Sen. María Elena Durazo

Existing law, referred to as the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act of 1975 (MICRA) , prohibits an attorney from contracting for or collecting a contingency fee for representing any person seeking damages in connection with an action for injury or damage against a health care provider based upon alleged professional negligence in excess of specified limits. This bill would recast those provisions and base the amount of contingency fee that may be contracted for upon whether recovery is pursuant to settlement agreement and release of all claims executed before a civil complaint or demand for arbitration is filed, or pursuant to settlement, arbitration, or judgment after a civil complaint or demand for arbitration is filed, as specified. The bill would add and revise definitions for these purposes. Existing law provides that in any action against a health care provider based upon professional negligence, the injured plaintiff is entitled to recover noneconomic losses to compensate for pain, suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement, and other nonpecuniary damage. Existing law limits the amount of damages for noneconomic losses in an action for injury against a health care provider based on professional negligence to $250,000. This bill would remove the $250,000 limit on noneconomic damages and expand the recast provisions to include an action for injury against a health care institution, as defined. The bill would increase the applicable limitation based upon whether the action for injury involved wrongful death. The bill would specify that these limitations would increase by $40,000 each January 1st for 10 years and beginning on January 1, 2034, the applicable limitations on noneconomic damages for personal injury and for wrongful death would be adjusted for inflation on January 1st of each year by 2%. Existing law specifies that in any action for injury or damages against a provider of health care services, a superior court shall, at the request of either party, enter a judgment ordering that money damages or its equivalent for future damages of the judgment creditor be paid in whole or in part by periodic payments rather than by a lump-sum payment if the award equals or exceeds $50,000. This bill would increase the minimum amount of the judgment required to request periodic payments to $250,000. Existing law makes statements, writings, or benevolent gestures expressing sympathy or a general sense of benevolence relating to the pain, suffering, or death of a person involved in an accident and made to that person, or to the family of that person, inadmissible as evidence of an admission of liability in a civil action. This bill would specify that statements, writings, or benevolent gestures expressing sympathy, regret, a general sense of benevolence, or suggesting, reflecting, or accepting fault relating to the pain, suffering, or death of a person, or to an adverse patient safety event or unexpected health care outcome, as specified, shall be confidential, privileged, protected, not subject to subpoena, discovery, or disclosure, and shall not be used or admitted into evidence in any civil, administrative, regulatory, licensing, or disciplinary board, agency, or body action or proceeding, and shall not be used or admitted in relation to any sanction, penalty, or other liability, as evidence of an admission of liability or for any other purpose.

Existing law requires a local air pollution control district or an air quality management district (local air district) that intends to propose the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation that will significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations to perform, except as specified, an assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of the proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of the rule or regulation, as provided. Existing law defines "socioeconomic impacts" to include, among other things, the type of industries or business, including small business, affected by the rule or regulation, the impact of the rule or regulation on employment and the economy of the region affected by the adoption of the rule or regulation, and the range of probable costs, including costs to industry or business, including small business, of the rule or regulation. This bill would authorize a local air district to contract with a third party to conduct the required assessment of socioeconomic impacts, or portion thereof, as provided. The bill would require a local air district to ensure that a prospective third-party contractor include in its proposal for the assessment specified information, including, among other things, a conflicts statement and a proposed schedule and budget for the assessment. This bill would expand the definition of "socioeconomic impacts" to include the disproportionate impact, if any, of the proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of the rule or regulation on Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, Alaska Native, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals and women. The bill would require a local air district or the third-party contractor, if no disproportionate impact is identified, to describe the basis for its conclusion that there is no disproportionate impact. By expanding the definition of "socioeconomic impact" for purposes of a socioeconomic impacts assessment conducted by a local air district, this bill would increase the requirements on local officials, thereby imposing a state-mandated program. This bill would additionally require the State Air Resources Board, except as specified, to conduct an assessment of the socioeconomic impacts, as defined, of a proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation that will significantly affect air quality or emissions limitations, as provided, and similarly authorize the state board to contract with a third party to conduct the required assessment of socioeconomic impacts, or portion thereof, as provided. The bill would specify minimum standards for the assessment of socioeconomic impacts, and would require the state board or a third-party contractor to include in the assessment of socioeconomic impacts, specified information and analysis, including, but not limited to, the disproportionate impacts analysis described above. The bill would prohibit the state board from approving an assessment of socioeconomic impacts that fails to meet those requirements. 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, the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (RFDCPA) , generally regulates the collection of a consumer debt by a debt collector, as defined. The RFDCPA defines "consumer debt" to mean money, property, or their equivalent, due or owing or alleged to be due or owing from a natural person by reason of a consumer credit transaction. Existing law, the Debt Collection Licensing Act (DCLA) , prohibits a person from engaging in business as a debt collector in the state without a license from the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation. The DCLA requires the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation to revoke or suspend a license for a violation of the RFDCPA. The DCLA defines the term "consumer credit transaction" to mean a transaction between a natural person and another person in which property, services, or money is acquired on credit by that natural person from the other person primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. This bill would define "consumer debt," for purposes of the RFDCPA, to additionally include rental debt that became past due on or after January 1, 2019, and would make conforming changes. This bill would also specify that, for the purposes of the DCLA, the term "consumer credit transaction" does not mean a transaction that results in rental debt. The RFDCPA requires every debt collector collecting or attempting to collect a consumer debt to comply with certain provisions of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) , including certain provisions relating to mandatory disclosures. This bill would additionally exempt a landlord collecting rent, as specified, from the requirement to comply with the provisions of the FDCPA referenced above related to mandatory disclosures.

