Sen. María Elena Durazo

Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. The federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires a health insurance issuer to comply with minimum medical loss ratios (MLRs) and to provide an annual rebate to each insured if the MLR of the amount of the revenue expended by the issuer on costs to the total amount of premium revenue is less than a certain percentage, as specified. Existing law requires health care service plans and health insurers that issue, sell, renew, or offer a contract or policy, excluding specialized dental and vision contracts and policies, to comply with a minimum MLR of 85% and provide specified rebates. Existing law requires a health care service plan or health insurer that issues, sells, renews, or offers a contract or policy covering dental services to annually report MLR information to the appropriate department. This bill would require a health care service plan or health insurer that issues, sells, renews, or offers a specialized dental health care service plan contract or specialized dental health insurance policy to comply with a minimum MLR of 85% and to provide a specified rebate to an enrollee or insured. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

(1) Existing law provides for unemployment compensation benefits for eligible individuals in the state who are unemployed through no fault of their own. Existing law excludes from the definition of "wages," for purposes of the unemployment insurance law, remuneration in excess of $7,000 paid to an individual by an employer during any calendar year, with respect to employment. This bill would change the amount of remuneration that is excluded from the definition of "wages," to $____ on and after January 1, 2025, but before January 1, 2027, and to $____ on and after January 1, 2027. The bill would require an annual cost of living increase to the $____ amount on and after January 1, 2028, and each January 1 thereafter. (2) Under existing law, unemployment compensation benefit award computations are based on wages paid in the base period. Existing law defines "base period" for these purposes (main base period) , and also establishes an alternative base period that is applicable to new claims that are filed on or after a specified date, but no later than April 2, 2012, and for which a valid claim or benefit year cannot be established under the main base period. This bill would make the alternative base period the main base period for all claims. (3) Existing law provides that an individual who is unemployed in any week and is eligible for unemployment compensation benefits shall be paid an unemployment compensation benefit with respect to that week in an amount equal to their weekly benefit amount, reduced by the smaller of $25 or the amount of wages in excess of 25% of the wages payable to the individual for services rendered during that week. This bill would instead require the payment of an unemployment compensation benefit with respect to that week in an amount equal to their weekly benefit amount, reduced by the amount of wages in excess of 50% of the wages payable to the individual for services rendered during that week. (4) Under existing law, for new unemployment insurance claims filed with an effective date beginning on or after January 1, 2003, the weekly benefit amount for individuals whose highest wages in the quarter of their base period exceeds $1,832.99 is 50% of those wages divided by 13. On or after January 1, 2005, that law prohibits the weekly benefit amount from exceeding $450. This bill would instead, for new claims filed with an effective date beginning on or after January 1, 2025, set the individual's weekly benefit amount at 121 of the wages paid to the individual for employment by employers during the quarter of their base period in which their wages were highest, or $170, whichever is greater. The bill would set an increased maximum weekly benefit amount of $700. The bill would require an annual cost of living adjustment to the minimum and maximum weekly benefit amounts, commencing on January 1, 2026, and each January 1 thereafter. (5) Existing law establishes the Unemployment Compensation Disability Fund (disability fund) , a special fund, and authorizes the Controller to use the moneys in the disability fund for loans to the General Fund, as prescribed. Existing law, however, requires interest to be paid on all moneys loaned to the General Fund from the disability fund. This bill would impose additional requirements on loans made from the disability fund when the loan is made to pay interest due to the federal government for payments made to the state pursuant to specified federal law, or for any other reason related to the insolvency of the Unemployment Fund. (6) Existing law provides that employer contributions to the Unemployment Fund shall accrue and become payable by every employer, except as specified, for each calendar year with respect to wages paid for employment. Existing law requires, in addition to other contributions, every employer, except as specified, to pay into the Employment Training Fund contributions at the rate of 0.1% of wages, as defined, and sets forth the manner of collection. This bill would create in the State Treasury a special fund known as the Excluded Workers Fund. The bill would require every employer, except as specified, to pay into the Excluded Workers Fund contributions at the rate of 0.5% of wages, as defined. The bill would require, upon appropriation by the Legislature, specified costs to be reimbursed from the fund and would otherwise limit the use of moneys in the fund for the support of excluded worker programs to provide income assistance to excluded workers who are ineligible for the state or federal unemployment insurance benefits administered by the Employment Development Department and who are unemployed. (7) Because the bill would increase the amount of unemployment compensation paid and make an additional amount payable from the Unemployment Fund, a continuously appropriated special fund, as well as would increase the amount of the unemployment insurance contribution required to be paid by employers and thereby increase the amounts of benefits deposited in the fund, the bill would make an appropriation. (8) 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.

