The Political Reform Act of 1974 prohibits an officer of an agency from accepting, soliciting, or directing a contribution of more than $250 from any party, participant, or a party or participant's agent, while a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use is pending before the agency and for 3 months following the date a final decision is rendered in the proceeding, if the officer knows or has reasons to know that the participant has a financial interest, as defined. The act also prohibits a party, participant, or participant's agent from making a contribution of more than $250 to an officer of the agency during the proceeding and 3 months following the date a final decision is rendered. The act defines "agency" for these purposes to mean any state or local government agency, except certain entities, including local government agencies whose members are directly elected by the voters. This bill would remove the exception for local government agencies, thereby subjecting them to the prohibition described above. The bill would extend the prohibition on contributions from 3 to 12 months following the date a final decision is rendered in the proceeding. The bill would permit an officer who does not willfully and knowingly accept, solicit, or direct a prohibited contribution to cure the violation by returning it. The bill would require the party to a proceeding to disclose whether the party or the party's agent has made a contribution of more than $250 in the 12 months before the proceeding. A violation of the act is punishable as a misdemeanor. By expanding the scope of restrictions on contributions, this bill would expand the scope of an existing crime, and therefore 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 Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act.
Sponsored bills
Existing law authorizes a person who is unlawfully imprisoned under specified circumstances, including, without limitation, conviction on the basis of false evidence or the existence of new exculpatory evidence, to prosecute a writ of habeas corpus ordering their release. Existing law also authorizes such a person who is no longer in custody to prosecute a motion to vacate a judgment. Under existing law, if the district attorney stipulates to, or does not contest the factual allegations underlying the application for such a writ or motion, the district attorney is required to provide notice to the Attorney General. This bill would require such notice to be given no less than seven days before entering a stipulation. Under existing law, if a writ of habeas corpus or motion to vacate a judgment is granted for specified reasons, the petitioner may move for a finding of factual innocence by a preponderance of the evidence for the purpose of obtaining compensation for the pecuniary injury sustained through the erroneous conviction and incarceration. This bill would authorize a person, if the court has granted specified writs of habeas corpus and the charges were subsequently dismissed, or the person was acquitted of the charges on a retrial, to move the court for a finding that they are entitled to compensation. The bill would require the court to grant that motion unless the district attorney can establish by clear and convincing evidence that the person committed the acts constituting the offense and is therefore not entitled to compensation, as specified. The bill would make other conforming changes.
Existing law establishes the California Conservation Corps in the Natural Resources Agency and requires the corps to implement and administer the conservation corps program. Existing law authorizes the Director of the California Conservation Corps to establish the Education and Employment Reentry Program within the corps to develop, partner with, and create opportunities for certain forestry corps program objectives, collaborate with the Employment Development Department to provide access to workforce services, collaborate with nongovernmental organizations dedicated to providing access to counseling, mentorship, supportive housing, health care, and educational opportunities, and employ collaborations and partnerships available to the corps, as specified. This bill would require the director, upon appropriation by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act or another statute, in partnership with the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, to establish a forestry training center in northern California to provide enhanced training, education, work experience, and job readiness for entry-level forestry and vegetation management jobs. The bill would require the training center to include counseling, mentorship, supportive housing, health care, and educational services and authorize the training center to provide training modules on specified activities. The bill would require the director to enroll at the training center formerly incarcerated individuals and to prioritize enrollment for those formerly incarcerated individuals who have either successfully served on a California Conservation Camp program crew and were recommended by the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, as provided, or successfully served on a hand crew at the county level and were recommended for participation by the county probation and county fire departments. The bill would provide that successful completion of a training program at the training center constitutes qualifying experience for an entry-level forestry or vegetation management position at a state agency. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for northern California.
Existing law prohibits the dumping of waste matter upon a road or highway or in other locations, as specified. A violation of this prohibition, generally, is an infraction punishable by specified fines that escalate for subsequent convictions. Under existing law, the court may, as a condition of probation, order the convicted person to remove, or pay for the removal of, the waste matter. Under existing law, the dumping of commercial quantities of waste, as defined, is punishable as a misdemeanor and also includes escalating fines. This bill would increase the maximum fine for the dumping of commercial quantities of waste by a business that employs more than 10 employees from $3,000 to $5,000 for the first conviction, from $6,000 to $10,000 for the second conviction, and from $10,000 to $20,000 for the third and any subsequent convictions. The bill would require a court, when imposing a fine, to consider the defendant's ability to pay, as specified. This bill would also require, instead of authorize, the court to order a person convicted of dumping commercial quantities of waste to remove, or pay for the removal of, the waste matter that was illegally dumped. The bill would require the court to notify the issuing entity of certain professional or business licenses or permits held by the convicted person, that are related to the illegal dumping activity for which the person has been convicted, if applicable, and would require those entities to post information regarding these convictions on their internet website, as specified. The bill would retain the authorization for the court to order the defendant to pay for cleanup or perform specified community service, but would remove the requirement that it be ordered as a condition of probation.
