The Rechargeable Battery Recycling Act of 2006 requires every retailer, as defined, to have in place a system for the acceptance and collection of used rechargeable batteries for reuse, recycling, or proper disposal. The Cell Phone Recycling Act of 2004 prohibits the sale of a cell phone in this state to a consumer unless the retailer of that cell phone has in place a take-back system for the acceptance and collection of used cell phones for reuse, recycling, or proper disposal. This bill would make the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Act of 2006 inoperative as of September 30, 2026, and would repeal that act as of January 1, 2027, and would make the Cell Phone Recycling Act of 2004 inoperative as of September 30, 2027, and would repeal that act as of January 1, 2028. This bill would enact the Responsible Battery Recycling Act of 2022, which would require producers, as defined, either individually or through the creation of one or more stewardship organizations, to establish a stewardship program for the collection and recycling of covered batteries, as defined. The bill would require a program operator, as defined, to develop, and to submit to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (department) and the Department of Toxic Substances Control for review and for approval by the department, as specified, a stewardship plan and would prescribe the standards and elements required to be contained in a stewardship plan for covered batteries. The bill would require the department, in consultation with the Department of Toxic Substances Control, to adopt regulations to implement the act with an effective date of no earlier than April 1, 2025. The bill would require a program operator to have a complete stewardship plan approved by the department no later than 24 months after the effective date of the regulations adopted by the department in order for the program operator to be in compliance with the act. This bill would require a program operator to be audited annually, and submit a report and budget to the department, as prescribed, and would require a program operator, stewardship organization, producer, manufacturer, distributor, retailer, importer, recycler, or collection site to, among other things, provide the department and the Department of Toxic Substances Control with relevant records necessary to determine compliance with the act. The bill would require reports and records provided to the department to be provided under penalty of perjury, thereby creating a state-mandated local program by expanding the crime of perjury. The bill would restrict public access to certain information collected for the purpose of administering a stewardship program. The bill would preempt all rules, regulations, codes, ordinances, or other laws adopted by a city, county, city and county, municipality, or a local agency on or after January 1, 2023, regarding stewardship programs for covered batteries. This bill would require the department, within 24 months of the effective date of the regulations to implement these provisions, and each year thereafter, to post on its internet website a list of producers that are in compliance with the act, including the reported brands of covered batteries of each producer. The bill would require the department to remove from the list any producer, including its brands and covered batteries, that is not in compliance with the act. The bill would prohibit, on and after the date that a stewardship plan is approved by the department, a retailer or distributor from selling, distributing, offering for sale, or importing a covered battery in or into the state unless the producer of the covered battery is listed on that list as in compliance on the act, except as specified. The bill would require the department to relist on its internet website a producer, along with its brands and covered batteries, if the department subsequently determines that the producer is in compliance with the act. This bill would require a program operator to reimburse the department and the Department of Toxic Substances Control for their respective actual and reasonable regulatory costs that are directly related to implementing and enforcing the act in relation to the program operator's activities. The bill would require the department and the Department of Toxic Substances Control to deposit those moneys into the Covered Battery Recycling Fund, which the bill would establish, and would authorize the department and the Department of Toxic Substances Control to expend those moneys, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement and enforce the act. This bill would provide for enforcement of the act, including authorizing the department to impose an administrative civil penalty on a program operator, stewardship organization, producer, manufacturer, distributor, retailer, importer, recycler, or collection site in violation of the act not to exceed $10,000 per day, unless the violation is intentional, knowing, or reckless, then in that case not to exceed $50,000 per day. The bill would require the department to deposit those moneys into the Covered Battery Recycling Penalty Account, which the bill would establish in the fund, and would make those moneys available for expenditure upon appropriation by the Legislature. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. 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.
