Under existing law, price, fitness, and quality being equal, any body, officer, or other person charged with the purchase, or permitted or authorized to purchase supplies for the use of the state, or of any of its institutions or offices, or for the use of any county or city, is required to always prefer supplies, defined to include produce, that are grown, manufactured, or produced in the state, and is required to next prefer supplies partially manufactured, grown, or produced in the state. This bill would remove produce grown or partially grown in the state from this requirement. The bill would require all California state-owned or state-run institutions, except public universities and colleges and school districts, to purchase agricultural products grown in California when the bid or price of the California-grown agricultural product does not exceed by more than 5% the lowest bid or price for an agricultural product produced outside the state and the quality of the produce is comparable. This bill would also require the institutions, when they solicit or intend to accept a bid or price for agricultural products grown outside the state, to accept the bid or price from a vendor that packs or processes these agricultural products in the state before accepting a bid or price from a vendor that packs or processes these agricultural products outside of the state when specified conditions are met. This bill would require a school district that solicits bids for the purchase of an agricultural product to accept a bid or price for that agricultural product when it is grown in California before accepting a bid or price for an agricultural product that is grown outside the state when the bid or price of the California-grown agricultural product does not exceed the lowest bid or price for an agricultural product produced outside the state and the quality of the produce is comparable.
Sponsored bills
Existing law establishes, within the Government Operations Agency, the Department of Technology under the supervision of the Director of Technology, who also serves as the State Chief Information Officer. Existing law provides that the department is generally responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects. Existing law requires the heads of state agencies and entities to appoint chief information officers, requires state agencies and entities to report certain information to the department, and further requires state agencies to take all necessary steps to achieve the targets set forth by the department in its information technology performance management framework and report their progress to the department on a quarterly basis. This bill, before July 1, 2019, and before July 1 biennially thereafter, would require the director of each state agency or entity and the chief information officer of that state agency or entity to post on the home page of the agency's or entity's Internet Web site a signed certification that the agency's or entity's Internet Web site is in compliance with specified accessibility standards. The bill would require the director to create a standard form that each state agency's or state entity's chief information officer would be required to use to determine whether the state agency's or state entity's Internet Web site is in compliance with the specified accessibility standards.
The Medical Practice Act requires the Medical Board of California to adopt and administer standards for the continuing education of licensed physicians and surgeons and requires the board to require each licensed physician and surgeon to demonstrate satisfaction of the continuing education requirements at specified intervals. The act requires the board, in determining its continuing education requirements, to consider including courses on specified matters. This bill would require the board to consider including in its continuing education requirements a course in integrating mental and physical health care in primary care settings, especially as it pertains to early identification of mental health issues and exposure to trauma in children and young adults and their appropriate care and treatment.
Under the existing Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act, a penalty of $4 is imposed upon every conviction for a violation of the Vehicle Code, or a local ordinance adopted pursuant to the Vehicle Code, other than a parking offense. Existing law requires the county or the court that imposed the fine to transfer the moneys collected pursuant to this act to the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act Fund. Under existing law, money in the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act Fund is made available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the State Department of Health Care Services for specified purposes relating to emergency medical air transportation. Under existing law, the assessment of this $4 penalty will terminate on January 1, 2018, and any moneys unexpended and unencumbered in the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act Fund on June 30, 2019, will transfer to the General Fund. Existing law repeals the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act on January 1, 2020. This bill would rename the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act Fund as the Emergency Medical Air Transportation and Children's Coverage Fund and would authorize the department to use money from the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to fund children's health care coverage in addition to the purposes described above. This bill would extend the dates of the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act, so that the assessment of the penalties will terminate commencing January 1, 2020, and any moneys unexpended and unencumbered in the Emergency Medical Air Transportation and Children's Coverage Fund on June 30, 2021, would be transferred to the General Fund. The bill would extend the effective date of the Emergency Medical Air Transportation Act until January 1, 2022. The bill would also make conforming changes.
