Sen. Caroline Menjivar

Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a legislative body, as defined, of a local agency be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend and participate. The act generally requires for teleconferencing that the legislative body of a local agency that elects to use teleconferencing post agendas at all teleconference locations, identify each teleconference location in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and have each teleconference location be accessible to the public. Existing law also requires that, during the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction. The act provides an exemption to the jurisdictional requirement for health authorities, as defined. Existing law, until January 1, 2024, authorizes the legislative body of a local agency to use alternate teleconferencing provisions during a proclaimed state of emergency or in other situations related to public health that exempt a legislative body from the general requirements (emergency provisions) and impose different requirements for notice, agenda, and public participation, as prescribed. The emergency provisions specify that they do not require a legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. Existing law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes the legislative body of a local agency to use alternative teleconferencing in certain circumstances related to the particular member if at least a quorum of its members participate from a singular physical location that is open to the public and situated within the agency's jurisdiction and other requirements are met, including restrictions on remote participation by a member of the legislative body. This bill, until January 1, 2026, would authorize an eligible legislative body to use alternate teleconferencing provisions related to notice, agenda, and public participation, as prescribed, if the city council has adopted an authorizing resolution and 23 of an eligible legislative body votes to use the alternate teleconferencing provisions. The bill would define "eligible legislative body" for this purpose to mean a neighborhood council that is an advisory body with the purpose to promote more citizen participation in government and make government more responsive to local needs that is established pursuant to the charter of a city with a population of more than 3,000,000 people that is subject to the act. The bill would require an eligible legislative body authorized under the bill to provide publicly accessible physical locations for public participation, as prescribed. The bill would also require that at least a quorum of the members of the neighborhood council participate from locations within the boundaries of the city in which the neighborhood council is established. The bill would require that, at least once per year, at least a quorum of the members of the eligible legislative body participate in person from a singular physical location that is open to the public and within the boundaries of the eligible legislative body. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the neighborhood councils of the City of Los Angeles. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law, the Menstrual Equity for All Act of 2021, requires a public school, as provided, maintaining any combination of classes from grades 6 to 12, inclusive, to stock the school's restrooms with an adequate supply of free menstrual products, as defined, available and accessible, free of cost, in all women's restrooms and all-gender restrooms, and in at least one men's restroom, at all times, and to post a certain notice, on or before the start of the 2022–23 school year, as prescribed. This bill would extend these requirements, commencing on or before the start of the 2024–25 school year, to instead apply to public schools maintaining any combination of classes from grades 3 to 12, inclusive. By imposing new duties on local educational agencies, 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.

Existing law classifies controlled substances into 5 schedules and places the greatest restrictions and penalties on the use of those substances placed in Schedule I. Existing law classifies the drug fentanyl in Schedule II. Existing law prohibits a person from possessing for sale or purchasing for purposes of sale specified controlled substances, including fentanyl, and provides for imprisonment in a county jail for 2, 3, or 4 years for a violation of this provision. Existing law also imposes an additional term, and authorizes a trial court to impose a specified fine, upon a person who is convicted of a violation of, or of a conspiracy to violate, specified provisions of law with respect to a substance containing heroin, cocaine base, and cocaine, if the substance exceeds a specified weight. This bill would add fentanyl to the substances for which additional terms or fines can be imposed and would require a defendant who violates those laws with respect to a substance containing heroin, fentanyl, or cocaine, as specified, to know of the substance's nature or character as a controlled substance to be subjected to an additional term and authorized fine. By increasing the penalty for, and by changing the definition of, 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.

