Sen. Roger Niello

Existing law prohibits driving a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent. Existing law also prohibits driving a vehicle in excess of an established speed limit. Existing law requires that specified convictions, violations, and traffic-related incidents count as points against a driver's record for purposes of suspension or revocation of the privilege to drive. This bill, the Negligent Operator Treatment (NOT) in California Act, would, commencing on January 1, 2027, prohibit excessively speeding, defined as driving a vehicle at a speed that exceeds the posted speed limit by 26 miles per hour or more on a highway with a posted speed limit for passenger vehicles of 55 miles per hour or less. The bill would provide that a conviction for excessively speeding is punishable as an infraction and one point shall be assessed against a driver's record for a first violation and 2 points for any subsequent violation that occurs within 3 years after a previous violation for which the driver was convicted. By creating a new infraction, 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, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, requires the State Department of Developmental Services to contract with regional centers to provide services and supports to individuals with developmental disabilities and their families. The services and supports to be provided to a regional center consumer are contained in an individual program plan (IPP) , developed in accordance with prescribed requirements. Existing law requires the department to establish and implement a statewide Self-Determination Program, as defined, that is available in every regional center catchment area to provide participants and their families, within an individual budget, increased flexibility and choice, and greater control over decisions, resources, and needed and desired services and supports to implement their IPP. This bill would require the Governor to appoint, subject to Senate confirmation, a Deputy Director of Self-Determination, responsible for overseeing the successful implementation and operation of the program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 4685.8 of the Welfare and Institutions Code proposed by SB 1281 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1281 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Existing law prohibits, except as specified, a person sentenced to imprisonment in a county jail from being administered any psychiatric medication without prior informed consent. Existing law authorizes a county department of mental health, or other designated county department, to administer to an inmate involuntary medication on a nonemergency basis only after the inmate is provided, among other things, a hearing before a superior court judge, a court-appointed commissioner or referee, or a court-appointed hearing officer. Existing law, until January 1, 2025, additionally protects all inmates in a county jail from being administered any psychiatric medication without prior informed consent, with certain exceptions, and imposes additional criteria that must be satisfied before a county department of mental health or other designated county department may administer involuntary medication, including a requirement that the jail first make a documented attempt to locate an available bed for the inmate in a community-based treatment facility, under certain conditions, in lieu of seeking involuntary administration of psychiatric medication. Until January 1, 2025, if an inmate is awaiting resolution of a criminal case, existing law requires that a hearing to administer involuntary medication on a nonemergency basis be held before, and that any requests for ex parte orders be submitted to, a judge in the superior court where the criminal case is pending. Existing law, also until January 1, 2025, sets limits on the amount of time such orders are valid and requires any court-ordered psychiatric medication to be administered in consultation with a psychiatrist who is not involved in the treatment of the inmate at the jail, if one is available. This bill would extend these provisions until January 1, 2030. The bill would also require any county that, between January 1, 2025, and July 1, 2028, administers involuntary medication to any inmate awaiting arraignment, trial, or sentencing, to prepare and submit a report to the Legislature, as specified. The bill would require any involuntary treatment to be consistent with the standard of care. The bill would also permit the county to demonstrate a documented attempt to locate an available bed by submitting a declaration under penalty of perjury. By imposing new duties on counties and expanding the scope of the 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law provides that in a civil action brought by a plaintiff to challenge a housing development project that meets or exceeds the requirements for low- or moderate-income housing, a defendant may seek an order requiring the plaintiff to furnish an undertaking as security for costs and damages that may be incurred by the defendant if the bringing of the action or seeking by the plaintiff of particular relief, including injunctive relief, would result in a delay in carrying out the development project. Existing law requires this motion to be made on the grounds that (1) the action was brought in bad faith, vexatiously, to delay or thwart the low- or moderate-income nature of the housing development project and (2) the plaintiff will not suffer undue economic hardship by filing the undertaking. If the court determines, after hearing, that the grounds for the motion have been established, existing law requires the court to order the plaintiff to file an undertaking that may not exceed $500,000 as security for the defendant's costs and damages. This bill would require the motion described above to be made on the grounds that the action is without merit and that the action was brought in bad faith, vexatiously, for the purpose of delay, or to thwart the low- or moderate-income nature of the housing development project. The bill would permit the plaintiff, in responding to the motion, to seek to limit the amount of the undertaking by presenting evidence that filing the undertaking will cause the plaintiff to suffer undue economic hardship. The bill would require the court, in ordering the plaintiff to file such an undertaking, to take into consideration admitted evidence of the plaintiff's economic hardship and to avoid causing the plaintiff to suffer such hardship. The bill would authorize the court to decline to impose a bond on the plaintiff if the court determines that, based on the evidence, the bond would cause the plaintiff to suffer undue economic hardship.

