Rep. Joe Patterson

Existing law prohibits Members of the Legislature from entering into, or requesting that another party enter into, a nondisclosure agreement relating to the drafting, negotiation, or discussion of proposed legislation, and makes any nondisclosure agreement relating to the drafting, negotiation, or discussion of proposed legislation void and unenforceable. Existing law provides an exception for nondisclosure agreements, or portions thereof, that prevent only the disclosure of trade secrets, financial information, or proprietary information, as specified. This bill would prohibit an elective or appointive officer of a state agency acting in their official capacity from entering into, or requesting that another party enter into, a nondisclosure agreement relating to the drafting, negotiation, or discussion of a proposed regulation or legislation. The bill would also make any nondisclosure agreement relating to the drafting, negotiation, or discussion of a proposed regulation or legislation entered into by an elective or appointive officer of a state agency acting in their official capacity after the effective date of this bill void and unenforceable. The bill would provide an exception for nondisclosure agreements, or portions thereof, that prevent only the disclosure of trade secrets, private financial information, or proprietary information, as specified.

Existing law, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, governs the management and operation of common interest developments by an association. Existing law requires the board of an association to provide general notice of a proposed rule change at least 28 days before making the rule change, in accordance with certain procedures. Existing law, however, permits the board to make an emergency rule change if it determines that the change is required to address an imminent threat to public health or safety, or an imminent risk of substantial economic loss to the association, as prescribed. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to that provision. Existing law, the Common Interest Development Open Meeting Act, prohibits the board of a common interest development from taking action on any item of business outside of a board meeting. Existing law also prohibits the board from conducting a meeting via a series of electronic transmissions, except in specified emergency circumstances. This bill would prohibit a majority of the directors of the board, outside an authorized meeting, from using a series of communications of any kind, directly or through intermediaries, to discuss, deliberate, or take action on any item of business within the board's subject matter jurisdiction, except in an emergency. The bill would also exempt from this prohibition certain informational and ministerial communications. Existing law authorizes the board to adjourn to, or meet solely in, executive session to consider litigation and other specified matters. Existing law requires any matter discussed in executive session to be generally noted in the minutes of the immediately following meeting that is open to the entire membership. This bill would require discussions regarding ongoing litigation to have the case name, case number, and name of the court included as part of the executive session meeting minutes. This bill would require, if open session meetings of the board are electronically recorded using audio, or audio and video, that the recordings be considered a record of the association and be made available to members on the same basis as written meeting minutes. The bill would exempt a recording used solely for the purpose of creating meeting minutes and would authorize that the recording be deleted 12 months after the meeting minutes are completed. The bill, for meetings that are being recorded, would require notice to be given at the beginning of every open session of the board that the meeting is being recorded. Existing law requires the minutes, minutes proposed for adoption that are marked to indicate draft status, or a summary of the minutes of a board meeting, other than an executive session, to be available to members within 30 days of the meeting and distributed to a member upon request and upon reimbursement of the association's cost for making that distribution. This bill would prohibit the imposition of a charge for minutes that are distributed electronically. The bill would allow minutes posted on the association website to meet minute distribution requirements. The bill would require the minutes, or proposed minutes, to include specified information, including the date and time of the meeting. The bill would require an association to make the minutes available to a member who requests a physical copy of the minutes. Existing law requires an association to distribute an annual budget report 30 to 90 days before the end of its fiscal year that contains specified information. This bill would require the annual budget report to also include a statement listing any active litigation in which the association is named as a party, as specified.

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. Under existing federal law, in accordance with third-party liability rules, Medicaid is generally the payer of last resort if a beneficiary has another source of health care coverage in addition to Medicaid coverage. This bill would require the department, in the case of a Medi-Cal managed care plan enrollee who also has other health care coverage and for whom the Medi-Cal program is a payer of last resort, to ensure that a provider that is not contracted with the plan and that is billing the plan for Medi-Cal allowable costs not paid by the other health care coverage does not face administrative requirements significantly in excess of the administrative requirements for billing those same costs to the Medi-Cal fee-for-service delivery system. Under the bill, in the case of an enrollee who meets those coverage criteria, except as specified, a Medi-Cal fee-for-service provider would not be required to contract as an in-network provider with the Medi-Cal managed care plan in order to bill the plan for Medi-Cal allowable costs for covered health care services. The bill would authorize a Medi-Cal managed care plan to require a letter of agreement, or a similar agreement, under specified circumstances, including if a covered service requires prior authorization, or if a service is not covered by the other health care coverage but is a covered service under the plan, as specified. The bill would require the department to take the actions that it deems necessary to provide clarification regarding the conditions for billing plans to providers that render services to enrollees who also have other health care coverage. The bill would specify the intent of the Legislature that the department offer educational resources to an enrollee who needs assistance with understanding continuity of care and coordinating Medi-Cal and their other health care coverage when requested by the enrollee. The bill would require the department, annually from 2027 through 2030, to update the legislative health committees on the effectiveness of implementing these provisions. The bill would authorize the department to implement these provisions through plan letters or similar instructions. The bill would condition implementation of these provisions on receipt of any necessary federal approvals and the availability of federal financial participation.

Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, establishes the Medical Board of California within the Department of Consumer Affairs and charges it with administrative and enforcement duties related to the provision of medical services under the act. The act makes unprofessional conduct subject to discipline by the board the regular practice of medicine in a specified hospital having 5 or more physicians and surgeons on the medical staff without rules established by the board of directors to govern the operation of the hospital. The act requires the rules to include a provision for the organization of physicians and surgeons into a formal medical staff with staff appointments on an annual or biennial basis. This bill would revise that provision to instead require staff reappointments at least every 3 years. Existing law requires that physician and surgeon staff require members of the staff to demonstrate their ability to perform surgical and other procedures competently and to the satisfaction of an appropriate committee or committees of the staff at the time of original application for appointment to the staff and at least every 2 years thereafter. This bill would instead require physician and surgeon staff to require members of the staff to demonstrate their ability at least every 3 years thereafter. Existing law provides for the licensure and inspection of health facilities, including general acute care hospitals and acute psychiatric hospitals, by the State Department of Public Health and makes a violation of those provisions a crime. This bill would require the governing body of a general acute care hospital or an acute psychiatric hospital to require that medical staff establish controls that are designed to ensure the achievement and maintenance of high standards of professional ethical practices, including a requirement that all members of the medical staff be required to demonstrate their ability to perform surgical or other procedures competently and to the satisfaction of an appropriate medical staff committee or committees at the time of original application for appointment to the medical staff and every 3 years thereafter. The bill would prohibit the department from requiring an acute care hospital or acute psychiatric hospital to undertake routine reappointments more frequently than every 3 years. Because a violation of this requirement 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.

Maddy summaryCalifornia Assembly Resolution 141 expresses concern that the state's new energy efficiency standards for replacement tires may impose significant financial burdens on consumers and businesses. The resolution cites industry data suggesting tire costs could rise by up to $365 per set, contradicting official estimates of a smaller increase, and argues that the program's environmental benefits have not fully accounted for the impacts of manufacturing, transporting, and disposing of additional tires. It urges the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to reassess the program by conducting a comprehensive evaluation of affordability, tire safety, and full life-cycle environmental effects.

Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the Wildfire Fund Administrator, in consultation with the commission and other entities, to prepare and submit to the Legislature and the Governor a report that evaluates and sets forth recommendations on new models or approaches that mitigate damage, accelerate recovery, and responsibly and equitable allocate burdens from natural catastrophes, including catastrophic wildfires, across stakeholders, as provided. This bill would require the commission, on or before January 1, 2028, to generate a report assessing the verified restitution shortfalls for victims of wildfires caused by electrical corporations occurring before July 12, 2019, and to recommend restitution mechanisms for electrical corporations to address restitution shortfalls, as provided. The bill would require the commission, in developing the restitution mechanisms, to ensure, among other things, that the verified restitution shortfalls are consistently and fairly paid to ensure full compensation is issued in a timely manner.

Existing law establishes the Maddy Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Fund and authorizes each county to establish an emergency medical services fund for reimbursement of costs related to emergency medical services. Existing law, until January 1, 2027, requires 15% of the fund to be used to, among other things, improve access to, and coordination of, pediatric trauma and emergency services, with specified preferences, and requires the cost of administering money deposited into the EMS Fund to be reimbursed from the money collected, as specified. Existing law, until January 1, 2027, authorizes county boards of supervisors to elect to levy an additional penalty, for deposit into the EMS Fund, in the amount of $2 for every $10 upon fines, penalties, and forfeitures collected for criminal offenses. Existing law, until January 1, 2027, requires 15% of the funds collected pursuant to that provision to be used to provide funding for pediatric trauma centers. This bill would extend the operative date of these provisions until January 1, 2037.

This measure would urge the President of the United States and Congress of the United States to immediately restore full and consistent funding and staffing for the National Park Service.

Maddy summaryCalifornia Assembly Resolution 140 designates August 2026 as Children's Get Offline and Get Outdoors Month to promote awareness of the benefits of screen-free play for child development. The resolution cites research linking excessive social media use and reduced free play time to increased rates of anxiety, depression, and other behavioral issues among teenagers. It encourages families and communities to support unstructured outdoor activities and highlights ongoing federal efforts to protect children's mental health through technology guardrails.

Existing law, the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act, classifies controlled substances into 5 designated schedules, with the most restrictive limitations generally placed on controlled substances classified in Schedule I, and the least restrictive limitations generally placed on controlled substances classified in Schedule V. Existing federal law also regulates controlled substances by schedule. Under existing state and federal law, testosterone is classified as a Schedule III controlled substance. This bill would, if testosterone or dihydrotestosterone is excluded from Schedule III of the federal Controlled Substances Act and reclassified to a less restrictive schedule or exempted from the act, deem it to be rescheduled or exempted, respectively, under this division.