Existing federal law, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, provides for the protection of migratory birds, as specified. The federal act also authorizes states and territories of the United States to make and enforce laws or regulations that give further protection to migratory birds, their nests, and eggs. Existing law, the California Migratory Bird Protection Act, until January 20, 2025, made unlawful the taking or possession of any migratory nongame bird designated in the federal act before January 1, 2017, any additional migratory nongame bird that may be designated in the federal act after that date, or any part of those migratory nongame birds, except as provided. Existing law, as of January 1, 2026, repeals this provision. This bill would, indefinitely, make unlawful the taking or possessing of any migratory bird, as designated in the federal act before January 1, 2025, any additional migratory birds that may be designated in the federal act after that date, or any part of those migratory birds, except as provided. Existing law, operative January 20, 2025, makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, or any part of a migratory nongame bird, except as provided. This bill would repeal this provision. Under existing law, a violation of the Fish and Game Code is a crime. By narrowing the exception to a crime defined in existing law, the bill would expand the scope of a crime, thus 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Home Care Services Consumer Protection Act, requires a home care organization, as defined, to ensure that an affiliated home care aide completes specified training requirements prior to providing home care services, including annual training related to the aide's clients' rights and safety and how to provide for a client's daily living needs. A violation of the act is a misdemeanor. This bill would, beginning on January 1, 2027, additionally require a home care organization to ensure that a home care aide completes, prior to providing home care and annually thereafter, training related to the special care needs of clients with dementia. Because the bill creates new crimes by expanding the act to include additional requirements for home care organizations, 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.
Under existing law, knowingly buying or receiving stolen property or property that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft or extortion, as specified, is punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony if the value of the property exceeds $950. Existing law prohibits a local authority from regulating sidewalk vendors, except in accordance with certain provisions, including that a local authority may, by ordinance or resolution, adopt requirements regulating the time, place, and manner of sidewalk vending if the requirements are directly related to objective health, safety, or welfare concerns. This bill, until January 1, 2031, would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to adopt an ordinance requiring a permit for the sale of specified merchandise on public property, if the ordinance includes specified written findings supported by substantial evidence, including, among other things, that there has been a significant pattern of merchandise being the subject of retail theft and then appearing for sale on public property within the City and County of San Francisco. The bill would require an ordinance adopted by the City and County of San Francisco to, among other things, identify a local permitting agency that is responsible for administering a permit system. The bill would authorize the ordinance to provide specified punishments for selling merchandise without a permit, including that 2nd and 3rd violations within 18 months of the first violation would be punishable as infractions, and that subsequent violations after 3 prior violations, that occur within 18 months of the first violation, would be punishable as infractions or misdemeanors by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 6 months, or by both that imprisonment and a fine. This bill would authorize the City and County of San Francisco to charge a fee for the cost of issuing a permit, not to exceed the reasonable regulatory costs of implementing the bill, as provided. The bill would authorize the permitting agency to accept specified forms of identification in lieu of a social security number, if the permitting agency otherwise requires a social security number for the issuance of a permit or business license, but would require the number collected from the alternative identification to be confidential, except as provided. The bill would prohibit the permitting agency from inquiring into or collecting certain information, including, information about an individual's immigration or citizenship status or criminal history. This bill would require, if an ordinance is adopted, the permitting agency to submit a report to the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco and the Legislature by January 1 of each year that includes specified information, including, among other things, the list or lists of merchandise that the City and County of San Francisco determined was a common target of retail theft. The bill would require the City and County of San Francisco, at least 60 days prior to the enactment of an ordinance, to hold one or more workshops to inform the development of the ordinance, and would require the City and County of San Francisco to administer a public information campaign for at least 30 calendar days prior to the enactment of the ordinance, including public announcements in major media outlets and press releases. