Existing law imposes various limitations on the emissions of air contaminants for the control of air pollution from vehicular and nonvehicular sources. Existing law assigns the responsibility for controlling air pollution for sources other than vehicular sources to an air pollution control district or air quality management district. Existing law establishes the South Coast Air Quality Management District as the district with the responsibility for controlling air pollution from sources other than vehicular sources in the South Coast Air Basin. Existing law establishes a district board consisting of 13 members to govern the south coast district. Existing law requires one member of the district board to be appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules and one member to be appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly. This bill would increase the number of members of the district board of the south coast district to 15 members by adding 2 environmental justice appointees, one appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules and one appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly.
Sponsored bills
Existing law prohibits a jury or judge from convicting a defendant, finding a special circumstance true, or using a fact in aggravation based on the uncorroborated testimony of an in-custody informant. Existing law defines "in-custody informant" for these purposes as a person, other than a codefendant, percipient witness, accomplice, or coconspirator, whose testimony is based on statements allegedly made by the defendant while both the defendant and the informant were held within a city or county jail, state penal institution, or correctional institution. Existing law provides that, except as otherwise provided by statute, all relevant evidence is admissible. The California Constitution provides for the Right to Truth-In-Evidence, which requires a 23 vote of the Legislature to exclude any relevant evidence from any criminal proceeding, as specified. This bill would instead make testimony by, or information obtained by, an in-custody informant, as defined, regarding statements made by the defendant while the defendant was in custody, inadmissible, as specified. The bill would provide an exemption for such testimony relating to a crime or incident occurring within a correctional facility and testimony obtained pursuant to a law enforcement operation, as described, that meets specified criteria.
Existing law establishes the Office of Small Business Advocate within the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development for the purpose of advocating for the causes of small business and to provide small businesses with the information they need to survive in the marketplace. This bill, the Keep California Working Act, would establish the Keep California Working Grant Program. The act would require the Small Business Advocate to administer the program and award grants, as specified, to small businesses and nonprofit entities that meet specified criteria, including that the entity has experienced economic hardship resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. The act would specify that grant money awarded pursuant to the program may be used only for specified purposes, including payroll costs, health care benefits, paid sick, medical, or family leave, and insurance premiums. The act would appropriate $2.6 billion dollars to the Office of Small Business Advocate for those purposes. The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law, in conformity with federal income tax law, generally define "gross income" as income from whatever source derived, except as specifically excluded, and provide various exclusions from gross income. This bill would exclude from gross income, for state income tax purposes, the amount of a grant awarded pursuant to the Keep California Working Grant Program. Existing law requires a bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. The bill also would include additional information required for a bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes the South Coast Air Quality Management District vested with the authority to regulate air emissions from stationary sources located in the South Coast Air Basin and establishes a district board, consisting of 13 members. This bill would add 2 members to the district board, appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules and the Speaker of the Assembly. The bill would require the 2 additional members to reside in and work directly with communities in the South Coast Air Basin that are disproportionately burdened by and vulnerable to high levels of pollution and issues of environmental justice. The bill would also require a candidate for these positions to meet other specified requirements. Existing law continues in existence the South Coast Air Quality Management District Advisory Council, which is appointed by the district board, to advise and consult with the board. This bill would authorize the district board to create a Labor Advisory Panel to provide feedback and input on all district permitting, rules, regulations, and planning issues that have the potential to impact the workforce in the South Coast Air Basin.
Existing law requires the Governor to appoint every office whose mode of appointment is not prescribed by law. Existing law also prescribes the manner of the Governor's appointment of those officers. This bill would require the office of the Governor to convene, on or before June 1, 2022, a working group to discuss and make recommendations on the most effective way to ensure the state's leadership on boards and commissions reflects the diversity in age, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, disability status, region, veteran status, and sexual orientation, among other things, that are representative of the state. The bill would require these recommendations to be completed and published on the Governor's internet website no later than March 1, 2023, and contain specified recommendations. The bill would set forth selection and qualification requirements for members of the working group. The bill would also require the working group to hold its first meeting no later than September 1, 2022, and to determine a schedule, at that first meeting, to have 5 additional meetings completed no later than February 1, 2023. The bill would terminate the working group on January 1, 2024. This bill would require the office of the Governor, on or before December 1, 2022, and on or before every December 1 thereafter, to create and deliver to the Legislature a report containing specified information relating to the demographic information, as defined, of individuals appointed by the office of the Governor and relating to information on every state board and commission. The bill would also require, on or before December 1, 2022, and on or before every December 1 thereafter, a portion of that report relating to the boards and commissions of the state to be published on the internet website of the office of the Governor. The bill would also make related findings and declarations.