Sponsored bills
(1) Existing law, the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, approved by the voters as Proposition 24 at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election, establishes the California Privacy Protection Agency. Existing law vests the agency with full administrative power, authority, and jurisdiction to implement and enforce the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 and requires the agency to be governed by a board. Existing law requires businesses to protect consumer privacy and information, make certain disclosures to consumers regarding a consumer's rights under the act in a specified manner, and disclose to consumers that a consumer has the right to request specific pieces of information, including the categories of information those businesses have collected about that consumer. Existing law, the Parent's Accountability and Child Protection Act, requires a person or business that conducts business in California and that seeks to sell specified products or services to take reasonable steps to ensure that the purchaser is of legal age at the time of purchase or delivery, including verifying the age of the purchaser. Existing law prohibits a person or business that is required to comply with these provisions from retaining, using, or disclosing any information it receives in an effort to verify age from a purchaser or recipient for any other purpose, except as specified, and subjects a business or person that violates these provisions to a civil penalty. This bill would enact the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, which, commencing July 1, 2024, would, among other things, require a business that provides an online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children to comply with specified requirements, including a requirement to configure all default privacy settings offered by the online service, product, or feature to the settings that offer a high level of privacy, unless the business can demonstrate a compelling reason that a different setting is in the best interests of children, and to provide privacy information, terms of service, policies, and community standards concisely, prominently, and using clear language suited to the age of children likely to access that online service, product, or feature. The bill would require a business, before any new online services, products, or features are offered to the public, to complete a Data Protection Impact Assessment, as defined, for any online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children and maintain documentation of this assessment as long as the online service, product, or feature is likely to be accessed by children. The bill would require a business to make a Data Protection Impact Assessment available, within 5 business days, to the Attorney General pursuant to a written request and would exempt a Data Protection Impact Assessment from public disclosure, as prescribed. The bill would prohibit a business that provides an online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children from taking proscribed action, including, if the end user is a child, using personal information for any reason other than a reason for which the personal information was collected, unless the business can demonstrate a compelling reason that use of the personal information is in the best interests of children. This bill would create the California Children's Data Protection Working Group to deliver a report to the Legislature regarding best practices for the implementation of these provisions, as specified. The bill would require the members of the working group to have certain expertise, including in the areas of children's data privacy and children's rights. The bill would require the working group to take input from a broad range of stakeholders, including from academia, consumer advocacy groups, and small, medium, and large businesses affected by data privacy policies, and make prescribed recommendations on best practices, including identifying online services, products, or features likely to be accessed by children. This bill would authorize the Attorney General to seek an injunction or civil penalty against any business that violates its provisions. The bill would hold violators liable for a civil penalty of not more than $2,500 per affected child for each negligent violation or not more than $7,500 per affected child for each intentional violation. The bill would require any penalties, fees, and expenses recovered in an action brought under the act to be deposited in the Consumer Privacy Fund with the intent that they be used to fully offset costs incurred by the Attorney General in connection with the act. (2) The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 authorizes the Legislature to amend the act to further the purposes and intent of the act by a majority vote of both houses of the Legislature, as specified. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020. (3) 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.
Existing law establishes the Trial Court Trust Fund for the purpose of funding trial court operations. For purposes of those provisions, court operations are defined to include, among other things, juror expenses such as travel reimbursement. Existing law also specifies the travel reimbursement to be paid to jurors in civil and criminal cases at $0.34 per mile for each mile traveled in attending court after the first day, in going only. This bill would require the mileage reimbursement provision described above to apply to travel both going and leaving court. The bill would require that all jurors and prospective jurors who have been summoned be provided access to existing public transit services at no cost, as specified. The bill would authorize courts to partner with public transit operators to provide this no-cost service or to determine an alternate method of reimbursement up to a daily maximum of $12. The bill would exempt from this requirement a court located where a public transit operator does not provide existing service that is reasonably available to the court facility. The bill would require a court to consider certain factors in determining whether transit service is reasonably available to the court facility. The bill would require a court, prior to determining that transit service is not reasonably available, to contact the public transit operator to inquire whether new transit options may be implemented near the court. The bill would require the Judicial Council to sponsor a pilot program for 2 fiscal years to study whether increases in juror compensation and mileage reimbursement rates increase juror diversity and participation. The bill would require the Judicial Council to provide a report to the Legislature describing the findings of the pilot program and providing information for promoting juror diversity.