The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to permit private, nonprofit organizations to conduct raffles as a funding mechanism to support beneficial and charitable works, if, among other conditions, at least 90% of the gross receipts from the raffle go directly to beneficial or charitable purposes in California. The California Constitution further authorizes the Legislature to amend the percentage of gross receipts required to be dedicated to beneficial or charitable purposes by a statute passed by a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature. Existing statutory law implements those provisions and requires the Department of Justice to administer and enforce those provisions. Existing statutory law, until January 1, 2024, authorizes a major league sports raffle at a home game conducted by an eligible organization, as defined, for the purpose of directly supporting specified beneficial or charitable purposes in California, or financially supporting another private, nonprofit, eligible organization, as defined, that performs those purposes if, among other requirements, 50% of the gross receipts generated from the sale of raffle tickets are used to benefit or provide support for beneficial or charitable purposes, as defined, the other 50% is paid to the winner, and the winners of the prizes are determined by a manual draw, as specified. This bill would permanently extend the operation of those provisions beyond January 1, 2024. By extending the operation of provisions that revise the percentage of gross receipts required to go to beneficial or charitable purposes pursuant to the California Constitution, this bill would require a 23 vote of each house.

Prior state law established the Healthy California for All Commission for the purpose of developing a plan towards the goal of achieving a health care delivery system in California that provides coverage and access through a unified health care financing system for all Californians, including, among other options, a single-payer financing system. This bill would direct the Secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency to research, develop, and pursue discussions of a waiver framework in consultation with the federal government with the objective of a health care system that incorporates specified features and objectives, including, among others, a comprehensive package of medical, behavioral health, pharmaceutical, dental, and vision benefits, and the absence of cost sharing for essential services and treatments. The bill would further require the secretary to engage specified stakeholders to provide input on topics related to discussions with the federal government and key design issues, as specified. The bill would require the secretary, no later than January 1, 2025, to provide an interim report to specified committees of the Legislature and propose statutory language to the chairs of those committees authorizing the development and submission of applications to the federal government for waivers necessary to implement a unified health care financing system. The bill would require the secretary, no later than June 1, 2025, to complete drafting the waiver framework, make the draft available to the public on the agency's internet website, and hold a 45-day public comment period thereafter. The bill would require the secretary, no later than November 1, 2025, to provide the Legislature and the Governor with a report that communicates the finalized waiver framework, as specified, and sets forth the specific elements to be included in a formal waiver application to establish a unified health care financing system, as specified. The bill would also include findings and declarations of the Legislature related to the implementation of a unified health care financing system.

Existing law, after a tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied a residential real property for 12 months, prohibits the owner of the residential real property from terminating the tenancy without just cause and requires that just cause to be stated in the written notice to terminate tenancy. Existing law distinguishes between at-fault just cause and no-fault just cause and defines no-fault just cause to mean intent to occupy the residential real property by the owner or the owner's spouse, domestic partner, children, grandchildren, parents, or grandparents, withdrawal of the residential real property from the rental market, the owner complying with specified government orders that necessitate vacating the real property, and intent to demolish or to substantially remodel the residential real property. This bill would, with respect to the no-fault just cause related to an eviction based on an intent to occupy the residential real property, require, among other things, that the owner, as defined, or the owner's spouse, domestic partner, children, grandchildren, parents, or grandparents occupy the residential real property for a minimum of 12 continuous months as the person's primary residence, as provided. The bill would also, with respect to the no-fault just cause related to withdrawal of the residential real property from the rental market, require the rental units at the rental property be withdrawn from the rental market, as prescribed. The bill would require an owner who displaces a tenant to substantially remodel or demolish a unit to provide the tenant with written notice providing the tenant with specified information, including a description of the substantial remodel to be completed and the expected duration of the repairs, or the expected date by which the property will be demolished, and a copy of permits required to undertake the substantial remodel or demolition, as specified. This bill would also prescribe new enforcement mechanisms with respect to the provisions described above, including by making an owner who attempts to recover possession of a rental unit in material violation of those provisions liable to the tenant in a civil action for damages of up to 3 times the actual damages, in addition to punitive damages. The bill would authorize the Attorney General and the city attorney or county counsel, within whose jurisdiction the rental unit is located, to bring actions for injunctive relief against the owner, as specified. Existing law, until January 1, 2030, prohibits an owner of residential real property from, over the course of any 12-month period, increasing the gross rental rate for a dwelling or a unit more than 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, or 10%, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for that dwelling or unit at any time during the 12 months before the effective date of the increase, subject to specified conditions. This bill would make an owner who demands, accepts, receives, or retains any payment of rent in excess of the maximum rent increase allowed, as prescribed, liable in a civil action to the tenant from whom those payments are demanded, accepted, received, or retained for certain relief, including, upon a showing that the owner has acted willfully or with oppression, fraud, or malice, damages up to 3 times the amount by which any payment demanded, accepted, received, or retained exceeds the maximum allowable rent. This bill would authorize the Attorney General and the city attorney or county counsel, within whose jurisdiction the residential property is located, to enforce the bill's provisions and bring an action for injunctive relief, as specified. This bill would also make a technical, nonsubstantive change to those provisions. The bill would provide that its provisions become effective on April 1, 2024.

