Existing law prohibits a person from carrying a concealed firearm or carrying a loaded firearm in public. Existing law authorizes a licensing authority, as specified, if good cause exists for the issuance, and subject to certain other criteria including, among other things, the applicant is of good moral character and has completed a specified course of training, to issue a license to carry a concealed handgun or to carry a loaded and exposed handgun, as specified. Under existing law, the required course of training for an applicant is no more than 16 hours and covers firearm safety and laws regarding the permissible use of a firearm. This bill would require the licensing authority to issue or renew a license if the applicant is not a disqualified person for the license and the applicant is at least 21 years of age. The bill would remove the good character and good cause requirements from the issuance criteria. Under the bill, the applicant would be a disqualified person if they, among other things, are reasonably likely to be a danger to self, others, or the community at large, as specified. This bill would add the requirement that the applicant be the recorded owner, with the Department of Justice, of the pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person. This bill would change the training requirement to be no less than 16 hours in length and would add additional subjects to the course including, among other things, the safe storage and legal transportation of firearms. The bill would require an issuing authority, prior to that issuance, renewal, or amendment to a license, if it has direct access to the designated department system to determine if the applicant is the recorded owner of the pistol, revolver, or other firearm. The bill would require an issuing authority without access to that system to confirm the ownership with the sheriff of the county in which the agency is located. By requiring local agencies to issue licenses for concealed firearms, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The bill would require a licensing authority to provide the applicant notice if a new license or license renewal is denied or revoked. If an application is denied or a license is revoked based on a determination that the applicant is a disqualified person, the bill would permit the applicant to request a hearing to challenge the license denial or revocation, and require the licensing authority to inform the applicant of the ability to seek a hearing. If a new license or license renewal is denied or revoked for any other reason, the bill would authorize the applicant to seek a writ of mandate from a superior court within 30 days of receipt of notice of denial or revocation, and require the licensing authority to inform the applicant of the ability to seek a writ of mandate. By imposing new duties on local licensing authorities, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires an agency issuing a license described above to set forth specified information on the license, including, among other things, the licensee's name, occupation, and reason for desiring a license to carry the weapon. This bill would revise that information to include, among other things, the licensee's driver's license or identification number, fingerprints, and information relating to the date of expiration of the license, and would remove the requirement that the license detail the reason for desiring a license to carry the weapon. Existing law requires an applicant for a license described above to provide fingerprints, as specified. Existing law exempts an applicant from this requirement if they have previously applied to the same licensing authority and the applicant's fingerprints have previously been forwarded to the department, as specified, and instead requires that authority to note data that would provide positive identification in the files of the department, on the copy of any subsequent license submitted to the department. This bill would require the licensing authority to submit fingerprint images and related information to the department for each applicant applying for a new or renewal license. The bill would require the department to notify the licensing authority if the department is unable to ascertain, among other things, the final disposition of an arrest or criminal charge under state or federal law that would prohibit the person from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm. This bill would prohibit a license from being issued or renewed unless the department reports to a licensing authority that the applicant is eligible to possess, receive, own, or purchase a firearm. Existing law requires a licensing authority to charge an additional fee in an amount equal to reasonable processing costs for a new license. Existing law also prohibits a licensing authority from imposing, among other things, a requirement or condition that an applicant pay additional funds or obtain liability insurance. This bill would authorize a licensing authority to charge the additional processing cost fee for a license renewal and would permit the licensing authority to collect the first 50% of the fee upon filing of the application. The bill also removes the prohibition on licensing authority requirements for additional fees or liability insurance. Existing law requires that licenses and applications for licenses be uniform throughout the state, and to be submitted upon forms prescribed by the Attorney General. When revising the standard application form for licenses, existing law requires the Attorney General to convene a committee to review and revise the existing application form. Existing law requires the Attorney General to develop a uniform license that may be used as indicia of proof of licensure throughout the state. Existing law also requires the committee to convene to review and revise the design standard for a uniform license. This bill would authorize the Attorney General to revise the standard form for licenses and the design standard if the committee does not revise the form or issue a design standard within a specified time period. Under existing law, it is a crime to bring a firearm into a state or local building, and makes it a crime to bring a loaded firearm into, or upon the grounds of, any residence of the Governor, any other constitutional officer, or Member of the Legislature. Existing law exempts a licensee from that prohibition if, among other things, the licensee has a valid license to carry the firearm. This bill would remove those exemptions, except as specified. The bill would make it a crime to bring an unloaded firearm into, or upon the grounds of, any residence of the Governor, any other constitutional officer, or Member of the Legislature. The bill would also prohibit a licensee from carrying a firearm to specified locations, including, among other places, a building designated for a court proceeding and a place of worship, as defined, with specific exceptions. