(1) Existing law requires a state agency, board, or commission that directly or by contract collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians to use separate collection categories and tabulations for each major Asian and Pacific Islander groups, as specified. This bill would require 4 specific state departments, in the course of collecting demographic data directly or by contract as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians, to collect voluntary self-identification information pertaining to sexual orientation and gender identity, except as specified. This bill would require these state departments, during the regular process of reporting of demographic data to the Legislature, to report the collected data and method used to collect the data and make the data available to the public in accordance with state and federal law, except for personal identifying information, which shall be deemed confidential and prohibited from disclosure. The bill would prohibit these state departments from reporting demographic data that would permit identification of individuals or would result in statistical unreliability. The bill would limit the use of the collected data by these state departments, as specified. The bill would require these state departments to come into compliance with these provisions as early as possible, but no later than July 1, 2018. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations relating to this act. (2) 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law regulates the payment of compensation to employees by employers and prohibits an employer from conditioning employment on requiring an employee to refrain from disclosing the amount of his or her wages, signing a waiver of the right to disclose the amount of those wages, or discriminating against an employee for making such a disclosure. Existing law generally prohibits an employer from paying an employee at wage rates less than the rates paid to employees of the opposite sex in the same establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions. Existing law establishes exceptions to that prohibition where the payment is made pursuant to a seniority system, a merit system, a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production, or a differential based on any bona fide factor other than sex. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for an employer or other person acting either individually or as an officer, agent, or employee of another person to pay or cause to be paid to any employee a wage less than the rate paid to an employee of the opposite sex as required by these provisions, or who reduces the wages of any employee in order to comply with these provisions. This bill would revise that prohibition to eliminate the requirement that the wage differential be within the same establishment, and instead would prohibit an employer from paying any of its employees at wage rates less than those paid to employees of the opposite sex for substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility, as specified. The bill would revise and recast the exceptions to require the employer to affirmatively demonstrate that a wage differential is based upon one or more specified factors, including a seniority system, a merit system, a system that measures earnings by quantity or quality of production, or a bona fide factor other than sex, as specified. The bill would also require the employer to demonstrate that each factor relied upon is applied reasonably, and that the one or more factors relied upon account for the entire differential. The bill would prohibit an employer from discharging, or in any manner discriminating or retaliating against, any employee by reason of any action taken by the employee to invoke or assist in any manner the enforcement of these provisions. The bill would authorize an employee who has been discharged or discriminated or retaliated against, in the terms and conditions of his or her employment because the employee engaged in any conduct delineated in these provisions, to recover in a civil action reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages and work benefits caused by the acts of the employer, including interest thereon, as well as appropriate equitable relief. The bill would prohibit an employer from prohibiting an employee from disclosing the employee's own wages, discussing the wages of others, inquiring about another employee's wages, or aiding or encouraging any other employee to exercise his or her rights under these provisions. The bill would also increase the duration of employer recordkeeping requirements from 2 years to 3 years. By changing the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law authorizes an adult to give an individual health care instruction and to appoint an attorney to make health care decisions for that individual in the event of his or her incapacity pursuant to a power of attorney for health care. This bill, until January 1, 2026, would enact the End of Life Option Act authorizing an adult who meets certain qualifications, and who has been determined by his or her attending physician to be suffering from a terminal disease, as defined, to make a request for a drug prescribed pursuant to these provisions for the purpose of ending his or her life. The bill would establish the procedures for making these requests. The bill would also establish specified forms to request an aid-in-dying drug, under specified circumstances, an interpreter declaration to be signed subject to penalty of perjury, thereby creating a crime and imposing a state-mandated local program, and a final attestation for an aid-in-dying drug. This bill would require specified information to be documented in the individual's medical record, including, among other things, all oral and written requests for an aid-in-dying drug. This bill would prohibit a provision in a contract, will, or other agreement from being conditioned upon, or affected by, a person making or rescinding a request for the above-described drug. The bill would prohibit the sale, procurement, or issuance of any life, health, or annuity policy, health care service plan contract, or health benefit plan, or the rate charged for any policy or plan contract, from being conditioned upon or affected by the request. The bill would prohibit an insurance carrier from providing any information in communications made to an individual about the availability of an aid-in-dying drug absent a request by the individual or his or her attending physician at the behest of the individual. The bill would also prohibit any communication from containing both the denial of treatment and information as to the availability of aid-in-dying drug coverage. This bill would provide a person, except as provided, immunity from civil or criminal liability solely because the person was present when the qualified individual self-administered the drug, or the person assisted the qualified individual by preparing the aid-in-dying drug so long as the person did not assist with the ingestion of the drug, and would specify that the immunities and prohibitions on sanctions of a health care provider are solely reserved for conduct of a health care provider provided for by the bill. The bill would make participation in activities authorized pursuant to its provisions voluntary, and would make health care providers immune from liability for refusing to engage in activities authorized pursuant to its provisions. The bill would also authorize a health care provider to prohibit its employees, independent contractors, or other persons or entities, including other health care providers, from participating in activities under the act while on the premises owned or under the management or direct control of that prohibiting health care provider, or while acting within the course and scope of any employment by, or contract with, the prohibiting health care provider. This bill would make it a felony to knowingly alter or forge a request for drugs to end an individual's life without his or her authorization or to conceal or destroy a withdrawal or rescission of a request for a drug, if it is done with the intent or effect of causing the individual's death. The bill would make it a felony to knowingly coerce or exert undue influence on an individual to request a drug for the purpose of ending his or her life, to destroy a withdrawal or rescission of a request, or to administer an aid-in-dying drug to an individual without their knowledge or consent. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that nothing in its provisions is to be construed to authorize ending a patient's life by lethal injection, mercy killing, or active euthanasia, and would provide that action taken in accordance with the act shall not constitute, among other things, suicide or homicide. This bill would require physicians to submit specified forms and information to the State Department of Public Health after writing a prescription for an aid-in-dying drug and after the death of an individual who requested an aid-in-dying drug. The bill would authorize the Medical Board of California to update those forms and would require the State Department of Public Health to publish the forms on its Internet Web site. The bill would require the department to annually review a sample of certain information and records, make a statistical report of the information collected, and post that report to its Internet Web site. 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.