(1) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various categories of medical professionals by boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs, including, among others, the Medical Board of California and the Dental Board of California. Existing law makes specified actions by licensed health care providers unprofessional conduct and, in certain cases, a criminal offense. This bill would prohibit a healing arts board, as defined, from denying an application for a license or imposing discipline upon a licensee or health care practitioner on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or disciplinary action in another state if that judgment, conviction, or disciplinary action is based solely on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive sensitive services, as defined, that would be lawful if provided in this state, regardless of the patient's location. The bill would further provide that the performance, recommendation, or provision of a legally protected health care activity by a licensee or health care practitioner acting within their scope of practice for a patient who resides in a state in which the performance, recommendation, or provision of that legally protected health care activity is illegal, does not, by itself, constitute professional misconduct, upon which discipline or other penalty may be taken. In this connection, the bill would define a "legally protected health care activity" to mean specified acts, including, among others, the exercise and enjoyment, or attempted exercise and enjoyment, by a person of rights related to reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services secured by the Constitution or laws of this state or the provision of by a health care service plan contract or a policy, or a certificate of health insurance, that provides for those services. (2) Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, generally prohibits a health care provider, health care service plan, contractor, or corporation from sharing, selling, using for marketing, or otherwise using medical information for a purpose not necessary to provide health care services to the patient. This bill would prohibit a person or business from collecting, using, disclosing, or retaining the personal information of a person who is physically located at, or within a precise geolocation of, a family planning center, as defined, except as necessary to perform the services or provide the goods requested. The bill would prohibit the sale or sharing of this information. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person or entity to institute and prosecute a civil action for a violation of these provisions and specify damages and costs authorized to be recovered. The bill would specify these provisions do not apply to a provider of health care, a health care service plan, or a contractor, as defined. (3) Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, declares as contrary to the public policy of this state a law of another state that authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person or entity that engages in certain activities relating to obtaining or performing an abortion. Existing law prohibits the state from applying an out-of-state law described above to a case or controversy in state court or enforcing or satisfying a civil judgment under the out-of-state law. This bill would state that California law governs in any action against a person who provides or receives by any means, including telehealth, reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services, as specified, if the care was legal in the state in which it was provided at the time of the challenged conduct. The bill would state that interference with the right to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirming mental health care services, as those terms are defined, is against the public policy of California. The bill would declare as a violation of public policy a public act or record of a foreign jurisdiction that, among other things, authorizes a person to bring a civil action against a person, provider, or other entity in California for, among other acts, seeking or providing reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirmative mental health care services. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that nothing in the bill be interpreted to undermine or decrease any existing protections under California law. The bill would authorize a person to institute a civil action against a person who engages in abusive litigation, as defined, that infringes on or interferes with a legally protected health care activity, among other things. The bill would specify damages and costs authorized to be recovered and would specify circumstances under which a court may exercise jurisdiction over a person in such a civil action. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person, provider, or other entity, as defined, to move to modify or quash a subpoena issued in connection with abusive litigation. The bill would specify the laws of California govern in a case or controversy heard in California related to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming health care services, or gender-affirming mental health care services, except as required by federal law. (4) Existing law permits a judgment creditor to apply for the entry of a judgment based on a sister state judgment by filing an application with a superior court and requires the court clerk to enter a judgment based on the application. Existing law also requires courts to grant a stay enforcement of such a judgment under specified circumstances. This bill would additionally require a court to grant a stay of enforcement of a sister state judgment if a money judgment or lien on real property was obtained for the exercise of a right guaranteed by the United States Constitution, a right guaranteed by the California Constitution, or against a person or entity for aiding and abetting the exercise of those rights, as specified. (5) Existing law prohibits an abortion from being performed upon an unemancipated minor unless she first has given her written consent to the abortion