Sen. Tony Mendoza

The State Teachers' Retirement Law establishes the Defined Benefit Program of the State Teachers' Retirement Plan. The law requires certain employers, as defined, to contribute moneys to the State Teachers' Retirement System (STRS) . This bill would require an employer that fails to make a required contribution to STRS to notify members of the delinquency within 30 days, as specified.

The Public Employees' Retirement Law (PERL) establishes the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) , which provides pension and other benefits to members of PERS. PERL requires certain public employers to contribute moneys to PERS. Existing law prohibits the state, school employers, and contracting agencies, as defined, from refusing to pay the employers' contribution as required by PERL. This bill would require a contracting agency that fails to make a required contribution to PERS to notify members of the delinquency within 30 days, as specified.

Existing law makes the transfer of a firearm by gift, bequest, intestate succession, or other means from one individual to another exempt from the requirement firearm transaction be conducted through a firearms dealer if certain criteria are met, including that the transfer is between members of the same immediate family. Existing law makes the importation of a firearm into the state exempt from the requirement that the firearm first be delivered to a firearms dealer in this state if certain criteria are met, including that the person acquired ownership of the firearm from an immediate family member by bequest or intestate succession. Existing law defines immediate family member for these purposes as meaning the parent and child relationship and the grandparent and grandchild relationship. This bill would define the qualifying relationships for purposes of the above exemptions to apply to transfers to a parent, child, sibling, grandparent, or grandchild related by consanguinity, adoption, or steprelation. Existing law generally requires the loan of a firearm to be conducted through a licensed dealer. This bill would exempt from the requirement, the loan and storage of a firearm if certain conditions are met, including, among others, that the firearm being loaned stays and is stored in the receiver's place of residence or in an enclosed structure on the receiver's private property, that is not zoned for commercial, retail, or industrial activity, the loan does not exceed 60 days, is not made for consideration, and specified safe storage requirements are met. The bill would also require the Department of Justice to prescribe and make available, as specified, a form that explains the obligations imposed by these provisions. The bill would require that the form be signed by both the party loaning the firearm for storage and the person receiving the firearm. Existing law exempts the sale, delivery, or transfer of a firearm to an authorized law enforcement representative from the requirement of transferring a firearm through a licensed dealer, the requirement that a person selling, leasing, or transferring firearms be licensed, and from certain crimes relating to the sale, lease, or transfer of firearms. This bill would specify these exceptions extend to the loan of a firearm to an authorized law enforcement representative.

The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act prohibits the sale, furnishing, giving, or giving away of alcoholic beverages to, or the purchase of alcoholic beverages by, persons under the age of 21 years, and imposes penalties in that regard. Under the act, a licensee may petition the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control for an offer in compromise when a decision by the department to suspend a license becomes final, but not for a 3rd or subsequent violation of the provisions referenced above that occurs within 36 months of the initial violation. The act authorizes the department to revoke a license for a 3rd violation of those provisions within a 36-month period, as specified. This bill would authorize the department to not aggregate a first violation of those provisions pertaining to minors as the first violation for the purposes of determining penalties, suspension, or an offer in compromise if the licensee or designee has completed or agrees to complete a Responsible Retailer Course within 6 months of the date of settlement or final decision. The bill would prescribe the requirements of the course and would require the licensee to submit to the department a certificate of completion of the course. The bill would authorize the department to accept a certificate of completion only if the department previously had received from the training provider an attestation under penalty of perjury that the course meets the prescribed requirements. By expanding the scope of the existing crime of perjury, 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.

