Existing law provides for the compensation of victims and derivative victims of specified types of crimes by the California Victim Compensation Board from the Restitution Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, for specified losses suffered as a result of those crimes. Existing law defines various terms for purposes of these provisions, including "crime," which includes any public offense wherever it may take place that would constitute a misdemeanor or felony. This bill would revise the definition of "crime" to include any public offense described above regardless of whether any suspect is arrested for or charged with the commission of the crime. The bill would also include in the definition of "crime" the use of force by a peace officer that is beyond what is reasonable under the totality of the circumstances, and that causes the victim injury or death, regardless of whether the peace officer is arrested for or charged with the commission of a crime or a public offense. By expanding the types of crime for which compensation can be paid from a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. Existing law specifies that a person is not eligible for compensation under specified conditions, including, among other things, if the board determines that denial of the claim for compensation is appropriate because of the nature of the victim's involvement in the events leading to the crime, or the involvement of the person whose injury or death gives rise to the application. If the victim is determined to have been involved in the events leading to the qualifying crime, existing law specifies the factors that the board may consider to mitigate that involvement including, among other things, that the victim's injuries were significantly more serious than reasonably could have been expected based on the victim's level of involvement, or that a third party interfered in a manner that was not reasonably foreseeable by the victim. This bill would recast the factors that may be considered in determining whether the victim was involved in the events leading to the qualifying crime. The bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, prohibit the board from denying an application based upon the victim's involvement in the crime if the claim is for injury or death that happened as a result of the use of excessive force by a peace officer. Existing law requires the board to deny an application if it finds that the victim failed to cooperate reasonably with a law enforcement agency in the apprehension and conviction of a criminal committing the crime. This bill would prohibit the board from determining that a victim failed to cooperate with law enforcement based upon their conduct with law enforcement at the scene of the crime or on a hospital following the crime, and specify that lack of cooperation shall not be found solely because a victim delayed in reporting the qualifying crime. The bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, prohibit the board from denying an application based solely upon the victim's failure to cooperate if the claim is for injury or death that happened as a result of the use of excessive force by a peace officer. The bill would prohibit the board from denying an application for a claim based on injuries or death as a result of the use of excessive force by a peace officer based solely on a police report, or the lack thereof, or based upon whether the peace officer was arrested or charged with a crime. The bill would, absent a police report, authorize these claims to be supported by other evidence. The bill would also prohibit the board from denying an application, in whole or in part, based solely upon the contents of a police report, or because a police report was not made by the victim, or based upon whether any suspect was arrested or charged with the qualifying crime. The bill would require the board to consider other evidence to establish that a qualifying crime occurred. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Sponsored bills
The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law, the Permit Streamlining Act, among other things, requires a public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove that project within specified time periods. This bill would extend by 18 months the period for the expiration, effectuation, or utilization of a housing entitlement, as defined, that was issued before, and was in effect on, March 4, 2020, and that will expire before December 31, 2021, except as specified. The bill would toll this 18-month extension during any time that the housing entitlement is the subject of a legal challenge. The bill would also provide that if the state or a local agency extends, on or after March 4, 2020, but before the effective date of the bill, the otherwise applicable time for the expiration, effectuation, or utilization of a housing entitlement for not less than 18 months and pursuant to the same conditions provided by this bill, that housing entitlement shall not be extended an additional 18 months pursuant to this bill. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to housing entitlements, 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 establishes a system of public elementary and secondary schools in the state, and authorizes local educational agencies throughout the state to operate schools and provide instruction to pupils in kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law provides that no monetary liability and no cause of action arises against specified entities for certain conduct, including, except for specified damages, for a hospital for any action taken upon the recommendation of its medical staff, or against any other person or organization for any action taken, or restriction imposed, which is required to be reported, if that action or restriction is reported, as specified. This bill would require, during the COVID-19 pandemic, as defined, the governing board of a local educational agency, as defined, or its designee, to establish health and safety policies and procedures for operating programs and facilities in a manner consistent with applicable federal, state, and local requirements and COVID-19-related guidelines published by the State Department of Public Health. The bill would require the governing boards of local educational agencies, or their designees, to ensure that reasonable efforts are undertaken to implement those policies and procedures. The bill would exempt a local educational agency, and its officers or employees, that meet these requirements from monetary liability and damages for injury relating to COVID-19 infection, transmission, or specified policies and procedures established pursuant to the bill, any condition in existence because of the COVID-19 pandemic, or any act or omission by the local educational agency, its officers, or its employees