and also has obtained the written consent of one of her parents or legal guardian. Existing law provides specified judicial procedures to be followed if one or both of the unemancipated pregnant minor's or her guardian refuse to consent or if the minor elects not to seek their consent. This bill would repeal these provisions. (6) Existing law defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Existing law creates an exemption for a person who commits an act that results in the death of a fetus under specific circumstances, including if the act is solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the person pregnant with the fetus. This bill would expand that exemption to include a person pregnant with a fetus who committed the act that resulted in the death of the fetus. (7) Existing law prohibits a state or local law enforcement agency or officer from knowingly arresting or knowingly participating in the arrest of any person for performing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of an abortion or for obtaining an abortion, if the abortion is lawful in this state. Existing law prohibits a state or local public agency from cooperating with or providing information to an individual or agency from another state or a federal law enforcement agency, as specified, regarding a lawful abortion. This bill would additionally prohibit a state or local government employee or a person acting on behalf of the local or state government, among others, from providing information or expending resources in furtherance of an investigation that seeks to impose civil or criminal liability or professional sanctions on an individual for a legally protected health care activity that occurred in this state or that would be legal if it occurred in this state. The bill would require any out-of-state subpoena, warrant, wiretap order, pen register trap and trace order, or other legal process to include an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury that the discovery request is not in connection with an out-of-state proceeding relating to a legally protected health care activity, except as specified. By requiring an individual seeking to discovery under these provisions to declare certain conditions are present under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a state-mandated local program. (8) Existing law authorizes a magistrate to issue a warrant, upon application by a bail bondsman, as described, for an individual fleeing bail in another state and found in this state upon a finding of probable cause for believing that the person is a fugitive. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to take a person who is a fugitive admitted to bail in another state into custody, except pursuant to a magistrate's order. This bill would prohibit a magistrate from issuing a warrant for the arrest of an individual whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of the laws of another state that authorize a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, an abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the recipient's location. The bill would make a bail bondsman who takes such an individual into custody without a warrant guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of $5,000 and ineligible for and subject to forfeiture of specified licenses. The bill would create a civil cause of action for an individual taken into custody in violation of this provision. By creating a new crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (9) Existing law, the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act, prohibits a person, other than a certified law enforcement officer, from apprehending, detaining, or arresting a bail fugitive unless the person is a licensed bail fugitive recovery agent, or both a bail licensee and private investigator who are also bail fugitive recovery agents. Existing law makes a violation of the Bail Fugitive Recovery Persons Act a misdemeanor. This bill would prohibit a person authorized under the act from apprehending, detaining, or arresting a bail fugitive who has been admitted to bail in another state and whose alleged offense or conviction is for the violation of a law of another state that authorizes a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care, if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state, regardless of the recipient's location. The bill would make a violation of this provision an infraction punishable by a fine of $5,000 and make the authorized individual ineligible for and subject to forfeiture of specified licenses. The bill would create a civil cause of action for an individual taken into custody in violation of this provision. By expanding the application of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. (10) Existing law establishes a process by which a material witness in this state may be ordered to attend and testify in a pending prosecution or grand jury in another state. This bill would prohibit a judge from ordering a witness to appear pursuant to these provisions if the criminal prosecution is based on the laws of another state that authorizes a criminal penalty to an individual performing, receiving, supporting, or aiding in the performance or receipt of sexual or reproductive health care, including, but not limited to, an abortion, contraception, or gender-affirming care if the sexual or reproductive health care is lawful under the laws of this state. (11) Existing law provides for the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families and individuals. Existing federal law establishes the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , known in California as CalFresh, under which supplemental nutrition assistance benefits allocated to the state by the federal government are distributed to eligible individuals by each county. Existing federal regulations disqualify a fleeing felon, as defined, from receiving benefits under the CalFresh program. This bill would require a determination that a person is fleeing to avoid prosecution for purposes of eligibility in the CalWORKs program if a federal, state, or local law enforcement officer in their