(1) Existing law exempts a student, other than a person excluded from the term "immigrant," as defined, from paying nonresident tuition at the California State University and the California Community Colleges if the student meets certain requirements. Existing law authorizes a state court, if it finds that this provision, or any similar provision adopted by the Regents of the University of California, is unlawful, to order that the administering entity terminate any waiver awarded pursuant to this provision, and prohibits the award of money damages, tuition refund or waiver, or other retroactive relief. This bill would extend the exception from the above provision to a nonimmigrant student, as defined. The bill would therefore make the person eligible for the exemption from nonresident tuition made by this provision if the nonimmigrant student meets its requirements. The bill would authorize a state court, if it finds that this extension, or any similar provision adopted by the Regents of the University of California, is unlawful, to order the administering entity to terminate any waiver awarded pursuant to this extension, and would prohibit the award of money damages, tuition refund or waiver, or other retroactive relief. Because the bill would impose new duties on community college districts with respect to determining eligibility for exemptions from paying nonresident tuition, the bill would constitute a state-mandated local program. (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, 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 grants the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, which is within the Department of Industrial Relations, jurisdiction over all employment and places of employment, with the power necessary to enforce and administer all occupational health and safety laws and standards. The Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, an independent entity within the department, has the exclusive authority to adopt occupational safety and health standards within the state. Existing law, the California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973, requires employers to comply with certain standards ensuring healthy and safe working conditions, as specified, and charges the division with enforcement of the act. Other existing law relating to occupational safety imposes special provisions on certain industries and charges the division with enforcement of these provisions. This bill would require a motion picture production employer to hire a qualified set safety supervisor for all motion picture productions to perform a risk assessment, as specified, to be completed prior to the first day of production on a feature, an episode of a series, or a program, and to be on set daily to ensure cast and crew are not engaged in or exposed to an environment or activity that puts workers' health and safety at risk. The bill would allow the use of a firearm and blank ammunition containing gunpowder or other explosive charge on motion picture productions only for specified purposes and under specified safety conditions. The bill would require a qualified armorer, property master, or designee handling a firearm in the course of the motion picture production to have a specified state permit, to have completed certain training in firearms, and to have a specified federal document for the possession and custody of the firearm. The bill would require an employer to document and report to certain entities any incident involving a firearm or blank ammunition that occurs during a film or television production, as prescribed. This bill would prohibit ammunition on film, television, and commercial sets, except in prescribed circumstances, subject to certain safety rules and laws. The bill would require an employer to ensure that any employee responsible for handling, or in proximity to, firearms on set completes a specific firearm training or equivalent training, as prescribed. The bill would require an employer to comply with the bill and all safety standards adopted by the standards board. The bill would establish exemptions from its provisions for specified registered security guards and peace officers when they are on the perimeter of a set where motion picture production is happening. This bill would require the division to enforce its provisions and, before July 1, 2023, to propose to the standards board, for its review and adoption on or before January 1, 2024, a standard that protects the health and safety of motion picture production employees with regard to the storage, handling, and use of firearms and blanks on set and for use of ammunition. The bill would require the division, in the development of the proposed safety standard, to consider and incorporate, to the extent feasible and consistent with the bill, the provisions of specified joint industry-labor safety bulletins. The bill would also require the division to consider certain other safety standards as it determines to be relevant. The bill would establish civil penalties for specified violations. The bill would define terms for its purposes.

This measure would acknowledge the Muslim holy month of Ramadan and express the Legislature's respect to Muslims across California and throughout the world on this occasion.

Existing law, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, grants a consumer, as defined, various rights with respect to personal information, as defined, that is collected or sold by a business, as defined, including the right to direct a business that sells personal information about the consumer to third parties not to sell the consumer's personal information. Existing law, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) , generally prohibits a government entity from compelling the production of or access to electronic communication information or electronic device information, as defined, without a search warrant, wiretap order, order for electronic reader records, subpoena, or order for a pen register or trap and trace device, except for emergency situations, as specified. This bill would authorize a regulating agency, as defined, as a term of a regulation, license, permit, or other authorization, to require a shared mobility service provider over which it has jurisdiction to provide to the regulating agency shared mobility service data, as defined, in a form that facilitates auditing, as prescribed. The bill would prohibit a regulating agency from disclosing deidentified shared mobility service data to another public agency unless certain criteria are met, including the purpose of the disclosure is to assist the recipient public agency with a public purpose. The bill would prohibit a regulating agency or recipient public agency from disclosing shared mobility service data to a local, state, or federal law enforcement agency other than as required by law, as specified. The bill would also prohibit a regulating agency from disclosing shared mobility service data that includes location data to the public unless certain criteria are met, including the location data does not depict a shared mobility device or shared mobility service currently in use by a user of the device or service. The bill would provide that shared mobility service data is not "electronic device information" or "electronic information" as those terms are defined in ECPA. 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.