The Political Reform Act of 1974 comprehensively regulates campaign finance, including by limiting contributions that may be made to or received by certain candidates or committees, as specified. This bill would allow a committee that receives a contribution, or portion thereof, in excess of specified limits to return the contribution, or portion thereof, or to attribute the portion of the contribution that exceeds the limit to another election, without the contribution violating those limits, provided that the committee returns or attributes the amount in excess within 14 days of receipt, the committee does not deposit or allow deposit of the contribution with actual knowledge that the contribution exceeds the applicable limit, and the committee does not make use of the contribution prior to returning or attributing it, as specified. If the committee deposits or allows deposit of the contribution with actual knowledge that the contribution exceeds the applicable limits, the bill would allow the committee to return the contribution, or portion thereof, or to attribute the portion of the contribution that exceeds the limit to another election, without violating those limits if the committee returns or attributes the amount in excess of the contribution limit within 72 hours of receipt or on or before the date of the election, whichever is sooner, and provided that the committee does not make use of the contribution prior to returning or attributing it, as specified, and does not deposit or allow deposit of the contribution with actual knowledge that the contribution is more than 2 times the applicable limit. The bill would require the committee to notify the contributor by the deadline for returning or attributing the contribution that the contribution exceeded the applicable limit. The bill would specify the manner by which a committee may attribute a contribution or portion thereof to another election. The Political Reform Act of 1974, an initiative measure, provides that the Legislature may amend the act to further the act's purposes upon a 23 vote of each house of the Legislature and compliance with specified procedural requirements. This bill would declare that it furthers the purposes of the act.
(1) Existing law, the Warren-911-Emergency Assistance Act, requires every local public agency, as defined, to have an emergency communication system and requires the digits "911" to be the primary emergency telephone number within the system. Existing law specifies provisions governing the operation and financing of community mental health services for the mentally disordered in every county through locally administered and locally controlled community mental health programs. Existing law specifies that county mental health services should be organized to provide immediate response to individuals in precrisis and crisis and to members of the individual's support system on a 24-hour, 7-day-per-week basis and authorizes provision of crisis services offsite as mobile services. Existing federal law, the National Suicide Hotline Designation Act, designates the 3-digit telephone number "988" as the universal number within the United States for the purpose of the national suicide prevention and mental health crisis hotline system operating through the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline maintained by the Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Abuse and the Veterans Crisis Line maintained by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. This bill would enact the Miles Hall Lifeline and Suicide Prevention Act. The bill would require the Office of Emergency Services to verify, no later than July 16, 2022, that technology that allows for transfers between 988 centers as well as between 988 centers and 911 public safety answering points, is available to 988 centers and 911 public safety answering points throughout the state. The bill would require, no later than 90 days after passage of the act, the office to appoint a 988 system director, among other things. The bill would require, no later than July 1, 2024, the office to verify interoperability between and across 911 and 988. The bill would require the office to consult with specified entities on any technology requirements for 988 centers. This bill would require the California Health and Human Services Agency to create, no later than December 31, 2023, a set of recommendations to support a 5-year implementation plan for a comprehensive 988 system. The bill would require that agency to convene a state 988 advisory group, as described, for purposes of advising the agency on the set of recommendations. The bill would require the agency to report annually, on or before December 31, beginning December 31, 2024, and until December 31, 2029, to the Legislature on the status of 988 implementation in the state, as described. The Administrative Procedure Act generally governs the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations by state agencies and for the review of those regulatory actions by the Office of Administrative Law. The bill would provide that regulations and other similar instruments made pursuant to these provisions by the Office of Emergency Services and the California Health and Human Services Agency are not subject to the rulemaking provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act. (2) Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law also provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires a health care service plan contract or disability insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2021, to provide coverage for medically necessary treatment of mental health and substance use disorders, as defined, under the same terms and conditions applied to other medical conditions. This bill would require health care service plans and insurers to cover medically necessary treatment of a mental health or substance use disorder, including behavioral health crisis services, provided by a 988 center or mobile crisis team, regardless of whether the service is provided by an in-network or out-of-network provider, at the in-network cost-sharing amount, as defined. By creating a new crime under the Knox-Keene Act, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law, the Emergency Telephone Users Surcharges Act, generally imposes a surcharge on each access line for each month or