(1) Under existing law, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act, if a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, interferes or attempts to interfere, by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, is authorized to bring a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to protect the exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights secured. Existing law also authorizes an action brought by the Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney, to seek a civil penalty of $25,000. This bill would provide that a threat, intimidation, or coercion under the act may be inherent in any interference with a civil right and would describe intentional acts for these purposes as an act in which the person acted with general intent or a conscious objective to engage in particular conduct. The bill would, with a specified exception, eliminate certain immunity provisions for peace officers or public entities employing peace officers sued under the act. The bill would also authorize specified persons to bring an action under the act for the death of a person. (2) Existing laws defines persons who are peace officers and the entities authorized to appoint them. Existing law requires certain minimum training requirements for peace officers including the completion of a basic training course, as specified. Existing law prescribes certain minimum standards for a person to be appointed as a peace officer, including moral character and physical and mental condition, and certain disqualifying factors for a person to be employed as a peace officer, including a felony conviction. This bill would disqualify a person from being employed as a peace officer if that person has been convicted of, or has been adjudicated in an administrative, military, or civil judicial process as having committed, a violation of certain specified crimes against public justice, including the falsification of records, bribery, or perjury. The bill would also disqualify any person who has been certified as a peace officer by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training and has surrendered that certification or had that certification revoked by the commission, or has been denied certification. The bill would require a law enforcement agency employing certain peace officers to employ only individuals with a current, valid certification or pending certification. (3) Existing law establishes the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to set minimum standards for the recruitment and training of peace officers and to develop training courses and curriculum. Existing law authorizes the commission to establish a professional certificate program that awards basic, intermediate, advanced, supervisory, management, and executive certificates on the basis of a combination of training, education, experience, and other prerequisites, for the purpose of fostering the professionalization, education, and experience necessary to adequately accomplish the general police service duties performed by peace officers. Existing law authorizes the commission to cancel a certificate that was awarded in error or obtained through misrepresentation or fraud, but otherwise prohibits the commission from canceling a certificate that has properly been issued. This bill would grant the commission the power to investigate and determine the fitness of any person to serve as a peace officer in the state. The bill would direct the commission to issue or deny certification, which includes a basic certificate or proof of eligibility, to a peace officer in accordance with specified criteria. The bill would require the commission to issue a proof of eligibility or basic certificate, as specified, to certain persons employed as a peace officer on January 1, 2021, who do not otherwise possess a certificate. The bill would require a proof of eligibility or basic certificate to be renewed at least every 2 years and would require the commission to assess a fee, in an amount determined by the commission, for the application and renewal of the certificate or proof of eligibility, as well as an annual certification fee. The bill would require the fees to be deposited into the Peace Officer Certification Fund, created by the bill, and would continuously appropriate those funds to the commission for the administration of the certification program, as specified, thereby making an appropriation. The bill would declare certificates or proof of eligibility awarded by the commission to be property of the commission and would authorize the commission to revoke a proof of eligibility or certificate on specified grounds, including the use of excessive force, sexual assault, making a false arrest, or participating in a law enforcement gang, as defined. The bill would create the Peace Officer Standards Accountability Division within the commission to investigate and prosecute proceedings to take action against a peace officer's certification. The bill would require the division to review and investigate grounds for decertification and make findings as to whether grounds for action against an officer's certification exist. The bill would require the division to notify the officer subject to decertification of their findings and allow the officer to request review. The bill would also create the Peace Officer Standards Accountability Advisory Board with 9 members to be appointed as specified. The bill would require the board to hold public meetings to review the findings after investigation made by the division and to make a recommendation to the commission. The bill would require the commission to adopt the recommendation of the board if supported by clear and convincing evidence and, if action is to be taken against an officer's certification, return the determination to the division to commence formal proceedings consistent with the Administrative Procedures Act. The bill would require the commission to notify the employing agency and the district attorney of the county in which the officer is employed of this determination, as specified. The bill would make all records related to the revocation of a peace officer's certification public and would require that records of an investigation be retained for 30 years. The bill would require an agency employing peace officers to report to the commission the employment, appointment, or separation from employment of a peace officer, any complaint, charge, allegation, or investigation into the conduct of a peace officer that could render the officer subject to revocation, findings by civil oversight entities, and civil judgements that could affect the officer's certification. In case of a separation from employment or appointment, the bill would require each agency to execute an affidavit-of-separation form adopted by the commission describing the reason for separation. The bill would require the affidavit to be signed under penalty of perjury. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the board to report annually on the activities of the division, board, and commission, relating to the certification program, including the number of applications for certification, the events reported, the number of investigations conducted, and the number of certificates surrendered or revoked. By imposing new requirements on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 832.7 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 776 to be operative only if this bill and SB 776 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 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.