This measure would proclaim the week of March 3, 2024, to March 9, 2024, inclusive, as Women in Construction Week.

This measure would require the Senate to direct its policy committees to incorporate more effective equity considerations in their analyses of future energy and climate legislation and would resolve the Senate into exploring methods to integrate equity more formally into its daily activities.

Existing law requires all contracts for the acquisition of information technology goods and services related to information technology projects, as defined, to be made by or under the supervision of the Department of Technology, which also has the final authority in the determination of information technology procurement policy. This bill, the Affordable Internet and Net Equality Act of 2024, would require the Department of Technology, in coordination with the Public Utilities Commission and the Department of General Services, to develop and establish the Net Equality Program. The bill would require the state and state agencies to only enter into a procurement contract with an internet service provider offering affordable home internet service to households participating in certain public assistance programs, as specified. The bill would define affordable home internet service to mean internet service costing no more than $30 per month and that meets specified minimum speed requirements. The bill would require these internet service providers to establish a telephone number to sign up eligible households and would require these providers to advertise the availability of affordable home internet service, among other requirements placed on these providers. This bill would require the Department of Technology to annually post on its internet website a list of internet service providers that meet the requirements of the bill, as provided. The bill would not apply to the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the Office of Emergency Services, a contract entered into before January 1, 2026, or an internet service provider with fewer than 100,000 California residential subscribers. The bill would also make its provisions severable.

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. Existing law defines "owner" for these purposes to mean either a natural person who has at least a 25% recorded ownership interest in the property or a natural person who has any recorded ownership interest in the property if 100% of the recorded ownership is divided among owners who are related to each other as sibling, spouse, domestic partner, child, parent, grandparent, or grandchild. Existing law defines "natural person" for these purposes to include a natural person who is a settlor or beneficiary of a family trust or, if the property is owned by a limited liability company or partnership, a natural person with a 25% ownership interest in the property, as specified. This bill would revise the definition of "natural person" to instead include, if the property is owned by a limited liability company or partnership, a natural person who is a beneficial owner, as defined, with least a 25% ownership interest in the property. The bill would also make a nonsubstantive change to these provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

This measure would declare that the Legislature honors the life and legacy of Cindy Montañez and declares January 19 as Cindy Montañez Day.

Existing law authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated if specified requirements are satisfied. Existing law prohibits the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads until the manufacturer submits an application to the Department of Motor Vehicles, as specified, and that application is approved. This bill would require a manufacturer of an autonomous vehicle to report to the department a collision on a public road that involved one of its autonomous vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of 10,001 pounds or more that is operating under a testing permit that resulted in damage of property, bodily injury, or death within 10 days of the collision. The bill would require a manufacturer of an autonomous vehicle to annually submit to the department specified information regarding the deactivation of the autonomous mode for its autonomous vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of 10,001 pounds or more that were operating under a testing permit that authorized the vehicle to operate on public roads. The bill would prohibit the operation of an autonomous vehicle with a gross vehicle weight of 10,001 pounds or more on public roads for testing purposes, transporting goods, or transporting passengers without a human safety operator physically present in the autonomous vehicle at the time of operation. The bill would require the Department of Motor Vehicles, by January 1, 2029, or 5 years after commencement of testing, whichever occurs later, and upon appropriation by the Legislature, to submit a report to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature evaluating the performance of autonomous vehicle technology and its impact on public safety and employment in the transportation sector for autonomous vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of 10,001 pounds or more. The bill would require the Department of the California Highway Patrol, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, the Department of Transportation, the State Air Resources Board, and other relevant state agencies to provide additional information needed to research the report.