Existing law authorizes the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads for testing purposes by a driver who possesses the proper class of license for the type of vehicle operated if specified requirements are satisfied. Existing law prohibits the operation of an autonomous vehicle on public roads until the manufacturer submits an application to the Department of Motor Vehicles, as specified, and that application is approved. Existing law requires the department to notify the Legislature if it receives an application from a manufacturer seeking approval to operate an autonomous vehicle capable of operating without the presence of a driver inside the vehicle. Existing law prohibits such an application from becoming effective any sooner than 180 days after that application is submitted. Existing law requires the department to adopt regulations no later than January 1, 2015, setting forth requirements for submitting evidence of insurance, surety bond, or self-insurance, and for submitting and approving an application to operate an autonomous vehicle. Existing law requires the department to approve an application submitted by a manufacturer if it finds, among other information, that the applicant has completing testing necessary to satisfy the department that the autonomous vehicles are safe to operate on the public roads. Existing law prohibits the limitation or expansion of existing authority to operate autonomous vehicles on public roads, until 120 days after the department adopts those regulations. This bill would repeal the requirement that the department notify the Legislature of receipt of an application seeking approval to operate an autonomous vehicle capable of operating without the presence of a driver inside the vehicle. The bill would also repeal the requirement that the approval of such an application not be effective any sooner that 180 days after the date the application is submitted. The bill would require the department to provide public notice when it adopts the autonomous vehicle regulations, would repeal the 120 day prohibition against limiting or expanding the authority to operate autonomous vehicles, and instead would prohibit the department from approving an application submitted pursuant to the regulations until 30 days after public notice of the adopted regulations is provided. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law authorizes individuals to contribute amounts in excess of their personal income tax liability for the support of specified funds, including the Emergency Food Assistance Program Fund. Existing law also has general administrative provisions applicable to voluntary contributions. Existing law provides for any new or extended voluntary contribution fund, to include the words "voluntary tax contribution" in the name of the fund, require the administering agency to include specified information about the fund on its Internet Web site, continuously appropriate from the fund the contributions made to the administering agency, and set a minimum contribution amount for the continuation of any voluntary tax contribution on the tax return form and include a generally applicable repeal date for a voluntary tax contribution. Existing law requires that the Emergency Food Assistance Program Fund equal or exceed a minimum contribution amount, which initially was $250,000 and which was required to be and has been adjusted for inflation. This bill would change the name of the Emergency Food Assistance Program Fund to the Emergency Food for Families Voluntary Tax Contribution Fund, would provide that the required calendar year minimum contribution amount for the fund to continue appearing on the return is an unadjusted $250,000, and would extend the provisions that apply to that voluntary contribution fund to January 1, 2026. The bill would make a continuous appropriation from the Emergency Food for Families Voluntary Tax Contribution Fund to the Franchise Tax Board and the Controller for reimbursement of all costs incurred in the administration of these provisions and to the State Department of Social Services for allocation to the Emergency Food Assistance Program. The bill would also make additional changes to conform to the provisions described above.
Existing law imposes various restrictions on employers with respect to applicants for employment. A violation of those restrictions is a misdemeanor. This bill would prohibit an employer from relying on the salary history information of an applicant for employment as a factor in determining whether to offer an applicant employment or what salary to offer an applicant. The bill also would prohibit an employer from seeking salary history information about an applicant for employment and would require an employer, upon reasonable request, to provide the pay scale for a position to an applicant for employment. The bill would not prohibit an applicant from voluntarily and without prompting disclosing salary history information and would not prohibit an employer from considering or relying on that voluntarily disclosed salary history information in determining salary, as specified. The bill would apply to all employers, including state and local government employers and the Legislature and would not apply to salary history information disclosable to the public pursuant to federal or state law. The bill would specify that a violation of its provisions would not be subject to the misdemeanor provision.
