Existing law makes it unlawful to permit or allow a dog to pursue any big game mammal, as defined, during the closed season, or any fully protected, rare, or endangered mammal at any time. Existing law authorizes employees of the Department of Fish and Game to capture any dog not under the reasonable control of its owner or handler, that is in violation of that provision, or that is inflicting, or immediately threatening to inflict, injury in violation of this provision. Existing law generally prohibits a person from using dogs to hunt, pursue, or molest bears,, but allows the use of one dog per hunter for the hunting of bears during open deer season, and the use of more than one dog per hunter during the open bear season except during the period when archery deer seasons or regular deer seasons are open. Under existing law, except as excluded, violations of the Fish and Game Code are misdemeanors. This bill, except as specified, would generally make it unlawful to permit or allow a dog to pursue a bear, as defined, or bobcat at any time. The bill would exempt from that prohibition the use of dogs by federal, state, or local law enforcement officers, or their agents or employees, when carrying out official duties as required by law. The bill would eliminate existing provisions allowing for the use of dogs to hunt bears, and would, instead, authorize the use of not more than 3 dogs to pursue bears or bobcats pursuant to a depredation permit issued by the department. The bill would authorize the department to authorize specified entities to use dogs to pursue bears or bobcats for the purpose of scientific research, under certain conditions. The bill would also authorize the pursuit of bears or bobcats by dogs that are guarding or protecting livestock or crops on property owned, leased, or rented by the owner of the dogs, if the dogs are maintained with, and remain in reasonable proximity to, the livestock or crops being guarded or protected. The bill would authorize the Fish and Game Commission to establish a hound tag program, imposing prescribed requirements on the licensure and use of hounds, as defined, to pursue mammals. By changing the definition of a crime, 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law establishes the California State University, under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in the state. Existing law authorizes the trustees by rule to require all persons to pay fees, rents, deposits, and charges for services, facilities, or materials provided by the trustees to those persons. This bill would prohibit specified California State University campus-based mandatory fees from being reallocated without an affirmative vote of the majority of the members of either the student body or a specified campus fee advisory committee voting on the fee reallocation, unless the vote that established the fee authorizes an alternative or automatic reallocation mechanism for that fee.
(1) Existing law, except as specified, requires every person, other than a fur dealer, who traps fur-bearing mammals or nongame mammals, designated by the Fish and Game Commission, or who sells raw furs of those mammals, to have a trapping license from the Department of Fish and Game. Certain persons taking mammals injurious to growing crops or other property are exempted from the trapping license requirement, except those persons providing trapping services for profit are required to obtain a trapping license from the department. This bill, commencing July 1, 2013, would establish 2 classes of trapping licenses. The bill would authorize a person who has complied with all applicable licensing and license renewal requirements to trap wildlife for recreation or fur to be issued a class I trapping license. The bill, commencing July 1, 2013, would authorize specified persons trapping wildlife for a profit be issued a class II trapping license. The bill, commencing July 1, 2013, would require the department to publish a list of class II trapping licensees on its Internet Web site. The bill would authorize the commission to issue a formal warning or suspend a license when a licensee is found, after a duly noticed hearing, to have published inconsistent information on wildlife diseases, as specified. The bill would require the commission to establish a base fee for a class II trapping license, in an amount sufficient to recover all reasonable administrative, implementation, and enforcement costs of the department and commission relating to the license, and would require the commission to implement this fee structure on or before July 1, 2013. The bill, commencing July 1, 2013, would make available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, revenues of those class II trapping license fees to fund reimbursement of the department and commission for the reasonable costs of the administration, implementation, and enforcement of provisions of law relating to class II trapping licenses and of regulations adopted pursuant to those provisions. The bill, commencing July 1, 2013, would require a class II trapping licensee to make a reasonable effort, as defined, to determine whether dependent young are present within a home or business premise and to prevent orphaning young animals as a consequence of trapping and killing the mother. The bill, commencing July 1, 2013, would further require class II trapping licensees to provide clients with a written contract, containing prescribed information, prior to setting traps. (2) Existing law, except as expressly provided, makes any violation of the Fish and Game Code, or any rule, regulation, or order made or adopted under that code, a misdemeanor. Existing law makes certain actions relating to trapping unlawful. The bill also would make