Sen. María Elena Durazo
Sponsored bills
The California Public Records Act requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection, unless an exemption from disclosure applies. Existing law provides that nothing in the act requires the disclosure of corporate proprietary information including trade secrets, among other things. This bill would provide that specified records of a private industry employer that are prepared, owned, used, or retained by a public agency are not trade secrets and are public records, including certain records relating to employment terms and conditions of employees working for a private industry employer pursuant to a contract with a public agency, if those wages, benefits, working hours and other employment terms and conditions relate to work performed under the contract, records of compliance with local, state, or federal domestic content requirements, and records of a private industry employer's compliance with job creation, job quality, or job retention obligations contained in a contract or agreement with a state or local agency. The bill, however, would exclude contracts between a public agency and a private industry employer entered into before January 1, 2020, and records that include communications between the state or local agency and specified state or local officials, on matters posing a threat to the security of a public building, a threat to the security of essential public services, or a threat to the public's right of access to public services or public facilities, from these provisions. Because the bill would require local officials to perform additional duties, it would impose a state-mandated local program. 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. 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 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. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Existing law makes garment manufacturers liable for guaranteeing payment of wages to employees of their contractors. This bill would expand the definition of garment manufacturing to include dyeing, altering a garment's design, and affixing a label to a garment. The bill would prohibit any employee engaged in the performance of garment manufacturing to be paid by the piece or unit, or by the piece rate, except as specified. The bill would impose a statutory penalty of $200 against a garment manufacturer or contractor, payable to the employee, for each pay period in which the employee is paid by the piece rate. This bill would define "brand guarantor" for purposes of these provisions as a person contracting for the performance of garment manufacturing, as specified, regardless of whether the person with whom they contract performs manufacturing operations or hires a contractor or subcontractor to perform manufacturing operations. This bill would specify that a garment manufacturer or brand guarantor who contracts with another person for the performance of garment manufacturing operations shares joint and several liability with any manufacturer and contractor for the full amount of unpaid wages, any other compensation, damages, and penalties to any and all employees who performed manufacturing operations for any violation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, and civil penalties, as specified. This bill would create a rebuttable presumption in a claim filed with the Labor Commissioner to recover unpaid wages, if an employee has provided the Labor Commissioner with labels or other information that the commissioner finds credible relating to the identity of any brand guarantor or garment manufacturer that the brand guarantor or garment manufacturer is liable with the contractor for any amounts found to be due to the employee. The bill would also give the Labor Commissioner authority to enforce these provisions by issuing a stop order or a citation. Existing law requires every employer engaged in the business of garment manufacturing to keep certain records for three years, including, among other things, contract worksheets indicating the price per unit agreed to between the contractor and manufacturer. This bill would also require every employer engaged in the business of garment manufacturing and brand guarantors to keep all contracts, invoices, purchase orders, work orders, style or cut sheets, and any other documentation pursuant to which garment manufacturing work was, or is being, performed for 4 years. Existing law requires the commissioner to deposit $75 of each garment manufacturer's registration fee into a separate account to be disbursed by the commissioner only to persons determined by the commissioner to have been damaged by the failure to pay wages and benefits by a garment manufacturer, contractor, or subcontractor. Existing law requires the commissioner to promulgate all regulations and rules necessary to carry out the provisions of this part. The commissioner, upon good cause, may impose, in their discretion, the terms of penalties, the revocation of registrations, and the confiscation or disposal of goods in accordance with those rules and regulations. This bill would name the separate account into which a portion of a garment manufacturer's registration fee is deposited the Garment Manufacturers Special Account. The bill would require the Labor Commissioner to determine which claims for payment from the Garment Manufacturer's Special Account are accepted, and the amount of money, if any, that is to be disbursed from the account on an accepted claim.