Existing law imposes various taxes, including personal income and excise taxes. The California Constitution requires a 23 vote of both houses of the Legislature for the passage of any change in statute that results in any taxpayer paying a higher tax. The California Constitution generally prohibits the total annual appropriations subject to limitation of the state and each local government from exceeding the appropriations limit of the entity of government for the prior fiscal year, adjusted for the change in the cost of living and the change in population, and prescribes procedures for making adjustments to the appropriations limit. This measure would impose an excise tax, payroll taxes, and a State Personal Income CalCare Tax at specified rates to fund comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage and a health care cost control system for the benefit of every resident of the state, as well as reserves deemed necessary to ensure payment, to be established in statute. The measure would authorize the Legislature, upon an economic analysis determining insufficient amounts to fund these purposes, to increase any or all of these tax rates by a statute passed by majority vote of both houses of the Legislature. This measure would establish the CalCare Trust Fund in the State Treasury and would deposit these tax revenues in the fund for the purpose of funding this health care coverage, cost control system, and reserves, and would authorize the Legislature to appropriate these funds by a statute passed by a majority vote of the membership of both houses. The measure would exclude appropriations of revenues from the CalCare Trust Fund from the limitation on appropriations and from consideration for purposes of educational funding mandated by the California Constitution. This measure would prohibit the above-described provisions from becoming operative until the later operative date of a statute that establishes comprehensive universal single-payer health care coverage, a health care cost control system, and necessary reserves, and a statute that establishes the administration, collection, and enforcement of the excise tax, payroll taxes, and a State Personal Income CalCare Tax imposed by the measure.
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 each department to develop and adopt regulations to ensure that enrollees and insureds have access to needed health care services in a timely manner. Under existing law, a Medi-Cal managed care plan is required to comply with timely access standards developed by the department. Existing regulations require a health care service plan or an insurer to ensure that their contracted provider networks have adequate capacity and availability of licensed health care providers to offer enrollees and insureds appointments that meet specified timeframes. Existing regulations require a health care service plan or an insurer to ensure that for an enrollee requesting a nonurgent appointment with a nonphysician mental health care provider, or an insured requesting a nonurgent appointment with a nonphysician mental health care or substance use disorder provider, appointments are offered within 10 business days of the request for an appointment. Existing regulations also authorize appointments for preventive care services and periodic followup care, including periodic office visits to monitor and treat mental health or substance use disorder conditions, as specified, to be scheduled in advance consistent with professionally recognized standards of practice as determined by the treating licensed health care provider acting within the provider's scope of practice. These regulations of the Department of Managed Health Care are limited in application to mental health care providers, while those regulations of the Department of Insurance are applicable to both mental health care and substance use disorder providers. This bill would codify the regulations adopted by the Department of Managed Health Care and the Department of Insurance to provide timely access standards for health care service plans and insurers for nonemergency health care services. The bill would require both a health care service plan and a health insurer, including a Medi-Cal Managed Care Plan, to ensure that appointments with nonphysician mental health and substance use disorder providers are subject to the timely access requirements, as specified. The bill would additionally require, commencing July 1, 2022, a health care service plan and a health insurer, including a Medi-Cal Managed Care Plan, to ensure that an enrollee or insured that is undergoing a course of treatment for an ongoing mental health or substance use disorder condition is able to get a followup appointment with a nonphysician mental health care or substance use disorder provider within 10 business days of the prior appointment. The bill would require that a referral to a specialist by another provider meet the timely access standards. If a health care service plan is operating in a service area that has a shortage of providers and the plan is not able to meet the geographic and timely access standards for providing mental health or substance use disorder services with an in-network provider, the bill would require the plan, including a Medi-Cal Managed Care Plan, to arrange coverage outside the plan's contracted network. By imposing new requirements on health care service plans, the willful violation of which would be a crime, 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.
