the Governor, commencing January 1, 2026, to maintain on its internet website a list of every state board and commission that includes, for each state board or commission, the membership list, stated purpose, duties, meeting frequency, internet website, and vacancies in the membership. The bill would require the office of the Governor, on or before January 1, 2027, and annually thereafter, to create and publish on its internet website a report containing aggregate demographic information of appointments made by the office during the prior calendar year, as specified.

Existing law requires a person who is incarcerated in state prison or confined in a local detention facility, or a state or local juvenile facility, and who menstruates or experiences uterine or vaginal bleeding to, upon request, have access to, be allowed to use, and continue to use materials necessary for personal hygiene with regard to their menstrual cycle and reproductive system, including, but not limited to, sanitary pads and tampons. This bill would require the person to have ready access to these menstrual products without having to request them. By imposing additional duties on local detention facilities, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law requires the State Department of Public Health to license, regulate, and inspect health facilities, as specified, including general acute care hospitals. A violation of these provisions is a crime. Under existing law, a general acute care hospital is required to provide certain basic services, including medical, nursing, surgical, anesthesia, laboratory, radiology, pharmacy, and dietary services. Existing law authorizes a general acute care hospital to provide various special or supplemental services if certain conditions are met. Existing regulations define a supplemental service as an organized inpatient or outpatient service that is not required to be provided by law or regulation. Existing law requires a health facility to provide 90 days of public notice of the proposed closure or elimination of a supplemental service, and 120 days of public notice of the proposed closure or elimination of an acute psychiatric hospital. This bill would change the notice period required before proposed closure or elimination of the supplemental service of inpatient psychiatric unit or a perinatal unit from 90 days to 120 days. By changing the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the health facility to provide public notice of the proposed elimination of the supplemental service of either inpatient psychiatric unit or perinatal unit, as specified. The bill would require the health facility to conduct at least one noticed public hearing within 60 days of providing public notice of the proposed elimination of the inpatient psychiatric unit or perinatal unit and would require the health facility to accept public comment. The bill would require the health facility to post the public hearing notice and the agenda along with the public notice. The bill would require the health facility holding the public hearing to meet prescribed requirements, including notifying the board of supervisors of the county in which the health facility is located when a public hearing is scheduled and inviting the board of supervisors to provide testimony on the impacts of the elimination of the services to the county and community health systems. 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 authorizes the court to issue an order to restrain a person to prevent acts of domestic violence, abuse, and sexual abuse, and to provide for a separation of the persons involved in the domestic violence for a period sufficient to permit these persons to seek resolution. Existing law authorizes a person who has suffered harassment, as defined, to seek a temporary restraining order and an order prohibiting harassment. Existing law prohibits denial of the right to petition when the petitioner has vacated the household to avoid abuse, and, under certain conditions, in the case of a marital relationship. This bill would specify the jurisdictions in which the petitioner may file for a restraining order, including, among other jurisdictions, the superior court in the county where the defendant resides, where the offense occurred, or where the petitioner resides or is temporarily located. The bill would expressly state that an individual need not be a resident of the state to file a petition for a restraining order under these provisions. The bill would also declare the severability of its provisions.

(1) Existing federal law, the Victims of Crime Act of 1984, creates the Crime Victims Fund and authorizes federal financial assistance to states for the purpose of supporting eligible crime victim assistance programs. Existing law creates various programs under the Office of Emergency Services related to crime prevention and education, including, among other things, programs concerning family violence prevention and domestic violence prevention. This bill, the California Victims of Crime Act, would establish the California Crime Victims Fund in the State Treasury and would require that moneys deposited in the fund be continuously appropriated to the Office of Emergency Services to support crime victims services. The bill would require the Office of Emergency Services to seek advisement from the Victims of Crime Act Steering Committee on priorities for utilizing the funds and would require the Treasurer to provide an annual report to the Legislature on the amounts deposited into the fund. By continuously appropriating moneys to the Office of Emergency Services for the support of crime victim services, the bill would make an appropriation. (2) Existing law establishes the aggravated white-collar crime enhancement which imposes enhanced penalties against a person who commits 2 or more related felonies, a material element of which is fraud or embezzlement, that involve a pattern of related felony conduct, and the pattern of related felony conduct involves the taking or loss of more than $100,000, as specified. This bill would authorize a court to impose an additional fine, known as the corporate white collar criminal enhancement, against a corporation that is convicted of a misdemeanor or felony. The bill would authorize the court to determine the amount of the fine, but would set specified limits. The bill would require the court to consider certain factors when determining the amount of the fine, including, among other things, the nature and seriousness of the offense and the corporation's assets, liabilities, and net worth, as specified. The bill would require that any moneys collected under this provision be deposited into the California Crime Victims Fund. (3) The California Constitution entitles the victim of a crime to restitution. Existing law requires the court in each criminal case to order a convicted defendant to pay full restitution to the victim and a separate restitution fine, as specified. This bill would, if a corporation is convicted of a misdemeanor or felony offense, require the court to impose a separate and additional restitution fine, as specified. The bill would authorize the court to determine the amount of the restitution fine, but would impose specified maximums. The bill would require any moneys collected under this provision to be distributed to the California Crime Victims Fund and the prosecuting agency that brought the criminal prosecution, as specified.