part thereof for which a service user subscribes with a service supplier, at an amount no greater than $0.80, based on the Office of Emergency Services' estimate of the number of access lines to which the surcharge will be applied per month for a calendar year period that it estimates, pursuant to a specified formula, will produce sufficient revenue to fund the current fiscal year's 911 costs. Existing law imposes a surcharge on the purchase of prepaid mobile telephony services at the time of each retail transaction in this state, at the rate equal to the monthly surcharge amount per access line, to be paid by prepaid consumers and collected by sellers, as defined. Existing law exempts certain lines from the surcharge, including lines supplying lifeline service. Existing law requires the surcharge to be remitted to, and administered by, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, in accordance with specified provisions. Existing law makes certain violations of the Emergency Telephone Users Surcharge Act a crime. Existing law requires amounts to be paid to the state pursuant to the Emergency Telephone Users Surcharge Act to be deposited into the State Emergency Telephone Number Account and that the amounts deposited, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be spent solely for specified purposes, including payment for the installation of, and ongoing expenses for, a basic system. This bill would create a separate surcharge, beginning January 1, 2023, on each access line for each month or part thereof for which a service user subscribes with a service supplier. The bill would set the 988 surcharge for the 2023 and 2024 calendar years at $0.08 per access line per month and, for years beginning January 1, 2025, at an amount based on a specified formula, but no greater than $0.30 per access line per month. This bill would make applicable relevant provisions of the Emergency Telephone Users Surcharge Act to the 988 surcharge, as provided, including existing surcharge exemptions. The bill would authorize the 911 and 988 surcharges to be combined into a single-line item, as described. The bill would provide for specified costs to be paid by the fees prior to distribution to the Office of Emergency Services. The bill would make conforming changes in regard to the 988 surcharge. This bill would create the 988 State Suicide and Behavioral Health Crisis Services Fund and would require the fees to be deposited along with other specified moneys into the fund. The bill would provide that the funds be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes and in accordance with specified priorities. The bill would require the Office of Emergency Services to require an entity seeking moneys available through the fund to annually file an expenditure and outcomes report containing specified information. (4) This bill would appropriate $300,000 from the General Fund to the 988 State Suicide and Behavioral Health Crisis Services Fund for expenditure by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration in the 2022–23 fiscal year for purposes of implementing the amendments to the Emergency Telephone Users Surcharge Act. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 41100 of the Revenue and Taxation Code proposed by SB 1496 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1496 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) By expanding the scope of crimes imposed by the Emergency Telephone Users Surcharge Act, 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. (7) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) , governed by a board of directors, with specified powers and duties relative to the construction and operation of a rapid transit system. Existing law also establishes the independent Office of the BART Inspector General within BART and requires the BART Inspector General to be appointed to serve an initial 4-year term by the Governor from a list of 3 nominees submitted by the board. Existing law requires the Inspector General to be removed from office by the board of directors, subject to the approval of the Governor, under certain circumstances. Existing law specifies the duties and responsibilities of the Inspector General including, among others, conducting, supervising, and coordinating audits and investigations relating to the district's programs and operations. This bill would revise the duties and responsibilities of the Inspector General by, among other things, requiring the Inspector General to engage in fraud prevention activities and provide recommendations to strengthen internal controls that will prevent or detect fraud, waste, or abuse. The bill would revise the manner in which the Inspector General is required to be removed from office. The bill would provide that the Inspector General shall have the independence necessary to conduct all of its audits and investigations in conformity with specified standards. To ensure the confidentiality of its work from the district, the bill would authorize the Office of the BART Inspector General to establish a system for maintaining records that is outside of the district's computer network and not accessible by the district, as specified. The bill would authorize the Inspector General to appoint, employ, evaluate, and remove assistants, employees, and personnel, and to prescribe their duties, scope of authority, and qualifications, as specified. The bill would provide the Inspector General with access and authority to examine all records, files, documents, accounts, reports, correspondence, or other property of the district and external entities that perform work for the district, and to meet with any employee or officer of the district or a contractor of the district as necessary to complete an audit or investigation, as specified. The bill would prohibit an employee or officer of the district or a contractor of the district from engaging in specified activities in connection with an audit, investigation, or review conducted by the Inspector General. The bill would authorize the Inspector General to issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of records, files, documents, accounts, reports, correspondence, or other property, or for the making of oral or written sworn statements, in any interview conducted as part of an audit, investigation, or review. Existing law requires the board of