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law prohibits a person from knowingly possessing a firearm in a sterile area of an airport, passenger vessel terminal, or public transit facility, as defined. This bill would additionally prohibit a person from knowingly possessing a firearm in any building, real property, or parking area under the control of an airport or passenger vessel terminal, as specified. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law, the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995, makes it a crime to possess a firearm in a place that the person knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone. Existing law defines a school zone as an area in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of the public or private school. Existing law provides exceptions to that crime, including if a person with a valid concealed carry license who is carrying the firearm described in the license in an area that is not in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school and when a firearm is an unloaded pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed on the person and is in a locked container or within the locked trunk of a motor vehicle. This bill would revise the exception for a person who has a valid concealed carry license to permit them to carry a specified firearm in an area that is not within any building, real property, or parking area under the control of a public or private school, or on a street or sidewalk immediately adjacent to a building, real property, or parking area under the control of that public or private school, as specified. Existing law requires a licensing authority to revoke a license to carry a firearm if the licensing authority is notified by the department or the licensing authority determines that a licensee is prohibited from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm under state or federal law. This bill would also require a licensing authority to revoke a license if, among other things, a licensee has provided inaccurate or incomplete information on their application for a new license or license renewal. Existing law authorizes a licensing authority to impose reasonable restrictions on the time, place, manner, and circumstances when a licensee may carry a firearm capable of being concealed. While carrying a firearm, this bill would prohibit a licensee from, among other things, consuming an alcoholic beverage or controlled substance and from falsely representing that the licensee is a peace officer. The bill would authorize the department to adopt emergency regulations to implement the concealed firearm licensing system, as specified. This bill would make conforming changes. The bill would additionally make various findings and declarations of the Legislature. The bill would state that its provisions are severable. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 29805 of the Penal Code proposed by SB 368 to be operative only if this bill and SB 368 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 30370 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 135 and SB 135 to be operative only if this bill and either of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted 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 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.
Sponsored bills
Existing law establishes the California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP) Grant Program, administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections, to award competitive grants for the purpose of violence intervention and prevention. Existing law imposes various taxes, including taxes on the privilege of engaging in certain activities. The Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is a crime, provides procedures for the collection of certain fees and surcharges. This bill, the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Act, would, commencing July 1, 2024, impose an excise tax in the amount of 11% of the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of a firearm, firearm precursor part, and ammunition, as specified. The tax would be collected by the state pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law. The bill would require that the revenues collected be deposited in the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Fund, which the bill would establish in the State Treasury. The bill would require the moneys received in the fund to be used to fund various gun violence prevention, education, research, response, and investigation programs, as specified. The bill would require the Director of Finance to transfer, as a loan, $2,400,000 from the General Fund to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to implement these provisions, as specified. The bill would require each licensed firearms dealer, firearms manufacturer, and ammunition vendor to register with the department for a certificate, as specified. The bill would also provide procedures for the issuance, revocation, and reinstatement of a permit. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature. Because this bill would expand the scope of the Fee Collection Procedures Law, the violation of which is 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.
