Sen. María Elena Durazo

Existing law prohibits an employer, who is required by law to give an employee a rest period during a workday, from requiring the employee to work during the rest period. Existing law requires an employer to pay the employee one additional hour of pay, at the employee's regular rate of compensation, for each rest period not provided. Existing law requires employers to provide a reasonable amount of break time to employees desiring to express milk for the employee's infant child. Existing law also requires an employer to make reasonable efforts to provide the employee with the use of a room, or other location, other than a bathroom, in close proximity to the employee's work area, for the employee to express milk in private. Existing law exempts an employer from the break time requirement if the employer's operations would be seriously disrupted by providing that time to employees desiring to express milk. Existing law subjects employers who violate these provisions to a civil penalty of $100 per violation and authorizes the Labor Commissioner to issue citations for those violations. This bill would instead require an employer to provide a lactation room or location that includes prescribed features and would require an employer, among other things, to provide access to a sink and refrigerator in close proximity to the employee's workspace, as specified. The bill would deem denial of reasonable break time or adequate space to express milk a failure to provide a rest period in accordance with state law. The bill would prohibit an employer from discharging, or in any other manner discriminating or retaliating against, an employee for exercising or attempting to exercise rights under these provisions and would establish remedies that include filing a complaint with the Labor Commissioner. The bill would authorize employers with fewer than 50 employees to seek an exemption from the requirements of these provisions if the employer demonstrates that the requirement posed an undue hardship by causing the employer significant difficulty or expense, as specified. The bill would require an employer who obtains an exemption to make a reasonable effort to provide a place for an employee to express milk in private, as specified. The bill would require an employer to develop and implement a policy regarding lactation accommodation and make it available to employees, as specified.