in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, as provided, with specified exceptions. By imposing new duties on 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, the Credit Services Act of 1984, defines and regulates the activities of credit services organizations. Existing law generally defines a credit services organization as a person who, for payment, performs specified credit-related services, such as improving a buyer's credit record and obtaining loans. Existing law requires credit services organizations to obtain a surety bond, as specified, before conducting business and requires that they register with the Attorney General, subject to a fee of $100. Among other things, existing law prohibits a credit services organization from receiving money before full and complete performance of the service the organization has agreed to perform and from failing to perform services agreed upon within 6 months. Existing law requires that credit services be provided pursuant to a written contract, which is required to contain specified statements, and, before the execution of a contract, a credit services organization must provide a prescribed information statement. Existing law requires the contract to contain a notice informing the buyer that the contract can be canceled within 5 days from the date the contract is signed. Existing law authorizes a buyer of services who is injured by a credit services organization's violation of the act, or its breach of contract, to bring an action for damages or injunctive relief, as specified. Existing law also authorizes any person, including a consumer credit reporting agency, to bring an action, as specified, for a violation of the act. This bill would instead require the Department of Business Oversight to register and regulate credit services organizations. The bill would replace the term "buyer" with the term "consumer" for purposes of describing a person utilizing the services of a credit services organization and would prescribe other definitions in this regard. The bill would require a credit services organization to provide a consumer an itemized monthly statement showing each service performed for a consumer, as specified, and would require the organization to perform services agreed upon within 180 days of contracting for those services. The bill would require the information statement and contract to inform the consumer that the contract can be canceled before midnight on the 5th working day after the consumer signs it. The bill would extend prohibitions on counseling a consumer to make untrue statements to other specified parties. Among other things, the bill would prohibit a credit services organization from impersonating a consumer, from failing to identify communications originating from the organization, from submitting a dispute to a consumer credit reporting agency, creditor, debt collector, or debt buyer more than 180 days after the disputed account has been removed, or from failing to provide along with its first written communication to a credit reporting agency or data furnisher sufficient information to investigate a dispute of an account. The bill would also require a consumer credit reporting agency, creditor, debt collector, or debt buyer that knows that a consumer is represented by a credit service organization to communicate with the credit services organization, except as specified. The bill would require a credit services organization to redact specified information in certain written communications. The bill would require a credit services organization to maintain certain information on file for 4 years. The bill would revise information that must be provided before a credit service contract is executed, including a notice regarding the filing of complaints with the Department of Business Oversight or the Attorney General, and would require the Department of Business Oversight to maintain an internet website for this purpose. The bill would revise statements that a credit services contract must include. The bill would prescribe statutory penalties that may be imposed on a credit services organization that willfully and knowingly violates the act. The bill would authorize the Department of Business Oversight to periodically increase the amount of the fee it is authorized to charge for registration of credit services organizations, but the amount of the fee would be prohibited from exceeding that which is reasonable and necessary to satisfy the department's costs in complying with its duties to regulate credit services organizations.
Under existing law, the Department of Consumer Affairs, under the control of the Director of Consumer Affairs, is comprised of various boards that license and regulate various professions and vocations. Existing law requires an applicant seeking a license from a board within the department to meet specified requirements and to pay certain licensing fees. Existing law requires a board within the department to issue, after appropriate investigation, certain types of temporary licenses to an applicant if the applicant meets specified requirements, including that the applicant supplies evidence satisfactory to the board that the applicant is married to, or in a domestic partnership or other legal union with, an active duty member of the Armed Forces of the United States who is assigned to a duty station in this state under official active duty military orders and the applicant holds a current, active, and unrestricted license that confers upon the applicant the authority to practice, in another state, district, or territory of the United States, the profession or vocation for which the applicant seeks a temporary license from the board. Existing law requires these temporary licenses to expire 12 months after issuance. Under existing law, some of the funds within the jurisdiction of a board consist of revenue from fees that are continuously appropriated. This bill would require boards not subject to the temporary licensing provisions described above to issue licenses to an applicant if the applicant meets specified requirements, including that the applicant supplies evidence satisfactory to the board that the applicant is an honorably discharged veteran of the Armed Forces of the United States or is married to, or in a domestic partnership or other legal union with, an active duty member of the Armed Forces of the United States, as provided. The bill would require an application for a license to include a signed affidavit attesting to the fact that the applicant meets all requirements for a license. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill's expansion of the requirement to issue licenses would result in revenues from fees for certain licenses being deposited into continuously appropriated funds. By establishing a new source of revenue for those continuously appropriated funds, the bill would make an appropriation. 