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. This bill would authorize 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. The bill would authorize an electronic device to be used to sell tickets. The bill would prohibit the use of a random number generator for the manual draw or sale of tickets. This bill would define an eligible organization as a private, nonprofit organization established by, or affiliated with, a team from specified sports organizations that has been qualified to conduct business in California for at least one year before conducting a raffle and is exempt from taxation pursuant to specified provisions of federal and California law. The bill would require, if an eligible organization conducts a raffle for purposes of financially supporting another private, nonprofit, eligible organization, the eligible organization conducting the raffle to distribute to the other eligible organization all proceeds not paid out to the winners within 15 days of conducting the raffle. The bill would require an eligible organization to disclose to all ticket purchasers the designated private, nonprofit organization for which the raffle is being conducted. This bill would also prohibit an eligible organization from conducting a raffle, and a manufacturer or distributor of raffle-related products or services from conducting business with an eligible organization for purposes of conducting a raffle pursuant to these provisions, without first having obtained and thereafter maintained a registration from the Department of Justice, as specified. Once registered, the bill would require an eligible organization to file annually thereafter with the department a report that includes specified information for each of the eligible organization's last 3 fiscal years, and would require the department to make those reports available online, as provided. This bill would require the department to adopt, on or before June 1, 2016, regulations to enforce these provisions, would authorize the department to assess annual registration fees, as specified, to be deposited in the General Fund to cover the reasonable costs of establishing and operating this registration system, and would require the department to maintain a database of registrants and conduct specified proceedings in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act. The bill would repeal its provisions on December 31, 2018.
Existing law grants to the City of Los Angeles all the right, title, and interest of the State of California in and to all tidelands and submerged lands situated below the line of mean high tide of the Pacific Ocean within the boundaries of the city in trust for specified purposes, including promotion of commerce, navigation, and fishery, and for certain uses relating to those purposes. Existing law authorizes the City of Los Angeles to grant franchises and permits on, and leases of, those lands, or any part thereof, for those specified purposes and for limited terms, not exceeding 50 years. This bill would instead authorize the City of Los Angeles to grant franchises and permits on, or leases of, those lands for those specified purposes for limited terms, not exceeding 66 years.
The Dental Practice Act provides for the licensure and regulation of persons engaged in the practice of dentistry by the Dental Board of California, and prohibits the practice of dentistry by any person without a valid license, except in certain circumstances. This bill would additionally exempt from that prohibition the practice of dentistry, as specified and as approved by the board, by a final year student, as defined, without compensation or expectation of compensation and under the supervision of a licensed dentist with a clinical faculty appointment at a sponsored event, as defined, if specified conditions are met. This bill would require the sponsoring entity of the sponsored event to provide the board with a list of the names of the students practicing dentistry exempted pursuant to this bill at the sponsored event, the name of the school of enrollment of those students, and the name and license number of the supervising licensed dentist.
Existing law authorizes the holder of a winegrower's license, a beer manufacturer, a distilled spirits manufacturer, or a distilled spirits manufacturer's agent, to purchase advertising space and time from, or on behalf of, an on-sale retail licensee, under certain conditions, if the on-sale retail licensee is the owner, manager, agent of the owner, assignee of the owner's advertising rights, or major tenant of specified facilities. This bill would expand the exceptions to existing law to allow beer manufacturers, winegrowers, distilled spirits rectifiers, distilled spirits manufacturers, or distilled spirits manufacturer's agents to purchase advertising space and time from, or on behalf of, on-sale retail licensees at a fairgrounds with a horse racetrack and equestrian and sports facilities located in the County of San Diego. By creating new crimes this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of San Diego. This bill would incorporate changes to Section 25503.6 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by both this bill and SB 462, which would become operative only if both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2016, and this bill is chaptered last. 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 proclaim April 12 through April 19, 2015, as California Holocaust Memorial Week and would urge Californians to observe these days of remembrance for the victims of the Holocaust in an appropriate manner.
This measure would recognize the California Association of County Veterans Service Officers for helping veterans secure their federal and state benefits over the past 70 years.
This measure would, among other things, memorialize the Congress of the United States to ban the sale or display of any Confederate flag, including the Confederate Battle Flag, on federal property and encourage states to ban the use of Confederate States of America symbolism from state flags, seals, and symbols, and would encourage the donation of Confederate artifacts to museums.