it unlawful to kill any trapped mammal by listed methods or to solicit trapping services business from the public for reasons of health or safety pursuant to specified laws. The bill also would prohibit the trapping of bats, except where expressly authorized under specified circumstances. By specifying these new Fish and Game Code violations, thereby defining new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law, except as specified, prohibits the taking or possession of nongame mammals, as defined. Existing law authorizes the department to enter into cooperative agreements with state and federal agencies for the purpose of controlling harmful nongame mammals. This bill would authorize the department to enter into cooperative agreements with a special district or a state or local agency having responsibility for levee maintenance for the purpose of controlling nongame mammals to maintain irrigation, water supply, drainage, and flood control works. (4) 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 that the cost of seizing, caring for, and treating any stray, abandoned, or endangered animal seized pursuant to specified provisions regarding the failure to care for animals, or pursuant to a search warrant, shall constitute a lien on the animal and that the animal shall not be returned to its owner until the charges are paid. Existing law provides that, if these charges are not paid within 14 days of the seizure, or if an owner fails to pay charges permitted, as specified, and take possession of the animal within 14 days of notice of availability of the animal to be returned, the animal shall be deemed to have been abandoned and may be disposed of by the impounding officer. Existing law also provides that no animal properly seized pursuant to these provisions shall be returned to its owner until, in the determination of the seizing agency or the hearing officer, the animal is physically fit, or the owner can demonstrate that he or she can and will provide the necessary care. Existing law requires, when an officer seizes or impounds an animal based on a reasonable belief that prompt action is required to protect the health or safety of the animal or the safety of others, that prior to the commencement of any criminal proceedings, the officer provide the owner or keeper of the animal, if known or ascertainable after reasonable investigation, with the opportunity for a postseizure hearing to determine the validity of the seizure or impoundment, or both. Existing law authorizes the court to order, as a condition of probation, that a person convicted of violating these provisions be prohibited from owning, possessing, caring for, or residing with animals, and in the event of the acquittal or final discharge without conviction of the arrested person, the court is required, on demand, to direct the release of seized or impounded animals upon a showing of proof of ownership. The bill would, if an animal is deemed to have been abandoned because the owner has failed to pay the charges and take possession of the animal within 14 days of notice of availability of the animal to be returned, authorize the seizing agency to dispose of the animal. The bill would also authorize a seizing agency or prosecuting attorney, in the case of cats and dogs, prior to final disposition of any criminal charges against the owner of an animal, to file a petition in the criminal proceeding requesting the court to issue an order forfeiting the animal to the city, county, or seizing agency prior to the final disposition of the criminal charge. The bill would require notice and a hearing, as specified, and would impose upon the petitioner the burden of establishing, beyond a reasonable doubt, that even if the owner is acquitted of the charges, he or she will not be legally permitted to retain the animal. If the petitioner meets his or her burden, the bill would require the court to order the immediate forfeiture of the animal as sought by the petition. The bill, in the event of the acquittal or final discharge without conviction of the person charged, would require the court, on demand, to direct the release of seized or impounded animals upon a showing of proof of ownership. Existing law provides that any person who has been convicted of certain crimes regarding cruelty to animals and the failure to care for animals, and who within a specified period after conviction, owns, possesses, maintains, has custody of, resides with, or cares for any animal, is guilty of a public offense punishable by a $1,000 fine. Existing law authorizes the court to reduce the duration of the mandatory ownership prohibition if the defendant files a petition seeking that order and, at the subsequent hearing, establishes probable cause to believe specified facts, including that he or she does not present a danger to animals and has the ability to properly care for all the animals in his or her care. Existing law also authorizes the court to exempt owners of livestock from these restrictions if the defendant files a petition to establish that the imposition of these restrictions would result in substantial or undue economic hardship to the defendant's livelihood and that the defendant has the ability to properly care for all livestock in his or her care. This bill would require a defendant who files a petition seeking to reduce the duration of the mandatory ownership prohibition or an exemption, as described above, to establish the basis for granting the relief by a preponderance of the evidence. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 597.1 of the Penal Code proposed in SB 1162, that would become operative only if SB 1162 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2013, and this bill is chaptered last.