(1) Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant be served a 3 days' notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified. Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prohibits a tenancy from being terminated unless specified conditions are met, including that the tenant fails to pay rent, utility charges, or reasonable incidental service charges and 3 days' notice in writing is provided to the tenant, as specified. This bill would enact the COVID-19 Tenant Relief Act of 2020. This bill would require that any 3 days' notice that demands payment of COVID-19 rental debt that is served on a tenant during the covered time period meet specified criteria, including that the notice include an unsigned copy of an attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress and that the notice advise the tenant that the tenant will not be evicted for failure to comply with the notice if the tenant delivers a signed attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress to the landlord, as specified. The bill would define "covered time period" for purposes of these provisions as the time between March 4, 2020, and either 90 days after the termination of the COVID-19 state of emergency or April 1, 2021, whichever occurs earlier. The bill would provide that a tenant is not guilty of an unlawful detainer if the tenant makes the demanded payment, vacates the property, or delivers a signed attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress within 15 days of the service of the notice. The bill would deem a 3 days' notice that fails to comply with this criteria void and insufficient to support a judgment for unlawful detainer or to terminate a tenancy under the Mobilehome Residency Law. The bill would prohibit a tenant that delivers an attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress pursuant to these provisions from being deemed in default with regard to the COVID-19 rental debt. Existing law regulates specified terms and conditions of tenancies. Existing law authorizes a landlord to demand security at the beginning of a tenancy for residential property and specifies the purposes for which the security may be used, including, among others, compensating the landlord for the tenant's default in payment of rent. The bill would prohibit a landlord from applying a security deposit to satisfy COVID-19 rental debt or applying a monthly rental payment to any COVID-19 rental debt, unless the tenant agrees in writing. The bill would define "COVID-19 rental debt" as unpaid rent or any other unpaid financial obligation under the tenancy that accrued during the covered time period. The bill would prohibit a landlord from charging a tenant, or attempting to collect from a tenant, fees for a late payment of COVID-19 rental debt. The bill would prohibit a landlord from terminating a tenancy or threatening to terminate a tenancy, in retaliation against a tenant for having COVID-19 rental debt. This bill would prohibit a housing provider, credit reporting agency, tenant screening company, or other specified entities from using an alleged COVID-19 rental debt as a negative factor in evaluating creditworthiness, as specified. The bill would prohibit a cause of action to recover COVID-19 rental debt until 15 months after the date the COVID-19 state of emergency terminates or April 1, 2022, whichever is earlier. This bill would provide that any provision of a stipulation settlement agreement, or other agreement that conflicts with or purports to waive these provisions is prohibited and void as contrary to public policy. The bill would provide that if a local initiative, ordinance, regulation, or other policy conflicts with these provisions, the provision that provides the greater protection to tenants controls. (2) Existing law prescribes various requirements to be satisfied before the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust. In this regard, existing law requires that a notice of default and a notice of sale be recorded and that specified periods of time elapse between the recording and the sale. Existing law establishes certain requirements in connection with foreclosures on mortgages and deeds of trust, including restrictions on the actions mortgage servicers may take while a borrower is attempting to secure a loan modification or has submitted a loan modification application. This bill would enact the Small Landlord and Homeowner Relief Act of 2020. The bill would authorize a borrower to request forbearance during the effective time period from any mortgage obligation by submitting a request to the borrower's mortgage servicer, either orally or in writing, affirming that the borrower is experiencing a financial hardship that prevents the borrower from making timely payments on the mortgage obligation due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 