official capacity presents an outstanding felony arrest warrant containing specified National Crime Information Center Uniform Offense Classification Codes. (12) Existing law refers to "unborn children" and "unborn persons" in various contexts, including, among others, defining low-risk pregnancy conditions for determining the scope of authorization of a certificate to practice nurse-midwifery, defining active labor for health facility licensing provisions, and defining spouse for California State Teachers' Retirement System benefits. This bill would replace "unborn child" and "unborn person" with "fetus" in those provisions. (13) Existing law also refers to "unborn persons" in various contexts, including naming unknown defendants in real property actions, allowing a court to appoint a guardian ad litem to advocate for inadequately represented interests in probate proceedings, allowing a guardian ad litem to give consent on behalf of a beneficiary who lacks legal capacity, and providing an exception for requiring a personal representative to file an account of the distributions of a decedent's estate. This bill would replace "unborn person" with "unborn beneficiary" in those provisions. (14) 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. (15) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2746.5 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by SB 667 to be operative only if this bill and SB 667 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law declares another state's law authorizing a civil action against a person or entity that receives or seeks, performs or induces, or aids or abets the performance of an abortion, or who attempts or intends to engage in those actions, to be contrary to the public policy of this state, and prohibits the application of that law to a controversy in state court and the enforcement or satisfaction of a civil judgment received under that law. This bill would specifically include within these provisions, in addition to abortion performers, abortion providers. 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 also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. The bill would also prohibit a contract issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2024, between a health care service plan or health insurer and a health care services provider from containing any term that would result in termination or nonrenewal of the contract or otherwise penalize the provider based on a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or another professional disciplinary action in another state if the judgment, conviction, or professional disciplinary action is solely based on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive care that would be lawful if provided in California. The bill would also prohibit a health care service plan or health insurer from discriminating against a licensed provider solely on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or another professional disciplinary action in another state if the judgment, conviction, or professional disciplinary action is solely based on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive care that would be lawful if provided in California. 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. Existing law requires that the State Department of Public Health automatically suspend as a Medi-Cal provider any individual or entity that has a license, certificate, or other approval to provide health care that is revoked or suspended by a federal, California, or another state's licensing, certification, or approval authority, has otherwise lost that license, certificate, or approval, or has surrendered that license, certificate, or approval while a disciplinary hearing was pending. The bill would also authorize the department, subject to obtaining necessary federal approvals and the availability of federal financial participation under Medi-Cal, to elect to not suspend an individual or entity as a provider in the Medi-Cal program if the revocation, suspension, or loss of the individual or entity's license, certification, or approval authority in another state or the pending disciplinary hearing during which the individual or entity surrendered the license, certification, or approval authority in another state is based solely on conduct that is not deemed to be unprofessional conduct under California law. The bill would also require the department to seek any necessary federal approvals to implement these provisions. Under existing law, the Director of Health Care Services is authorized, for purposes of administering the Medi-Cal program, to suspend a provider of service from further participation under the program for specified reasons, including conviction of any felony or any misdemeanor involving fraud, abuse of the Medi-Cal program or any patient, or otherwise substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a provider of service. Existing law requires the director, upon receipt of written notification from the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services that a physician or other individual practitioner has been suspended from participation in the Medicare or Medicaid programs, to promptly suspend the practitioner from participation in the Medi-Cal program. Existing law also requires the Director of Health Care Services to notify the administrative director of a suspension of a physician from participation in the Medi-Cal program imposed pursuant to provisions authorizing the director to suspend a provider of service from participation. This bill would authorize the director, subject to obtaining necessary federal approvals and the availability of federal financial participation under Medi-Cal, to request a waiver under federal law, as permitted, if the provider's suspension from participating in the Medicare or Medicaid program was based solely on conduct that is not deemed to be unprofessional conduct under California law. The bill would also require the department to seek any necessary federal approvals to implement these provisions. 