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 law generally requires a recipient of CalWORKs benefits to participate in welfare-to-work activities as a condition of eligibility for aid. Existing law requires that necessary supportive services be available to participants in welfare-to-work activities, including child care, personal counseling, transportation costs, and ancillary expenses. This bill would, on and after April 1, 2018, require the above-described supportive services to additionally include the costs of diapers. The bill would make a participant who is participating in a welfare-to-work plan eligible for $30 per month to assist with diaper costs for each child who is under 36 months of age. The bill would require the State Department of Social Services to implement this provision through all-county letters until regulations are adopted by January 1, 2020. By increasing the duties of counties administering the CalWORKs program, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would instead provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of implementing the bill. 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, the Moore-Brown-Roberti Family Rights Act, or California Family Rights Act (CFRA) , makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer, as defined, to refuse to grant a request by an eligible employee to take up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period (1) for reason of a child born to, adopted by, or placed for foster care with, the employee, (2) to care for the employee's parent or spouse who has a serious health condition, as defined, or (3) because the employee is suffering from a serious health condition rendering him or her unable to perform the functions of the job. Existing law prohibits an employer from refusing to allow a female employee disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition to take a leave for a reasonable time of up to 4 months before returning to work. Existing law also prohibits an employer from refusing to maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for an employee who takes that leave, as specified. This bill would prohibit an employer, as defined, from refusing to allow an employee with more than 12 months of service with the employer, who has at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period, and who works at a worksite in which the employer employs at least 20 employees within 75 miles, to take up to 12 weeks of parental leave to bond with a new child within one year of the child's birth, adoption, or foster care placement. The bill would also prohibit an employer from refusing to maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for an employee who takes this leave. The bill would allow the employer to recover coverage costs under specific circumstances. The bill would provide that it would not apply to an employee who is subject to both specified state law regarding family care and medical leave, and the federal Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. Under the bill, if the employer employs both parents and they are entitled to leave pursuant to this bill for the same birth, adoption, or foster care placement, the parents' mandated parental leave would be capped at the amount granted to an employee by the bill. The bill would authorize the employer to grant simultaneous leave to these parents. This bill would also prohibit an employer from refusing to hire, or from discharging, fining, suspending, expelling, or discriminating against, an individual for exercising the right to parental leave provided by this bill or giving information or testimony as to his or her own parental leave, or another person's parental leave, in an inquiry or proceeding related to rights guaranteed under this bill. The bill would additionally prohibit an employer from interfering with, restraining, or denying the exercise of, or the attempt to exercise, any right provided under this bill. The bill would require the Fair Employment and Housing Council, to the extent that state regulations interpreting CFRA are within the scope of, and not inconsistent with the bill or with other state law, to incorporate those regulations by reference to govern leave under the bill. Under existing law, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing is authorized to provide mediation services to parties involved in actions under its jurisdiction. This bill, until January 1, 2020, would require the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, upon receiving funding from the Legislature, to create a parental leave mediation pilot program, as specified. Under the pilot program, within 60 days of receipt of a right-to-sue notice, an employer may request all parties to participate in the department's Mediation Division Program. If the employer makes such a request, the bill would prohibit an employee from pursuing any civil action under these provisions until the mediation is complete, as defined, which would include an employee's election not to participate in mediation. The bill would provide that the employee's statute of limitations would be tolled during the course of the mediation, as specified.
(1) Existing law generally governs a patient's access to his or her health records. Existing law requires a health care provider to provide any patient, former patient, or the representative of a patient or former patient a copy, at no charge, of the relevant portion of the patient's health records upon presenting to the health care provider a written request and proof that the health records are needed to support an appeal regarding eligibility for specified public benefit programs. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions by certain health care providers an infraction. This bill would make those health care providers provide those patients with a copy of those health records at no charge to support a claim for eligibility for a public benefit program. The bill would specify additional public benefit programs to which these requirements would apply. The bill would make related conforming changes. By making the existing criminal penalties applicable to additional duties of a health care provider, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 123110 of the Health and Safety Code proposed by SB 241 to be operative only if this bill and SB 241 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (2) 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 provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services through fee-for-service or managed care delivery systems. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed by, and funded pursuant to, federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law provides that family planning services are a covered Medi-Cal benefit, subject to utilization controls, as specified. This bill would prohibit a Medi-Cal managed care plan, as defined, from restricting the choice of the qualified provider, as defined, from whom a Medi-Cal beneficiary enrolled in the plan may receive family planning services. The bill would require a Medi-Cal managed care plan to reimburse an out-of-plan or out-of-network qualified provider at the applicable fee-for-service rate. If federal approval is required to implement these provisions, the bill would be implemented only to the extent that federal approval is obtained. The bill would make related legislative findings and declarations.
