Existing law entitles state employees to a paid holiday on specific days, including the 3rd Monday in February, except as specified. Existing law, in addition, authorizes state employees to elect to use 8 hours of vacation, annual leave, compensating time off, or personal holiday credit corresponding with specific dates, including the 4th Friday in September, known as "Native American Day," as specified. This bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, entitle state employees to a holiday on the 4th Friday in September, known as "Native American Day," as specified, in lieu of the above-described election. The bill would authorize any state bargaining unit to negotiate for a paid holiday on Native American Day, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 19853 and 19853.1 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2017 and SB 1394 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(1) Existing law, commonly referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to grant a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards, as specified, to an applicant for a housing development when the applicant seeks a density bonus for the housing development, as specified, if the applicant agrees to construct, among other things, a specified percentage of units for very low income, lower income, or senior citizen housing, and meets other requirements. This bill would, instead, require a city or county to grant a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards, as specified, to an applicant for a housing development when the applicant submits an application for a housing development that a city, county, or city and county determines meets specified criteria, including, among others, the housing development includes specified percentage of units for very low income, lower income, or senior citizen housing. (2) Existing law defines density bonus for the purposes of the Density Bonus Law to mean a density increase over the otherwise base density, as specified. Existing law specifies the base density calculation standards and requires base density to be determined using dwelling units per acre, except as otherwise provided. For the purpose of calculating a density bonus, existing law requires the residential units to be on contiguous sites that are the subject of one development application, as specified. Existing law also requires the density bonus to be permitted in geographic areas of the housing development other than the areas where the units for the lower income households are located. This bill would allow an applicant who provides a base density study, as defined, to elect to receive a density bonus in the form of a percentage increase in maximum floor area ratio, as specified. The bill would create an additional exception to the requirement that base density be determined using dwelling units per acre for applicants who elect to provide a base density study. This bill would revise and recast the provisions related to permitting of a density bonus relative to the geographic area to instead require a density bonus, incentive, or concession, or waiver or reduction, on sites that are the subject of the same housing development, as specified. (3) Existing law requires a city or county to adopt procedures and timelines for processing a density bonus application and to notify the applicant for a density bonus whether the application is complete in a manner consistent with specified timelines. If the local government notifies the applicant that the application is deemed complete, this bill would require the city or county to provide the applicant with a determination that the project is eligible for a density bonus. (4) Existing law authorizes an applicant for a density bonus to submit to a city or county a proposal for the specific incentives or concessions that the applicant requests and requires the city or county to grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the city or county makes a certain written finding, based upon substantial evidence. Existing law specifies the number of incentives or concessions an applicant is eligible to receive based on certain criteria. This bill would make revisions to certain of those calculations related to incentives or concessions. (5) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. Existing law specifies that the granting of a density bonus or incentive or concessions shall not require or be interpreted to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approval. Existing law also specifies that the granting of an incentive or concessions shall not require or be interpreted to require a study. This bill would specify that the granting of a waiver or reduction of development standards shall not require or be interpreted to require a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval. The bill would also specify that the granting of a density bonus, incentive or concession, or waiver or reduction of development standards shall not be discretionary. The bill would specify that the granting of a density bonus, incentive or concession, or waiver or reduction of development standards shall not require or be interpreted to require environmental review under CEQA. (6) 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. (7) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65915 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2480, SB 1383, or both, to be operative only if this bill and AB 2480, SB 1383, or both, are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (8) By imposing new requirements on local governments, 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 designates specific days as holidays in this state, including, among others, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and Cesar Chavez Day. Existing law designates certain days as judicial holidays and exempts others including, Lunar New Year, Diwali, and Genocide Remembrance Day. This bill would designate Sylvia Mendez Day as a state holiday, but would exempt the holiday from being a judicial holiday. The bill would include related legislative findings and declarations. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure proposed by AB 2017 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2017 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 6700 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2017 and SB 1394 to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law allows the court to issue a protective order restraining a defendant from any contact with the victim if the defendant has been convicted of specified crimes, including a crime involving domestic violence, human trafficking, a crime in furtherance of a criminal street gang, or a registerable sex offense. This bill would additionally authorize the court to consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from contact with any person who is a member of the victim's family, as defined, or household. By authorizing the issuance of protective orders in certain circumstances and the extension of certain protective orders, a violation of which is punishable as a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 136.2 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 1889 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1889 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 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 sets forth specified prior authorization and step therapy limitations for health care service plans and health insurers. This bill would require a health care service plan contract or health insurance policy issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2027, to require a health care service plan or health insurer to complete prior authorization within 30 days upon initial request, as specified, for a drug approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of a rare disease if the drug is prescribed by a specialist with expertise in the condition or disease being treated, the specialist has determined the drug is medically necessary, and the drug is the only FDA-approved treatment for the rare disease. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan 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 requires the Franchise Tax Board, on or before March 1, 2022, and annually on or before March 1 thereafter, to report certain information to the Legislature regarding health coverage penalties paid by households, in addition to related information. This bill would change the annual reporting deadline to April 1, as provided.