(1) Existing law, the Assisted Outpatient Treatment Demonstration Project Act of 2002, known as Laura's Law, requires each county to offer specified mental health programs, unless a county or group of counties opts out by a resolution passed by the governing body, as specified. Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, provides for short-term and longer-term involuntary treatment and conservatorships for people who are determined to be gravely disabled. This bill, contingent upon the State Department of Health Care Services developing an allocation to provide financial assistance to counties, would enact the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act, which would authorize specified adult persons to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, and who meet other specified criteria. The bill would require the Counties of Glenn, Orange, Riverside, San Diego, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne and the City and County of San Francisco to implement the program commencing October 1, 2023, and the remaining counties to commence no later than December 1, 2024. The bill would require the Judicial Council to develop a mandatory form for use in filing a CARE process petition and would specify the process by which the petition is filed and reviewed, including requiring the petition to be signed under penalty of perjury, and to contain specified information, including the facts that support the petitioner's assertion that the respondent meets the CARE criteria. The bill would also specify the schedule of review hearings required if the respondent is ordered to comply with an up to one-year CARE plan by the court. The bill would make the hearings in a CARE Act proceeding confidential and not open to the public, thereby limiting public access to a meeting of a public body. The bill would authorize the CARE plan to be extended once, for up to one year, and would prescribe the requirements for the graduation plan. By expanding the crime of perjury and imposing additional duties on the county behavioral health agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the court to appoint counsel for the respondent, unless the respondent has retained their own counsel. The bill would require the Legal Services Trust Fund Commission at the State Bar to provide funding to qualified legal services projects to provide legal counsel in CARE Act proceedings, as specified. The bill would authorize the respondent to have a supporter, as defined. The bill would require the State Department of Health Care Services, in consultation with specified stakeholders, to provide optional training and technical resources for volunteer supporters on the CARE process, community services and supports, supported decisionmaking, and other topics, as prescribed. This bill would require the California Health and Human Services Agency, or a designated department within that agency, to engage an independent, research-based entity to advise on the development of data-driven process and outcome measures for the CARE Act and to convene a workgroup to provide coordination and support among relevant state and local partners and other stakeholders throughout the phases of county implementation of the CARE Act. The bill also would require the State Department of Health Care Services to provide training and technical assistance to county behavioral health agencies to implement the act and to provide training to counsel, as specified. The bill would require the Judicial Council, in consultation with the department and others, to provide training to judges regarding the CARE process, as specified. This bill would authorize the court, at any time during the CARE process, if it finds the county or other local government entity not complying with court orders, to report that finding to the presiding judge of the superior court or their designee. If the presiding judge or their designee finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the local government has substantially failed to comply with the CARE process, the presiding judge may impose a fine of up to $1,000 per day and, if the court finds persistent noncompliance, to appoint a special master to secure court-ordered care for the respondent at the county's cost. The bill would establish the CARE Act Accountability Fund in the State Treasury to receive the fines collected under the Act, which would, upon appropriation, be allocated and distributed by the department to the local government entity that paid the fines to serve individuals who have schizophrenia spectrum or other psychotic disorders who are experiencing or are at risk of homelessness, criminal justice involvement, hospitalization, or conservatorship. This bill would require the department, in consultation with the Judicial Council, to develop an annual reporting schedule for the submission of CARE Act data from the trial courts and would require the Judicial Council to aggregate the data and submit it to the department. The bill would require the department, in consultation with various other entities, to develop an annual CARE Act report and would require county behavioral health agencies and other local governmental entities to provide the department with specified information for that report. The bill would require an independent, research-based entity retained by the department to develop an independent evaluation of the effectiveness of the CARE Act and would require the department to produce a preliminary and final report based on that evaluation. By increasing the duties of a local agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would exempt a county or an employee or agent of a county from civil or criminal liability for any action by a respondent in the CARE process, except when an act or omission constitutes gross negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct. Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) , an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, establishes the Mental Health Services Fund (MHSF) , a continuously appropriated fund, to fund various county mental health programs, including children's mental health care, adult and older adult mental health care, prevention and early intervention programs, and innovative programs. This bill would clarify that MHSA funds may be used to provide services to individuals under a CARE agreement or a CARE plan. (2) Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires health care service plans and insurers to provide coverage for medically necessary treatment of mental health and substance use disorders. Violation of the Knox-Keene Act by a health care service plan is a crime. This bill would require health care service plans and insurers to cover the cost of developing an evaluation for CARE process services and the provision of all health care services for an enrollee or insured when required or recommended for the person pursuant to a CARE plan, as specified, without cost sharing, except for prescription drugs, and regardless of whether the services are provided by an in-network or out-of-network provider. Because a violation of this requirement by a health care service plan would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law prohibits a person from being tried or adjudged to punishment while that person is mentally incompetent. Existing law establishes a process by which a defendant's mental competency is evaluated and by which the defendant receives treatment, with the goal of returning the defendant to competency. Existing law suspends a criminal action pending restoration to competency. This bill, for a misdemeanor defendant who has been determined to be incompetent to stand trial, would authorize the court to refer the defendant to the CARE process. (4) 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. (5) This bill would state that its provisions are severable. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1370.01 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 1223 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1223 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (7) 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.
Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to require each housing development, as defined, that is financed on or after January 1, 2018, pursuant to the Zenovich-Moscone-Chacon Housing and Home Finance Act, to authorize a resident of the housing development to own or otherwise maintain one or more common household pets, as defined, within the resident's dwelling unit, subject to applicable state laws and local government ordinances related to public health, animal control, and animal anticruelty. Existing law establishes a low-income housing tax credit program pursuant to which the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC) provides procedures and requirements for the allocation, in modified conformity with federal law, of state insurance, personal income, and corporation tax credit amounts to qualified low-income housing projects that have been allocated, or qualify for, a federal low-income housing tax credit, and farmworker housing. This bill would require any housing development that is financed on or after January 1, 2023, pursuant to the act or by any moneys administered or otherwise provided by the department, or that is the basis for the receipt, on or after January 1, 2023, of any low-income housing tax credit, as described, to authorize a resident of the housing development to own or otherwise maintain one or more common household pets, as defined, within the resident's dwelling unit, subject to applicable state laws and local government ordinances related to public health, animal control, and animal anticruelty and other reasonable conditions, as defined. The bill would, among other things, prohibit the imposition of a monthly fee for the ownership or maintenance of a common household pet in these housing developments.