emergency. The bill would define "borrower" for these purposes as a natural person who is a mortgagor, trustor, or confirmed successor in interest; an entity other than a natural person provided that the secured property is currently occupied by one or more residential tenants; or a mobilehome owner who is the borrower on a security agreement relating to a loan or conditional sale contract that gives the secured party the right to foreclose its security interest in a manufactured home or mobilehome, except as specified. The bill would define "effective time period" as the time period between the operational date of these provisions and either 90 days after the termination of the COVID-19 state of emergency or April 1, 2021, whichever occurs first. This bill would also authorize a mobilehome owner who is the borrower on any security agreement relating to a loan or conditional sale contract which, according to its terms, gives the secured party the right to foreclose its security interest in a manufactured home or mobilehome to request forbearance during the effective time period, as specified. This bill would require a mortgage servicer or lienholder to, if certain requirements are met, offer the forbearance requested for an initial period of up to 180 days, which may be extended at the request of the borrower or mobilehome borrower, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer or lienholder to limit the total forbearance provided to 360 days and authorize the mortgage servicer or lienholder to count any forbearance already provided to the borrower between March 4, 2020, and the date of the mobilehome borrower's initial request against that 360 days. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer or lienholder from assessing, accruing, or applying any fees, penalties, or additional interest during the forbearance period, as specified. The bill would require a mortgage servicer or lienholder to attempt to contact the borrower, including a mobilehome borrower, with diligent effort at least 30 days before the end of any forbearance period granted pursuant to these provisions to inquire whether the borrower is able to resume making preforbearance mortgage or loan payments. The bill would, if the borrower indicates that they will not be able to resume preforbearance payments, require the mortgage servicer or lien holder to evaluate the borrower for loss mitigation and foreclosure prevention, as specified. Alternatively, if the borrower affirms they are able to resume preforbearance payments or fails to respond to the mortgage servicer, the bill would require the mortgage servicer or lienholder to reinstate the preforbearance payments and provide a specified notice to the borrower that includes, among other things, a description of any options available to the borrower to address the amount unpaid during the forbearance. This bill would authorize a multifamily borrower that was current on its payments as of February 1, 2020, to submit a written request for forbearance to the mortgage servicer affirming that the multifamily borrower is experiencing a financial hardship during the COVID-19 emergency. The bill would define "multifamily borrower" for purposes of these provisions as a borrower of a residential mortgage loan that is secured by a lien against a property comprising 5 or more dwelling units. The bill would require a mortgage servicer to provide an initial forbearance period of 30 days and grant additional 30-day extension periods upon the request of the borrower, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to limit the total forbearance provided to 180 days and authorize the mortgage servicer to count any forbearance already provided to the borrower between March 4, 2020, and the date of the mobilehome borrower's initial request against that 180 days. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to condition forbearance on the receipt of reasonable documentation from the borrower that demonstrates a decrease of at least 10% or more of the multifamily borrower's gross rental revenue, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to condition any extension of the forbearance period on the receipt of payment equal to the net operating income derived from the property and the borrower keeping all property tax and insurance payments current. This bill would authorize a borrower, including a mobilehome borrower and multifamily borrower, who is likely to suffer material harm from a violation of these provisions to bring an action to obtain injunctive relief, damages, and restitution, as specified. The bill would require a court to award a prevailing borrower reasonable attorney's fees and costs in any action based on a violation of these provisions. This bill would provide that any waiver by a borrower of these provisions is contrary to public policy and void.