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law requires a provider of commercial financing to disclose certain information, as specified. Existing law provides that a provider of commercial financing licensed under the California Financing Law (CFL) is subject to examination and enforcement by the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation under the CFL for any violation of those disclosure provisions, as specified. Certain violations of the CFL are a crime. This bill would prohibit a provider of commercial financing from using the term "interest" or "rate" in a deceptive way that could reasonably result in the recipient being misled and would require those providers to use the term "annual percentage rate" or the acronym "APR" in specified circumstances. The bill would repeal the provision subjecting those providers to the CFL described above and would instead provide that a violation of the disclosure provisions described above and the provisions of the bill is a violation of the CFL if the violation relates to a commercial financing transaction subject to the CFL, or a violation of the California Consumer Financial Protection Law if the violation relates to a commercial financing transaction that is not subject to the CFL. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the California Coastal Act of 1976, among other things, requires anyone wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, except as specified, in addition to obtaining any other permit required by law from any local government or from any state, regional, or local agency, to obtain a coastal development permit from the California Coastal Commission or a local government, as provided. The act provides that a coastal development permit is not required for specified types of development in specified areas, as provided. Existing law provides that a coastal development permit is not required for any category of development, or any category of development within a specified geographic area, if the commission, after a public hearing, and by a 23 vote of its appointed members, finds that there is no potential for any significant adverse effect, as specified, on coastal resources or on public access to, or along, the coast and, where the exclusion precedes certification of the applicable local coastal program, that the exclusion will not impair the ability of local government to prepare a local coastal program. Existing regulation, before a categorical exclusion becomes effective, requires specified things to occur, including that the public agency issuing the permit accepts and agrees to the terms and conditions to which the categorical exclusion has been made subject. This bill would require the commission, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, by July 1, 2027, to identify, based on specified considerations, infill areas within at least 3 local jurisdictions that do not have a certified local coastal program for a categorical exclusion from the coastal development permitting requirement. Specifically, until June 30, 2037, if a development in one of those identified infill areas is a residential housing project comprised only of units that are deed restricted for persons of very low, low, or moderate income, as specified, this bill would categorically exclude the development from that requirement. The bill would exempt the categorically excluded infill areas from the above-described regulation. The bill would require, before commencing development, a proponent of the development to request from the commission, and for the commission to issue, a notice of exclusion. This bill would require the commission, on or before August 1, 2027, to post on its internet website clearly defined maps of the categorical exclusion areas. The bill would also require the commission, on or before January 1, 2035, to report to the Legislature the number of projects that were constructed or are currently under construction pursuant to this categorical exclusion.
Existing law requires the State Oil and Gas Supervisor to supervise the drilling, operation, maintenance, and abandonment of wells so as to prevent damage to life, health, property, and natural resources, damage to underground oil and gas deposits from infiltrating water and other causes, loss of oil, gas, or reservoir of energy, and damage to underground and surface waters suitable for irrigation or domestic purposes by the infiltration of, or the addition of, detrimental substances. Existing law defines "wells" to mean oil or gas wells or other wells related to oil or gas production. Under existing law, a person who fails to comply with the requirements relating to the regulation of wells is guilty of a misdemeanor. This bill would, until January 1, 2035, establish the Gravity-Based Energy Storage Well Pilot Program and would authorize the supervisor to authorize the conversion of not more than 250 wells for use as gravity-based energy storage wells, as defined, to evaluate their use, including the establishment of appropriate operating conditions and physical parameters to safely generate energy, as provided. The bill would authorize the supervisor, the State Water Resources Control Board, or an appropriate regional water quality control board, before authorizing the use of a well as a gravity-based energy storage well, to require the operator to provide certain information demonstrating the suitability of the well for use as a gravity-based energy storage well. The bill would require idle wells that are authorized for use as gravity-based energy storage wells to