(1) Existing law, the Political Reform Act of 1974, provides for the comprehensive regulation of campaign financing and activities. The act requires a committee that supports or opposes ballot measures to name and identify itself using a name or phrase that clearly identifies the economic or other special interests of its major donors of $50,000 or more. The act also requires that the identity of a common employer shared by major donors be disclosed. This bill would repeal these provisions. (2) The act defines "expenditure" as a payment, a forgiveness of a loan, a payment of a loan by a 3rd party, or an enforceable promise to make a payment, unless it is clear from the surrounding circumstances that it is not made for political purposes. This bill, which would be known as the California Disclose Act, would describe circumstances in which a payment would be made for political purposes within the meaning of the definition of "expenditure." (3) The act prohibits a candidate or committee from sending a mass mailing unless the name, street address, and city of the candidate or committee are shown on the outside of each piece of mail in the mass mailing, as specified. This bill would additionally require the name of such an entity to be disclosed in a mass electronic mailing, as defined, that the entity sends. The bill would provide that these disclosure requirements do not apply if the mass mailing or mass electronic mailing is paid for by an independent expenditure. (4) The act prohibits a candidate, committee, or slate mailer organization from expending campaign funds to pay for specified telephone calls that advocate support of, or opposition to, a candidate, ballot measure, or both, unless the name of the organization that authorized or paid for the call is disclosed to the recipient of the call during the course of each call. This bill would instead apply these requirements to a candidate, a candidate controlled committee established for an elective office for the controlling candidate, a political party committee, and a slate mailer organization that expends campaign funds to pay for such telephone calls. The bill would provide that these disclosure requirements do not apply if the telephone call is paid for by an independent expenditure. (5) The act also requires advertisements, as defined, to include prescribed disclosure statements, including, among others, a requirement that the disclosure statements include the names of the persons who made the 2 highest cumulative contributions, as defined, to the committee paying for the advertisement. This bill would repeal and recast provisions of the act relating to advertisement disclosure statements. The bill would revise the definition of "advertisement" to exclude a number of communications, including communications that involve wearing apparel, sky writing, and certain electronic media communications, as specified. The bill would also replace existing advertisement disclosure statements with newly prescribed disclosure statements that identify the name of the committee paying for the advertisement and the top contributors to that committee. The bill would define "top contributors" for purposes of these provisions as the persons from whom the committee paying for the advertisement received its 3 highest cumulative contributions, as specified. The bill would exempt certain committees, including committees that make independent expenditures totaling $1,000 or more in a calendar year, from the requirement to disclose the top contributors in advertisement disclosure statements. The bill would also prescribe location and format criteria for the disclosure statements that are specific to radio and telephone, television and video, print, and electronic media advertisements. (6) The act imposes, in addition to other penalties, a fine of up to triple the amount of the cost of an advertisement on a person who violates the disclosure requirements for advertisements. This bill would revise the scope of violations subject to that fine by specifying that it applies to certain disclosure requirements and intentional violations. (7) The act prohibits a person from making a contribution as an intermediary on behalf of another person without disclosing to the recipient of the contribution specified information about both the intermediary and the source of the contribution. The act also prohibits a person from making a contribution to a committee on the condition or with the agreement that it will be contributed to a particular candidate unless the contribution is disclosed in compliance with those requirements for contributions made by an intermediary. This bill would prohibit a person from making a contribution to a committee or candidate that is earmarked unless the contribution is disclosed in compliance with the requirements for contributions made by an intermediary. The bill would also describe circumstances in which a contribution is deemed to be earmarked. The bill would impose additional disclosure requirements in connection with earmarked contributions from one committee to another. (8) Because a violation of the act is punishable as a misdemeanor, 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. (9) The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law authorizes victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking to complete an application to be approved by the Secretary of State for the purpose of enabling state and local agencies to respond to requests for public records without disclosing a program participant's residence address contained in any public record and otherwise provide for confidentiality of identity for that person, subject to specified conditions. Any person who makes a false statement in an application is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would make this program available to a victim of human trafficking, as defined. The bill would also make the program available to household members, as defined, of a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, or human trafficking, excluding the perpetrator, if applicable. The bill would make additional conforming changes. By including victims of human trafficking and specified household members of victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, or human trafficking, this bill would impose new duties on local public officials and expand the scope of an existing crime, thereby creating 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law defines extortion as the obtaining of property from another, with his or her consent, or the obtaining of an official act of a public officer, induced by a wrongful use of force or fear, or under color of official right. This bill would include within the definition of extortion the obtaining of consideration, as defined, by force, fear, or under color of official right. The bill would define "consideration" as anything of value, including enumerated sexual acts or sexual images. By changing the elements of the crime of extortion, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation and local authorities to designate certain highway lanes for the exclusive or preferential use of high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs) , requires the department or local authorities to place signage advising motorists of the rules governing the use of those lanes, and prohibits the use of those lanes by motorists other than in conformity with the posted rules. Existing law provides a limited exemption allowing motorcycles, mass transit vehicles, and paratransit vehicles to use HOV lanes. This bill would provide an exemption to allow for blood transport vehicles, as defined, to use HOV lanes, regardless of the number of occupants. The bill would require certain conditions be met for the new exemption to be operative, including requiring the Director of Transportation to determine that the exemption would not result in a loss of federal funds or conflict with federal law, as specified, and requiring the director to post that determination on the Department of Transportation's Internet Web site.
Under existing law, there are programs providing assistance for, among other things, emergency housing, multifamily housing, farmworker housing, home ownership for very low and low-income households, and downpayment assistance for first-time home buyers. Existing law also authorizes the issuance of bonds in specified amounts pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires that proceeds from the sale of these bonds be used to finance various existing housing programs, capital outlay related to infill development, brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development, and housing-related parks. Existing law, the Veterans' Bond Act of 2008, authorized, for purposes of financing a specified program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, the issuance, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law, of bonds in the amount of $900,000,000. This bill would enact the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018, which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. Of the proceeds from the sale of these bonds, $3,000,000,000 would be used to finance various existing housing programs, as well as infill infrastructure financing and affordable housing matching grant programs, as provided, and $1,000,000,000 would be used to provide additional funding for the above-described program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, as provided. This bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election in accordance with specified law. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
This measure would urge the United States government to urge the Mexican government and the Ministers, the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court in Mexico, whose President is Javier Laynez Potisek, to make a final determination to pay the braceros pursuant to the decision of February 29, 2016, and would urge the United States government to urge the Mexican government to accept a variety of documents to prove that a bracero or his or her heir or beneficiary has a valid claim.