Under existing law, a candidate for the United States House of Representatives or local elective office may purchase space in the county voter information guide to make a candidate statement. A candidate for United States Senate may purchase space for a candidate statement in the state voter information guide. A candidate for state elective office may also purchase space to make a candidate statement in the state voter information guide, but only if the candidate accepts certain voluntary campaign expenditure limits. Existing law prohibits these candidate statements from making any reference to the candidate's opponents. This bill would limit a candidate statement to a recitation of the candidate's own education, professional experience, public service, community involvement, and qualifications. The bill would prohibit a candidate statement from including, in addition to references to other candidates, a link or other reference to external content other than the candidate's campaign website; content that is vulgar or profane, or that threatens or incites violence; false statements or misleading claims; or any other content that is unrelated to the candidate's qualifications. The candidate would be required to submit a declaration with the candidate statement that attests that the statement is true and correct. Because a person who willfully makes a false statement in that declaration would be guilty of the crime of perjury, this bill expands the scope of that crime and thereby creates a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Secretary of State and county elections officials to omit from the voter information guide any portion of a candidate statement that does not comply with the bill, except false statements and misleading claims, and it would require them to print the remainder of the statement if it can stand independently and does not mislead voters. The bill would make a fee paid by a candidate for the printing or inclusion of a candidate statement nonrefundable if any part of the statement is printed in the voter information guide, but the fee would be refunded if the statement is omitted. By increasing the duties of county elections officials, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. Existing law provides for the public examination of state and county voter information guides. During the 20-day examination period for the state guide, an elector may seek a writ of mandate or an injunction requiring any or all of the materials to be amended or deleted. During the 10-day examination period for the county guide, a voter of the relevant jurisdiction in which an election is being held, or the relevant local elections official themselves, may seek a writ of mandate or an injunction requiring any or all of the materials to be amended or deleted. A court will issue such a writ of mandate or injunction only upon clear and convincing proof that the material in question is false, misleading, or inconsistent with law, and that issuance of the writ or injunction will not substantially interfere with the printing or distribution of official election materials as provided by law. This bill would similarly allow any registered voter to seek a writ of mandate or an injunction requiring any or all of the material in a candidate statement in the state or a county voter information guide to be amended or deleted, as specified. This bill would require that, as in current law, the writ of mandate or an injunction only be issued upon clear and convincing proof that the material in question is false, misleading, or inconsistent with the requirements of the bill, and that issuance of the writ or injunction will not substantially interfere with the printing or distribution of official election materials as provided by law. This bill would additionally allow a county elections official to bring such an action for a writ or injunction challenging a candidate statement in the county voter information guide over which they have jurisdiction. 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 mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws, including various motion picture credits, commonly referred to as motion picture credit 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0, and the certified studio credit, to be allocated by the California Film Commission in differing amounts equal to specified percentages of the qualified expenditures of a qualified motion picture in this state. Existing law establishes the continuously appropriated Tax Relief and Refund Account and the Corporation Tax Fund and provides that payments required to be made to taxpayers or other persons are to be paid from those funds. This bill would allow a credit against those taxes in an amount between 35% and 50% of qualified expenses relating to the post-production of a qualified motion picture in California to be allocated by the California Film Commission, as specified. The bill would require the credit to be administered in the same manner as the motion picture credit 4.0, except as specified. The bill would require the California Film Commission to utilize a post-production services ratio, as defined, to allocate credits, as specified. The bill would limit the aggregate amount of credits allocated in a fiscal year based on a determination made by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act plus additional amounts, as described. The bill would require that 85% of the total allocable credits are reserved for qualified taxpayers that attest, under penalty of perjury, that they will abide by specified labor condition requirements. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated locale program. This bill would allow a qualified taxpayer to elect to be paid a refund if the amount allowable as a credit exceeds the qualified taxpayer's tax liability for the taxable year, as specified. By requiring moneys to be paid from the Tax Relief and Refund Account and the Corporation Tax Fund, the bill would make an appropriation. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure, as defined, to include tax credits, to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax credit will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would include findings and reporting requirements in compliance with this requirement. The bill would require exchange of information between the Legislative Analyst's Office and other specified agencies in order to comply with these requirements. The bill would make the unauthorized disclosure of this information subject to existing law, the violation of which is a crime. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 17039 and 23036 of the Revenue and Taxation Code proposed by AB 2222 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2222 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, requires a business that provides an online service, product, or feature likely to be accessed by children to comply with certain requirements, including, among other things, prohibiting the business from collecting, selling, sharing, or retaining any personal information that is not necessary to provide the online service, product, or feature, except as specified. Existing law imposes specified civil penalties upon a business that violates these provisions. This bill would repeal the above-described act and would instead impose similar provisions without the above-referenced exceptions and would impose civil penalties for a violation of these provisions. The bill would require a business that provides an online product or service likely to be accessed by children to take reasonable steps to prevent specified risks of harm to children. The bill would authorize a child to void any provision of a contract that was entered into by the child or their parent or guardian as a result of a design feature of the online product or service. The bill would authorize the Attorney General or a public prosecutor to bring a civil action for a violation of these provisions, as specified.
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 requires the State Bar Court to order the involuntary inactive enrollment of a licensee whose default has been entered pursuant to the State Bar Rules of Procedure, as specified, if a notice containing certain language is duly served on the licensee. This bill would include findings and declarations by the Legislature relating to the history, governance, and responsibilities of the State Bar, and would specify that these provisions, and other provisions relating to the State Bar, are declaratory of existing law. The bill would delete the requirement that the notice contain certain language and would instead require the notice to contain specified provisions in clear, easily understandable language, in at least 12-point font, and in capital letters. The bill would preclude specified provisions of law relating to the State Bar from being construed to affect or alter the status of the State Bar, as described. Existing law subjects the State Bar and its meetings to the requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act and provides that the State Bar may hold closed session meetings for various purposes, including, among other things, matters relating to the Committee of Bar Examiners' consideration of moral character. This bill would expand the permissible grounds for a closed session meeting to include, among other things, the Committee of Bar Examiners' consideration of any matter that would disclose certain confidential information. Existing law requires the State Bar to collect, in conjunction with collection of its annual license fees, membership fees for the California Lawyers Association (CLA) if the Board of Trustees of the State Bar makes specified determinations. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, permit the State Bar to continue to collect fees for the CLA, provided that the Board of Trustees of the State Bar makes those specified determinations. The bill would also permit the State Bar, until January 1, 2030, to assist the CLA in transitioning to collect its own membership fees, provided that the CLA reimburses the State Bar for the costs of this assistance. Existing law permits, in the conduct of investigations relating to attorneys, the chief trial counsel or their designee to compel, by subpoena, the attendance of witnesses and the production of books, papers, and documents pertaining to the investigation. This bill would permit the chief trial counsel or their designee to also compel, by subpoena, the attorney who is the subject of the investigation. Existing law requires the State Bar to assist the Sections of the State Bar, as specified, to incorporate as a private, nonprofit corporation, known as the CLA, a voluntary association that is not part of the State Bar. Existing law authorizes the State Bar to assist the CLA in gaining appointment to the American Bar Association House of Delegates. Existing law requires the State Bar and the CLA to enter into a memorandum of understanding regarding, among other things, providing low- and no-cost mandatory continuing legal education (MCLE) , expertise and information to the State Bar, and