Existing law provides that generally if an employee is discharged or laid off, wages earned by the employee are due and payable immediately. Existing law provides specified requirements for certain occupations, including temporary services employees, employees engaged in the production or broadcasting of motion pictures, and employees at venues that host live theatrical or concert events. Existing law provides that an employee engaged in the production or broadcasting of motion pictures whose employment terminates is entitled to receive payment of wages earned at the time of termination by the next regular payday. Existing law provides for civil penalties for violations of these provisions. This bill would provide that an "events employee," as defined, whose employment terminates is entitled to receive payment of wages earned at the time of termination by the next regular payday, except as specified. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to the payment of wages of specified public employees. The bill would make conforming changes to the provisions requiring payment of wages due upon termination of employment. By expanding the definition of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 203, 203.1, and 220 of the Labor Code proposed by SB 671 to be operative only if this bill and SB 671 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California as the 3 segments of public postsecondary education in this state. The missions and functions of these segments are set forth in the Donahoe Higher Education Act. The Student Voter Registration Act of 2003 requires the Secretary of State to annually provide every high school and University of California campus, and authorizes the Secretary of State to annually provide every community college and California State University campus, with voter registration forms, as specified. The act also requires the California State University and the California Community Colleges to implement a process and the infrastructure to allow a person who enrolls online at the institution to submit an affidavit of voter registration electronically on the internet website of the Secretary of State. The act encourages the University of California to comply with this provision. This bill would establish the Student Civic and Voter Empowerment Program to be conducted by the Secretary of State, in partnership with the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California. The bill would require each campus of the California Community Colleges and the California State University, and request each campus of the University of California, (1) to distribute, in consultation with the Secretary of State, campuswide emails to all students with specified voting- and election-related dates and information, and to include specified dates on all print and online academic calendars, (2) to post on social media reminders to students of specified voter-related dates and information, and (3) to designate one person per campus as the Civic and Voter Empowerment Coordinator with specified responsibilities, including developing a Civic and Voter Empowerment Action Plan. The bill would require the Secretary of State to evaluate the program each year, and to report to the Legislature the results of the evaluation on or before January 1, 2021, and annually thereafter. The bill would require the Secretary of State to develop a Students Vote Project to implement these requirements. By imposing additional duties on community college districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law specifies that a hiring of residential real property, for a term not specified by the parties, is deemed to be renewed at the end of the term implied by law unless one of the parties gives written notice to the other of that party's intention to terminate. Existing law requires an owner of a residential dwelling to give notice at least 60 days prior to the proposed date of termination, or at least 30 days prior to the proposed date of termination if any tenant or resident has resided in the dwelling for less than one year, as specified. Existing law requires any notice given by an owner to be given in a prescribed manner, to contain certain information, and to be formatted, as specified. This bill would, with certain exceptions, prohibit an owner, as defined, of residential real property from terminating a tenancy without just cause, as defined, which the bill would require to be stated in the written notice to terminate tenancy when the tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied the residential real property for 12 months, except as provided. The bill would require, for certain just cause terminations that are curable, that the owner give a notice of violation and an opportunity to cure the violation prior to issuing the notice of termination. The bill, if the violation is not cured within the time period set forth in the notice, would authorize a 3-day notice to quit without an opportunity to cure to be served to terminate the tenancy. The bill would require, for no-fault just cause terminations, as specified, that the owner, at the owner's option, either assist certain tenants to relocate, regardless of the tenant's income, by providing a direct payment of one month's rent to the tenant, as specified, or waive in writing the payment of rent for the final month of the tenancy, prior to the rent becoming due. The bill would require the actual amount of relocation assistance or rent waiver provided to a tenant that fails to vacate after the expiration of the notice to terminate the tenancy to be recoverable as damages in an action to recover possession. The bill would provide that if the owner does not provide relocation assistance, the notice of termination is void. The bill would except certain properties and circumstances from the application of its provisions. The bill would require an owner of residential property to provide prescribed notice to a tenant of the tenant's rights under these provisions. The bill would not apply to residential real property subject to a local ordinance requiring just cause for termination adopted on or before September 1, 2019, or to residential real property subject to a local ordinance requiring just cause for termination adopted or amended after September 1, 2019, that is more protective than these provisions, as defined. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2030. Existing law governs the hiring of residential dwelling units and requires a landlord to provide specified notice to tenants prior to an increase in rent. Existing law, the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, prescribes statewide limits on the application of local rent control with regard to certain properties. That act, among other things, authorizes an owner of residential real property to establish the initial and all subsequent rental rates for a dwelling or unit that meets specified criteria, subject to certain limitations. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property from, over the course of any 12-month period, increasing the gross rental rate for a dwelling or unit more than 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, as defined, or 10%, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for the immediately preceding 12 months, subject to specified conditions. The bill would prohibit an owner of a unit of residential real property from increasing the gross rental rate for the unit in more than 2 increments over a 12-month period, after the tenant remains in occupancy of the unit over a 12-month period. The bill would exempt certain properties from these provisions. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to submit a report, on or before January 1, 2030, to the Legislature regarding the effectiveness of these provisions. The bill would provide that these provisions apply to all rent increases occurring on or after March 15, 2019. The bill would provide that in the event that an owner increased the rent by more than the amount specified above between March 15, 2019, and January 1, 2020, the applicable rent on January 1, 2020, shall be the rent as of March 15, 2019, plus the maximum permissible increase, and the owner shall not be liable to the tenant for any corresponding rent overpayment. The bill would authorize an owner who increased the rent by less than the amount specified above between March 15, 2019, and January 1, 2020, to increase the rent twice within 12 months of March 15, 2019, but not by more than the amount specified above. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. The Planning and Zoning Law requires the owner of an assisted housing development in which there will be an expiration of rental restrictions to, among other things, provide notice of the proposed change to each affected tenant household residing in the assisted housing development subject to specified procedures and requirements, and to also provide specified entities notice and an opportunity to submit an offer to purchase the development prior to the expiration of the rental restrictions. This bill would authorize an owner of an assisted housing development, who demonstrates, under penalty of perjury, compliance with the provisions described above with regard to the expiration of rental restrictions, to establish the initial unassisted rental rate for units without regard to the cap on rent increases discussed above, but would require the owner to comply with the above cap on rent increases for subsequent rent increases in the development. The bill would authorize an owner of a deed-restricted affordable housing unit or an affordable housing unit subject to a regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a government agency limiting rental rates that is not within an assisted housing development to establish the initial rental rate for the unit upon the expiration of the restriction, but would require the owner to comply with the above cap on rent increases for subsequent rent increases for the unit. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. By requiring an owner of an assisted housing development to demonstrate compliance with specified provisions under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the existing crime of perjury and thus 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 provides for the compensation of victims and derivative victims of specified types of crimes by the California Victim Compensation Board from the Restitution Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, for specified losses suffered as a result of those crimes. Existing law requires an application for compensation to be filed within 3 years of the date of the crime, 3 years after the victim attains 21 years of age, or 3 years from the discovery that an injury or death had been sustained as a direct result of the crime, whichever is later. This bill would extend the time to file an application for compensation from 3 years to 7 years under each of these circumstances. The bill would also make a conforming change and delete an obsolete provision. By extending the application timeframes authorizing certain uses of continuously appropriated funds, the bill would make an appropriation.

Existing law governs the determination of child custody and visitation in contested proceedings. Existing law requires the court, for purposes of deciding custody, to determine the best interests of the child based on certain factors, including the nature and amount of contact with both parents, and consistent with specified findings, including that the court's primary concern must be to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of the child. Existing law further provides that custody should be granted in a specified order of preference, according to the best interests of the child. Existing law prohibits the court, in granting custody to either parent, from preferring a parent as custodian because of the parent's sex. This bill would prohibit the court from considering the sex, gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation of a parent, legal guardian, or relative in determining the best interests of a child for the purpose of granting custody, and would make related findings.