Existing law regulates the sale or offer to sell by a dealer to a consumer of a collectible in or from this state, as specified. Existing law defines the term "collectible" to mean any autographed item, as specified, sold or offered for sale in or from this state by a dealer, to a consumer for $5 or more. Existing law defines the term "autographed" to mean bearing the actual signature of a personality signed by that individual's own hand. Existing law defines a "dealer," among other things, as a person who is principally in the business of selling or offering for sale collectibles in or from this state or a person who by his or her occupation holds himself or herself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to collectibles. Existing law includes a person engaged in a cable television business for the sale of collectibles in the definition of dealer. Existing law excludes, among other persons, the personality who signs the memorabilia from the definition of dealer. Existing law also excludes from the definition of dealer a provider or operator of an online marketplace, provided that the marketplace provider or operator is not principally in the business of selling, or offering for sale, collectibles, in or from the state, exclusively or nonexclusively, or does not hold itself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to collectibles. This bill would instead define "autographed collectible" to mean an autographed sports or entertainment media item, as specified, sold or offered for sale by a dealer to a consumer for $50 or more, bearing the signature of a particular person that increases the sale value of the item over that of a comparable item without the actual signature. The bill would exclude, among other items, works of fine art, signed books, furniture, and decorative objects, from the definition of an autographed collectible. The bill would amend the definition of a dealer to be, among other things, a person who is in the business of selling autographed collectibles and who sells 3 or more autographed collectibles in a period of 12 months. The bill would include a person engaged in any television business for the sale of autographed collectibles and an auctioneer or auction company in the definition of dealer. The bill would delete the exclusion of a provider or operator of an online marketplace from the definition of dealer. Existing law requires a dealer to provide a certificate of authenticity, as specified, for each collectible to, among other things, indicate to a buyer whether a collectible item was purchased from a 3rd party and if so, the name and address of the 3rd party. This bill instead would require a dealer to provide an express warranty, as specified. The bill also would require a dealer, for items obtained on and after January 1, 2018, separate from the express warranty, to maintain a record stating whether the autographed collectible was purchased by the dealer from a 3rd party and the name and address of the 3rd party. The bill would permit discovery of this information in a civil dispute, as specified. The bill would require the dealer to keep the 3rd-party information on file for 7 years. Existing law requires a dealer displaying or offering for sale a collectible in this state to have at the location and in close proximity to the collectible merchandise a conspicuous sign that informs consumers of the written certificate of authenticity requirement, as specified. Existing law exempts auctioneers selling collectibles from this requirement. Existing law also requires a dealer engaged in a mail-order, telephone-order, or online business for the sale of collectibles in or from this state to, among other things, include in each television or online advertisement a similar disclosure in an onscreen message, as specified. This bill would require an auctioneer, auction company, and a vendor at a trade show to display specified signage regarding the express warranty requirements for autographed collectibles. Existing law grants certain individuals the right to cancel or to rescind certain contracts within a specified number of business days. Existing law requires a retail seller that sells goods to the public in this state that has a policy as to any of those goods of not giving full refunds, or of not allowing equal exchanges, or any combination thereof, for at least 7 days following purchase of the goods, as specified, to conspicuously display that policy, as specified. The bill would grant a consumer the right to cancel the contract for the purchase of an autographed collectible represented by a dealer as authentic until at least midnight of the 3rd day after the day on which the consumer purchased the autographed collectible, except when the autographed collectible is purchased at a public auction or trade show, or as part of a trade or barter, as specified. The bill would specify procedures and conditions of the cancellation. The bill would require the 3-day right of return, except as specified, to be included in the sign and the onscreen message a dealer is required to display. Existing law prohibits a dealer from displaying or offering for sale a collectible in this state at any trade show or similar event primarily featuring sales of collectibles or other memorabilia that offers onsite admission ticket sales, except as provided. Existing law requires a promoter who arranges or organizes a trade show featuring collectibles and autograph signings to provide a specified notification to any dealer who agrees to purchase or rent space in the trade show. This bill would repeal those provisions. Existing law provides that a consumer who is injured by a failure of the dealer to provide a certificate of authenticity is entitled to recover from that dealer, among other things, 10 times his or her actual damages. Existing law also authorizes the court to award additional damages based on the egregiousness of the dealer's conduct. This bill instead would provide for specified civil penalties in a civil action against the dealer for failure to comply with the provisions regarding express warranties. The bill would provide for separate specified civil penalties for providing a false warranty, providing a false warranty as the result of gross negligence, and knowingly providing a false warranty, as well as attorney's fees and other costs to be paid to the consumer. The bill would authorize the court to award punitive damages based on the egregiousness of the dealer's conduct. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law specifies that a food facility that donates any food that is fit for human consumption at the time it was donated to a nonprofit charitable organization or a food bank is not liable for any damage or injury resulting from the consumption of the donated food, unless the injury resulted from negligence or a willful act in the preparation or handling of the donated food. This bill, the California Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, would expand these provisions to persons and gleaners who donate food, as defined. The bill would narrow the exception to protection from liability to injury resulting from gross negligence or intentional misconduct. The bill would specify that the immunity from civil liability provided by these provisions applies to the donation of food that is fit for human consumption and that has exceeded the labeled shelf life date recommended by the manufacturer, provided, in instances of perishable food, the person that distributes the food to the end recipient makes a good faith evaluation that the food is wholesome. The bill would authorize food facilities to donate food directly to end recipients for consumption. Existing law specifies that a nonprofit charitable organization or food bank is not liable for an injury or death from distributing food without charge that is fit for human consumption unless the injury or death is a direct result of negligence, recklessness, or intentional misconduct. This bill would narrow the exception to protection from liability to injury or death as a direct result of gross negligence or intentional misconduct. Existing law authorizes a person engaged in the business of processing, distributing, or selling an agricultural product to donate, free of charge, a product that is in a condition that it may be used as food for human beings, to a nonprofit charitable organization. Existing law limits the liability of a county, its agencies, and persons who donate agricultural products. Existing law provides that these provisions do not relieve any nonprofit charitable organization from any liability for any injury, including, but not limited to, injury resulting from the ingesting of an agricultural product, as a result of receiving, accepting, gathering, or removing any donated agricultural product. This bill would expand this provision to include a gleaner and also authorize food facilities to donate food directly to end recipients for consumption. The bill would specify that these donations are protected under this act if the donated food has exceeded the labeled shelf life date recommended by the manufacturer, provided, in instances of perishable food, the person that distributes the food to the end recipient makes a good faith evaluation that the food is wholesome. The bill would repeal these provisions relating to not relieving nonprofit charitable organizations from liability for injuries. Existing law authorizes a food facility to donate food to a food bank or to any other nonprofit charitable organization for distribution to persons free of charge. Existing law exempts a food facility that donates food from civil or criminal liability or penalty for violation of any laws, regulations, or ordinances regulating the labeling or packaging of the donated product or, with respect to any other laws, regulations, or ordinances, for a violation occurring after the time of the donation. This bill would also authorize a person or gleaner to donate food to a food bank or to a nonprofit charitable organization and exempt the person or gleaner from civil or criminal liability relating to the donated food. The bill would also expand these provisions to include the donation of food by food facilities directly to end recipients. The bill would specify that the immunity from civil or criminal liability or penalty applies to the donation of food that has exceeded the labeled shelf life date recommended by the manufacturer, provided, in instances of perishable food, the person that distributes the food to the end recipient makes a good faith evaluation that the food is wholesome. The bill would require enforcement officers to promote the recovery of food fit for human consumption, as specified. Because the bill would require local officials to perform additional duties, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make other conforming and nonsubstantive changes. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law requires the Department of Food and Agriculture, headed by the Secretary of Food and Agriculture, to promote and protect the agricultural industry of the state. This bill would enact the Farmer Equity Act of 2017 and would require the department to ensure the inclusion of socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, as defined, in the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of food and agriculture laws, regulations, and policies and programs, as specified. The bill would require the secretary to create a position within the department's executive office to support the department's efforts to include socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers in its policies and programs, as specified. The bill would require the department on or before January 1, 2020, to submit a report to the Governor and the Legislature on efforts to serve socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers and female farmers and ranchers in California and include recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature on how to improve processes to include socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.