Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, prohibits housing discrimination, including discrimination through public or private land use practices, decisions, or authorizations, based on specified personal characteristics, including source of income. Existing law defines the term "source of income" for purposes of the provisions relating to discrimination in housing accommodations described above, to mean lawful, verifiable income paid directly to a tenant or paid to a representative of a tenant. Existing law specifies that for the purposes of this definition, a landlord is not considered a representative of a tenant. This bill would instead define the term for purposes of those provisions, to mean verifiable income paid directly to a tenant or to a representative of a tenant, or paid to a housing owner or landlord on behalf of a tenant, including federal, state, or local public assistance and housing subsidies, as specified. The bill would also specify that for the purposes of this definition, a housing owner is not considered a representative of a tenant. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 12927 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1497 and SB 222 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1497 or SB 222 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 12955 of the Government Code proposed by SB 222 to be operative only if this bill and SB 222 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Sponsored bills
Existing law, beginning October 1, 2019, and stayed pending voter approval under the powers of referendum pursuant to the California Constitution, requires Pretrial Assessment Services, as defined, to assess a person arrested or detained, as specified, according to a risk assessment instrument, as defined. Existing law requires Pretrial Assessment Services to release from confinement specified individuals based on that risk assessment, and, if the person is not released, to submit that assessment to the court for use in its pretrial release or detention decision. This bill would require each pretrial services agency that uses a pretrial risk assessment tool to validate the tool by January 1, 2021, and on a regular basis thereafter, but no less frequently than once every 3 years, and to make specified information regarding the tool, including validation studies, publicly available. The bill would require the Judicial Council to maintain a list of pretrial services agencies that have satisfied those validation requirements and complied with those transparency requirements. The bill would require the Judicial Council, beginning on December 31, 2020, and on or before December 31 of each year thereafter, to publish a report on its internet website with data related to outcomes and potential biases in pretrial release. The bill would require specified pretrial services agencies, the Department of Justice, courts, and local governments that elect to use risk assessment tools to work with the Judicial Council to provide the data necessary for this report. The bill would also require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2022, to provide a report to the courts and the Legislature containing recommendations to mitigate bias and disparate effect in pretrial decisionmaking.
Existing law establishes the California Conservation Corps and requires that young people participating in the corps program generally be engaged in projects that, among other things, preserve, maintain, and enhance environmentally important lands and waters. Existing law requires the director of the corps to establish a forestry corps program to accomplish certain objectives, including developing and implementing forest health projects, as provided, and establishing forestry corps crews. Existing law establishes the California Conservation Camp program to provide for the training and use of inmates and wards assigned to conservation camps to perform public conservation projects, including, but not limited to, forest fire prevention and control, forest and watershed management, recreation, fish and game management, soil conservation, and forest and watershed revegetation. This bill would authorize the director of the corps to establish the Education and Employment Reentry Program within the corps and to enroll in the program formerly incarcerated individuals who successfully served on a California Conservation Camp program crew and were recommended for participation as a program member by the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The bill would prescribe program enrollment terms, and would require the director of the corps, in conjunction with the Employment Development Department, to prioritize developing and executing plans to assist program members in obtaining continued employment following participation in the program. The bill would also establish program activities and objectives, including, among others, assisting with the forestry corps program objectives. The bill would authorize the corps, subject to the discretion and approval of the director of the corps, to enter into a planning agreement with certain entities to develop reentry and job training opportunities for the formerly incarcerated individuals described above who do not otherwise qualify for corps enrollment under corps policies. The bill would make implementation of the program contingent upon an appropriation being made in the annual Budget Act or another statute for its purposes.
Existing law imposes an additional 3-year sentence for each prior separate prison term served by a defendant where the prior and current offense was a violent felony, as defined. For other felonies, existing law imposes an additional one-year term for each prior separate prison term or county jail felony term, except under specified circumstances. This bill would instead impose that additional one-year term served for each prior separate prison term served for a conviction of a sexually violent offense, as defined.
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.
(1) Existing law requires the State Department of Public Health to maintain a program of maternal and child health, which may include, among other things, facilitating services directed toward reducing infant mortality and improving the health of mothers and children. Existing law requires the Office of Health Equity within the department to serve as a resource for ensuring that programs collect and keep data and information regarding ethnic and racial health statistics, and strategies and programs that address multicultural health issues, including, but not limited to, infant and maternal mortality. This bill would make legislative findings relating to implicit bias and racial disparities in maternal mortality rates. The bill would require a hospital that provides perinatal care, and an alternative birth center or a primary clinic that provides services as an alternative birth center, to implement an evidence-based implicit bias program, as specified, for all health care providers involved in perinatal care of patients within those facilities. The bill would require the health care provider to complete initial basic training through the program and a refresher course every 2 years thereafter, or on a more frequent basis if deemed necessary by the facility. The bill would require the facility to provide a certificate of training completion upon request, to accept certificates of completion from other facilities, and to offer training to physicians not directly employed by the facility. The bill would require the department to track and publish data on pregnancy-related death and severe maternal morbidity, as specified. (2) Existing law requires that each death be registered with the local registrar of births and deaths in the district in which the death was officially pronounced or the body was found. Existing law sets forth the persons responsible for completing the certificate of death and requires certain medical and health content on the certificate, including information indicating whether the decedent was pregnant at the time of death or within the year prior to the death, if known. Certain violations of these requirements are a crime. This bill would require the certificate to indicate additional information regarding the pregnancy status of the decedent, as specified. By changing the definition of existing crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law requires hospitals to provide specified information regarding patient's rights to each patient upon admission or as soon thereafter as reasonably practical, including, among other things, information about the right to be informed of continuing health care requirements following discharge from the hospital. Existing law makes violations of these requirements a crime. This bill would require the hospital to additionally provide patients with information on the patient's right to be free of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status. The bill would additionally require the hospital to provide patients with information on how to file a complaint with specified state entities. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (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.
