(1) Existing law requires that specified persons who have been released on parole from state prison who were not imprisoned for a violent felony, a serious felony, or an offense requiring registration as a sex offender, and who have been on parole for a period of 6 months, be discharged from parole unless the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation recommends to the Board of Parole Hearings that the person should be retained, and the board, for good cause, determines that the person is to be retained. Existing law additionally requires specified persons who have been released on parole from state prison who were imprisoned for a serious felony or an offense requiring registration as a sex offender, and who have been on parole continuously for one year since release from confinement, to be similarly discharged from parole. Finally, existing law requires that specified persons who have been released on parole from state prison who were imprisoned for a violent felony, and who have been released on parole for a period not exceeding 3 years and have been on parole continuously for 2 years since release from confinement, or who have been released on parole for a period not exceeding 5 years and have been on parole continuously for 3 years since release from confinement, be similarly discharged from parole. This bill would create a program under which the length of a parolee's period of parole could be reduced through credits earned by successfully completing specified education, training, or treatment programs, or by participating in volunteer service, while adhering to the conditions of parole. The bill would make this program inapplicable to a person who is required to register as a sex offender. The bill would, if AB 1304 is enacted, additionally require this program to award credits for participation in substance abuse treatment programs, as specified. (2) Under existing law, an inmate is released to the county of their residence before incarceration or, when the interest of public safety is best served, to another location specified by the Board of Parole Hearings. Existing regulations prohibit a parolee from traveling more than 50 miles from their residence without the approval of a parole agent. The bill would also increase the 50-mile travel restriction for a parolee who successfully participates in the parole credit program, subject to certain restrictions. The bill would require the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the Board of Parole Hearings to adopt regulations to carry out this program, as specified. This bill would, as a condition of continued state funding, prohibit any entity that receives state funds and provides services and programs in the fields of education, job training, workforce placement, health, or housing, from denying access to services or programs to a person on the basis that the person is currently or previously has been on parole or postrelease community supervision.
Sponsored bills
Existing law requires law enforcement agencies to maintain a policy on the use of force, as specified. Existing law requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to implement courses of instruction for the regular and periodic training of law enforcement officers in the use of force. Existing law requires law enforcement agencies to report to the Department of Justice, as specified, any incident in which a peace officer is involved in a shooting or use of force that results in death or serious bodily injury. This bill would create a division within the Department of Justice to, upon the request of a law enforcement agency, review the use-of-force policy of the agency and make recommendations, as specified. This bill would require a state prosecutor to investigate incidents of an officer-involved shooting resulting in the death of an unarmed civilian, as defined. The bill would make the Attorney General the state prosecutor unless otherwise specified or named. The bill would authorize the state prosecutor to prepare a written report, and would require the state prosecutor to post any reports made on a public internet website. The bill would require, commencing July 1, 2023, the Attorney General to operate a Police Practices Division within the department to review, upon the request of a local law enforcement agency, the use of deadly force policies of that law enforcement agency and make recommendations, as specified. The bill would require the department to implement these provisions subject to an appropriation for this purpose.
Existing law authorizes a peace officer to take a minor into temporary custody when that officer has reasonable cause to believe that the minor has committed a crime or violated an order of the juvenile court. In these circumstances, existing law requires the peace officer to advise the minor that anything the minor says can be used against the minor, that the minor has the right to remain silent, that the minor has the right to have counsel present during any interrogation, and that the minor has the right to have counsel appointed if the minor is unable to afford counsel. Existing law requires, until January 1, 2025, that a youth 15 years of age or younger consult with legal counsel in person, by telephone, or by video conference prior to a custodial interrogation and before waiving any of the above-specified rights. Existing law directs a court deciding the admissibility of statements made by a youth 15 years of age or younger during or after a custodial interrogation to consider the effects of failing to provide counsel before the custodial interrogation. Existing law directs the Governor to convene a panel of experts to examine the effects and outcomes of these provisions, including the appropriate age of youth to whom these provisions should apply. This bill would instead apply these provisions to a youth 17 years of age or younger, and would indefinitely extend the operation of these provisions. The bill would direct a court to consider any willful failure of a law enforcement officer to allow a youth 17 years of age or younger to speak with counsel before a custodial interrogation in determining the credibility of that law enforcement officer, and would eliminate the above-specified provisions requiring the Governor to convene a panel of experts.