Existing law specifies the process by which a corporation may be converted into a domestic other business entity if specified conditions are met. This bill would instead provide that this process applies to the conversion of a corporation into a domestic other business entity, foreign other business entity, or foreign corporation, as specified. The bill would define terms for purposes of these provisions, make other conforming changes, and establish the means by which an obligation of a corporation that has converted to a foreign corporation or foreign other business entity may be enforced. Existing law requires a corporation that desires to convert to a domestic other business entity to approve a plan of conversion that includes, among other things, the jurisdiction of organization of the converted entity after conversion. This bill would require a corporation to also provide the name and form after conversion. Existing law authorizes the Secretary of State to charge a fee to an entity not exceeding $150 for its conversion made under these provisions. This bill would remove the authorization of the Secretary of State to charge a fee for corporate conversions.
Existing law, until January 1, 2025, authorizes local agencies, as defined, to use the design-build procurement process for specified public works with prescribed cost thresholds. Existing law requires specified information submitted by a design-build entity in the design-build procurement process to be certified under penalty of perjury. Existing law authorizes the Director of General Services to use the progressive design-build procurement process for the construction of up to 3 capital outlay projects, as jointly determined by the Department of General Services and the Department of Finance, and prescribes that process. Existing law defines "progressive design-build" as a project delivery process in which both the design and construction of a project are procured from a single entity that is selected through a qualifications-based selection at the earliest feasible stage of the project. Existing law, pursuant to the process, after selection of a design-build entity, authorizes the Department of General Services to contract for design and preconstruction services sufficient to establish a guaranteed maximum price, as defined. Existing law authorizes the department, upon agreement on a guaranteed maximum price, to amend the contract in its sole discretion, as specified. Existing law requires specified information to be verified under penalty of perjury. This bill, until January 1, 2029, would authorize local agencies, defined as any city, county, city and county, or special district authorized by law to provide for the production, storage, supply, treatment, or distribution of any water from any source, to use the progressive design-build process for up to 15 public works projects in excess of $5,000,000 for each project, similar to the progressive design-build process authorized for use by the Director of General Services. The bill would require a local agency that uses the progressive design-build process to submit, no later than January 1, 2028, to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature a report on the use of the progressive design-build process containing specified information, including a description of the projects awarded using the progressive design-build process. The bill would require the design-build entity and its general partners or joint venture members to verify specified information under penalty of perjury. By expanding 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 establishes the State Air Resources Board as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources emitting greenhouse gases. Existing law, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, requires the state board to ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40% below the 1990 level by 2030. The act requires the state board to prepare and approve a scoping plan for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and, as part of its scoping plan, to establish specified carbon dioxide removal targets for 2030 and beyond. This bill would establish the Geologic Carbon Sequestration Group to provide independent expertise and regulatory guidance to the state board. The bill would establish certain of the group's duties, including identifying suitable locations of a class of carbon dioxide injection wells and providing specified guidance regarding the monitoring and operation of carbon dioxide injection wells.
Existing law prescribes various circumstances under which a minor may consent to their medical care and treatment without the consent of a parent or guardian. These circumstances include, among others, authorizing a minor 12 years of age or older who may have come into contact with an infectious, contagious, or communicable disease to consent to medical care related to the diagnosis or treatment of the disease, if the disease or condition is one that is required by law or regulation to be reported to the local health officer, or is a related sexually transmitted disease, as may be determined by the State Public Health Officer. This bill would additionally authorize a minor 15 years of age or older to consent to vaccines that meet specified federal agency criteria. The bill would authorize a vaccine provider, as defined, to administer a vaccine pursuant to the bill, but would not authorize the vaccine provider to provide any service that is otherwise outside the vaccine provider's scope of practice.
Existing law, the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) , governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law excludes certain employees from coverage under the Dills Act, including, among others, managerial employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, as defined. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. This bill would enact the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act, to provide employees of the Legislature the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters of employer-employee relations. The bill would prescribe rights, duties, and prohibitions in this context that parallel those in the Dills Act. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including employees of the Legislature in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Legislature. The bill would make it a misdemeanor for any person to willfully resist, prevent, impede, or interfere with any member of the board, or any of its agents, in the performance of duties pursuant to its provisions. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that the provisions of the Legislature Employer-Employee Relations Act are severable. The bill would become operative on July 1, 2024. 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.