(1) Existing law authorizes the governing board of any school district or community college district to order an election and submit to the electors of the district the question of whether the bonds of the district shall be issued and sold to raise money for specified purposes. Existing law generally requires, to pass a school bond measure, that either at least 23 of the votes cast on the proposition of issuing bonds be in favor of issuing the bonds to pass the measure, or, if certain conditions are met, at least 55% of the votes cast on the proposition of issuing bonds be in favor of issuing the bonds. Existing law prohibits the total amount of bonds issued by a school district or community college district from exceeding 1.25% of the taxable property of the district, as provided. This bill would raise that limit to 2%. (2) Existing law also authorizes a unified school district to issue bonds receiving at least 55% of the votes cast on the proposition of issuing the bonds that, in aggregation with bonds issued with a 23 favorable vote, do not exceed 2.5% of the taxable property of the district, as provided. This bill would raise that limit to 4%. The bill would make a similar percentage increase for community college districts. (3) The Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 provides for the adoption of rules, regulations, and procedures, under the administration of the Director of General Services, for the allocation of state funds by the State Allocation Board for the construction and modernization of public school facilities. This bill would, among other things, require a school district to submit to the Department of General Services a 5-year school facilities master plan or updated 5-year school facilities master plan, as provided, as a condition of participating in the school facilities program under the act, would require the school district to submit specified information in the school district's application for an apportionment of state funds, and would make other changes to requirements a school district is required to comply with before participating in programs under the act. The bill would require the department to process applications to participate in the program, as specified, and would make other changes to the method by which the board makes apportionments of moneys under the act. This bill would establish the 2020 State School Facilities Fund, and authorize the board to apportion, and make disbursements of, moneys in the fund, as provided. The bill would require, for bonds approved by voters in 2020 or thereafter, the board to adjust a school district's required local and state contribution, as specified. The bill would authorize new construction and modernization grants to be used for seismic mitigation purposes and, among other things, to establish schoolsite-based infrastructure to provide broadband internet access. The bill would also authorize modernization grants to be used, among other things, for the control, management, or abatement of lead and for the demolishment and construction of a building on an existing schoolsite that meets specified conditions. The bill would prohibit the use of new construction and modernization grants for the purchase of portable electronic devices with a useful life of less than 3 years. This bill would authorize funding for health and safety projects by a school district, as provided. This bill would authorize the board to provide a grant to test for lead in water outlets used for drinking or preparing food on schoolsites serving kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, as provided. The bill would specify procedures that small school districts, as defined, may use to obtain project and construction management, new construction grants, and modernization grants. The bill would also make conforming changes in, and remove inoperative provisions from, the act. (4) The act also requires the board to adopt regulations for determining the amount of funding and the eligibility and prioritization of funding that school districts with a financial hardship may receive from bond acts for construction, modernization, or relocation assistance. The act requires those regulations to include consideration of various factors, including whether the school district's total bonding capacity is $5,000,000 or less, in which case the school district shall be deemed eligible for financial hardship. This bill, for purposes of the regulations related to financial hardship eligibility, would increase the total bonding capacity cap to $15,000,000, to be adjusted as specified. (5) The California Constitution prohibits the Legislature from creating a debt or liability that singly or in the aggregate with any previous debts or liabilities exceeds the sum of $300,000, except by an act that (A) authorizes the debt for a single object or work specified in the act, (B) has been passed by a 23 vote of all the Members elected to each house of the Legislature, (C) has been submitted to the people at a statewide general or primary election, and (D) has received a majority of all the votes cast for and against it at that election. This bill would set forth the Public Preschool, K-12, and College Health and Safety Bond Act of 2020 as a state general obligation bond act that would provide $15,000,000,000 to construct and modernize education facilities, as specified. This bond act would become operative only if approved by the voters at the March 3, 2020, statewide primary election. The bill would also provide for the submission of the bond act to the voters at that election. (6) Existing law establishes the California State University, which is administered by the Board of Trustees of the California State University, and the University of California, under the administration of the Regents of the University of California, as segments of public postsecondary education in this state. This bill would require the Board of Trustees and the Regents to comply with certain conditions, as provided, before receiving funds from the 2020 University Capital Outlay Bond Fund established pursuant to the Public Preschool, K-12, and College Health and Safety Bond Act of 2020. (7) Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to impose, as specified, an alternative fee, charge, dedication, or requirement on developers to fund school facilities, until the date new construction bond proceeds authorized by the Preschool-College Public Education Bond Act of 2016 are expended, or December 31, 2020, whichever is earlier. This bill would remove this authority beginning the earlier of January 1, 2021, or the date new construction bond proceeds authorized by the 2016 bond act are expended or apportioned, until January 1, 2028. The bill would also exempt multifamily housing developments that are located no further than 12 mile from a major transit stop, and reduce by 20% from specified amounts for any other multifamily housing developments, as specified, from any fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement for the construction or reconstruction of school facilities, as provided. (8) This bill, except for the provision making the provisions of the bill severable, would become effective upon the adoption of the Public Preschool, K-12, and College Health and Safety Bond Act of 2020 by the voters at the March 3, 2020, statewide primary election.