be identified as gravity-based energy storage wells in a plan for the management and elimination of idle wells or updates to the plan required to be filed with the supervisor. The bill would require the Geologic Energy Management Division to require mechanical integrity testing of wells before conversion to gravity-based energy storage wells and not less than annually thereafter. The bill would require an operator of a gravity-based energy storage well, in the event of a loss of mechanical integrity of the well or a leak to the environment, to notify the division, the State Air Resources Board, the appropriate regional water quality control board, and schools and community members within 3,200 feet of the well and to cease operation until the mechanical integrity is restored or to plug and abandon the well, as provided. The bill would require gravity-based energy storage wells to be continuously monitored for leaks. The bill would require operators of gravity-based energy storage wells to annually report to the division certain information regarding their operation of the gravity-based energy storage wells. The bill would specify that the authorization for wells to be used as gravity-based energy storage wells ends at the termination of the pilot program. The bill would, by January 1, 2033, require the division, in consultation with certain entities, to evaluate the pilot program and make recommendations to the Legislature for a framework to implement an ongoing Gravity-Based Energy Storage Well Program to regulate the operation of gravity-based energy storage wells, as provided. The bill would, until January 1, 2035, impose an annual charge on operators of gravity-based energy storage wells, as provided, to defray the regulatory costs incurred by the state in maintaining surveillance of those wells, ensuring that testing is conducted properly, and ensuring no damage occurs to the environment by reason of the conversion. Because a violation of the requirements of the Gravity-Based Energy Storage Well Pilot Program would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing 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 provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law generally authorizes a health care service plan or health insurer to use prior authorization and other utilization review or utilization management functions, under which a licensed physician or a licensed health care professional who is competent to evaluate specific clinical issues may approve, modify, delay, or deny requests for health care services based on medical necessity. Existing law requires a health care service plan or health insurer, including those plans or insurers that delegate utilization review or utilization management functions to medical groups, independent practice associations, or to other contracting providers, to comply with specified requirements and limitations on their utilization review or utilization management functions. This bill would require the departments to issue instructions on or before July 1, 2026, to health care service plans and health insurers to report statistics regarding covered health care services subject to prior authorization and the percentage rate at which they are approved or modified, among other things. The bill would require a health care service plan or health insurer to report those statistics, including information from another entity to which the plan or insurer delegates responsibility for prior authorization decisions, to the appropriate department on or before December 31, 2026. The bill would require the departments to evaluate these reports, identify the health care services approved at a rate that meets or exceeds the threshold rate of 90%, and, on or before July 1, 2027, publish a list of the services identified. Beginning on the date specified by the relevant department, but no later than January 1, 2028, the bill would require a plan or insurer, or its delegated entities, to cease requiring prior authorization for the most frequently approved covered health care services. The bill would authorize a plan or insurer to reinstate prior authorization for a specific health care provider if it determines that the provider has engaged in fraudulent activity or clinically inappropriate care, as specified. No later than 4 years after the cessation of prior authorization requirements, the bill would require the departments to publish reports regarding the impact of that cessation using information reported by plans and insurers, including data on reinstatements of prior authorization for specific providers. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2034. Because a willful violation of the bill's requirements relative to health care service plans would be a crime, 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.
Existing law regulates various businesses to, among other things, preserve and regulate competition, prohibit unfair trade practices, and regulate advertising. Existing federal law requires the Federal Communications Commission to develop regulations that require commercials to have the same average volume as the programs they accompany. The federal regulations apply to television broadcast stations, cable operators, and other multichannel video programming distributors. This bill would prohibit, on and after July 1, 2026, a video streaming service, as defined, that serves consumers in the state from transmitting the audio of commercial advertisements louder than the video content the advertisements accompany, as specified. The bill would state that it does not create a private right of action.