(1) Existing law requires a court to make an expedited support order if specified information is filed, including the minimum amount the obligated parent or parents are required to pay pursuant to the statewide uniform guideline for support or specified minimum basic standards for adequate care. This bill would repeal those provisions as of January 1, 2024. (2) Existing law sets a statewide uniform guideline for determining child support and requires the Judicial Council to periodically review that guideline to recommend appropriate revisions, including economic data on the cost of raising children and an analysis of guidelines and studies from other states. Existing law further requires a court to order, as additional child support, payment of reasonable uninsured health care costs for the child and payment of childcare costs, and may order costs related to the educational or other special needs of the child, and travel expenses for visitation. Existing law requires the court, in making an order pursuant to the uninsured health care costs, to follow specified protocols. This bill, commencing September 1, 2024, would, among other things, revise the statewide uniform guideline for determining child support, including the amount that establishes a rebuttable presumption that the obligor is entitled to a low-income adjustment. This bill would expand the above-referenced protocols with regard to issuing an order to pay uninsured health care costs to also include orders to pay for specified childcare costs, if those expenses are actually incurred. (3) Existing law requires counties to maintain a local child support agency to promptly and effectively establish, modify, and enforce child support obligations, to enforce spousal support obligations, and to determine paternity of a child born out of wedlock. Existing law requires that the local child support agency provide notice of the amount of child support that is sought pursuant to the statewide uniform guidelines based upon the income or income history of the support obligor and that a proposed judgment be provided. Existing law requires the Judicial Council, in consultation with specified others, to develop a simplified summons, complaint, and answer forms for any action brought pursuant to those provisions. Existing law requires the simplified complaint form to be based upon the income or income history of the support obligor. This bill, commencing January 1, 2026, would, among other things, instead require that complaint form to require the local child support agency to use specified methods to calculate income, including using earning capacity if the local child support agency has sufficient evidence to establish earning capacity. The bill would also authorize the department to implement those provisions by a child support services letter or similar instruction until permanent regulations are adopted. The bill would require the department to adopt regulations to implement those provisions by January 1, 2027. By imposing new duties on a local child support agency, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a judgment to be entered without hearing and without other specified requirements in an action filed by the local child support agency involving the simplified procedures described above. This bill, commencing January 1, 2026, would among other things, expand that requirement to actions based on earning capacity, as specified. The bill would require a local child support agency to conduct a review of the case to determine if there is sufficient additional evidence available to establish actual income of the defendant, as specified. By imposing new duties on a local child support agency, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also require the Judicial Council, no later than September 1, 2024, to adopt and approve any forms necessary to implement those provisions. The bill would make those forms effective January 1, 2026. (4) 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.
The measure would apply to the United States Congress to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the Constitution of the United States for the purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment relating to firearms, as specified.
This measure would denounce the actions of the Tennessee House of Representatives in expelling two African-American Democratic Representatives.
(1) The California Constitution prohibits the ad valorem tax rate on real property from exceeding 1% of the full cash value of the property, subject to certain exceptions. This measure would create an additional exception to the 1% limit that would authorize a city, county, city and county, or special district to levy an ad valorem tax to service bonded indebtedness incurred to fund the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, including downpayment assistance, or permanent supportive housing, or the acquisition or lease of real property for those purposes, if the proposition proposing that tax is approved by 55% of the voters of the city, county, city and county, or special district, as applicable, and the proposition includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would prohibit a city, county, city and county, or special district from placing a proposition on the ballot pursuant to these provisions if the voters have previously approved a proposition pursuant to these provisions or the below special tax provisions until all funds from the previous proposition are committed to programs and projects listed in the specific local program or ordinance, as described. The measure, subject to certain vote thresholds, would authorize the Legislature to enact laws establishing additional accountability measures and laws for the downpayment assistance programs authorized by the measure, as specified. The measure would specify that these provisions apply to any city, county, city and county, or special district measure imposing an ad valorem tax to pay the interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (2) The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax by a local government upon