Existing law defines a placement agency as a local governmental agency, a general acute care hospital, a conservator, a regional center, or a private entity receiving public funds that is engaged in finding homes or other places for placement of specified persons, including placement in an adult residential facility, residential care facility for persons with chronic life-threatening illness, or residential care facility for the elderly. Existing law requires an employee of a placement agency who knows, or reasonably suspects, that a facility that is not exempt from licensing requirements is operating without a license to report the name and address of the facility to the State Department of Social Services. Failure to report the facility is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would expand the definition of placement agencies to include private referral agencies that refer persons for remuneration to an adult residential facility, a residential care facility for persons with chronic life-threatening illness, or a residential care facility for the elderly. Because the bill would expand the requirements imposed on a placement agency to apply to a private referral agency, the violation of which would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also require the aforementioned facilities to provide a resident with a disclosure statement before an admission agreement is signed if the services of a private referral agency are used and the facility licensee knows the private referral agency was used and has a long-term agreement or contract with the private referral agency. The bill would authorize the State Department of Social Services to assess a civil penalty, as specified, if the facility fails to provide the disclosure. The bill would prohibit a private referral agency or its employees from holding any power of attorney for a person receiving placement referral services or to receive or hold that person's property in any capacity. The bill would require, commencing July 1, 2018, a private referral agency to maintain liability insurance in specified amounts. The bill would make it unlawful for an employee, independent contractor, or other person who is acting on behalf of a government agency, hospital, or other health care institution to offer, provide, or accept a payment, rebate, refund, commission, preference, or discount as payment, compensation, or inducement for referring patients, clients, or customers to an adult residential facility, residential care facility for persons with chronic life-threatening illness, residential care facility for the elderly, or private referral agency. The bill would require the State Department of Social Services to keep track of any consumer complaints arising from consumer interactions with private referral agencies and would authorize the department to levy civil penalties, as specified. The bill would prohibit a private referral agency from disclosing any personal information of a person receiving services unless authorized to do so and would require a private referral agency to retain, for no less than 3 years, an acknowledgment from the person being referred, or his or her conservator, guardian, authorized family member or other authorized representative, attorney in fact, or agent under a power of attorney, stating that the authorization had been made. The bill would require a private referral agency to conduct a suitability determination of each person who seeks a referral and is referred to an adult residential facility, residential care facility for persons with chronic life-threatening illness, or residential care facility for the elderly. The bill would require a private referral agency to train its employees who make referrals to an adult residential facility, residential care facility for persons with chronic life-threatening illness, or residential care facility for the elderly, as specified. The bill would also require the State Department of Social Services to, no later than January 1, 2023, submit a report on the effectiveness of existing statutory remedies related to private referral agencies to the Legislature, as specified. The bill would require the report to include an evaluation of whether further regulation of private referral agencies is needed and would require the department to work with stakeholders and consider consumer complaints, previous actions, and any other applicable documents or reports when conducting its evaluation. Existing law makes specified persons mandated reporters of elder or dependent adult abuse, including administrators, supervisors, and licensed staff of a facility that provide care or services for elder or dependent adults. Under existing law, failure to report physical abuse, abandonment, abduction, isolation, financial abuse, or neglect of an elder or dependent adult is a misdemeanor. The bill would include on the list of mandated reporters owners, operators, and employees of a specified private referral agency. By expanding the crime of failure to report elder or dependent adult abuse, 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.

(1) Existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992, provides for the establishment and operation of charter schools. Existing law generally requires a petition to establish a charter school to be submitted to the governing board of a school district, and, under specified circumstances, authorizes a petition to be submitted to and approved by a county board of education or the State Board of Education. Existing law provides that a county board of education may approve a petition for the operation of a charter school that operates at one or more sites within the geographic boundaries of the county and that provides instructional services that are not generally provided by a county office of education. Existing law also provides that a petition for the operation of a charter school may be submitted directly to the state board and that the state board has authority to approve a charter for the operation of a state charter school that may operate at multiple sites throughout the state. This bill would repeal those provisions authorizing a county board of education or the state board to approve a petition to establish a charter school and would specify that, on and after January 1, 2018, a petition to establish a charter school may not be approved by a county board of education or the state board and may be submitted only to the school district the boundaries within which the charter school would be located. The bill would provide that charter schools operating under a charter approved by a county board of education or the state board may continue to operate under those charters only until the date on which the charter is required to be renewed. (2) Under existing law, a charter school that is unable to locate within the jurisdiction of the chartering school district may, under specified circumstances, establish a site outside of the boundaries of the school district but within the county in which the school district is located. This bill would delete that provision. (3) Existing law provides that if a petition to establish a charter school is denied by the governing board of a school district, the petitioner may submit the petition to the county board of education, which may grant or deny the petition. This bill would repeal those provisions and would instead provide that a petitioner may appeal the denial of a petition to the county board of education, which may consider the appeal only if the appeal alleges that the governing board of the school district committed a procedural violation in reviewing the petition. The bill would provide that if a county board of education finds, by substantial evidence, that the governing board of the school district committed a procedural violation in reviewing the petition, the county board of education shall remand the petition to the school district for reconsideration. (4) Existing law provides that a charter school may appeal a school district's decision to revoke the charter school's charter to the county board of education and, if the county board of education upholds the decision, to appeal the county board of education's decision to the state board. This bill would delete those provisions and would instead authorize a charter school, upon revocation of its charter by a school district, to appeal the decision to the county board of education to consider only whether the school district committed a procedural violation in making its decision and, if the county board of education finds a procedural violation was committed, to remand the charter school back to the school district to reconsider its decision to revoke the charter. (5) This bill would also make other related changes and conforming and nonsubstantive changes. (6) To the extent the bill would impose additional requirements on local educational agencies and charter schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law provides for the regulation of life and disability insurance by the Department of Insurance. Existing law authorizes the Insurance Commissioner, in order to streamline the department's file review process for life and disability insurance forms, to develop and publish procedural requirements for file submission, guidelines and checklists that list and interpret applicable required and optional insurance statutes and regulations, and standard insurance contract language previously approved by the department. This bill would additionally authorize the commissioner to develop and publish an expedited policy form approval application.