(1) Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, requires the Department of Managed Health Care to license and regulate health care service plans and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also requires the Department of Insurance to regulate health insurers. Existing law regulates individual, small employer, and large employer health care service plan contracts and health insurance policies, as defined. Existing federal law, the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) , authorizes multiple employer welfare arrangements (MEWAs) in which two or more employers join together to provide health care coverage for employees or to their beneficiaries. Under existing state law, the status of each distinct member of an association determines whether that member's association coverage is individual, small group, or large group health coverage. This bill would authorize an association of employers to offer a large group health care service plan contract or large group health insurance policy consistent with ERISA if certain requirements are met, including that the association is headquartered in this state, is a MEWA as defined under ERISA, and was established as a MEWA prior to March 23, 2010, and has been in continuous existence since that date. The bill would also require the large group health care service plan contract or health insurance policy to have provided a specified level of coverage as of January 1, 2019, and to include coverage for employees, and their dependents, who are employed in designated job categories on a project-by-project basis for one or more participating employers, with no single project exceeding 6 months in duration, and who, in the course of that employment, are not covered by another group health care service plan contract or group health insurance policy in which the employer participates. The bill would also require the MEWA and participating employers to have a genuine organizational relationship unrelated to the provision of health care benefits and would require the participating employers to have a commonality of interests from being in the same line of business, as specified. This bill would require the MEWA, on or before June 1, 2022, to file an application for registration with the Department of Managed Health Care or the Department of Insurance, as applicable, and to annually file evidence of ongoing compliance with the bill's requirements with the applicable department. The bill would prohibit a health care service plan or health insurer, on or after June 1, 2022, from marketing, issuing, amending, renewing, or delivering large employer health care coverage or large employer health insurance coverage to a MEWA that provides benefits to a resident in this state unless the MEWA is registered and is in compliance with the bill or unless the MEWA filed an application for registration and the application is pending before the applicable department. Because a violation of the bill by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1357.503 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 10753.05 of the Insurance Code proposed by SB 326 and SB 718 to be operative only if this bill and SB 326, SB 718, or both are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (3) 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 crime, punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony, to actively participate in a criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in, or have engaged in, a pattern of criminal gang activity and to actively promote, further, or assist in felonious criminal conduct by members of that gang. Existing law provides for an enhanced sentence, as specified, for a person who is convicted of a crime committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, a criminal street gang with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in criminal conduct by the gang members. Existing law defines "pattern of criminal gang activity" for this purpose as the commission of, attempted commission of, conspiracy to commit, or solicitation of, sustained juvenile petition for, or conviction of 2 or more of a list of specified offenses, provided at least one of these offenses occurred after the effective date of these provisions and the last of those offenses occurred within 3 years after a prior offense, and the offenses were committed on separate occasions, or by 2 or more persons. Under existing law, the specified offenses to form a pattern of criminal gang activity include, among others, burglary, looting, felony vandalism, and various personal identity fraud crimes. This bill would also require that the crimes committed to form a pattern of criminal gang activity have commonly benefited a criminal street gang and that the common benefit from the offenses be more than reputational, as specified. The bill would remove looting, felony vandalism, and specified personal identity fraud violations from the crimes that define a pattern of criminal gang activity. The bill would prohibit the use of the currently charged crime to prove the pattern of criminal gang activity. This bill would require, if requested by the defense in a case where a sentencing enhancement for participation in a criminal street gang is charged, that the defendant's guilt of the underlying offense first be proved and that a further proceeding on the sentencing enhancement occur after a finding of guilt. The bill would require that a charge for active participation in a criminal street gang be tried separately from all other counts that do not otherwise require gang evidence as an element of the crime. For purposes of the enhancement, existing law defines "criminal street gang" as an ongoing organization, association, or group of 3 or more persons, whether formal or informal, having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more of the enumerated criminal acts, having a common name or common identifying sign or symbol, and whose members individually or collectively engage in, or have engaged in, a pattern of criminal gang activity. This bill, instead, would define "criminal street gang" as an ongoing, organized organization or group of 3 or more persons, whether formal or informal, having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more of the enumerated criminal acts, having a common name or common identifying sign or symbol, and whose members collectively engage in, or have engaged in, a pattern of criminal gang activity. Existing law, until January 1, 2022, requires the court, when applying the enhancement, to select the sentence that best serves the interests of justice. Existing law, on and after January 1, 2022, requires the court to instead order the imposition of the middle term of the sentence enhancement, unless there are circumstances in aggravation or mitigation. This bill would extend to January 1, 2023, the requirement that the court select the sentence that best serves the interest of justice.