directors of BART to appoint a general manager who is responsible, subject to the direction and control of the board, for the acquisition, construction, maintenance, and operation of the facilities of the district and also for the administration of the business affairs of the district. This bill would require the general manager or appropriate district officer to respond to findings and recommendations made by the Office of the BART Inspector General within a reasonable amount of time, not to exceed 30 days. By creating new duties for a local agency, 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 requires a blood bank to be licensed by the State Department of Health Care Services. Existing law authorizes specified individuals to collect human blood at a blood bank that meets specified requirements if the collection is under the direct and responsible supervision of a licensed physician or surgeon. Existing regulations authorize blood collection when a physician is not present on the blood bank premises when specified requirements are met, including that a qualified physician or emergency medical facility is no more than 15 minutes away. Existing law requires a health care provider to obtain verbal or written consent from a patient before the use of telehealth to deliver health care services. An existing executive order has suspended that requirement during the COVID-19 pandemic. This bill would authorize blood collection at a blood bank when a physician or surgeon is not physically present if the medical director and their medical advisory committee approve and if the employee placed in charge is a registered nurse. The bill would authorize the registered nurse placed in charge to be physically present or available via telehealth, so long as the method of telehealth used is synchronous. The bill would require a blood bank, under these circumstances, to report annually to the department on any adverse donor events requiring emergency medical intervention, including whether a registered nurse was physically present on the premises, and to provide, at the request of the department, written procedures for managing adverse donor reactions. The bill would make these provisions inoperative on January 1, 2028.
Existing law requires all California state-owned or state-run institutions, except public universities and colleges and school districts, to purchase an agricultural product grown in California when the bid or price of the California-grown agricultural product does not exceed by more than 5% the lowest bid or price for an agricultural product produced outside the state and the quality of the California-grown agricultural product is comparable. Existing law also requires the institutions, when they solicit or intend to accept a bid or price for agricultural products grown outside the state, to accept the bid or price from a vendor that packs or processes these agricultural products in the state before accepting a bid or price from a vendor that packs or processes these agricultural products outside of the state when specified conditions are met, including that the bid or price of the agricultural product grown outside the state and packed or processed in the state does not exceed by more than 5% the lowest bid or price for the agricultural product packed or processed outside the state. Existing law requires a school district that solicits bids for the purchase of an agricultural product to accept a bid or price for that agricultural product when it is grown in California before accepting a bid or price for an agricultural product that is grown outside the state when the bid or price of the California-grown agricultural product does not exceed the lowest bid or price for an agricultural product produced outside the state and the quality of the California-grown agricultural product is comparable. Under existing law, these provisions only apply to a contract to purchase agricultural products for a value that is less than the value of the threshold for supplies and services for which California has obligated itself under the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization. This bill would revise and recast these provisions. The bill would instead require a California state-owned or state-run institution that purchases agricultural food products, as defined, to implement necessary practices to achieve a goal of ensuring that at least 60% of the agricultural food products that it purchases in a calendar year are grown or produced in the state by December 31, 2025. The bill would provide that this goal does not apply to local educational agencies and the segments of public postsecondary education. The bill would change the above-described requirement for school districts to apply to the purchase of a domestic agricultural food product that is grown outside the state, instead of an agricultural product that is grown outside of the state, and would expand the application of this requirement from school districts to local educational agencies. The bill would eliminate the above-described preference for in-state vendors. The bill would provide that the bill's provisions neither limit nor expand California's obligations under the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization. By creating new duties for local educational agencies, 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, 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 establishes the California Promise, which requires at least 20 campuses of the California State University to establish a California Promise program by which the campus enters into a pledge with a student who satisfies specified criteria to support the student in earning a baccalaureate degree within 4 academic years, or if the student is a community college transfer student who earned an associate degree for transfer, within 2 academic years, of the academic year of the student's first year of enrollment at the California State University. This bill would require, commencing with the 2023–24 academic year, that at least 5% of each incoming class at each participating campus of the California State University be a participant in the California Promise program, and that at least 70% of those participating students be either low-income students, first-generation students, or students from communities that are underrepresented in postsecondary education.