educational programs and materials to licensees and the public. Existing law requires the CLA to provide low-cost programs and materials by which licensees may satisfy their MCLE requirements. This bill would delete those provisions. The bill would instead authorize the State Bar to assist a voluntary association of attorneys in gaining appointment to the American Bar Association Houses of Delegates, and would authorize the State Bar to enter into a memorandum of understanding with a voluntary association of attorneys to provide low- and no-cost mandatory continuing legal education, expertise, and information to the State Bar, and educational programs and materials to licensees and the public. The bill would require a voluntary association of attorneys to provide low-costs programs and materials by which licensees may satisfy their MCLE requirements. The bill would make conforming changes. Existing law authorizes the State Bar to establish an examining committee, also known as the Committee of Bar Examiners, and makes the Committee of Bar Examiners responsible for the approval, regulation, and oversight of degree-granting unaccredited law schools that award the juris doctor (J.D.) professional degree in California and that are not approved by the American Bar Association or the Committee of Bar Examiners. This bill would prohibit any person or entity from referring to itself as a law school, or any similar name, in any firm name, trade name, fictitious business name, or on any advertisement, letterhead, business card, or sign, unless the person or entity awards the juris doctorate professional degree in California and is either approved by the American Bar Association, accredited by the Committee of Bar Examiners, or registered with the Committee on Bar Examiners. Existing law requires financial institutions, on or before each March 1, to electronically provide to the State Bar certain information for every client trust account actually known to the financial institution associated with an attorney's State Bar license number. This bill would expand those requirements to also include every interest on lawyer's trust account (IOLTA) . Existing law requires licensees of the State Bar, limited liability partnerships, or law corporations registered with the State Bar to provide to the State Bar all requested information pursuant to a request made as part of a compliance review or investigative audit. Existing law makes that information exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act. This bill would also make those provisions applicable to a request by the State Bar made as part of a disciplinary investigation. Existing law provides for an attorney to be disbarred or suspended for committing either a felony or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude. Existing law also requires the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel to, within a specified time, transmit to the California Supreme Court the record of any conviction of an attorney involving moral turpitude. This bill would expand the grounds for disbarment or suspension to include the conviction of any felony. The bill would also make conforming changes, including to the responsibilities of the Office of Chief Trial Counsel to transmit evidence of the relevant convictions to the California Supreme Court. Existing law requires the California Supreme Court, upon receipt of a certified copy of a record of certain convictions, to suspend an attorney until the time of appeal has elapsed, or the judgment of conviction has been affirmed on appeal, or has otherwise become final, and until the further order of the court. This bill would require the California Supreme Court, upon receipt of a certified copy of a record of certain convictions, as specified, to suspend an attorney until the conviction has become final and until the further order of the court. The bill would also expand the scope of convictions under the laws of another state or territory that would constitute a felony for the purposes of these provisions. Existing law, until January 1, 2027, requires the board to charge an annual license fee of up to $400 for active licensees for 2026. Existing law, until January 1, 2027, and except as specified, requires the board to charge an annual license fee of up to $100 for inactive licensees. This bill would require the board to charge an annual license fee of up to $400 for active licensees for 2027. The bill would require the board to charge an annual license fee of up to $100 for inactive licensees. The bill would also require the State Bar to permit attorneys to file for inactive status through December 31 of the calendar year prior to becoming inactive. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2028. Existing law requires the board to administer a Client Security Fund to relieve or mitigate pecuniary losses caused by the dishonest conduct of licensees of the State Bar, among others. Existing law requires any licensee whose actions have caused the payment of funds to an applicant from the Client Security Fund to reimburse the Client Security Fund for all moneys paid out as a result of the licensee's conduct, plus interest and costs, as specified. Existing law requires the reimbursed amount, plus applicable interest and costs, to be added to the license fee of a publicly reproved or suspended licensee. This bill would remove the limitation that those provisions are applicable only to publicly reproved or suspended licensees and would thereby require the reimbursed amount, plus applicable interest and costs, to be added to