Existing law, the State Bar Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of attorneys by the State Bar of California, a public corporation governed by a board of trustees. Existing law authorizes the State Bar to establish an examining committee, also known as the Committee of Bar Examiners, with powers that include examining all applicants for admission to practice law. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, generally requires all meetings of a state body to be open and public. The State Bar Act makes the State Bar subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, with specified exceptions. The Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act authorizes a state body that is an advisory board, advisory commission, advisory committee, advisory subcommittee, or similar multimember advisory body to hold an open meeting by teleconference if certain requirements are satisfied. This bill would specify that the Committee of Bar Examiners shall not be considered an advisory board, advisory commission, advisory committee, advisory subcommittee, or similar multimember advisory body for purposes of those provisions. Existing law prohibits the Committee of Bar Examiners from altering the bar examination in a manner that requires the substantial modification of the training or preparation required for passage of the examination, except after giving 2 years' notice of that change, and requires the committee to communicate and cooperate with the Law School Council. This bill would prohibit the Committee of Bar Examiners from changing the vendor or creator of the multiple choice questions except after giving 18 months' notice, except as specified, and would prohibit the Committee of Bar Examiners from authorizing a remote administration of the bar examination except after giving 2 years' notice. The bill would require 120 days' notice for specified alterations of the bar examination, including changes to the medium in which testing materials are provided. The bill would require the Committee of Bar Examiners to communicate and cooperate with the Law School Council and their deans, or their designees, of law schools accredited by the American Bar Association or the committee. The bill would require the Committee of Bar Examiners to give notice if artificial intelligence is used in creating questions for or grading the bar examination. The bill would authorize the use of scaling on the bar examination, as specified. Existing law, until January 1, 2026, requires the board of trustees of the State Bar to fix the annual license fee for active licensees for 2025 at a sum not exceeding $400, and, for the annual license fee for inactive licensees for 2025, a sum not exceeding $100. This bill, until January 1, 2027, would require the board to fix the annual license fee for active licensees for 2026 at a sum not exceeding $400, and the annual license fee for inactive licensees at a sum not exceeding $100. Existing law requires certain revenue received from specified noninsurance and insurance affinity programs offered to licensees of the State Bar to go to the California Lawyers Association or an affiliated 501(c) (3) organization to support their respective diversity, equity and inclusion, access to justice, and civil engagement efforts. Existing law prohibits the California Lawyers Association from creating, operating, participating in, or soliciting its members for any affinity or royalty program involving similar insurance or noninsurance products or services with a percentage or share of costs being distributed to the California Lawyers Association. This bill would require the California Lawyers Association or the affiliated 501(c) (3) organization to submit an annual report to the Legislature detailing their use of funds and a statement of compliance with the prohibition on creating, operating, or soliciting members for affinity or royalty programs involving similar products or services. Existing law prohibits a person who is not an attorney to literally translate from English into another language any words or titles that imply that the person is an attorney, and subjects the person to, among other things, a civil penalty payable to the State Bar. Existing law requires the State Bar to annually report the collection and expenditure of those funds for the preceding calendar year to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary. This bill would instead require the State Bar to annually report the collection and expenditure of those funds for the preceding fiscal year. Existing law requires the State Bar to create a program to certify alternative resolution firms, providers, or practitioners. Existing law requires the program to include different levels or tiers of certification of alternative dispute resolution firms, providers, or practitioners. Existing law requires the higher levels or tiers to be awarded to firms, providers, or practitioners that demonstrate a higher level of commitment to accountability and consumer protection based on criteria developed by the State Bar, and requires the levels or tiers to reference only specified standards of conduct. This bill would instead require higher levels or tiers to be awarded to firms, providers, or practitioners that demonstrate a high level of commitment to accountability and consumer protection based on criteria or other standards, including additional education or training, adopted by the State Bar, and would delete the provision requiring the levels or tiers to reference only specified standards of conduct. This bill would also delete obsolete provisions, update cross-references, and make other technical changes in various provisions of the act, including deleting a provision prohibiting inactive licensees from voting or holding office on the board.
Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to install screening on state freeway overpasses to prevent objects from being dropped or thrown upon vehicles passing underneath, as provided.. This bill would require, beginning on or before July 1, 2028, the Department of Transportation, in consultation with the State Department of Public Health and in collaboration with impacted local governments, to incorporate suicide deterrent considerations in the updates of applicable guidance documents, as provided.