Existing law requests the Regents of the University of California to assemble a colloquium of scholars to draft a research proposal to analyze the economic benefits of slavery that accrued to owners and the businesses, including insurance companies and their subsidiaries, that received those benefits, and to make recommendations to the Legislature regarding those findings. Existing law requires the Insurance Commissioner to request and obtain information from insurers licensed and doing business in this state regarding any records of slaveholder insurance policies issued by any predecessor corporation during the slavery era. Existing law requires insurers to research and report to the commissioner on insurance policies that provided coverage for injury to, or death of, enslaved people. This bill would establish the Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans, with a Special Consideration for African Americans Who are Descendants of Persons Enslaved in the United States, consisting of 9 members, appointed as provided. The bill would require the Task Force to, among other things, identify, compile, and synthesize the relevant corpus of evidentiary documentation of the institution of slavery that existed within the United States and the colonies. The bill would require the Task Force to recommend, among other things, the form of compensation that should be awarded, the instrumentalities through which it should be awarded, and who should be eligible for this compensation. The bill would require the Task Force to submit a written report of its findings and recommendations to the Legislature. The bill would authorize reimbursement of the members' expenses only to the extent an appropriation therefor is made in the Budget Act. The bill would state that any state level reparations authorized under these provisions are not to be considered a replacement for any reparations enacted at the federal level. The bill would repeal these provisions on July 1, 2023.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA establishes a procedure by which a person may seek judicial review of the decision of the lead agency made pursuant to CEQA. CEQA requires a court to make specified orders if it finds that any determination, finding, or decision of a public agency has been made without compliance with CEQA. The Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011 (leadership act) authorizes the Governor, until January 1, 2020, to certify projects that meet certain requirements, including certain labor-related requirements, for streamlining benefits provided by the leadership act related to compliance with CEQA and streamlining of judicial review of action taken by a public agency to require a judicial action to be resolved within 270 days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court. The leadership act provides that if a lead agency fails to approve a project certified by the Governor before January 1, 2021, the certification expires and is no longer valid. The leadership act requires a lead agency to prepare the record of proceedings for the certified project concurrent with the preparation of the environmental documents. The leadership act is repealed by its own terms on January 1, 2021. This bill would additionally include projects to construct a fixed guideway, as defined, and related fixed facilities meeting certain conditions as projects that are eligible for certification by the Governor under the leadership act. The bill would provide that the certification by the Governor expires if the lead agency fails to approve the project by January 1, 2024. Because a lead agency would be required to prepare the record of proceedings for these projects, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would provide that this act shall become effective only if Senate Bill 995 of the 2019–20 Regular Session is enacted on or before January 1, 2021. 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, the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) , which includes the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) , an initiative statute enacted by the voters as Proposition 64 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, provides for the licensure and regulation of commercial cannabis activity, including testing laboratories, by the Bureau of Cannabis Control and other licensing authorities. Existing law prohibits licensed testing laboratories from acquiring or receiving cannabis or cannabis products except from a licensee in accordance with MAUCRSA, except as provided. This bill would authorize a licensed testing laboratory to receive and test samples of cannabis or cannabis products from a state or local law enforcement, or a prosecuting or regulatory agency in order to test the cannabis or cannabis products. The bill would also clarify that testing conducted by a testing laboratory for state or local law enforcement, a prosecuting agency, or a regulatory agency, is not commercial cannabis activity and would prohibit that testing from being arranged or overseen by the bureau.
Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of residential tenancies, and requires a landlord to provide a tenant with various notices at the time the lease is executed and throughout the tenancy. The Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act and the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act regulate consumer credit reporting agencies that collect credit-related information on consumers and report this information to subscribers and the persons who furnish that information to consumer credit reporting agencies, as provided. This bill, beginning July 1, 2021, and until July 1, 2025, would require a landlord of an assisted housing development, as defined, to offer tenants obligated on the lease of units in the development the option of having their rental payments reported to at least one consumer reporting agency, as specified. The bill would authorize a landlord to charge a tenant that elects to have rent reported the lesser of $10 per month or the actual cost to the landlord to provide the service. The bill would prescribe requirements regarding how the offer of rent reporting is to be made for new and existing leases. The bill would authorize a tenant who elects to have rent reported to file a written request to stop that reporting, provided that, in this case, the bill would prohibit the tenant from electing rent reporting again for at least 6 months. The bill would declare that a tenant who elects to have rent reported does not forfeit specified tenant rights and if a tenant makes deductions from rent or otherwise withholds it, as authorized, the deductions or withholding does not constitute a late rental payment. The bill would exempt from these provisions a landlord of an assisted housing development with 15 or fewer dwelling units, unless specified conditions are met.