(1) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities serving adults by the State Department of Health Care Services, as prescribed. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions punishable by a civil penalty of not less than $25 or more than $50 per day for each violation, with additional penalties for repeat violations, as specified. This bill would require, for any licensing application submitted on or after January 1, 2019, the department to deny an application for a new facility license, if the proposed location is in proximity to an existing facility in an area zoned residential that would result in overconcentration, as defined. The bill would prohibit the expansion or intensification of legal nonconforming facilities, as defined. The bill would require the department or a county licensing agency, at least 45 days prior to approving any application for any new facility, to post on its Internet Web site the address of the proposed new facility, as specified, and would require the license applicant to notify in writing the city or unincorporated area's planning department in the jurisdiction where the proposed facility would be located of the license application and provide the applicable planning department a copy of the license application. By requiring a county licencing agency to post in this manner, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a city or county to request denial of the license applied for on the basis of an overconcentration of facilities. This bill would additionally make initial licenses to providers provisional, and revokable for good cause, as defined. The bill would require all programs and medical services offered or provided by a licensed alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility to be specified in the license application and provided exclusively within the licensed facility on the licensed property and for the benefit of the residential patients or program participants. The bill would increase the penalties for a violation of the licensing and regulatory provisions to not less than $1,000 or more than $15,000 per day for each violation, and increase the additional penalties for repeat violations, as specified. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to permit private, nonprofit, eligible organizations to conduct raffles as a funding mechanism to support beneficial and charitable works, if, among other conditions, at least 90% of the gross receipts from the raffle go directly to beneficial or charitable purposes in California. The California Constitution further authorizes the Legislature to amend the percentage of gross receipts required to be dedicated to beneficial or charitable purposes by a statute passed by a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature. Existing statutory law implements those provisions and requires the Department of Justice to administer and enforce those provisions. Existing law authorizes a major league sports raffle at a home game conducted by an eligible organization, as defined, for the purpose of directly supporting specified beneficial or charitable purposes in California, or financially supporting another private, nonprofit, eligible organization, as defined, that performs those purposes if, among other requirements, each ticket sold contains a unique and matching identifier, 50% of the gross receipts generated from the sale of raffle tickets are used to benefit or provide support for beneficial or charitable purposes, as defined, the other 50% is paid to the winner, and the winners of the prizes are determined by a manual draw, as specified. This bill would similarly authorize a private, nonprofit organization to conduct a raffle for the purpose of directly supporting specified beneficial or charitable purposes in California, or financially supporting another private, nonprofit, eligible organization, as defined, that performs those purposes if, among other requirements, the raffle is conducted at a fair, exposition, or exhibition conducted by, and with the authorization of, a district agricultural association, a county fair association, a citrus fruit fair association, or the California Exposition and State Fair, 50% of the gross receipts generated from the sale of raffle tickets are used to benefit or provide support for beneficial or charitable purposes, as defined, and the other 50% is paid to the winner. The bill would also require the Department of Justice to administer and enforce these provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Existing law imposes an annual tax on the gross premiums of an insurer, as defined, doing business in this state at specified rates. Existing law, until January 1, 2017, allows a credit under the Personal Income Tax Law, the Corporation Tax Law, and a credit against the tax imposed on an insurer in an amount equal to 20% of a qualified investment, as defined, made in a community development financial institution, as defined, but not to exceed, in the aggregate amount under all those laws, $50,000,000 per year and authorizes the California Organized Investment Network to certify investments for the credit until January 1, 2017. Existing law provides that if a qualified investment is reduced before the end of the 60th month, but not below $50,000, an amount equal to 20% of the total reduction for the year shall be added to the tax imposed on the taxpayer. Existing law also provides that if a qualified investment is withdrawn before the end of the 60th month and not reinvested in another community development financial institution within 60 days, the entire amount of any credit previously allowed for that taxable year is required to be added to the tax imposed on the taxpayer. These provisions are repealed on December 1, 2017. This bill would establish similar credits under the Personal Income Tax Law, the Corporation Tax Law, and the tax imposed on an insurer for taxable years or years, as specified, beginning on or after January 1, 2017, and before January 1, 2022. The bill would, as compared to the tax credit that expired on January 1, 2017, require priority for the tax credit to be given to insurance company investors over all other tax credit investors and would instead require that the provision regarding withdrawal, without reinvestment, of a qualified investment also applies when a qualified investment is reduced. This bill would repeal these provisions on December 1, 2022. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.