Existing law prescribes, in accordance with federal law, the powers of the protection and advocacy agency, which is a private, nonprofit corporation, charged with protecting and advocating for the rights of persons with developmental disabilities and mental disorders. Under existing law, a protection and advocacy agency's powers include the authority to pursue legal, administrative, and other appropriate remedies to ensure the protection of the rights of persons with developmental disabilities and persons with mental illness, to provide information and referral to programs and services addressing the needs of persons with developmental disabilities and persons with mental illness, and to investigate any incident of abuse or neglect of persons with developmental disabilities or persons with mental illness if the complaints are reported to the protection and advocacy agency or if probable cause exists to believe that abuse or neglect has occurred. This bill would make various changes to the protection and advocacy agency's access to facilities, programs, and records by, among other things, authorizing the protection and advocacy agency to exercise the authority to take certain actions if the agency receives a complaint or report of alleged abuse or neglect or makes a related determination, as described. The authority would include monitoring a facility's, program's, or service provider's compliance with respect to the rights and safety of individuals with disabilities, requiring a facility, program, or service provider to provide immediate access to interview any individual with a disability unless providing immediate access would interfere with treatment or therapy to be provided to the individual, and providing the protection and advocacy agency with additional access to the records of persons with a disability. The bill would also require the protection and advocacy agency to obtain written consent from specified individuals before releasing information concerning them to a person not otherwise authorized to receive it. The bill would permit the sharing of health information and records with a protection and advocacy agency to the extent the sharing is required by law and complies with the requirements of that law.

Existing law establishes the California DREAM Loan Program, which provides a student attending a participating campus of the University of California or California State University with a loan, referred to as a DREAM loan, if the student satisfies specified requirements, including a requirement that the student be exempt from paying nonresident tuition or meet equivalent requirements adopted by the regents, and that the student is enrolled in an "instructional program," defined as a program of study that results in the award of a baccalaureate degree or undergraduate certificate, or undergraduate coursework in a program of study leading directly to a first professional degree for which no baccalaureate degree or undergraduate degree is awarded. This bill would, commencing with the 2020–21 academic year, expand DREAM loan eligibility to a student who is enrolled in a program of study leading to a professional or graduate degree, including, but not limited to, a teaching credential, if the student meets the other applicable qualifications. This bill would require the participating institution to determine the proportion of program funding used for instructional programs and for graduate programs. The bill would require that priority under this program be given to loans for instructional programs.

Existing law, known as the Student Athlete Bill of Rights, requires intercollegiate athletic programs at 4-year private universities or campuses of the University of California or the California State University that receive, as an average, $10,000,000 or more in annual revenue derived from media rights for intercollegiate athletics to comply with prescribed requirements relating to student athlete rights. This bill would prohibit California postsecondary educational institutions except community colleges, and every athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics, from providing a prospective intercollegiate student athlete with compensation in relation to the athlete's name, image, or likeness, or preventing a student participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student's name, image, or likeness or obtaining professional representation relating to the student's participation in intercollegiate athletics. The bill also would prohibit an athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics from preventing a postsecondary educational institution other than a community college from participating in intercollegiate athletics as a result of the compensation of a student athlete for the use of the student's name, image, or likeness. The bill would require professional representation obtained by student athletes to be from persons licensed by the state. The bill would specify that athlete agents shall comply with federal law in their relationships with student athletes. The bill would prohibit the revocation of a student's scholarship as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation as authorized under these provisions. The bill would prohibit a student athlete from entering into a contract providing compensation to the athlete for use of the athlete's name, image, or likeness if a provision of the contract is in conflict with a provision of the athlete's team contract. The bill would prohibit a team contract from preventing a student athlete from using the athlete's name, image, or likeness for a commercial purpose when the athlete is not engaged in official team activities, as specified. These provisions would become operative on January 1, 2023. This bill would require the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to convene a community college athlete name, image, and likeness working group composed of individuals appointed on or before July 1, 2020, as specified. The bill would require the working group to review various athletic association bylaws and state and federal laws regarding a college athlete's use of the athlete's name, image, and likeness for compensation and, on or before July 1, 2021, submit to the Legislature and the California Community College Athletic Association a report containing its findings and policy recommendations in connection with this review.