(1) Existing law authorizes the Judicial Council to provide by rule of court for racial, ethnic, and gender bias, and sexual harassment training and training for any other bias based on sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, ethnic group identification, age, mental disability, physical disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, or sexual orientation for judges, commissioners, and referees. This bill would authorize the Judicial Council to develop training on implicit bias with respect to these characteristics. The bill would require all court staff who interact with the public to complete 2 hours of any training developed by the Judicial Council pursuant to this authorization every 2 years. The bill would authorize the Judicial Council to adopt a rule of court, effective January 1, 2021, to implement these requirements. (2) Existing law requires the State Bar to request the California Supreme Court to adopt a rule of court authorizing the State Bar to establish and administer a mandatory continuing legal education (MCLE) program. This bill would require the State Bar to adopt regulations to require the mandatory continuing legal education curriculum to include training on implicit bias and the promotion of bias-reducing strategies, as specified. The bill would require a licensee of the State Bar to meet the requirements for each MCLE compliance period ending after January 31, 2023.
Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to establish that a worker is an independent contractor for those purposes. AB 5 of the 2019–20 Regular Session states the intent of the Legislature to codify the decision in the Dynamex case and clarify its application. AB 5 provides that for purposes of the provisions of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. AB 5 also exempts specified occupations from the application of Dynamex, and would instead provide that these occupations are governed by the test adopted in S. G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341 (Borello) . This bill would, until January 1, 2021, also exempt a newspaper distributor working under contract with a newspaper publisher and a newspaper carrier working under contract, either with a newspaper publisher or newspaper distributor, from the Dynamex provisions proposed to be added by AB 5 described above. This bill would make its operation contingent on the enactment of AB 5 of the 2019–20 Regular Session.
The hazardous waste control laws require the Department of Toxic Substances Control to regulate the handling and management of hazardous waste and hazardous materials. A violation of the hazardous waste control laws is a crime. Existing law, as part of the hazardous waste control laws, prohibits a person from manufacturing, shipping, selling, or offering for sale or promotional purposes jewelry, as defined, for retail sale in the state, unless the jewelry is made entirely from specified materials that do not exceed specified lead and cadmium content limits. Existing law provides that, for jewelry that is not children's jewelry or body piercing jewelry, the content limits for electroplated metal, unplated metal, plastic or rubber, and dye or surface coating are 6%, 1.5%, 0.02%, and 0.06% of lead by weight, respectively. Existing law imposes separate content requirements for children's jewelry, as provided. Existing law defines "children" for purposes of these provisions to mean children 6 years of age and younger. Existing law requires a manufacturer or supplier of jewelry that is sold, offered for sale, or offered for promotional purposes to prepare a certification that attests that the jewelry does not contain a level of lead or cadmium in excess of the provided limits. Existing law provides test methods and procedures for testing jewelry for purposes of these provisions. This bill would revise and recast the provisions relating to the materials authorized to be used to make jewelry and children's jewelry, but with certain provisions not to become operative until June 1, 2020. The bill would, on and after June 1, 2020, reduce the lead content limits for electroplated metal, unplated metal, and a dye or surface coating to 0.05% of lead by weight, and would reduce the lead content limit for plastic or rubber to 0.02% of lead by weight. The bill would reduce the lead content limit for children's jewelry to 0.009% of lead by weight for surface coatings and 0.01% of lead by weight for all other components, and would reduce the cadmium limit for surface coatings on children's jewelry to 0.0075% of soluble cadmium by weight, as provided. The bill would revise the definition of "children" to mean persons under 15 years of age. The bill would require the manufacturer or supplier certification to include additional detail about the jewelry covered by the certification, including, among other things, the date or dates on which, and the location or locations where, the jewelry was tested for purposes of certification. Because a violation of these additional certification requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also authorize the use of additional specified test methods to determine compliance with the standards for lead in children's jewelry. 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 measure would recognize the need to pursue avenues to implement proposed reparations for the descendants of African slaves in the United States. The measure would further recognize August 2019 as marking 400 years since Africans were brought to Virginia.