the approval of 23 of the voters of the local government voting on that tax. This measure would authorize a local government to impose, extend, or increase a sales and use tax or transactions and use tax imposed in accordance with specified law or a parcel tax for the purposes of funding the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, including downpayment assistance, or permanent supportive housing, or the acquisition or lease of real property for those purposes, if the proposition proposing that tax is approved by a majority vote of the membership of the governing board of the local government and by 55% of its voters voting on the proposition and the proposition includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would prohibit a local government from placing a proposition on the ballot pursuant to these provisions if the voters have previously approved a proposition pursuant to these provisions or the above ad valorem tax provisions until all funds from the previous proposition are committed to programs and projects listed in the specific local program or ordinance, as described. The measure, subject to certain vote thresholds, would authorize the Legislature to enact laws establishing additional accountability measures and laws for the downpayment assistance programs authorized by the measure, as specified. This measure would also make conforming changes to related provisions. The measure would specify that these provisions apply to any local measure imposing, extending, or increasing a sales and use tax, transactions and use tax, or parcel tax for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (3) The California Constitution prohibits specified local government agencies from incurring any indebtedness exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided in that year, without the assent of 23 of the voters and subject to other conditions. In the case of a school district, community college district, or county office of education, the California Constitution permits a proposition for the incurrence of indebtedness in the form of general obligation bonds for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of school facilities, or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities, to be adopted upon the approval of 55% of the voters of the district or county, as appropriate, voting on the proposition at an election. This measure would expressly prohibit a special district, other than a board of education or school district, from incurring any indebtedness or liability exceeding any applicable statutory limit, as prescribed by the statutes governing the special district. The measure would also similarly require the approval of 55% of the voters of the city, county, city and county, or special district, as applicable, to incur bonded indebtedness, exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided in that year, that is in the form of general obligation bonds issued to fund the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, or permanent supportive housing projects, if the proposition proposing that bond includes specified accountability requirements. The measure would specify that this 55% threshold applies to any proposition for the incurrence of indebtedness by a city, county, city and county, or special district for these purposes that is submitted at the same election as this measure. (4) This measure would deem another measure on the same statewide election ballot relating to state or local requirements for the imposition, adoption, creation, or establishment of taxes, charges, and other revenue measures in conflict with it and would make the other measure null and void if this measure receives more affirmative votes.
Existing law authorizes a peace officer to make an arrest pursuant to a warrant or without a warrant if, among other circumstances, the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed a public offense in the officer's presence. Under existing law, it is unlawful to disobey the lawful order, signal, or direction of a uniformed peace officer performing any duties pursuant to the Vehicle Code or to refuse to submit to any lawful vehicular inspection authorized by the Vehicle Code. Existing case law deems a temporary detention of a person during an automobile stop by the police, even if only for a brief period and for a limited purpose, a seizure, under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and as such, requires the actions to be reasonable. Under existing case law, the decision to stop an automobile is reasonable if the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. Existing case law holds that constitutional reasonableness of traffic stops does not depend on the actual motivations of the individual officers involved and that ulterior motives do not invalidate police conduct that is justifiable on the basis of probable cause to believe that a violation of law has occurred. This bill would prohibit a peace officer from stopping or detaining the operator of a motor vehicle or bicycle for a low-level infraction, as defined, unless a separate, independent basis for a stop exists or more than one low-level infraction is observed. The bill would state that a violation of these provisions is not grounds for a defendant to move for return of property or to suppress evidence. The bill would authorize a peace officer who does not have grounds to stop a vehicle or bicycle, but can determine the identity of the owner, to send a citation or warning letter to the owner. The bill would authorize local authorities to enforce a nonmoving or equipment violation of the Vehicle Code through government employees who are not peace officers. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 21100 of the Vehicle Code proposed by AB 436 and AB 825 to be operative only if this bill and AB 436, this bill and AB 825, or this bill, AB 436, and AB 825 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law establishes the state prisons under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Existing law places county jails under the jurisdiction of the sheriff for the confinement of persons sentenced to imprisonment for the conviction of a crime. This bill would require every jail, prison, public or privately operated detention facility, and a facility in which individuals are subject to confinement or involuntary detention to develop and follow written procedures governing the management of segregated confinement, as specified, and to make those written procedures publicly available. The bill would require those facilities to document the use of segregated confinement by, among other things, providing written orders of that confinement to the individual confined, as specified. The bill would prohibit those facilities from involuntarily placing an individual in segregated confinement if the individual belongs to a designated population, including, among others, that the individual has a mental or physical disability or that the individual is under 26 years of age or over 59 years of age. The bill would require the facility to periodically check on the individual and have a medical or mental health professional periodically assess the individual. This bill would require a facility to offer out-of-cell programming to individuals in segregated confinement for at least 4 hours per day, not including time spent on an unpaid work assignment or in paid employment. The bill would require a facility to maximize the amount of time that an incarcerated person held in segregated confinement spends outside of their cell by providing outdoor and indoor recreation, education, clinically appropriate treatment therapies, and skill-building activities, as specified, and would require facilities to develop and provide appropriate programming to individuals that pose a significant safety risk to themselves or others, as specified. The bill would also authorize a facility to use segregated confinement to help treat and protect against the spread of communicable disease, under certain circumstances. This bill would prohibit a facility from holding an individual in segregated confinement for more than 15 consecutive days and no more than 45 days in a 180-day period, as specified. This bill would also prohibit a facility from imposing limitations on services, treatment, or basic needs; conducting out-of-cell programming opportunities in a smaller cage or therapy module; placing an individual in segregated confinement on the basis of confidential information, as specified; using specified restraints when an individual is in segregated confinement; and using segregated confinement as a means of protecting an individual. This bill would require a facility administrator or chief physician to conduct a secondary review of a person in segregated confinement's dispute regarding qualification in the designated populations category. This bill would require facilities to create and publish monthly, semiannual, and annual reports, as specified. The bill would require the Office of the Inspector General and the Board of State and Community Corrections to assess each facility's compliance with the act, as specified. This bill would require local and state authorities to promulgate regulations or directives to implement the act, where applicable. The bill would declare these provisions to be severable. By imposing additional duties on county jails, this bill would create 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.
The Budget Act of 2022 and the Budget Act of 2023 made appropriations for the support of state government for the 2022–23 and 2023–24 fiscal years. This bill would amend the Budget Act of 2022 and the Budget Act of 2023 by amending and adding items of appropriation and making other changes. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a Budget Bill.
The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 prohibits a business from selling the personal information of a consumer if the business has actual knowledge that the consumer is less than 16 years of age, unless the consumer, in the case of a consumer at least 13 years of age and less than 16 years of age, or the consumer's parent or guardian, in the case of a consumer who is less than 13 years of age, has affirmatively authorized the sale of the consumer's personal information. The California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act requires, beginning July 1, 2024, a business that provides an online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children to comply with specified requirements, including a requirement to configure all default privacy settings offered by the online service, product, or feature to the settings that offer a high level of privacy, as prescribed, and requires a business, before any new online services, products, or features are offered to the public, to complete a Data Protection Impact Assessment for any online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children and maintain documentation of this assessment as long as the online service, product, or feature is likely to be accessed by children. This bill would prohibit a social media platform, as defined, from using a design, algorithm, or feature that the platform knows, or by the exercise of reasonable care should have known, causes child users, as defined, to do any of certain things, including experience addiction to the social media platform. This bill would provide that a social media platform is not in violation of the bill if the social media platform instituted and maintained a program of at least quarterly audits, as defined, of its designs, algorithms, and features that have the potential to cause violations of the provision described above, and the social media platform corrected, within 60 days of the completion of the audit, any design, algorithm, or feature discovered by the audit to present more than a de minimis risk of violating that provision. This bill would subject a social media platform that knowingly and willfully violates these provisions to a civil penalty not to exceed $250,000 per violation, an injunction, and an award of litigation costs and attorney's fees in an action brought only by certain public attorneys, including the Attorney General.