(1) Existing law prohibits an employer from discharging, or discriminating or retaliating against, an employee who is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking, for taking time off from work to obtain or attempt to obtain relief to help ensure the health, safety, or welfare of the victim or victim's child. Existing law requires an employee, as a condition of taking time off for these purposes, to give the employer reasonable advance notice of the employee's intention to take time off, unless doing so is not feasible. Existing law prohibits an employer, when an unscheduled absence occurs, from taking any action against the employee if the employee, within a reasonable time after the absence, provides a certification to the employer meeting certain criteria, including documentation from one of specified persons that the employee was undergoing treatment for specific injuries. Existing law authorizes an employee to file a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement for a violation of that prohibition, and makes it a misdemeanor for an employer to refuse to rehire, promote, or restore an employee who has been determined to be so eligible by a grievance procedure or legal hearing. This bill would expand the above provision to prohibit an employer from discharging, or discriminating or retaliating against, an employee who is a victim of crime or abuse for taking time off from work to obtain or attempt to obtain relief, as prescribed. The bill would also prohibit an employer from taking action against an employee, when an unscheduled absence occurs, if the employee victim of crime or abuse provides certification that they were receiving services for certain injuries, or if the documentation is from a victim advocate, as defined. The bill would additionally prohibit such action if the employee provides certification in any other form of documentation that reasonably verifies that the crime or abuse occurred. The bill would also define "victim" and "crime" for purposes of these provisions. By expanding the definition of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law also prohibits an employer with 25 or more employees from discharging, or discriminating or retaliating against, an employee who is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking for taking time off from work for any of specified purposes, including seeking medical attention for injuries caused by domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. This bill would prohibit the discharge of, or discrimination or retaliation against, an employee who is a victim, as defined, for taking off work, as specified. The bill would revise the categories of time off work under these circumstances, to include taking time off work to seek medical attention for injuries caused by crime or abuse, to obtain services from prescribed entities as a result of the crime or abuse, to obtain psychological counseling or mental health services related to an experience of crime or abuse, or to participate in safety planning and take other actions to increase safety from future crime or abuse. The bill would define terms for these purposes. (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 requires every secondhand dealer and coin dealer to report daily the receipt of all secondhand tangible personal property, except for firearms, which they have purchased, taken in trade or pawn, or accepted for sale on consignment or for auctioning, in accordance with certain provisions, to the statewide uniform electronic reporting system known as the California Pawn and SecondhandDealer System (CAPSS) , operated by the Department of Justice. Existing law requires the report to contain specified information, including the name and current address of the intended seller or pledger, and a form of identification for that person, which may include a Matricula Consular, in addition to another item of identification bearing an address. Existing law makes it a crime to commit perjury and also imposes various criminal penalties for violations of the secondhand goods provisions. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2023, exempt a seller or pledger who verifies their identity using a Matricula Consular from the requirements that their name and current address be included in the report. The bill would specify that in these cases no personal identifying information would be reported to CAPSS. The bill would instead require each secondhand dealer or coin dealer to record and maintain the name, current address, and the Matricula Consular number of the seller or pledger for 3 years from the date the item was reported to CAPSS, and to also record and maintain a certification by the intended seller or pledger that they are the owner of the property or have the authority of the owner to seller or pledge the property, along with taking a legible fingerprint from that person. The bill would also require each secondhand dealer or coin dealer, upon receiving notification from local law enforcement that the item has been reported lost, stolen, or embezzled, to provide law enforcement with the information collected from the identification used by the intended seller or pledger. By expanding the scope of existing crimes, 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.
The existing federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 provides for the negotiation and execution of tribal-state gaming compacts for the purpose of authorizing certain types of gaming on Indian lands within a state. The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to negotiate and conclude tribal-state gaming compacts, subject to ratification by the Legislature. Existing law expressly ratifies a number of tribal-state gaming compacts, and amendments of tribal-state gaming compacts, between the State of California and specified Indian tribes. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project, as defined, that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment, as defined, or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. This bill would ratify the tribal-state gaming compacts entered into between the State of California and the following Indian tribes: the Ione Band of Miwok Indians, the Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California, the Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians, the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, the Tolowa Dee-ni' Nation, and the Tule River Indian Tribe of California. The bill would provide that, in deference to tribal sovereignty, certain actions related to these compacts and amended compacts are not projects for purposes of CEQA. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.