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, the Reproductive Privacy Act, provides that every individual possesses a fundamental right of privacy with respect to their personal reproductive decisions. Existing law prohibits the state from denying or interfering with a person's right to choose or obtain an abortion prior to viability of the fetus, or when the abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the person. Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA) , generally prohibits a provider of health care, a health care service plan, or a contractor from disclosing medical information regarding a patient, enrollee, or subscriber without first obtaining an authorization, unless a specified exception applies. The CMIA requires every provider of health care, health care service plan, pharmaceutical company, or contractor who, among other things, maintains or stores medical information to do so in a manner that preserves the confidentiality of the information contained therein. The CMIA also prohibits a provider of health care, a health care service plan, a contractor, or an employer from releasing medical information that would identify an individual or related to an individual seeking or obtaining an abortion in response to a subpoena or a request or to law enforcement if that subpoena, request, or the purpose of law enforcement for the medical information is based on, or for the purpose of enforcement of, either another state's laws that interfere with a person's rights to choose or obtain an abortion or a foreign penal civil action. Existing law makes a violation of the CMIA that results in economic loss or personal injury to a patient punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would require specified businesses that electronically store or maintain medical information on the provision of sensitive services on behalf of a provider of health care, health care service plan, pharmaceutical company, contractor, or employer to develop capabilities, policies, and procedures, on or before July 1, 2024, to enable certain security features, including limiting user access privileges and segregating medical information related to gender affirming care, abortion and abortion-related services, and contraception, as specified. The bill would additionally prohibit a provider of health care, health care service plan, contractor, or employer from cooperating with any inquiry or investigation by, or from providing medical information to, an individual, agency, or department from another state or, to the extent permitted by federal law, to a federal law enforcement agency that would identify an individual or that is related to an individual seeking or obtaining an abortion or abortion-related services that are lawful under the laws of this state, unless the request for medical information is authorized in accordance with specified existing provisions of law. The bill would exempt a provider of health care from liability for damages or from civil or enforcement actions relating to cooperating with, or providing medical information to, another state or a federal law enforcement agency before January 31, 2026, if the provider of health care is working diligently and in good faith to comply with the prohibition. Because the bill would expand the scope of an existing crime, it would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the California Health and Human Services Agency, in consultation with stakeholders and local partners, to establish the California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework that includes a single data sharing agreement and common set of policies and procedures that govern and require the exchange of health information among health care entities and government agencies in California. Existing law requires, on or before January 31, 2024, that specified entities, including general acute care hospitals and skilled nursing facilities, exchange health information, as defined, in real time. This bill would exclude the exchange of health information related to abortion and abortion-related services from automatically being shared on the California Health and Human Services Data Exchange Framework. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 130290 of the Health and Safety Code proposed by SB 582 to be operative only if this bill and SB 582 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.

Existing law establishes the California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP) Grant Program, administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections, to award competitive grants for the purpose of violence intervention and prevention. Existing law imposes various taxes, including taxes on the privilege of engaging in certain activities. The Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, provides procedures for the collection of certain fees and surcharges. This bill, the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Act, would, commencing July 1, 2024, impose an excise tax in the amount of 11% of the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of a firearm, firearm precursor part, and ammunition, as specified. The tax would be collected by the state pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law. The bill would require that the revenues collected be deposited in the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Fund, which the bill would establish in the State Treasury. The bill would require the moneys received in the fund to be used to fund various gun violence prevention, education, research, response, and investigation programs, as specified. The bill would require the Director of Finance to transfer, as a loan, $2,400,000 from the General Fund to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to implement these provisions, as specified. The bill would require each licensed firearms dealer, firearms manufacturer, and ammunition vendor to register with the department for a certificate, as specified. The bill would also provide procedures for the issuance, revocation, and reinstatement of a permit. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. Because this bill would expand the scope of the Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.