Existing law establishes various housing programs administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, including the Multifamily Housing Program, pursuant to which the department provides financial assistance in the form of deferred payment loans to pay for the eligible costs of development for specified types of housing projects. Existing law also establishes the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program, administered by the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency, for the purpose of providing jurisdictions with one-time grant funds to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate homelessness challenges, as provided. Existing law requires that the California Workforce Development Board and each local workforce development board ensure that programs and services funded by the federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2014 and directed to apprenticeable occupations are conducted in coordination with apprenticeship programs approved by the Division of Apprenticeship Standards, as specified. Existing law also establishes the Strategic Growth Council and, among other things, requires the council to manage and award grants and loans to support the planning and development of sustainable communities. Existing law also establishes the State Coastal Conservancy in the Natural Resources Agency with prescribed powers and responsibilities for implementing a program of agricultural land protection, area restoration, and resources enhancement within the coastal zone, as defined. Existing law establishes the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, known as "GO-Biz," within the Governor's office to serve the Governor as the lead entity for economic strategy and the marketing of California on issues relating to business development, private sector investment, and economic growth. This bill, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would make up to $2,000,000,000 available in each fiscal year for the purpose of providing emergency economic recovery and development, climate change, and disaster response. Of the amount made available for any fiscal year, the bill would require the Controller to allocate $1,808,000,000, or a proportional amount of the total available amount for the applicable fiscal year, among various housing programs administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program, and for distribution by the California Workforce Development Board among local agencies to participate in, invest in, or partner with new or existing preapprenticeship training programs established as described above. The bill would require the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency to establish deadlines for applications and submitting final reports under the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program with respect to moneys allocated to that program under the bill. Of the amount made available for any fiscal year under its provisions, the bill would require the Controller to allocate $192,000,000, or a proportional amount of the total available amount for the applicable fiscal year, to the State Coastal Conservancy, the Strategic Growth Council, and GO-Biz, to be used for the Climate, Sea Level, and Natural Disaster Program and the Community Economic Development Program. The bill would require the State Coastal Conservancy and the Strategic Growth Council, in consultation with the Office of Planning and Research or any other appropriate state agency, to allocate $100,000,000, or a proportional amount, under the Climate, Sea Level, and Natural Disaster Program among specified eligible entities for the purpose of protecting communities dealing with the effects of climate change, as specified. The bill would require GO-Biz, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development and any other appropriate state agency, council, or department, to allocate $92,000,000, or a proportional amount, under the Community Economic Development Program among these specified eligible entities for various purposes relating to community development. The bill would require eligible applicants to comply with specified requirements, including submitting plans for outreach to, and retention of, women, minority, disadvantaged youth, formerly incarcerated, and other underrepresented subgroups and, subject to certain exceptions, certifying that a skilled and trained workforce, as defined, will be used to complete any project funded under those programs. By requiring the certification of certain information, thereby expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, 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.
Existing law imposes taxes upon income and real property, as well as taxes upon certain transactions and excise taxes. This bill would impose an annual tax at a rate of 0.4% of a resident of this state's worldwide net worth in excess of $30,000,000, or in excess of $15,000,000 in the case of a married taxpayer filing separately. The bill would describe worldwide net worth with reference to specific federal provisions and would provide that worldwide net worth does not include specific assets, including directly held real property or liabilities related to directly held real property. The bill would also authorize the Franchise Tax Board to adopt regulations to carry out these provisions, including regulations regarding the valuation of certain assets that are not publicly traded. Existing law requires the Franchise Tax Board to administer the Personal Income Tax Law. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to amend or create returns with regard to the Wealth Tax. 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 bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires that the housing element include, among other things, an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development. If the inventory of sites does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all households pursuant to specified law, existing law requires the local government to rezone sites within specified time periods and that this rezoning accommodate 100% of the need for housing for very low and low-income households on sites that will be zoned to permit owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential use by right for specified developments. This bill, the Neighborhood Homes Act, would deem a housing development project, as defined, an allowable use on a neighborhood lot, which is defined as a parcel within an office or retail commercial zone. The bill would require the density for a housing development under these provisions to meet or exceed the density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households according to the type of local jurisdiction, including a density of at least 20 units per acre for a suburban jurisdiction. The bill would require the housing development to meet all other local requirements for a neighborhood lot, other than those that prohibit residential use, or allow residential use at a lower density than that required by the bill. The bill would provide that a housing development under these provisions is subject to the local zoning, parking, design, and other ordinances, local code requirements, and procedures applicable to the processing and permitting of a housing development in a zone that allows for the housing with the density required by the act. The bill would also require that a housing development under these provisions comply with public notice, comment, hearing, or other procedures applicable to a housing development in a zone with the applicable density. The bill would provide that the existing zoning designation applies if the existing zoning designation for the parcel allows residential use at a density greater than that required by these provisions. The bill would require a local agency to require that a rental of any unit created pursuant to the bill's provisions be for a term longer than 30 days. The bill would authorize a local agency to exempt a neighborhood lot from these provisions in its land use element of the general plan if the local agency concurrently reallocates the lost residential density to other lots so that there is no net loss in residential density in the jurisdiction, as provided. The bill would specify that it does not alter or affect the application of any housing, environmental, or labor law applicable to a housing development authorized by these provisions, including, but not limited to, the California Coastal Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, the Housing Accountability Act, obligations to affirmatively further fair housing, and any state or local affordability laws or tenant protection laws. The bill would require an applicant of a housing development under these provisions to provide notice of a pending application to each commercial tenant of the neighborhood lot. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by the Neighborhood Homes Act address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The Housing Accountability Act, which is part of the Planning and Zoning Law, prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project, as defined for purposes of the act, for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or an emergency shelter unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That act states that it shall not be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring a housing development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need, except as provided. That act further provides that a housing development project or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. The bill would provide that for purposes of the Housing Accountability Act, a proposed housing development project is consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if the housing development project is consistent with the standards applied to the parcel pursuant to specified provisions of the Neighborhood Homes Act and if none of the square footage in the project is designated for hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging use, except for a residential hotel, as defined. The Planning and Zoning Law, until January 1, 2026, also authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies specified objective planning standards, including a requirement that the site on which the development is proposed is zoned for residential use or residential mixed-use development, or has a general plan designation that allows residential use or a mix of residential and nonresidential uses, with at least 23 of the square footage of the development designated for residential use. Under that law, the proposed development is also required to be consistent with objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards in effect at the time the development is submitted to the local government. This bill would permit the development to be proposed for a site zoned for office or retail commercial use if the site has had no commercial tenants on 50% or more of its total usable net interior square footage for a period of at least 3 years prior to the submission of the application. The bill would also provide that a project located on a neighborhood lot, as defined, shall be deemed consistent with objective zoning standards, objective design standards, and objective subdivision standards if the project is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Neighborhood Homes Act. The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 authorizes a local agency to establish a community facilities district to finance various services, including police protection, fire protection, recreation programs, and library services, and provides for the annexation of territory to an existing community facilities district. This bill would authorize an applicant seeking to develop a housing project on a neighborhood lot to request that a local agency establish a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District, or to request that the neighborhood lot be annexed to an existing community facilities district, as specified, to finance improvements and services to the units proposed to be developed. The bill would prohibit any further proceedings to be taken to annex the territory, or to authorize that annexation in the future, for a period of one year from the decision of the legislative body at the hearing on the annexation if a specified number or groups of persons, including 50% or more of the registered voters or 6 registered voters, whichever is more, residing within the territory proposed for annexation or proposed to be annexed in the future, file written protests with the legislative body. The bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing any development, impact, or mitigation fee, charge, or exaction in connection with the approval of a development project to the extent that those facilities and services are funded by a community facilities district established pursuant to these provisions. By imposing new duties on local agencies with regard to local planning and zoning, 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.
The Personal Income Tax Law and California Constitution imposes taxes based upon taxable income of individuals, estates, and trusts at specified rates. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2020, in addition to those taxes, would impose an additional tax of at the rates of 1%, 3%, and 3.5% on that portion of a taxpayer's taxable income over specified thresholds, as provided. 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 bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law establishes the Board of State and Community Corrections to promote effective state and local efforts and partnerships in California's adult and juvenile criminal justice system and requires the board to inspect each local detention facility in the state biennially. Existing law requires a privately operated local detention facility responsible for the custody and control of a local prisoner to operate pursuant to a contract with the city, county, or city and county, as appropriate. Existing law requires each contract to include a provision whereby the private agency or entity agrees to operate in compliance with all appropriate state and local building, zoning, health, safety, and fire statutes, ordinances, and regulations, and with specified minimum jail standards established by regulations adopted by the board. Existing law provides that the failure of a privately operated local detention facility to comply with the appropriate health, safety, and fire laws, or with the minimum jail standards adopted by the board may be grounds for the termination of the contract. This bill would, among other changes, make these provisions also applicable to facilities responsible for the custody and control of civil detainees and require the contract to include a provision whereby the private agency or entity agrees to operate in compliance with Federal Performance-Based Detention Standards and to maintain specified insurance coverages, including general, automobile, and umbrella liability, and workers' compensation. The bill would also require an insurer providing the insurance to require the facility to comply with the standards and to notify the director of the facility and the Insurance Commissioner of deficiencies and that the contract will be canceled if the deficiencies are not corrected within 60 days, among other duties.