Existing law establishes the Victims of Corporate Fraud Compensation Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, within the State Treasury administered by the Secretary of State, the sole purpose of which is to provide restitution to victims of corporate fraud. This bill would revise and recast those provisions, including eliminating the requirement that the Secretary of State adopt those regulations. The bill would provide that an aggrieved person who obtains a final judgment, as specified, against a corporation based upon the corporation's fraud, misrepresentation, or deceit, made with intent to defraud, may file an application with the Secretary of State for payment from the fund for the amount unpaid on the judgment that represents the awarded actual and direct loss to the claimant in the final judgment. The bill would limit the amount to be paid from the fund to $50,000 with respect to any one claimant, as specified. This bill would require a claimant to apply for restitution on a form prescribed by the Secretary of State including specified information and representations. The bill would establish procedures for the Secretary of State in determining whether a claim shall be paid, including giving written notice to the claimant and the corporation, as specified. The bill would prescribe procedures for judicial review of a denied claim. The bill would require a corporation to reimburse the fund and pay interest for any payment made from the fund by the Secretary of State in settlement of a claim or toward satisfaction of a final judgment against the corporation, as specified. The bill would make it a crime to file a document under these provisions that is false or contains willful, material misstatements. The bill would apply its provisions to applications submitted to the Secretary of State on or after January 1, 2013. The bill would make conforming changes. Because this bill would create new crimes, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law makes it a felony, generally known as human trafficking, to deprive or violate the personal liberty of another with the intent to effect or maintain a felony violation of, among other crimes, pimping, pandering, and abducting a minor for the purpose of prostitution. Existing law, the California Control of Profits of Organized Crime Act, defines criminal profiteering as any act committed or attempted, or any threat made for financial gain or advantage, that may be charged as a crime under specified provisions, including murder, money laundering, human trafficking, and crimes in which the perpetrator induces, encourages, persuades, threatens, or forces a person under 18 years of age to engage in a commercial sex act. Under existing law, property and assets acquired or received in exchange for the proceeds immediately derived from the pattern of criminal profiteering activity are subject to forfeit. The money proceeds from that forfeiture are distributed as prescribed. In cases involving human trafficking of minors for purposes of prostitution or lewd conduct or in any case involving taking a person for prostitution in which the victim is a minor, the funds are deposited in the Victim-Witness Assistance Fund to be available for appropriation to fund child sexual exploitation and child sexual abuse victim counseling centers and prevention programs and for grants to community-based organizations that serve minor victims of human trafficking. This bill would authorize the forfeiture of vehicles, boats, airplanes, money, negotiable instruments, securities, real property, or other things of value used for the purpose of facilitating the human trafficking involving a commercial sex act where the victim is an individual under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime and property acquired through human trafficking or which was received in exchange for the proceeds of human trafficking of a person under 18 years of age when the crime involved a commercial sex act. The bill would prescribe the distribution of those funds, including to the General Fund of the state or local governmental entity, whichever prosecutes, and to the Victim-Witness Assistance Fund to be used upon appropriation for grants to community-based organizations that serve victims of human trafficking.