the license fee of any licensee required to reimburse the Client Security Fund. The bill would make a failure to pay the Client Security Fund as part of the license fee a basis for suspension from the practice of law and would make payment to the Client Security Fund a condition of transfer of a licensee's status to an active status from a suspension, involuntary inactive enrollment, or voluntary inactive status. Existing law requires the CLA to adopt a dues schedule and to provide that schedule to the State Bar by October 1 of each year. Existing law specifies that membership in the CLA is voluntary and that the CLA is not part of the State Bar, however, existing law requires the State Bar to collect, in conjunction with its annual license fees, the membership fees for the CLA. This bill would repeal those provisions on January 1, 2030. Existing law requires the State Bar to provide offers of discounts and other benefits to licensees, including insurance and noninsurance affinity programs. Existing law authorizes the State Bar, if approved by the board and other specified entities, to transfer administration of those programs to Cal Bar Affinity, and specifies the manner of distribution of the revenue received from insurance and noninsurance affinity programs. This bill, commencing January 1, 2028, would instead authorize the State Bar, if approved by the board, to transfer financial administration of the programs offering discounts and other benefits to licensees to CalBar Connect, would require CalBar Connect to distribute revenue received from insurance and noninsurance affinity programs to California ChangeLawyers, and would require California ChangeLawyers to distribute a certain amount of that revenue in accordance with specified requirements. Existing law, upon the payment of the annual license fee, including any required costs and penalties, as specified, requires the board to direct the issuance of a certificate evidencing the payment to each licensee. This bill would delete those provisions relating to the issuance of a certificate evidencing the required payment. 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.
(1) The United States and California Constitutions guarantee all persons the right to equal protection of the laws. The California Constitution further recognizes the right of all persons to pursue and obtain safety, happiness, and privacy, guarantees an individual's reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, and prohibits disqualification of a person from entering or pursuing a business, profession, vocation, or employment because of, among other things, sex. This bill would require, under all state laws, that any provision that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, discrimination on the basis of gender, or similar discrimination be interpreted to prohibit sex discrimination. The bill would define "sex discrimination" to include, among other things, discrimination based on any of specified actual or perceived characteristics or actions, including based on degree of conformity to sex or gender stereotypes. This bill would provide that this interpretation reflects the existing protections of specified state constitutional laws, as described above. The bill would require these provisions to be liberally construed to effectuate the purposes of these constitutional protections. The bill would make related findings and declarations. (2) Existing law, the Unruh Civil Rights Act (act) , provides that all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments regardless of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability status, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status. That act defines "sex" to include, among other things, pregnancy, childbirth, or medical conditions related to pregnancy or childbirth. This bill would further define, for purposes of the act, "sex" to include any characteristics set forth under the above-described definition of "sex discrimination." (3) Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) , makes certain discriminatory employment and housing practices unlawful, and authorizes a person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful practice to file a verified complaint with the Civil Rights Department. The FEHA defines various terms in connection with unlawful practices, including the term "sex." This bill would further define "sex" to include any characteristics set forth under the above-described definition of "sex discrimination." (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 51 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 1940 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1940 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 12926 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1940 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1940 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) This bill would include certain provisions that become operative only if AB 1940 is enacted and takes effect on or before January 1, 2027, and amends Section 12926 of the Government Code. In that regard, the bill would expand the above-described definition of "sex discrimination" to include discrimination based on actual or perceived perimenopause, menopause, or postmenopause or medical conditions related to perimenopause, menopause, and postmenopause.
This measure would call on Congress to enact legislation that restores and strengthens the full protections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and it would call on the President to sign the legislation.
