Sen. Roger Niello

Existing law makes it a crime to possess for sale or purchase for purpose of sale, transport, import, sell, furnish, administer, give away, manufacture, compound, convert, produce, derive, process, or prepare various controlled substances, including, among others, fentanyl, peyote, and various other opiates and narcotics. This bill, Alexandra's Law, would require the court to advise a person who is convicted of, or who pleads guilty or no contest to, the above crimes, as specified, of the danger of selling or administering illicit drugs and counterfeit pills and that, if a person dies as a result of that action, the defendant can be charged with homicide. The bill would require the court to read the advisory statement in a case in which the defendant exchanged a controlled substance containing fentanyl or its analogs for anything else of value, as specified. The bill would require the advisory statement to be included in a plea form, if used, and specified on the record. The bill would require that the fact the advisory was given be recorded in the abstract of conviction and would prohibit the advisement from being used as evidence in the prosecution of a minor in juvenile court.

Existing law, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, enacted as an initiative statute by Proposition 47, as approved by the electors in the November 4, 2014, statewide general election, makes the theft of property that does not exceed $950 in value petty theft and makes that crime punishable as a misdemeanor, with certain exceptions. The initiative statute defines shoplifting as entering a commercial establishment with the intent to commit larceny while that establishment is open during regular hours, where the value of the property that is taken or intended to be taken does not exceed $950. The initiative statute requires that shoplifting be punished as a misdemeanor. Existing law, as amended by Proposition 47, provides that a registered sex offender or a person with a prior conviction for certain serious or violent felonies, such as a sexually violent offense, who commits petty theft is subject to imprisonment in the county jail for up to one year or in the state prison for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. This bill would reinstate a provision of law that was repealed by Proposition 47 that provides that a person who has been convicted 3 or more times of petty theft, grand theft, or other specified crimes and who is subsequently convicted of petty theft is subject to imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in a county jail for 18 months or 2 or 3 years. The bill would also make this provision and the provision relating to a person with serious, violent, or sexual prior offenses applicable to a person whose prior or current conviction is for shoplifting. This bill would require the Secretary of State to place the provisions of the bill that amend the initiative statute on the ballot for the November 5, 2024, statewide general election.

Existing law, with certain exceptions, establishes 8 hours as a day's work and a 40-hour workweek and requires payment of prescribed overtime compensation for additional hours worked. Existing law authorizes the adoption by 23 of employees in a work unit of alternative workweek schedules providing for workdays no longer than 10 hours within a 40-hour workweek. This bill would enact the California Workplace Flexibility Act of 2023. The bill would permit an individual nonexempt employee to request an employee-selected flexible work schedule providing for workdays up to 10 hours per day within a 40-hour workweek and would allow the employer to implement this schedule without the obligation to pay overtime compensation for those additional hours in a workday. The bill would prescribe a method for calculating the payment of overtime for hours worked in excess of the permitted amounts and would establish requirements for termination of these agreements. The bill would except from its provisions employees covered by collective bargaining and public employees, as specified. The bill would require the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement in the Department of Industrial Relations to enforce this provision and adopt regulations.

Existing law requires the coroner to inquire into and determine the manner, circumstances, and cause of all violent, sudden, or unusual deaths. Existing law authorizes a county board of supervisors, by ordinance, to abolish the office of coroner and provide instead for the office of medical examiner, to be appointed by the board and to exercise the powers and perform the duties of the coroner. This bill would require a coroner or medical examiner who evaluates an individual who died, in the coroner or medical examiner's expert opinion, as the result of an overdose to report the data gathered pursuant to the bill to the Overdose Detection Mapping Application Program managed by the Washington/Baltimore High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program. By imposing new duties on coroners and medical examiners, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would exempt a coroner or medical examiner from civil or criminal liability for making a report in good faith. 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 prohibit overdose information reported by a coroner or medical examiner from being used in a criminal investigation or prosecution, thereby requiring a 23 vote. 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 includes the terms "mentally retarded persons," "mentally retarded children," "retardation," and "handicap." This bill, The Dignity for All Act, would make nonsubstantive changes to those provisions to eliminate this obsolete terminology. The bill would repeal obsolete provisions of law.

Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, provides for the involuntary commitment and treatment of a person who is a danger to themselves or others or who is gravely disabled. Existing law, for purposes of involuntary commitment, defines "gravely disabled" as either a condition in which a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is unable to provide for their basic personal needs for food, clothing, or shelter or has been found mentally incompetent, as specified. This bill expands the definition of "gravely disabled" to also include a condition in which a person, as a result of a severe substance use disorder, or a co-occurring mental health disorder and a severe substance use disorder, is, in addition to the basic personal needs described above, unable to provide for their personal safety or necessary medical care, as defined. The bill would also expand the definition of "gravely disabled," as it applies to specified sections, to include, in addition to the basic needs described above, the inability for a person to provide for their personal safety or necessary medical care as a result of chronic alcoholism. The bill would authorize counties to defer implementation of these provisions to January 1, 2026, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes. To the extent that this change increases the level of service required of county mental health departments, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law also authorizes the appointment of a conservator, in the County of Los Angeles, the County of San Diego, or the City and County of San Francisco, for a person who is incapable of caring for the person's own health and well-being due to a serious mental illness and substance use disorder. Existing law establishes the hearsay rule, under which evidence of a statement is generally inadmissible if it was made other than by a witness while testifying at a hearing and is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated. Existing law sets forth exceptions to the hearsay rule to permit the admission of specified kinds of evidence. Under this bill, for purposes of an opinion offered by an expert witness in any proceeding relating to the appointment or reappointment of a conservator pursuant to the above-described provisions, the statements of specified health practitioners or a licensed clinical social worker included in the medical record would not be made inadmissible by the hearsay rule under specified conditions. The bill would authorize the court to grant a reasonable continuance if an expert witness in a proceeding relied on the medical record and the medical record has not been provided to the parties or their counsel. Existing law requires the State Department of Health Care Services to collect data quarterly and publish, on or before May 1 of each year, a specified report that includes, among other things, the number of persons for whom temporary conservatorship are established in each county and an analysis and evaluation of the efficacy of mental health assessments, detentions, treatments, and supportive services provided, as specified. This bill would, beginning with the report due May 1, 2024, require the report to also include the number of persons admitted or detained, as specified, for conditions that include, among others, grave disability due to a mental health disorder, severe substance use disorder, or both a mental health disorder and a severe substance use disorder. 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 authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion to a defendant in specified cases, including when the defendant is suffering from a mental disorder, specified controlled substances crimes, and when the defendant was, or currently is, a member of the United States military. This bill would, until July 1, 2029, authorize the Counties of Sacramento and Yolo to offer secured residential treatment pilot programs, known as Hope California, for individuals suffering from substance use disorders (SUDs) who have been convicted of qualifying drug-motivated felony crimes, as specified. The bill would require the program to meet certain conditions relating to, among other things, a risk, needs, and biopsychosocial assessment, a comprehensive curriculum, a determination by a judge of the length of treatment, data collection, licensing and monitoring of the facility by the State Department of Health Care Services, and reporting to the department and the Legislature. The bill would require the judge to offer the defendant voluntary participation in the pilot programs, as an alternative to a jail or prison sentence otherwise imposed, if the defendant's crime was caused, in whole or in part, by the defendant's SUD, the crime was not a sex crime, serious or violent felony, nonviolent drug possession, domestic violence, or driving under the influence, and the judge makes their determination based on the recommendations of the treatment providers, on a finding by the county health and human services agency that the defendant's participation would be appropriate, and on a specified report prepared with input from interested parties. Under the bill, the defendant would be eligible to receive credits for participation in the program, as specified. The bill would set forth a procedure for the transfer of a participant out of the secured residential treatment program based on the recommendations of the treatment providers or program administrators or based on the participant's request, as specified. If the participant successfully completes the court-ordered drug treatment, as determined by treatment providers pursuant to the pilot program, the bill would require the court to set aside the conviction and to dismiss the accusation or information against the defendant and would authorize the court to set aside the conviction and to dismiss the accusation or information of any previous drug possession or drug use crimes on the participant's record. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain state summary criminal history information, as defined, and to furnish this information to various state and local government officers, officials, and other prescribed entities, if needed in the course of their duties. Existing law requires the Department of Justice, as part of the state summary criminal history information, to disseminate every conviction rendered against an applicant unless the conviction falls within an exception. This bill would exempt from dissemination a conviction that has been set aside pursuant to the above provisions. Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services, including mental health and substance use disorder services, pursuant to a schedule of benefits. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law, with certain exceptions based in part on the type and location of the service, provides for the suspension of Medi-Cal benefits to an inmate of a public institution. This bill would, to the extent permitted under federal and state law, make treatment provided to a participant during the program reimbursable under the Medi-Cal program, if the participant is a Medi-Cal beneficiary and the treatment is a covered benefit under the Medi-Cal program. If treatment services are not reimbursable under the Medi-Cal program or through the participant's personal health care coverage, the bill would authorize funds allocated to the state from the 2021 Multistate Opioid Settlement Agreement, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature, to be used to reimburse those treatment services to the extent consistent with the terms of the settlement agreement and the court's final judgment, as specified. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Sacramento and Yolo.

Existing law authorizes victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking, and elder or dependent adult abuse, and members of their households, to complete an application to be approved by the Secretary of State for the purpose of enabling state and local agencies to respond to requests for public records without disclosing a program participant's changed name or location, subject to specified conditions. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for any person to make a false statement in an application. This bill, beginning on July 1, 2024, would make victims of child abduction, as defined, and members of their households eligible for the protections of this address confidentiality program. By expanding the scope of the program to include victims of child abduction and their household members, this bill would impose new duties on local public officials and expand the scope of an existing crime, thereby imposing 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 authorizes the Director of General Services to use the progressive design-build procurement process for the construction of up to 3 capital outlay projects, as jointly determined by the Department of General Services and the Department of Finance, and prescribes that process. Existing law defines "progressive design-build" as a project delivery process in which both the design and construction of a project are procured from a single entity that is selected through a qualifications-based selection at the earliest feasible stage of the project. Existing law, until January 1, 2029, authorizes local agencies, defined as any city, county, city and county, or special district authorized by law to provide for the production, storage, supply, treatment, or distribution of any water from any source, to use the progressive design-build process for up to 15 public works projects in excess of $5,000,000 for each project, similar to the progressive design-build process authorized for use by the Director of General Services. Existing law requires a local agency that uses the progressive design-build process to submit, no later than January 1, 2028, to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature a report on the use of the progressive design-build process containing specified information, including a description of the projects awarded using the progressive design-build process. Existing law requires the design-build entity and its general partners or joint venture members to verify specified information under penalty of perjury. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, provide additional authority for cities, counties, cities and counties, or special districts to use the progressive design-build process for up to 10 public works in excess of $5,000,000, not limited to water-related projects, excluding projects on state-owned or state-operated facilities. The bill would require information to be provided under penalty of perjury and would require similar reports due no later than December 31, 2028. By expanding the crime of perjury, 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.