This measure would designate a specified portion of Interstate 80 in the City and County of San Francisco as the Willie Mays Highway. The measure would request the Department of Transportation to determine the cost of appropriate signs showing this special designation and, upon receiving donations from nonstate sources covering that cost, to erect those signs.

This measure would declare the month of September 2024 as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month and state the commitment of the Legislature to support efforts to find cures, and less toxic treatments, for childhood cancer.

Existing law prohibits a court from ordering a case into mediation where the amount in controversy exceeds $50,000, as specified. This bill would instead prescribe the following requirements that must be met before a court may order a case to mediation: (1) the amount in controversy does not exceed $150,000, (2) the case has been set for trial, (3) at least one party has notified the court of its interest in mediation, and (4) the parties have been notified of their option to stipulate to a mutually agreeable mediator. The bill would require the court to select a mediator, at no cost to the parties, if the parties do not stipulate to a mutually agreeable mediator. The bill would require all parties and counsel attending the mediation to comply with specified attendance provisions set forth in the California Rules of Court. The bill would require the mediation to conclude no later than 120 days before the trial date. The bill would provide that determination and any stipulation of the amount in controversy shall be without prejudice as to any finding on the value of the case or in a subsequent trial.

Existing law makes a person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for the person's safety, or the safety of the person's immediate family, guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony. This bill would also make a person guilty of stalking if the person willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for the safety of that person's pet, service animal, emotional support animal, or horse. 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 state law, Proposition 7, an initiative measure approved by the voters at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election, sets the standard time for California and sets daylight saving time to begin each March and end each November. Proposition 7 authorizes the Legislature to amend these provisions by a 23 vote to change the dates and times of the daylight saving time period, consistent with federal law, and authorizes the Legislature to amend these provisions by a 23 vote to provide for the application of year-round daylight saving time when authorized by federal law. Existing law requires the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to continuously carry out studies, research projects, data collection, and other activities required to assess the nature, extent, and distribution of energy resources to meet the needs of the state. This bill would 2 3 vote. The bill would instead require the state and all political subdivisions of the state to observe year-round standard time. The bill would exempt the state and all political subdivisions of the state from the provisions of federal law that establish the advancement of time. The bill would"?> require the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to, on or before February 1, 2027, prepare and submit a report to the Legislature assessing the near-term and long-term impacts of observing year-round standard time on energy demand and supply, as specified. The bill would make the operation of its provisions contingent upon an appropriation by the Legislature for its purpose.

Existing law requires the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to do certain things with respect to fire prevention, including organizing fire crews and patrols. This bill would require, upon appropriation by the Legislature, the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the Office of Emergency Services, and the Department of Toxic Substances Control, in consultation with specified entities, to form a workgroup related to exposure of toxic heavy metals after a wildfire. The bill would require the workgroup to do certain things, including establishing best practices and recommendations for wildfire-impacted communities and first responders to avoid exposure to heavy metals after a wildfire. The bill would authorize the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to contract with public universities, research institutions, and other technical experts to support the work of the workgroup. The bill would require the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the Office of Emergency Services, and the Department of Toxic Substances Control to report their findings to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2026.