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 California Constitution limits the amount of ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property, defined as the county assessor's valuation of real property as shown on the 1975–76 tax bill and, thereafter, the appraised value of the property when purchased, newly constructed, or a change in ownership occurs after the 1975 assessment, subject to an annual inflation adjustment not to exceed 2%. The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to authorize a person over 55 years of age or any severely and permanently disabled person residing in property eligible for the homeowner's exemption to transfer the base year value of that property to a replacement dwelling of equal or lesser value located in the same county, or another county that has adopted an ordinance allowing base years value transfers from other counties, as provided. The California Constitution also provides that the purchase or transfer of the principal residence, and the first $1,000,000 of other real property, of a transferor in the case of a transfer between parents and their children, or between grandparents and their grandchildren if all the parents of those grandchildren are deceased, is not a "purchase" or "change in ownership" for purposes of determining the "full cash value" of property for taxation. This measure, beginning on and after April 1, 2021, would authorize an owner of a primary residence who is over 55 years of age, severely disabled, or a victim of a wildfire or natural disaster, as defined, to transfer the taxable value, defined as the base year value plus inflation adjustments, of their primary residence to a replacement primary residence located anywhere in the state, regardless of the location or value of the replacement primary residence, that is purchased or newly constructed as that person's principal residence within 2 years of the sale of the original primary residence. The measure would limit a person who is over 55 years of age or severely disabled to 3 transfers under these provisions. The measure, beginning on and after February 16, 2021, would exclude from the terms "purchase" and "change in ownership" for purposes of determining the "full cash value" of property the purchase or transfer of a family home or family farm, as those terms are defined, of the transferor in the case of a transfer between parents and their children, or between grandparents and their grandchildren if all the parents of those grandchildren are deceased. In the case of a transfer of a family home, the measure would require that the property continue as the family home of the transferee. The measure would require that the taxable value of the property be determined as provided. In the case of property tax benefits provided to a family home under these provisions, the bill would require the transferee to claim the homeowner's or disabled veteran's exemption within one year of the transfer. The measure would specify that the above-described provisions relating to transfers between parents or grandparents and children or grandchildren would apply to transfers occurring on or before February 15, 2021. The measure would establish the California Fire Response Fund in the State Treasury. The measure would require the Controller to annually transfer a specified amount, based on calculations by the Director of Finance, of the additional revenues and savings that accrued to the state from the implementation of this measure's provisions from the General Fund to that fund. However, the measure would provide that, if the amount required to be transferred to the California Fire Response Fund exceeds the amount transferred for the previous fiscal year by more than 10%, that excess amount would not be transferred to the California Fire Response Fund. The measure would require the Legislature to appropriate moneys in the fund solely for the purpose of funding fire suppression staffing by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and underfunded special districts that provide fire protection services, as provided. The measure would also establish the County Revenue Protection Fund and continuously appropriate moneys in that fund for the purpose of reimbursing eligible local agencies, as provided. The measure would require the Controller to annually transfer a specified amount, based on the above-described calculations by the Director of Finance, from the General Fund to that fund. The measure would require each county to annually determine the gain of the county and any local agency within the county resulting from the implementation of this measure and, if that amount of gain is negative, provide that specified eligible local agencies may receive a reimbursement from the County Revenue Protection Fund. The measure would require the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to provide a reimbursement to each eligible local agency that has a negative gain, determined every 3 years based on the aggregate gain of the eligible local agency, as provided, and require the Controller to transfer any remaining balance in the County Revenue Protection Fund to the General Fund at the end of each 3-year period, to be available for appropriation for any purpose.
This measure would proclaim March 2, 2020, to March 6, 2020, inclusive, as School Breakfast Week.
Existing law, the Contractors' State License Law, defines and regulates the activities of contractors and provides for their licensure, regulation, and discipline by the Contractors' State License Board within the Department of Consumer Affairs. Existing law authorizes the registrar of contractors to grant the retroactive renewal of a license if, within 90 days from the due date, the licensee requests the retroactive renewal in a petition to the registrar, shows that the failure to renew was due to circumstances beyond their control, files an application for renewal on a form prescribed by the registrar, and pays the appropriate renewal and delinquency fees. This bill, instead, would require the registrar to grant the retroactive renewal of a license if within 90 days of the expiration of the license, the otherwise eligible licensee submits a completed application for renewal and pays the renewal and delinquency fees. The bill would delete the requirement that the licensee demonstrate that the delay was due to circumstances beyond the licensee's control, and would deem an application for renewal submitted for purposes of these provisions if it is delivered to the board's headquarter or postmarked within 90 days of the expiration of the license.
This measure would declare the week of February 17 to February 21, 2020, inclusive, as California Fitness Week, and would encourage Californians to enrich their lives through proper nutrition and exercise.
This measure would proclaim February 20, 2020, as Introduce a Girl to Engineering Day.