Existing law authorizes a person proposing an eligible facility, including an energy storage system that is capable of storing 200 megawatthours or more of energy, to file with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) an application for certification for the site and related facility, as provided. Existing law provides that the certification issued by the Energy Commission is in lieu of any permit, certificate, or similar document required by a state, local, or regional agency for the use of the site and related facility. Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the PUC to direct the state's 3 largest electrical corporations to file applications for programs and investments to accelerate widespread deployment of distributed energy storage systems for specified purposes and authorizes the PUC to approve, or modify and approve, programs and investments of an electrical corporation in distributed energy storage systems with appropriate energy storage management systems, as defined. This bill would require that an application submitted to the Energy Commission after January 1, 2026, in accordance with the above-described provisions relating to certification of facilities by the Energy Commission, and an application submitted to a local jurisdiction, as defined, for an energy storage system, include the applicant's certification that, at least 30 days before submitting the application, the applicant met and conferred with the authority that has jurisdiction over fire suppression in the area where the energy storage system is proposed, as provided. The bill would also prohibit the Energy Commission certification or local approval unless, after installation is complete, but before commencing operations or use of the batteries, the energy storage system is inspected by the authority that has jurisdiction over fire suppression. The bill would require that the applicant bear the cost of the inspection, as specified. The bill would require, as part of the next update to the California Building Standards Code considered after July 1, 2026, the Office of the State Fire Marshal to review and consider proposing provisions that restrict the location of energy storage systems to dedicated-use noncombustible buildings or outdoor installations, as provided. By imposing additional duties on local officers, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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. 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 establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services, under fee-for-service or managed care delivery systems. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law establishes, until January 1, 2026, certain time and distance and appointment time standards for specified Medi-Cal managed care covered services, consistent with federal regulations relating to network adequacy standards, to ensure that those services are available and accessible to enrollees of Medi-Cal managed care plans in a timely manner, as specified. This bill would extend the operation of those standards to January 1, 2029. The bill would also require a managed care plan to ensure that each subcontractor network complies with certain appointment time standards unless already required to do so. The bill would require a plan to demonstrate to the department each subcontractor network's compliance with time or distance and appointment time standards, as specified. Existing law permits the department to authorize a managed care plan to use clinically appropriate video synchronous interaction, as defined, as a means of demonstrating compliance with the time or distance standards. Under this bill, the use of telehealth providers to meet time or distance standards would not absolve the managed care plan of responsibility to provide a beneficiary with access, including transportation, to in-person services if the beneficiary prefers. The bill would set forth other related provisions with regard to the use of telehealth. Existing law permits the department, upon request of a managed care plan, to authorize alternative access standards for the time or distance standards under certain conditions. This bill would, effective for contract periods commencing on or after January 1, 2027, require the department to consider the sufficiency of payment rates offered by the Medi-Cal managed care plan to the provider type or for the service type when evaluating requests for the utilization of alternative access standards. The bill would require a Medi-Cal managed care plan that does not meet time or distance standards without the use of an alternative access standards request to submit to the department documentation demonstrating efforts to contract with providers, as specified. The bill would require a Medi-Cal managed care plan, effective no sooner than contract periods commencing on or after January 1, 2026, to inform enrollees of their option to use or not use telehealth, covered transportation services, or out-of-network providers to access covered services if the health care provider is located outside of the time or distance standards. Existing law requires the department to annually evaluate a managed care plan's compliance with the time or distance and appointment time standards and to annually publish a report of its findings, as specified. This bill would require, effective for contract periods commencing on or after January 1, 2029, the evaluation by the department for appointment time standards compliance to be performed using a direct testing method, as specified. The bill would authorize the department to require enhanced time or distance standards that are more stringent than the time or distance standards described above in its contracts with Medi-Cal managed care plans. The bill would require the department to ensure that these enhanced standards are consistent across contracts for similar geographic classifications. The bill would require the department to publish all enhanced time and distance standards adopted by contract with a rationale for the enhanced standards. Under the bill, in alignment with federal regulation that requires the department to conduct analyses when developing or adjusting network adequacy standards, the department would be required to publish on its internet website by January 1, 2027, a specified workplan. The bill would also require the department to convene a stakeholder workgroup and to provide a 30-day public comment period, as specified. Existing law requires the department, to the extent permitted under federal law, to require a Medi-Cal managed care plan that is not licensed by the Department of Managed Health Care to comply with applicable requirements, under specified provisions relating to health equity and quality, for the purpose of serving applicable Medi-Cal beneficiaries. Under this bill, for purposes of implementing specified federal final rules relating to Medicaid, the department would be authorized to enter into contracts, or amend existing contracts, as specified. The bill would make this provision inoperative on January 1, 2029. The bill would authorize the department to implement the above-described provisions, relating to the health equity and quality requirements and to the Medicaid final rules, through all-county letters or similar instructions without taking any further regulatory action.