The Passenger Charter-party Carriers' Act, with certain exceptions, prohibits a charter-party carrier of passengers from engaging in transportation services subject to regulation by the Public Utilities Commission without obtaining a specified certificate or permit, as appropriate, from the commission. The act, except as specified, requires the driver of any limousine for hire operated by a charter-party carrier of passengers (carrier) under a valid certificate or permit to comply with prescribed requirements relating to alcoholic beverages, including ascertaining whether any passenger is under the age of 21 years, reading to the passenger a statement that the consumption of any alcoholic beverage in the vehicle is unlawful, requiring such a passenger to sign the statement, and, if a minor passenger, after signing the statement, is found to be, or to have been, consuming any alcoholic beverage during the course of the ride, immediately terminating the contract of hire and returning the passenger to the point of origin. The act also subjects the carrier to specified civil penalties, based on the number of offenses, for conviction of a driver, or any officer, director, agent, or employee of the carrier, of a violation of the Vehicle Code that prohibits storage of an opened container of an alcoholic beverage in a motor vehicle. This bill would repeal the above-described provisions concerning the responsibilities of a driver of a limousine for hire operated by a carrier relating to the consumption of alcoholic beverages by passengers under 21 years of age. The bill would instead require the charter-party carrier of passengers to ask the chartering party, as defined, to disclose at the time transportation service is prearranged or the contract of carriage is made and, upon being asked, would require the chartering party to disclose (1) if alcoholic beverages will be served by the chartering party, as defined, or be transported in the passenger compartment of the vehicle during transportation and (2) if any member of the party to be provided with transportation services will be under 21 years of age. The bill would require the charting party to designate a designee, as defined, and would impose different requirements for a designee of the chartering party and the driver of the vehicle depending upon the presence of specified circumstances. The bill would make the designee or, when present, the parent or legal guardian legally responsible for any reasonably foreseeable personal injury or property damage that is proximately caused by a violation of laws prohibiting the consumption of alcoholic beverages by a person under 21 years of age when alcoholic beverages are consumed during the provision of transportation services under certain circumstances. The bill would make failure to comply with certain of its requirements a misdemeanor and would make any violation of its requirements by a charter-party carrier of passengers or its driver subject to civil penalties imposed by the commission. The bill, by creating a new crime, 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 prohibits domestic insurers from acquiring foreign investments from or located in foreign jurisdictions designated as state sponsors of terrorism by the United States Secretary of State. Existing law, the Iran Contracting Act of 2010, provides that a person whose name appears on a list developed or contracted for development by the Department of General Services as a person determined by the department to be engaged in investment activities in Iran is ineligible to bid on, submit a proposal for, enter into, or renew a contract with a public entity. This bill would require that above-referenced investments by a domestic insurer in companies that are included on the list maintained by the Department of General Services be treated as nonadmitted assets on the financial statements of the domestic insurer. The bill would deem use of the list developed for purposes of the Iran Contracting Act of 2010 as automatic compliance with these requirements. The bill would require the insurer to provide the Department of Insurance, on an annual basis, with a list of the investments the insurer has in companies included on the Department of General Services list.
Existing law requires specified information to be provided to patients regarding their health care. Existing federal law requires a written report of the results of each mammography examination and requires a summary of that report to be sent to the patient within a specified time period. This bill, from April 1, 2013, until January 1, 2019, would require, under specified circumstances, a health facility at which a mammography examination is performed to include in the summary of the written report that is sent to the patient a prescribed notice on breast density.
Existing law establishes the Department of Veterans Affairs, which is responsible for administering various programs and services for the benefit of veterans. This bill would provide that if the federal government acts to reinstate benefits to discharged veterans, as specified, who were denied those benefits solely on the basis of sexual orientation pursuant to any federal policy prohibiting homosexual personnel from serving in the Armed Forces of the United States, the state shall reinstate to those veterans any state-offered benefits, as provided. This bill would require the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide Internet resources, Internet links, and print materials, as provided, regarding, or created by, veterans' legal services organizations that specialize in military discharge upgrades.